THE BIG 10 THREAD

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

It is interesting to go back and look at the first week rankings. They basically went all undefeated's, then all one loss teams then all two loss teams. It'll be interesting, for example, to see, if they rank an Oklahoma or Cal or a Memphis ahead of Michigan.

I am curious to see what the do with Memphis, because normally Group of 5 schools don't get much credit for going undefeated, because of the conferences they play in . However, the American is one of the better Group of 5, and with two Power 5 wins, namely Ole Miss, they have a decent resume.

 

[ericd7633]

What part of no FCS don't you get?

That is the biggest drag on Clemson's OOC schedule. As for App State, I see you are going with the tallest midget argument. Even being the best team in a shitty conference still doesn't override that App State is a member of shitty conference.

And your math ignores the fact there is that 9th conference game, which gives a little wiggly room to not play as tough of a OOC schedule as a team that plays only 8 game conference slate, especially in a weaker conference.

That's the thing you are missing, I'm talking overall strength of schedule, and OOC is only part of that. If your conference slate is murderers' row, as Michigan's will be, playing in the Big Ten East, that buys one a little slack in the OOC. But even then not enough IMHO to erase the stain of playing an FCS. So for example, the SEC plays the Sun Belt a lot, which I'm not going to hold that as much against a team such as Alabama, because in it's conference schedule they play LSU, Auburn, and other stronger schools than Clemson plays in it's conference.

So if you are from a weaker conference, like the ACC, you should really avoid scheduling FCS, and try to get at least 2 Power 5 schools (which normally the South Carolina game is a good resume booster, but sorry, not this year).

I did take that into account. As evidenced by me including them in the average ranking.

Also I just took average of Michigan's opponents for next year using the current Massey ratings and compared it to Clemson's 2015 opponents.

Michigan's 2016 Avg. Rank of opponents = 63.25
Clemson's 2015 Avg. Rank of opponents = 67.50

Not that big of a difference if you ask me. And certainly not enough for you to call out Clemson.

So again, I say, you can either be called a hypocrite or you can STFU about Clemson's schedule.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

I did take that into account. As evidenced by me including them in the average ranking.

Also I just took average of Michigan's opponents for next year using the current Massey ratings and compared it to Clemson's 2015 opponents.

Michigan's 2016 Avg. Rank of opponents = 63.25
Clemson's 2015 Avg. Rank of opponents = 67.50

Not that big of a difference if you ask me. And certainly not enough for you to call out Clemson.

So again, I say, you can either be called a hypocrite or you can STFU about Clemson's schedule.

Only now did you take the whole schedule into account, the previous post was OOC only. And even then, how good is your number for next year? We aren't even done with the 2015 season, speculating on the strength of schedule for 2016 is big time guess work. How much does Penn St. improve in year 2 under James Franklin? Does Indiana finally get a defense to match it's offense? What impact will the new Maryland coach have? Hell, maybe Colorado has a breakout year and wins the Pac-12 North! (stranger things have happened)

Also, and for the umpteenth time, Clemson has an FCS school on it!

That above all else I am criticizing Clemson over, and what I am saying the committee will hold against Clemson. Because if there is one thing fans and analysts were critical of scheduling during the BCS era was the dramatic increase of scheduling these lower tier schools to pad the records and get that undefeated season. Which one of the big goals of the playoff committee is to eliminate that behavior. So Clemson getting in just because they are undefeated while playing an FCS school sends the message that in this new playoff era it is still ok to schedule an FCS school. So if were down to an undefeated Clemson, with that FCS school and a 1-loss other conference champion that didn't paly an FCS school, my money is on the later getting in over Clemson.

I'm only speculating with a 2-loss conference champion, that played a much tougher schedule this year, how deep is the committee's commitment to strength of schedule. Which yes, if next year it came down to an undefeated Big Ten Champ Michigan and a 1-loss SEC champ who had a strong OOC schedule I'd expect the SEC champ to get in over Michigan, or at least be higher seeded. But when it comes to scheduling, all a school can control is the OOC, the conference schedule is dictated by the conference. And looking at the 2016 slate, not only does Michigan play the other big 3 schools in the East (MSU, OSU and PSU), but gets Wisconsin from the West, and they've been pretty good the past couple of season. So odds are at least 3 of those 4 are going to be in the top 15 come the end of 2016, if not all 4. So that gave Michigan a little slack with their OOC scheduling. Which they've done a good job for future schedules, getting a home-and-home with Texas, Oklahoma, UCLA, and Arkansas coming down the pipe.

