THE PAC 12 THREAD v.5

[WizardHawk]

Not if UW runs the table.

No way does the committee keep out an undefeated UW team even if the CCG is a laugher vs a weak South Champ.

But a meaty CCG opponent could still let a 1 loss UW team in again. Add as much strength as you can to remove any doubt.

P.S. I'd be just as happy with an undefeated UCLA team on the other side of that field.

 

[Eco]

I got into an interesting conversation with a buddy of mine who was saying that by the committee letting in UW, more teams are going to follow suit and NOT playing a difficult OCC.

You guys have probably discussed similar topics ad nausea, but we don't talk about the Huskies much here in Atlanta.

 

[Vitamike]

I'd be just as happy with an undefeated UCLA team on the other side of that field.

Don't count on that, there are just too many problems in Westwood for that to happen, but if it did you might want to watch what you wish for.

Any undefeated South team would spell trouble for UW's chances, and if it was UCLA, that would mean they already beat them Dawgs in Seattle earlier in the season...

 

[WizardHawk]

Don't count on that, there are just too many problems in Westwood for that to happen, but if it did you might want to watch what you wish for.

Any undefeated South team would spell trouble for UW's chances, and if it was UCLA, that would mean they already beat them Dawgs in Seattle earlier in the season...

Any talk of playoffs assumes you have to actually overcome a lot already. There's no assuming you win the CCG against anyone, more or less some undefeated team on a roll. As I said it's way too early fodder. If I'm stuck picking a side in a game where I don't like either team you have to look deep at all of the implications. Stanford is in our division so that alone is enough, but I freaking hate USC so much I need more than that.

And yes, you are right about the schedule. I'd be ok with a 1 loss UCLA team in the CCG then.

 

[socaljim242]

I got into an interesting conversation with a buddy of mine who was saying that by the committee letting in UW, more teams are going to follow suit and NOT playing a difficult OCC.

You guys have probably discussed similar topics ad nausea, but we don't talk about the Huskies much here in Atlanta.

I think you take the chance that you will be left out if you schedule a weak OCC schedule and you lose even one game. UW was lucky their only loss was USC who most considered a good team. If they had lost to any other team I think they might have been left out.

 

[Vitamike]

I think you take the chance that you will be left out if you schedule a weak OCC schedule and you lose even one game. UW was lucky their only loss was USC who most considered a good team. If they had lost to any other team I think they might have been left out.

Perfect analysis!!

Well done sir.

 

[WizardHawk]

I got into an interesting conversation with a buddy of mine who was saying that by the committee letting in UW, more teams are going to follow suit and NOT playing a difficult OCC.

You guys have probably discussed similar topics ad nausea, but we don't talk about the Huskies much here in Atlanta.

Yes, it was talked about at length, but not just among Pac12 fans. It was the talk of the college football world during the selection process. OSU gets in without even winning their own conference or even playing in their championship game. And a one loss UW gets in on the backs of a weak schedule. Both were major stories. Ohio State getting plain old punked turned out to probably be the bigger of the two stories.

UW got in because there were a lot of mostly flawed teams to choose from and UW had the least offensive loss and was a conference champion of the others in consideration.

Their results for sure aren't even going to have the impact you suggest on their own team. They have Auburn next year and Michigan in a H/H coming up soon. They aren't skimping on OOC to try and back door in, more or less is that going to spread to other teams. That's loser mentality to begin with.

SOS matters. You need as many quality wins as you can to make sure you are one of the four. You can't rely on having such a muddled field that lets you slip in. That's why we want as strong of a team in the CCG as we can face should we reach it. Sure, that means winning that game is that much harder, but any talk of the playoffs is irrelevant if you can't already win the big games in front of you before it.

 

[Eco]

I like that, and with ASU would play a tougher OCC opponent than Texas Tech.

However, with Francois's injury, they were discussing it at length again as to why major teams might be looking to avoid the big OCC games, because of the fear of injuries and essentially ruining your season after 1 game.

My thought process is that while yes, Francois (FSU) got hurt and his team lost, Jalen Hurts has just as likely of a chance to get hurt next week against Frenso State.

I don't mind Alabama playing Mercer and Fresno, because FSU was added in that mix.

Arizona State though does 2 weak OCC teams +1 a Power 5's retard (this year it's TT). Just trying and play a major school in a P5 and then 2 cupcakes.

Next two year's there is a home and home with Michigan State, which will be so much better for the program.

 

[wazzu31]

I just flat out hate the way the SEC does their 4 OOC games. They are allowed to schedule one tough game then cupcakes. It is an easier schedule than having 3 cupcakes then a conference schedule, and on top of that they essentially schedule their cupcakes before prime games. It's like if UW switched it to where they to play Montana the week after the AC so they get basically a bye week before the CCG.

 

[WizardHawk]

I think there probably was more of a mentality to just get into the BCS title game any way you can and see what happens. With a 4 team playoff getting in as a fraud only leaves you dead after the first game and a footnote on the season.

You really need to be a solid road tested team to be a real playoff contender. Passing on chances to test your team ultimately doesn't help prepare them for those playoffs.

Who knows if UW would have benefited from having a high caliber OOC game to draw from.

 

[Eco]

I just flat out hate the way the SEC does their 4 OOC games. They are allowed to schedule one tough game then cupcakes. It is an easier schedule than having 3 cupcakes then a conference schedule, and on top of that they essentially schedule their cupcakes before prime games. It's like if UW switched it to where they to play Montana the week after the AC so they get basically a bye week before the CCG.

