SEC BIAS IN THE BCS?

[UmphreakDomer]

There are some valid points but the truth of the matter is the SEC has really good football teams. I honestly don't understand why people care so much about the rankings until the end of the season because it typically works itself out. If some team goes undefeated and doesn't get in the NC game then they have a reason to complain about it. The most egregious thing we have seen in the BCS era is the 2004 Auburn team being left out of the NC game but nobody wants to talk about that right?

People cried about last year but everybody knew LSU and Bama were the two best teams in the country Oklahoma state lost to Iowa state.

i guess this is the part that i wouldnt agree with, based upon HOW it's all set up in the beginning, then how losses are weighted differently as the season continues. i'm not so sure a 1 loss SEC team and 1 loss PAC-12/Big 12 or possibly a B1G team are that much different. with so many potential variables thrown in, the bias is that the SEC is a more elite and that a loss is not as "frowned upon".

You are correct though, the teams that have the largest soapboxes are the ones that are undefeated and left out of the discussion. i just really hope that the playoff system will bring a bit more quality OOC games and less Savannah States (good for Savannah's pocket book, bad for football).

All of this is still only protection of ESPN/ABC/Disney's investment. Spend a bunch of money to own the TV rights, make sure those teams make it to the biggest game--with the most revenue generating advertising--thus maximizing your profit margin. are those teams good? yes. but, you have to admit, it's still slanted to get those particular teams (or obviously, at least one) into the championship game.

 

[UmphreakDomer]

Yes, the SEC is completely overrated as a "top to bottom" conference almost every year. The reason why is actually quite simple.

1. Every year the SEC has at least 1 world-beater team that is the best team in college football by a large margin. Some years they have 2. Which means when those two teams show out in the BCS and kick the crap out of their championship game and/or sugar bowl opponent it validates the conference. As the article points out... the weird thing is when Alabama loses to Utah or Arkansas to Ohio State... somehow the narrative is "other team got lucky" or "wow what shocker!" or something to that effect.

2. Most SEC teams play NO ONE outside of conference. It's really a joke. Florida plays FSU, South Carolina plays Clemson, etc.... but that's usually it. There are almost always at least 2-3 pure cupcakes on every SEC team's schedule. Therefor, at the end of the year, their records are always inflated.

3. The bottom half of the SEC is often a joke.... just like the bottom half of any conference. So the top 4-5 teams every year finish with somewhere near 7 automatic wins. Just look at Georgia this year... Buffalo, FAU, Vandy, Kentucky, Ole Miss, Auburn, Georgia Southern, Georgia Tech.... that's 8 teams who SUCK. Those are all seriously crappy teams. Georgia plays EIGHT of them. That means even if Georgia was totally average... they would get a minimum of 8 wins... and the kicker? They get lauded for their oh so tough SEC schedule... what a farce.

To take is a step further, the top of those 8 games they get two against average Missouri and Tennessee teams... and then two legit games against Florida/South Carolina. So they can go 0-2 against legit teams and still finish 10-2 with credit for "playing a tough schedule." Compare that to ND... who has to play at least five legit teams (Stanford, USC, Oklahoma, Michigan, Michigan State) plus three average teams (BYU, Miami, Purdue) and then four bad teams (Pitt, Boston College, Wake Forest, Navy). It's ridiculous. And once they start objectively weighting SOS in the playoff formula it'll finally count against these guys.

i tried. you succeeded. great post.

 

[ALLGATOR]

i guess this is the part that i wouldnt agree with, based upon HOW it's all set up in the beginning, then how losses are weighted differently as the season continues. i'm not so sure a 1 loss SEC team and 1 loss PAC-12/Big 12 or possibly a B1G team are that much different. with so many potential variables thrown in, the bias is that the SEC is a more elite and that a loss is not as "frowned upon".

You are correct though, the teams that have the largest soapboxes are the ones that are undefeated and left out of the discussion. i just really hope that the playoff system will bring a bit more quality OOC games and less Savannah States (good for Savannah's pocket book, bad for football).

All of this is still only protection of ESPN/ABC/Disney's investment. Spend a bunch of money to own the TV rights, make sure those teams make it to the biggest game--with the most revenue generating advertising--thus maximizing your profit margin. are those teams good? yes. but, you have to admit, it's still slanted to get those particular teams (or obviously, at least one) into the championship game.

The playoff system is going to change nothing at all no matter what the top SEC team will get in the 4 team playoff and proceed to win it. Remember Mike Slive was the conference commissioner pushing for the playoff the most. This year didn't Savannah state play FSU and Oklahoma state?

actually lets look at the conference ND has a partnership with now and their OCC games

BC -Amry & Maine
Clemson -Furman & Ball state
Duke - FIU Memphis
FSU- savanna state & Murray State
GT- Presbyterian & MTSU
Maryland- William & Marry
Miami Bethune-Cookman
UNC- Elon & Idaho
NCST- South Alabama & Citadel
Virginia- Richmond & Louisiana Tech (Bet they didnt not see that as a loss)
VT- Austin Peay & BG
Wake Forest- Liberty & Army

so the real question is "is the SEC going to add one more conference game"?