 

[ericd7633]

Only now did you take the whole schedule into account, the previous post was OOC only. And even then, how good is your number for next year? We aren't even done with the 2015 season, speculating on the strength of schedule for 2016 is big time guess work. How much does Penn St. improve in year 2 under James Franklin? Does Indiana finally get a defense to match it's offense? What impact will the new Maryland coach have? Hell, maybe Colorado has a breakout year and wins the Pac-12 North! (stranger things have happened)

Also, and for the umpteenth time, Clemson has an FCS school on it!

That above all else I am criticizing Clemson over, and what I am saying the committee will hold against Clemson. Because if there is one thing fans and analysts were critical of scheduling during the BCS era was the dramatic increase of scheduling these lower tier schools to pad the records and get that undefeated season. Which one of the big goals of the playoff committee is to eliminate that behavior. So Clemson getting in just because they are undefeated while playing an FCS school sends the message that in this new playoff era it is still ok to schedule an FCS school. So if were down to an undefeated Clemson, with that FCS school and a 1-loss other conference champion that didn't paly an FCS school, my money is on the later getting in over Clemson.

I'm only speculating with a 2-loss conference champion, that played a much tougher schedule this year, how deep is the committee's commitment to strength of schedule. Which yes, if next year it came down to an undefeated Big Ten Champ Michigan and a 1-loss SEC champ who had a strong OOC schedule I'd expect the SEC champ to get in over Michigan, or at least be higher seeded.

And guess what 3/4 of the CFP teams had on their schedule...an FCS school. And guess where the team that didn't play one ended up seeded...4th. And yeah now I'm bringing in the entire schedule. Because they are basically the same. You can continue to shit on Clemson's schedule this year and I'll continue to call you a hypocrite because on average ranking, at this moment, it's about the same.

Also it should be noted you starting this whole thing angling on a 2 loss Michigan team passing an undefeated Clemson team, which is bull shit because you sure as hell wouldn't be arguing for a 2 loss team to pass an undefeated Michigan team next year, even though the schedules are practically the same. And yes, I included Clemson's FCS team in those averages.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

And guess what 3/4 of the CFP teams had on their schedule...an FCS school. And guess where the team that didn't play one ended up seeded...4th. And yeah now I'm bringing in the entire schedule. Because they are basically the same. You can continue to shit on Clemson's schedule this year and I'll continue to call you a hypocrite because on average ranking, at this moment, it's about the same.

And guess what, most those teams that scheduled an FCS team won't even sniff the playoff.

As for "shitting on Clemson's schedule" I'm just calling a spade a spade. Clemson plays in the weakest of the Power 5 conferences, played and FCS school, a Sun Belt school (which is the weakest of the Group of 5), and one of the schools that Clemson usually depends on to build that resume, South Carolina, shit the bed this year.

And saying Michigan did the same, because you are applying this years rankings to next year is being disingenuous at best! Because the thing you have to remember is that the scheduling of the OOC games happens years in advance, so one has to make reasonable assumptions. That Texas home and home I mentioned, the games aren't until 2024 and 2027! Who knows how good either Texas or Michigan will be in 10 years. They both assume they are going to be good, because it's Michigan and Texas, but as recent history tells us that isn't necessarily always the case. As such, when Michigan looked at it's conference slate and saw Penn St., Michigan St., Ohio St., and Wisconsin, with the recent history of MSU/OSU/Wisconsin and PSU being on the upswing, one assumes that the conference slate is good enough to handle the resume portion. While on the flip side, sure, Clemson had South Carolina and Notre Dame, but with the reputation of the ACC being what it is, if they wanted to not raise any questions they should have avoided scheduling that FCS school. Hell, I wouldn't be raising this many question if was even a second Sun Belt school! It's one thing for Wake Forest to schedule FCS, because they are just hoping to get bowl eligible, but Clemson, with it's eye on greater goals ain't doing those goals any favors by scheduling Wofford.

