Who do you think would have made playoff

[4down20]

4Down20, are you saying that Boise actually benefitted from an easy schedule and wasn't punished for it? They absolutely were punished for it. Look at all those seasons listed above in which they finished either undefeated or in the top 10 at the end of the regular season and were completely shut out of any BCS bowl game while name brand AQ teams ranked in the teens were chosen instead. They never even had the chance due to their schedule (and other reasons). They only went to two BCS games which resulted in wins over then #7 OU and then #3 TCU. And those particular seasons their SOS was not outside of 100 as you claim. It was in the 50s, 60s, and 70s or in other words on par with some (not all) teams from crappier AQ conferences like the Big East, ACC, and in some cases even some Big 10 teams in terms of final SOS ranking.

No. Your schedule is what kept you out of it, so you were punished properly IMO. Although I'm not so sure about the BCS bowl thing, but I can't say much because the AQ stuff is bullshit anyway.

I'm saying what he wants to do wouldn't punish Boise St. And it's not a thing with Boise St, it's the lack of SoS and what it means for the future of the game if you reward it.

 

[Codaxx]

Larger format would encourage better scheduling. Much more likely to increase OOC SOS when you decrease the odds that 1 or even 2 losses will keep you out. Like Hoops, coaches could use early season games vs top competition to gauge his team's needs.

 

[Codaxx]

Isn't win or go home pretty much what the regular season is? Even as 1 loss teams get in, when they play the game before the loss it is often the same consequences. When Alabama lost to LSU in 2011, I thought we were done - and we were. Then I watched as all the other teams lost, and put themselves out of it. All were "win or go home games".

That 2011 game was the most meaningless game ever played. Your example is a perfect illustration why it is not the same. LSU/BAMA meaningless. ISU/OSU meaningful, so meaningful that it overruled a clear SOS advantage OSU

 

[Hook'Em0608]

Larger format would encourage better scheduling. Much more likely to increase OOC SOS when you decrease the odds that 1 or even 2 losses will keep you out. Like Hoops, coaches could use early season games vs top competition to gauge his team's needs.

I don't understand how someone can rationalize that the BCS and a 4 team playoff encourage harder scheduling than an 8 team playoff. Which is more forgiving? Which allows a route into the playoffs even if you lose a game or two?

I think he got too caught up in me using 1 loss and undefeated teams in my scenario. That isn't a condition of getting into the playoffs. It was just analyzing data from the BCS era.

Also, yes I believe that any undefeated team deserves a shot at the playoffs unless they are scheduling 4 FCS teams on top of a lesser conference schedule. It is incredibly hard to go undefeated even playing the old Boise St schedules. They were punished for their schedule already and I think they have improved their scheduling habits somewhat since then.

 

[Hook'Em0608]

Just to add to the Boise argument. Only 10 times did a non-AQ go undefeated. If an 8 team playoff would have been in place over that 16 year period we are talking 128 playoff spots. We can't give 10 out of 128 playoff spots to the non-AQ's? What is the point of them being in the same classification with us anymore then? For cannon fodder with no chance at success? That's pretty high and mighty a stance to take.

 

[4down20]

Larger format would encourage better scheduling. Much more likely to increase OOC SOS when you decrease the odds that 1 or even 2 losses will keep you out. Like Hoops, coaches could use early season games vs top competition to gauge his team's needs.

What you are really saying with the "decrease the odds that 1 or even 2 loses will keep you out" is that record is still what matters most.

Basketball plays way more games and doesn't really compare, except that the regular season has little meaning.

 

[4down20]

That 2011 game was the most meaningless game ever played. Your example is a perfect illustration why it is not the same. LSU/BAMA meaningless. ISU/OSU meaningful, so meaningful that it overruled a clear SOS advantage OSU

It was a perfectly meaningful game until the team you deem as being "more qualified" lost to a team that would have had a losing record if not for that game.

It's not that hard to understand. When you have losses on your record, who those losses came to matters.

 

[Hook'Em0608]

What you are really saying with the "decrease the odds that 1 or even 2 loses will keep you out" is that record is still what matters most.

Basketball plays way more games and doesn't really compare, except that the regular season has little meaning.

Record is always going to matter a lot obviously. Isn't that the whole point of playing the season? To do well? Not play that hardest schedule in the nation and go 8-4...

 

[Hook'Em0608]

It was a perfectly meaningful game until the team you deem as being "more qualified" lost to a team that would have had a losing record if not for that game.

It's not that hard to understand. When you have losses on your record, who those losses came to matters.

Unless you are 2007 LSU then who you beat matters. Or you are 2008 Florida and on and on. I completely understand the argument for Alabama. It's just the refusal of some of you to admit the narrative changed that is frustrating. It was always who did you play who did you beat until that season. Not that I agree 100 percent with that narrative. But it damn sure was what ESPN pushed until that season.