The SEC scheduling became a big deal during SEC"s hayday, when you had 3 of the top 5 in the conference, 7 teams in the top 25. The point is that the conference wants one of their teams to make the playoffs, so why would you stack up all your talented teams to play back-to-back-to-back games.

 

[WizardHawk]

I just flat out hate the way the SEC does their 4 OOC games. They are allowed to schedule one tough game then cupcakes. It is an easier schedule than having 3 cupcakes then a conference schedule, and on top of that they essentially schedule their cupcakes before prime games. It's like if UW switched it to where they to play Montana the week after the AC so they get basically a bye week before the CCG.

No, to equal their model it would be more like UW playing some minor FCS team before the apple cup so we had really two weeks to prepare for that and extra time to heal up before that game. It's total bullshit, but that's SEC football. Can't say I respect much about how their conference structure is setup. Not at all.

 

[Eco]

I think there probably was more of a mentality to just get into the BCS title game any way you can and see what happens. With a 4 team playoff getting in as a fraud only leaves you dead after the first game and a footnote on the season.

You really need to be a solid road tested team to be a real playoff contender. Passing on chances to test your team ultimately doesn't help prepare them for those playoffs.

Who knows if UW would have benefited from having a high caliber OOC game to draw from.

And probably not. I still think last year's Alabama team was one of the most talented in recent history, and you guys played much better than the score suggests. You pups did a lot better in the playoffs than the Buckeyes, who had a much more difficult OCC schedule that you guys.

 

[Eco]

No, to equal their model it would be more like UW playing some minor FCS team before the apple cup so we had really two weeks to prepare for that and extra time to heal up before that game. It's total bullshit, but that's SEC football. Can't say I respect much about how their conference structure is setup. Not at all.

I understand the SEC scheduling. I don't hate it although it does mean a lot of *yawn* weeks. Alabama for instance always has their bye week before LSU (LSU is also off that week), and then plays an FCS school the week before Auburn (this year it's Mercer).

In a perfect world, I'd get rid of Vandy and Mizzou, going back to 12 teams, and then have all the schools play one another in a season, and have the SEC Championship as the top 2 teams remaining, which would be a rematch, but a great one at that. I just don't think you can do it with 14 teams.

 

[WizardHawk]

I understand the SEC scheduling. I don't hate it although it does mean a lot of *yawn* weeks. Alabama for instance always has their bye week before LSU (LSU is also off that week), and then plays an FCS school the week before Auburn (this year it's Mercer).

In a perfect world, I'd get rid of Vandy and Mizzou, going back to 12 teams, and then have all the schools play one another in a season, and have the SEC Championship as the top 2 teams remaining, which would be a rematch, but a great one at that. I just don't think you can do it with 14 teams.

None of the other conferences need to have FCS cupcakes in their second to last week of the regular season to get a team into the playoffs. They all seem to find a way to play their tough rivalry games without that crutch. This year UW has @Stanford, and Utah the two weeks prior to the apple cup. You can play big boy football for 3 straight weeks at the end of the season. Or at least everyone else outside of the SEC can.

 

[wazzu31]

The SEC scheduling became a big deal during SEC"s hayday, when you had 3 of the top 5 in the conference, 7 teams in the top 25. The point is that the conference wants one of their teams to make the playoffs, so why would you stack up all your talented teams to play back-to-back-to-back games.

Problem is, you've never remotely had 3 of the best top 10 teams, let alone 3 of the top 5. The SEC scheduling has always allowed for one more win than the B1G, Big 12 or SEC teams. Each team realistcally has maybe 2 tough games in conference. You have had Alabama, Auburn then LSU in the past decade that even remotely had a chance to win another P5 conference.

 

[wazzu31]

No, to equal their model it would be more like UW playing some minor FCS team before the apple cup so we had really two weeks to prepare for that and extra time to heal up before that game. It's total bullshit, but that's SEC football. Can't say I respect much about how their conference structure is setup. Not at all.

Well I counting us more the lines of a LSU and the CCG like Alabama's Auburn matchup. Zero respect for the SEC or really Nick Saban for throwing two Iron Bowls to allow Auburn to play for a title.

 

[Eco]

None of the other conferences need to have FCS cupcakes in their second to last week of the regular season to get a team into the playoffs. They all seem to find a way to play their tough rivalry games without that crutch. This year UW has @Stanford, and Utah the two weeks prior to the apple cup. You can play big boy football for 3 straight weeks at the end of the season. Or at least everyone else outside of the SEC can.

And Bama does. Last year it was Auburn, Florida, UW, and Clemson. But I get what you are saying. I don't understand it, but it's always been that why since they restructured the conference. I doubt it'll change any time soon.

Problem is, you've never remotely had 3 of the best top 10 teams, let alone 3 of the top 5. The SEC scheduling has always allowed for one more win than the B1G, Big 12 or SEC teams. Each team realistcally has maybe 2 tough games in conference. You have had Alabama, Auburn then LSU in the past decade that even remotely had a chance to win another P5 conference.

We certainly have. There have been years when Alabama, LSU, and Auburn/UGA/Ole Miss/Miss State, have all been in the top 10, and maybe top 5.

 

[socaljim242]

SEC scheduling. Florida plays three games total all season on another teams home field.

 

[Olyduck]

No fires around Spokane, but the smoke is all over here. Air Index is in the "Hazardous" level. 300 particulate bullshit, not supposed to go outside for any length of time.

Eugene was in the 400 because they are in the valley. swoops down and sits there.