Also it should be noted you starting this whole thing angling on a 2 loss Michigan team passing an undefeated Clemson team, which is bull shit because you sure as hell wouldn't be arguing for a 2 loss team to pass an undefeated Michigan team next year, even though the schedules are practically the same. And yes, I included Clemson's FCS team in those averages.

Actually, I didn't even imply which school wouldn't necessarily make the cut, could be Clemson, could be Notre Dame, could be a 2-loss Pac-12 champ. Plenty of scenario's a Big Ten champ Michigan gets in.

And again, you are speculating on the strength of next years schedule. For example, Wisconsin opens next season again LSU at Lambeau field, what if Wisconsin wins? Then Wisconsin will look like a good matchup. MSU has a decent OOC schedule, with BYU and Notre Dame, if they sweep Michigan beating them will look good. And what if Penn St. finishes this season 4-1 and wins a quality bowl?

Part of this equation you are missing is perception, you can say you are accounting for the FCS team, but no matter how high or low they are ranked by whatever method they carry the big black mark of being FCS. Let me put it this way, when App St. upset my Wolverines in 2007 they were FCS at the time. Hence why it is considered one of the biggest (if not the biggest) upset in CFB history. What gets lost is that they were the 2 time, undefeated FCS national champs, and went on to a third undefeated national championship. But no one remembers that, only that an FCS team beat a top 5 Michigan.


And let me just state for the record, yes, in all likelihood an undefeated Clemson gets in over Michigan if they end up winning the Big Ten. I'm just saying the committee has made it quite clear that strength of schedule matters, and matters a lot. And if Michigan wins the Big Ten, with MSU only losing to Ohio State and let's say Penn State, MUS will be top ranked, and Michigan's other loss very well could be to an undefeated Pac-12 champ Utah, they could build a case as to why they deserve a spot. And it would test the question of exactly how important strength of schedule is?

 

[7Samurai13]

And guess what, most those teams that scheduled an FCS team won't even sniff the playoff.

As for "shitting on Clemson's schedule" I'm just calling a spade a spade. Clemson plays in the weakest of the Power 5 conferences, played and FCS school, a Sun Belt school (which is the weakest of the Group of 5), and one of the schools that Clemson usually depends on to build that resume, South Carolina, shit the bed this year.

And saying Michigan did the same, because you are applying this years rankings to next year is being disingenuous at best! Because the thing you have to remember is that the scheduling of the OOC games happens years in advance, so one has to make reasonable assumptions. That Texas home and home I mentioned, the games aren't until 2024 and 2027! Who knows how good either Texas or Michigan will be in 10 years. They both assume they are going to be good, because it's Michigan and Texas, but as recent history tells us that isn't necessarily always the case. As such, when Michigan looked at it's conference slate and saw Penn St., Michigan St., Ohio St., and Wisconsin, with the recent history of MSU/OSU/Wisconsin and PSU being on the upswing, one assumes that the conference slate is good enough to handle the resume portion. While on the flip side, sure, Clemson had South Carolina and Notre Dame, but with the reputation of the ACC being what it is, if they wanted to not raise any questions they should have avoided scheduling that FCS school. Hell, I wouldn't be raising this many question if was even a second Sun Belt school! It's one thing for Wake Forest to schedule FCS, because they are just hoping to get bowl eligible, but Clemson, with it's eye on greater goals ain't doing those goals any favors by scheduling Wofford.




Actually, I didn't even imply which school wouldn't necessarily make the cut, could be Clemson, could be Notre Dame, could be a 2-loss Pac-12 champ. Plenty of scenario's a Big Ten champ Michigan gets in.

And again, you are speculating on the strength of next years schedule. For example, Wisconsin opens next season again LSU at Lambeau field, what if Wisconsin wins? Then Wisconsin will look like a good matchup. MSU has a decent OOC schedule, with BYU and Notre Dame, if they sweep Michigan beating them will look good. And what if Penn St. finishes this season 4-1 and wins a quality bowl?

Part of this equation you are missing is perception, you can say you are accounting for the FCS team, but no matter how high or low they are ranked by whatever method they carry the big black mark of being FCS. Let me put it this way, when App St. upset my Wolverines in 2007 they were FCS at the time. Hence why it is considered one of the biggest (if not the biggest) upset in CFB history. What gets lost is that they were the 2 time, undefeated FCS national champs, and went on to a third undefeated national championship. But no one remembers that, only that an FCS team beat a top 5 Michigan.