 

[4down20]

Record is always going to matter a lot obviously. Isn't that the whole point of playing the season? To do well? Not play that hardest schedule in the nation and go 8-4...

Sure it's going to matter, the issue is when a team has an incredibly weak schedule and good record and is considered a top team. For example, Boise St and TCU in your list, Utah in your list, Tulane in your list, etc.

 

[4down20]

Unless you are 2007 LSU then who you beat matters. Or you are 2008 Florida and on and on. I completely understand the argument for Alabama. It's just the refusal of some of you to admit the narrative changed that is frustrating. It was always who did you play who did you beat until that season. Not that I agree 100 percent with that narrative. But it damn sure was what ESPN pushed until that season.

You are only able to name those teams because you ignore that the other teams lost as well.

 

[Hook'Em0608]

Sure it's going to matter, the issue is when a team has an incredibly weak schedule and good record and is considered a top team. For example, Boise St and TCU in your list, Utah in your list, Tulane in your list, etc.

So you disagree with 10 non-AQ teams making the playoffs over a 16 year period with 128 bids available? I again ask then, what is the point in them playing at the FBS level then? Either they get access to the FBS playoffs or we break off from them. Lip service access doesn't count, I mean real access...

 

[4down20]

So you disagree with 10 non-AQ teams making the playoffs over a 16 year period with 128 bids available? I again ask then, what is the point in them playing at the FBS level then? Either they get access to the FBS playoffs or we break off from them. Lip service access doesn't count, I mean real access...

No, I disagree with 10 teams who didn't deserve to make them making them over a 16 year period with 128 bids available.

I'm perfectly fine with any of those 10 teams playing a tougher schedule and then making it. That is why I think "AQ" is bullshit. Should be the same for everyone, and the fact is they didn't play the same type of schedule as the others.

 

[Hook'Em0608]

You are only able to name those teams because you ignore that the other teams lost as well.

Uh, Alabama lost too, at home, and didn't win their conference. You are ignoring that. I'm not saying Oklahoma St was the better team that year, I don't believe they were to be honest. I'm just trying to show you that the powers that be moved the goalpost on their narrative from years past. It was a David v. Goliath situation for Oklahoma St. They never stood a chance against Alabama in a PR war.

 

[4down20]

Uh, Alabama lost too, at home, and didn't win their conference. You are ignoring that. I'm not saying Oklahoma St was the better team that year, I don't believe they were to be honest. I'm just trying to show you that the powers that be moved the goalpost on their narrative from years past. It was a David v. Goliath situation for Oklahoma St. They never stood a chance against Alabama in a PR war.

"They" didn't move the goalpost. There is no "They", it's a set formula of which the "powers" have no control over.

The difference between SoS of the 2 teams was minor, and the difference between the losses and the manner they lost was huge. It's not just about the 1 stat, it's about a mixture of stats and the voters take those into account. If OkSt had went instead, I wouldn't have too much argument about it, it was very close.

And really I think it's a clear cut case of when 3 teams deserved to be playing for the national championship and the 4 team playoffs is a fix, especially since it was pretty much because of that year.

 

[Codaxx]

What you are really saying with the "decrease the odds that 1 or even 2 loses will keep you out" is that record is still what matters most.

Basketball plays way more games and doesn't really compare, except that the regular season has little meaning.

Umm, of course record matters, but it is not hard to figure out bring top 8 is easier than top 4

 

[Codaxx]

It was a perfectly meaningful game until the team you deem as being "more qualified" lost to a team that would have had a losing record if not for that game.

It's not that hard to understand. When you have losses on your record, who those losses came to matters.

Pretty simple to understand that if there is a set formula all wins and losses count. You are arguing certain games count more than others. Having an identical record with a superior SOS is harder, it's pretty logical. You just try to justify the results, because you are a Bama fan and can not be rational on the subject. Better loss or better win just rationalizations to justify a flawed system

 

[4down20]

Pretty simple to understand that if there is a set formula all wins and losses count. You are arguing certain games count more than others. Having an identical record with a superior SOS is harder, it's pretty logical. You just try to justify the results, because you are a Bama fan and can not be rational on the subject. Better loss or better win just rationalizations to justify a flawed system

Hard ranks in SoS which most people use and are good for reference do not paint an accurate picture at the real differences in difficulty between schedules. You think top10 SoS vs top20 schedule and it may seem like it's this bug huge difference in the numbers. When in reality the difference in strength between 2 teams may be less than 1-5% vs the toughest schedule.

So just saying "tougher schedule" isn't the whole thing, because they can be pretty close to difficulty. And when it's somewhat close, who a team won and lost to matters. When you get in bigger gaps, like #1 schedule down to #100, it's a huge gap and it doesn't matter.