And let me just state for the record, yes, in all likelihood an undefeated Clemson gets in over Michigan if they end up winning the Big Ten. I'm just saying the committee has made it quite clear that strength of schedule matters, and matters a lot. And if Michigan wins the Big Ten, with MSU only losing to Ohio State and let's say Penn State, MUS will be top ranked, and Michigan's other loss very well could be to an undefeated Pac-12 champ Utah, they could build a case as to why they deserve a spot. And it would test the question of exactly how important strength of schedule is?

Last season 3 out of the 4 teams played an FCS opponent, including Florida State. Ohio State is the only team not play an FCS team. So obviously the committee doesn't care that much about it if you have a quality OOC to counteract it.

 

[ericd7633]

And guess what, most those teams that scheduled an FCS team won't even sniff the playoff.

As for "shitting on Clemson's schedule" I'm just calling a spade a spade. Clemson plays in the weakest of the Power 5 conferences, played and FCS school, a Sun Belt school (which is the weakest of the Group of 5), and one of the schools that Clemson usually depends on to build that resume, South Carolina, shit the bed this year.

And saying Michigan did the same, because you are applying this years rankings to next year is being disingenuous at best! Because the thing you have to remember is that the scheduling of the OOC games happens years in advance, so one has to make reasonable assumptions. That Texas home and home I mentioned, the games aren't until 2024 and 2027! Who knows how good either Texas or Michigan will be in 10 years. They both assume they are going to be good, because it's Michigan and Texas, but as recent history tells us that isn't necessarily always the case. As such, when Michigan looked at it's conference slate and saw Penn St., Michigan St., Ohio St., and Wisconsin, with the recent history of MSU/OSU/Wisconsin and PSU being on the upswing, one assumes that the conference slate is good enough to handle the resume portion. While on the flip side, sure, Clemson had South Carolina and Notre Dame, but with the reputation of the ACC being what it is, if they wanted to not raise any questions they should have avoided scheduling that FCS school. Hell, I wouldn't be raising this many question if was even a second Sun Belt school! It's one thing for Wake Forest to schedule FCS, because they are just hoping to get bowl eligible, but Clemson, with it's eye on greater goals ain't doing those goals any favors by scheduling Wofford.




Actually, I didn't even imply which school wouldn't necessarily make the cut, could be Clemson, could be Notre Dame, could be a 2-loss Pac-12 champ. Plenty of scenario's a Big Ten champ Michigan gets in.

And again, you are speculating on the strength of next years schedule. For example, Wisconsin opens next season again LSU at Lambeau field, what if Wisconsin wins? Then Wisconsin will look like a good matchup. MSU has a decent OOC schedule, with BYU and Notre Dame, if they sweep Michigan beating them will look good. And what if Penn St. finishes this season 4-1 and wins a quality bowl?

Part of this equation you are missing is perception, you can say you are accounting for the FCS team, but no matter how high or low they are ranked by whatever method they carry the big black mark of being FCS. Let me put it this way, when App St. upset my Wolverines in 2007 they were FCS at the time. Hence why it is considered one of the biggest (if not the biggest) upset in CFB history. What gets lost is that they were the 2 time, undefeated FCS national champs, and went on to a third undefeated national championship. But no one remembers that, only that an FCS team beat a top 5 Michigan.


And let me just state for the record, yes, in all likelihood an undefeated Clemson gets in over Michigan if they end up winning the Big Ten. I'm just saying the committee has made it quite clear that strength of schedule matters, and matters a lot. And if Michigan wins the Big Ten, with MSU only losing to Ohio State and let's say Penn State, MUS will be top ranked, and Michigan's other loss very well could be to an undefeated Pac-12 champ Utah, they could build a case as to why they deserve a spot. And it would test the question of exactly how important strength of schedule is?

You bring up a lot of hypothetical bull shit in your response. I'm basing things off what they are right NOW. All that shit you say about the B1G I could just as easily say about the ACC teams. And I'm just calling it how I see Michigan's schedule next year, which is shit if you're going to call Clemson's shit this year.

You're acting as though scheduling an FCS school is some type of sin with the CFP committee. Newsflash, when 3/4 of the teams that made the CFP played an FCS team your assertion is bull shit.

Here's a thought. Strength of schedule can matter and at the same time you can still have a good strength of schedule even if there is an FCS team on said schedule. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[ericd7633]

And guess what, most those teams that scheduled an FCS team won't even sniff the playoff.

As for "shitting on Clemson's schedule" I'm just calling a spade a spade. Clemson plays in the weakest of the Power 5 conferences, played and FCS school, a Sun Belt school (which is the weakest of the Group of 5), and one of the schools that Clemson usually depends on to build that resume, South Carolina, shit the bed this year.

And saying Michigan did the same, because you are applying this years rankings to next year is being disingenuous at best! Because the thing you have to remember is that the scheduling of the OOC games happens years in advance, so one has to make reasonable assumptions. That Texas home and home I mentioned, the games aren't until 2024 and 2027! Who knows how good either Texas or Michigan will be in 10 years. They both assume they are going to be good, because it's Michigan and Texas, but as recent history tells us that isn't necessarily always the case. As such, when Michigan looked at it's conference slate and saw Penn St., Michigan St., Ohio St., and Wisconsin, with the recent history of MSU/OSU/Wisconsin and PSU being on the upswing, one assumes that the conference slate is good enough to handle the resume portion. While on the flip side, sure, Clemson had South Carolina and Notre Dame, but with the reputation of the ACC being what it is, if they wanted to not raise any questions they should have avoided scheduling that FCS school. Hell, I wouldn't be raising this many question if was even a second Sun Belt school! It's one thing for Wake Forest to schedule FCS, because they are just hoping to get bowl eligible, but Clemson, with it's eye on greater goals ain't doing those goals any favors by scheduling Wofford.




Actually, I didn't even imply which school wouldn't necessarily make the cut, could be Clemson, could be Notre Dame, could be a 2-loss Pac-12 champ. Plenty of scenario's a Big Ten champ Michigan gets in.

And again, you are speculating on the strength of next years schedule. For example, Wisconsin opens next season again LSU at Lambeau field, what if Wisconsin wins? Then Wisconsin will look like a good matchup. MSU has a decent OOC schedule, with BYU and Notre Dame, if they sweep Michigan beating them will look good. And what if Penn St. finishes this season 4-1 and wins a quality bowl?

Part of this equation you are missing is perception, you can say you are accounting for the FCS team, but no matter how high or low they are ranked by whatever method they carry the big black mark of being FCS. Let me put it this way, when App St. upset my Wolverines in 2007 they were FCS at the time. Hence why it is considered one of the biggest (if not the biggest) upset in CFB history. What gets lost is that they were the 2 time, undefeated FCS national champs, and went on to a third undefeated national championship. But no one remembers that, only that an FCS team beat a top 5 Michigan.


And let me just state for the record, yes, in all likelihood an undefeated Clemson gets in over Michigan if they end up winning the Big Ten. I'm just saying the committee has made it quite clear that strength of schedule matters, and matters a lot. And if Michigan wins the Big Ten, with MSU only losing to Ohio State and let's say Penn State, MUS will be top ranked, and Michigan's other loss very well could be to an undefeated Pac-12 champ Utah, they could build a case as to why they deserve a spot. And it would test the question of exactly how important strength of schedule is?

Also, just as a little side note. Out of the ten teams who had the best SOS last year NINE of those ten played an FCS school. But you're right playing an FCS school automatically disqualifies you from having a good schedule.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

Last season 3 out of the 4 teams played an FCS opponent, including Florida State. Ohio State is the only team not play an FCS team. So obviously the committee doesn't care that much about it if you have a quality OOC to counteract it.

Which I'm saying I'm not sure Clemson does. The two possibilities are South Carolina, which normally is good, but is having a terrible year this season. And Notre Dame, who's only quality opponent is Clemson, as such not to many people know how good Notre Dame really is. Also with Stanford play well as of late, I wouldn't be surprised if Notre Dame loses to Stanford, thus weakening Clemson's case, plus any other potential trip ups they might have.