As for the claim of Alabama bias. Alabama already went to the game and won it, there isn't a thing you can do about it but bitch. I care about how things will work out in the future, and Alabama could and likely will at some point, end up on either side of it. Alabama benefits over recent years in having more playoff slots if that is all I cared about.

 

[Codaxx]

Hard ranks in SoS which most people use and are good for reference do not paint an accurate picture at the real differences in difficulty between schedules. You think top10 SoS vs top20 schedule and it may seem like it's this bug huge difference in the numbers. When in reality the difference in strength between 2 teams may be less than 1-5% vs the toughest schedule.

So just saying "tougher schedule" isn't the whole thing, because they can be pretty close to difficulty. And when it's somewhat close, who a team won and lost to matters. When you get in bigger gaps, like #1 schedule down to #100, it's a huge gap and it doesn't matter.

As for the claim of Alabama bias. Alabama already went to the game and won it, there isn't a thing you can do about it but bitch. I care about how things will work out in the future, and Alabama could and likely will at some point, end up on either side of it. Alabama benefits over recent years in having more playoff slots if that is all I cared about.

I am simply putting out that every game doesn't count like you suggested. System randomly selects games that matter more. In fact, You could argue the winner of LSU/Bama was disadvantaged. Also shows SOS was over-ruled. You can rationalize the reason, but facts were LSU/Bama didn't mean much and neither did SOS. Those are facts.

 

[4down20]

I am simply putting out that every game doesn't count like you suggested. System randomly selects games that matter more. In fact, You could argue the winner of LSU/Bama was disadvantaged. Also shows SOS was over-ruled. You can rationalize the reason, but facts were LSU/Bama didn't mean much and neither did SOS. Those are facts.

Those are not facts. The LSU/Bama game was the game of year(century) because of what it meant. Yes, when every team in the country loses, things come back around. That hardly means the game didn't mean much.

And SoS was not "over-ruled". It's not like we are talking #100 and #1 SoS with a huge gap in difficulty. The difficulty in overall was minor. I personally had Oklahoma St as the #35 overall SoS and Alabama the #51. However, that is not really how big the gap between the two were. OSU was 82.73% as difficult as the toughest that year(Notre Dame). Alabama was 79.58% as tough at the toughest that year. For a huge difference of....3%. Sorry, but a 3% difference between the strength of 2 schedules is not enough to forget about who the teams lost too, and how good the teams really were in general.

So deal with it.

 

[Codaxx]

Those are not facts. The LSU/Bama game was the game of year(century) because of what it meant. Yes, when every team in the country loses, things come back around. That hardly means the game didn't mean much.

And SoS was not "over-ruled". It's not like we are talking #100 and #1 SoS with a huge gap in difficulty. The difficulty in overall was minor. I personally had Oklahoma St as the #35 overall SoS and Alabama the #51. However, that is not really how big the gap between the two were. OSU was 82.73% as difficult as the toughest that year(Notre Dame). Alabama was 79.58% as tough at the toughest that year. For a huge difference of....3%. Sorry, but a 3% difference between the strength of 2 schedules is not enough to forget about who the teams lost too, and how good the teams really were in general.

So deal with it.

What did LSU/Bama mean? Loser got a rematch. Winner got an extra game. Meant 0.

SOS was over-ruled. Your own stats confirm that. YOu just want to justify the decision. Your response made that clear. Team you lost to is insignificant. We know OSU's 12 games were harder than Bama's 12 games. Picking out 1 game is moronic.

 

[4down20]

What did LSU/Bama mean? Loser got a rematch. Winner got an extra game. Meant 0.

SOS was over-ruled. Your own stats confirm that. YOu just want to justify the decision. Your response made that clear. Team you lost to is insignificant. We know OSU's 12 games were harder than Bama's 12 games. Picking out 1 game is moronic.

Apparently the overwhelming majority of the country who matters disagrees with you and thinks what I said since it was the voters who did it.

If you are too ignorant to understand that more than 1 factor goes into things, then it's on you at this point. I'm tired of wasting my time for some butthurt retard.

 

[Codaxx]

Apparently the overwhelming majority of the country who matters disagrees with you and thinks what I said since it was the voters who did it.

If you are too ignorant to understand that more than 1 factor goes into things, then it's on you at this point. I'm tired of wasting my time for some butthurt retard.

And there it is. When challenged you resort to playing in the sandbox. It was pretty simple statement. OSU was passed over, despite the same record and a higher SOS. I simple showed that the system did not factor SOS and Bama was making the NC game, regardless if they won or lost the LSU game. There were no comments that Bama did not belong in the game. It was a discussion on the system. You take it personally and start getting all juvenile. That result is not completely unexpected given your past.