 

[rmilia1]

Iowa played a FCS school this year. I don't love doing that but the reality is many times a great FCS opponent is a far better team than a lot of FBS options. I'd take Illinois St over 50 plus FBS teams including quite a few P5 schools

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

You bring up a lot of hypothetical bull shit in your response. I'm basing things off what they are right NOW. All that shit you say about the B1G I could just as easily say about the ACC teams. And I'm just calling it how I see Michigan's schedule next year, which is shit if you're going to call Clemson's shit this year.

Dude.......you are trying to use the 2015 rankings to predict 2016 strength of schedule. That's hypothetical as fuck! All I'm saying is that the general perception is the Big Ten is a tougher conference than the ACC, and that the Big Ten East is arguably the toughest division in all of CFB, plus one of the cross division games is against the a Wisconsin team that has won their division 3 out of the last 4 years. Are you seriously comparing a lineup of Ohio State, Michigan State, Penn State, and Wisconsin to Florida State (the only other really good ACC school), Georgia Tech, Miami, and Syracuse?

You're acting as though scheduling an FCS school is some type of sin with the CFP committee. Newsflash, when 3/4 of the teams that made the CFP played an FCS team your assertion is bull shit.

If the committee was seriously considering all of those 3/4, then you might have a point. But they are trying to nail down the best 4 teams out of a list of maybe 6 or 7 candidates, how many of those candidates played an FCS school? Has Utah? No. Notre Dame? No. Has Michigan? No. Alabama and LSU have, but they get a pass for playing in the SEC. And with the Big 12 not looking so hot this year, maybe Baylor's playing Lamar gets held against them.

Here's a thought. Strength of schedule can matter and at the same time you can still have a good strength of schedule even if there is an FCS team on said schedule. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Never said you couldn't, the SEC does all the time. Which, as I've said multiple times, get away with it because they are the S.E.C! I'm saying an ACC school can't lean on their conference schedule to mask a weak OOC they way an SEC school can, or even a Big Ten school can. And with the FCS school and an ACC schedule, Clemson really needs at least 2 of the remaining 3 OOC games to be killer. With South Carolina being crappy this year, and some valid questions about Notre Dame, Clemson has anything but killer OOC games.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

Iowa played a FCS school this year. I don't love doing that but the reality is many times a great FCS opponent is a far better team than a lot of FBS options. I'd take Illinois St over 50 plus FBS teams including quite a few P5 schools

I don't necessarily disagree. See the App State upset over Michigan. That App State team could have probably beaten 75% of the FBS teams that year straight up, and the other 25% if they caught them unguarded (like they did Michigan). But how do you prevent an FBS school from padding their record with a crappy FCS school?

 

[rmilia1]

What's with all the talk of the B12 being down I keep seeing? 3 unbeatens and a really good Oklahoma

I don't necessarily disagree. See the App State upset over Michigan. That App State team could have probably beaten 75% of the FBS teams that year straight up, and the other 25% if they caught them unguarded (like they did Michigan). But how do you prevent an FBS school from padding their record with a crappy FCS school?

Well that's where the committee uses their head and looks at how good that FCS team is. It'll never be perfect but the people who mock a win over Illinois State when their team beat ULM are fucking idiots because Illinois St and FCS teams of their ilk are about 20 pts better than teams at the level of ULM

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

What's with all the talk of the B12 being down I keep seeing? 3 unbeatens and a really good Oklahoma

Oklahoma got upset by a hapless Texas team and TCU only snuck by Kansas State. When the top tier of the conference struggles against the lower tier, it doesn't look good. So if TCU loses somewhere, that Baylor/TCU matchup loses a lot of hype, and could be something that holds them back.

Well that's where the committee uses their head and looks at how good that FCS team is. It'll never be perfect but the people who mock a win over Illinois State when their team beat ULM are fucking idiots because Illinois St and FCS teams of their ilk are about 20 pts better than teams at the level of ULM

Ok sure, the committee in theory might be able to look past that, but there would be pressure to still not reward even scheduling a good FCS team nor a bad FBS team. However in context of this conversation, Wofford, the team on Clemson schedule, is not one of those better FCS teams. They were a .500 team last year and the year prior.

 

[Sgt Brutus]

Last season 3 out of the 4 teams played an FCS opponent, including Florida State. Ohio State is the only team not play an FCS team. So obviously the committee doesn't care that much about it if you have a quality OOC to counteract it.

Yeah we don't schedule HS teams

 

[ericd7633]

Dude.......you are trying to use the 2015 rankings to predict 2016 strength of schedule. That's hypothetical as fuck! All I'm saying is that the general perception is the Big Ten is a tougher conference than the ACC, and that the Big Ten East is arguably the toughest division in all of CFB, plus one of the cross division games is against the a Wisconsin team that has won their division 3 out of the last 4 years. Are you seriously comparing a lineup of Ohio State, Michigan State, Penn State, and Wisconsin to Florida State (the only other really good ACC school), Georgia Tech, Miami, and Syracuse?

If the committee was seriously considering all of those 3/4, then you might have a point. But they are trying to nail down the best 4 teams out of a list of maybe 6 or 7 candidates, how many of those candidates played an FCS school? Has Utah? No. Notre Dame? No. Has Michigan? No. Alabama and LSU have, but they get a pass for playing in the SEC. And with the Big 12 not looking so hot this year, maybe Baylor's playing Lamar gets held against them.

Never said you couldn't, the SEC does all the time. Which, as I've said multiple times, get away with it because they are the S.E.C! I'm saying an ACC school can't lean on their conference schedule to mask a weak OOC they way an SEC school can, or even a Big Ten school can. And with the FCS school and an ACC schedule, Clemson really needs at least 2 of the remaining 3 OOC games to be killer. With South Carolina being crappy this year, and some valid questions about Notre Dame, Clemson has anything but killer OOC games.

How else are you supposed to do it, without being biased? And yes the B1G is better than the ACC, no argument there from me, but with that said, the Michigan schedule projects to be just about as good(or worse in your opinion) as Clemson's this year. It should tell you something about just how truly, god awful, Michigan's OOC schedule is next year. And that's where this whole argument stemmed from. You made fun of Clemson's schedule because they have an FCS opponent, but even with that FCS opponent it is astronomically better than what Michigan's will be next year.

And here you go again calling Clemson's OOC schedule into question. It's just bull shit. And you're a hypocrite for calling that weak, but can't stomach to say it about Michigan's OOC next year....hypocrite.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

How else are you supposed to do it, without being biased? And yes the B1G is better than the ACC, no argument there from me, but with that said, the Michigan schedule projects to be just about as good(or worse in your opinion) as Clemson's this year. It should tell you something about just how truly, god awful, Michigan's OOC schedule is next year. And that's where this whole argument stemmed from. You made fun of Clemson's schedule because they have an FCS opponent, but even with that FCS opponent it is astronomically better than what Michigan's will be next year.

I don't know........wait until the end of the season, the 2016 season. Because hell, we are still mid season this year, those rankings are guaranteed to change. So if you want to bookmark this thread, and table the conversation until we have actual numbers, then I am more than happy to do that.
Until then we have to base predictions on more year to year historical trends. Like how Wisconsin has preformed the last 5 years. Or the good streak MSU has been on. Which again......you are comparing the OOC slate of a school with a 9 game slate in a tougher conference to a one with an 8 game slate in a weaker conference. You are comparing apples and oranges my friend. Because this is more than Clemson's OOC schedule, but the strength of their WHOLE schedule. Which again, given the relative weakness of the ACC, it would behoove them to have a stronger OOC schedule than someone in the SEC or Big Ten would have because a Michigan or an Alabama can lean on their conference games strengthen their schedule, a Clemson does not have that luxury when the only other quality school in the conference is FSU. Seriously, you think Clemson's beating up on a 2-5 Georgia Tech or a 3-4 Boston College looks good?

And here you go again calling Clemson's OOC schedule into question. It's just bull shit. And you're a hypocrite for calling that weak, but can't stomach to say it about Michigan's OOC next year....hypocrite.

How is an OOC of Colorado, Hawaii, and UCF terrible? The worst of the bunch is UH, and I would stack them up against anyone in the Sun Belt. UCF has had been decent the past couple of seasons. And historically Colorado isn't a bad school, it wasn't only a couple of decades ago they were a power in the then Big Eight.

Which again........Michigan can afford a slightly weaker OOC because they are going to play a 9 game conference schedule in the Big Ten. Which sorry if this rubs you the wrong way, is a tougher conference than the ACC. I'll give credit to Clemson for their series with South Carolina. Like I said before, that's one of the games they depends on for resume boosting, but this year they are having a bit of a down year.

 

[Innermind]

How is an OOC of Colorado, Hawaii, and UCF terrible? The worst of the bunch is UH, and I would stack them up against anyone in the Sun Belt. UCF has had been decent the past couple of seasons. And historically Colorado isn't a bad school, it wasn't only a couple of decades ago they were a power in the then Big Eight.

It's not a terrible OOC schedule... however... it's far from being good.

...Colorado, Hawaii, and UCF would be a very respectable OOC schedule for teams such as Maryland, Indiana, Rutgers, Purdue, Illinois... but... for B1G teams looking at being serious contenders for their division, and then possibly being considered for a playoff spot, that OOC schedule does not cut the mustard.

I cannot see Michigan fans being happy with that 2016 OOC schedule.

2016 is a transition year schedule-wise in the B1G, but B1G OOC schedules will get better as time goes on:

Big Ten Football Schedules



I believe all P5 conferences should be consistent and adopt the new B1G scheduling rules (9 conference games, at least one OOC P5 opponent, and no FCS opponents). IMO, college football would be better with this type of consistency/uniformity...each conference doing different things weakens college football.

I also believe the only non-P5 schools that should count towards the P5 qualification should be the two independents: Notre Dame and BYU.... however, I also believe schools such as Houston, Boise State, Colorado State, Memphis, BYU, Cincinnati, UConn, Notre Dame should be invited/brought into into P5 conferences:

Houston & Boise State to PAC
BYU & Colorado State & Memphis & Cincinnati to Big XII (becoming the Big XIV)
UConn & Notre Dame to ACC

Then I believe the American, MWC and the other group of five should bring-up/invite the best FCS programs to the FBS.

 

[rmilia1]

Honestly we don't know if a ooc of Colorado, Hawaii and UCF is good, bad, great or average. Coming in to this year a ooc of Georgia Tech, Arkansas and USC would have looked amazing. Halfway into the year it's just average. Hell Colorado could be top 10 next year. Who knows?

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

It's not a terrible OOC schedule... however... it's far from being good.

...Colorado, Hawaii, and UCF would be a very respectable OOC schedule for teams such as Maryland, Indiana, Rutgers, Purdue, Illinois... but... for B1G teams looking at being serious contenders for their division, and then possibly being considered for a playoff spot, that OOC schedule does not cut the mustard.

I cannot see Michigan fans being happy with that 2016 OOC schedule.

2016 is a transition year schedule-wise in the B1G, but B1G OOC schedules will get better as time goes on:

Big Ten Football Schedules



I believe all P5 conferences should be consistent and adopt the new B1G scheduling rules (9 conference games, at least one OOC P5 opponent, and no FCS opponents). IMO, college football would be better with this type of consistency/uniformity...each conference doing different things weakens college football.

I also believe the only non-P5 schools that should count towards the P5 qualification should be the two independents: Notre Dame and BYU.... however, I also believe schools such as Houston, Boise State, Colorado State, Memphis, BYU, Cincinnati, UConn, Notre Dame should be invited/brought into into P5 conferences:

Houston & Boise State to PAC
BYU & Colorado State & Memphis & Cincinnati to Big XII (becoming the Big XIV)
UConn & Notre Dame to ACC

Then I believe the American, MWC and the other group of five should bring-up/invite the best FCS programs to the FBS.

Never said I was "happy" with it. It is a sub-par OOC schedule, which is nice to see Michigan step up it's game after 2016. 2017 opens with Florida at Jerry-World, 2017/2018 has that home-and-home with Arkansas, and there is talk of resuming the series with Notre Dame around that time. Though I wouldn't mind a home-and-home with Hawaii, I'd be nice to see my Wolverines at Aloha Stadium.

But in context of this conversation, an OOC of Colorado/Hawaii/UCF (or what we expect of them in 2016) is on par with with Clemson playing Wofford, App State and the South Carolina team of this year (I've stated many times that Clemson usually depends on that being a quality matchup, they have been a let down this year). However the two big differences between Clemson and Michigan next year is that conference schedule.