 

[UmphreakDomer]

The playoff system is going to change nothing at all no matter what the top SEC team will get in the 4 team playoff and proceed to win it. Remember Mike Slive was the conference commissioner pushing for the playoff the most. This year didn't Savannah state play FSU and Oklahoma state?

actually lets look at the conference ND has a partnership with now and their OCC games

BC -Amry & Maine
Clemson -Furman & Ball state
Duke - FIU Memphis
FSU- savanna state & Murray State
GT- Presbyterian & MTSU
Maryland- William & Marry
Miami Bethune-Cookman
UNC- Elon & Idaho
NCST- South Alabama & Citadel
Virginia- Richmond & Louisiana Tech (Bet they didnt not see that as a loss)
VT- Austin Peay & BG
Wake Forest- Liberty & Army

so the real question is "is the SEC going to add one more conference game"?

i'm hoping that OOC games have increased competition across the board for all conferences.

 

[ALLGATOR]

i'm hoping that OOC games have increased competition across the board for all conferences.

From a fan perspective it would be great to see more competitive games but AD's dont look at it like that. Only 4 teams are getting into the playoffs. If you are the AD at Miss state or UNC why would you add another home and home? You dont believe that you are actually going to be in the title hunt plus you would lose revenue.

 

[North Buffalo Irish]

well good to know that some ND fans are looking at the whole picture. Random but the one game I would have loved to see this year is ND vs Tennessee.

So you think we are only on UT's level? You don't think we could go toe-to-toe with Florida, Georgia, LSU, Mississippi State?

I'd like to hear your take on a potential ND/UF matchup.

 

[UmphreakDomer]

From a fan perspective it would be great to see more competitive games but AD's dont look at it like that. Only 4 teams are getting into the playoffs. If you are the AD at Miss state or UNC why would you add another home and home? You dont believe that you are actually going to be in the title hunt plus you would lose revenue.

i'd tell you for certain, it would hold more water for me to see SEC teams actually LEAVE SEC country.

and i dont really think there is much loss of revenue if there are two competitive teams. there would probably be more of a calling for a prime time matchup. the biggest losers in this scenario would really just be the savanna states, because they do want to play the pay check games.

 

[Dizzyphil]

I believe that if a team schedules an out-of-conference game with a team that is not a FBS Div-1A team, they should not be eligible for the upcoming play-offs or the 6-game count towards bowl eligibility.

But that is just me.

Diz

 

[IrishLax]

From a fan perspective it would be great to see more competitive games but AD's dont look at it like that. Only 4 teams are getting into the playoffs. If you are the AD at Miss state or UNC why would you add another home and home? You dont believe that you are actually going to be in the title hunt plus you would lose revenue.

That's just wrong. Simply ignorant of things going on right now in CFB. Sorry to be harsh, but it's true. Many teams have already announced intentions to up their SOS. The playoff system is going to strongly weight SOS and teams are going away from cupcakes.

Here are a couple links about Ohio State already making moves:
Gene Smith: Ohio State looking to schedule fewer MAC teams | CollegeFootballTalk
Ohio State Buckeyes and TCU Horned Frogs to play home-and-home series - ESPN
Major college football powers returning to bold scheduling of exciting non-conference games - Yahoo! Sports

 

[ALLGATOR]

So you think we are only on UT's level? You don't think we could go toe-to-toe with Florida, Georgia, LSU, Mississippi State?

I'd like to hear your take on a potential ND/UF matchup.

I did not say you are only on UT's level I just want to see that game. ND has a nice front 7 but UT's QB can sling it and they have some really good WR's and TE's. It would be interesting to see if the line could get to the QB in time also I want to see how deep your Lb's could drop to help out your secondary. Plus UT's D is huge upfront but there secondary sucks so I would like to see ND O vs UT's D.


I just cant see ND moving the football on Florida. Score would be probably 17-6 maybe 17-10 that's me thinking your defense creates a turnover and you guys score off a short field.

 

[ALLGATOR]

That's just wrong. Simply ignorant of things going on right now in CFB. Sorry to be harsh, but it's true. Many teams have already announced intentions to up their SOS. The playoff system is going to strongly weight SOS and teams are going away from cupcakes.

Here are a couple links about Ohio State already making moves:
Gene Smith: Ohio State looking to schedule fewer MAC teams | CollegeFootballTalk
Ohio State Buckeyes and TCU Horned Frogs to play home-and-home series - ESPN
Major college football powers returning to bold scheduling of exciting non-conference games - Yahoo! Sports

I was just going to ignore your post but where are you showing me I am wrong? Because Ohio State is playing a home & home with TCU?

 

[IrishLax]

I was just going to ignore your post but where are you showing me I am wrong? Because Ohio State is playing a home & home with TCU?

Are you serious right now? I just gave you 3 articles as a specific anecdote of what I'm talking about.

The first illustrates exactly how an athletic director at a major university is doing the EXACT OPPOSITE what you're suggesting. The Ohio State AD is saying specifically that the new playoff format weighting SOS will make them drop MAC teams and schedule harder opponents in the future.

The next article details the new arrangement... showing that he followed through on what he said he would do.

Then the final one has a headline talking about how college football powers are going to be returning to scheduling big marquee matchups because of the new format weighting SOS.

I don't understand how it is even open interpretation. You're flat out wrong in what you said. Athletic directors across the country are looking to improve OOC games because if they don't they will get left out of the playoff due to poor SOS.... and are working on scheduling those games as we speak. Ohio State is the first example of this already happening mere weeks after the college football playoff system was announced.

 

[West Coast Domer]

I did not say you are only on UT's level I just want to see that game. ND has a nice front 7 but UT's QB can sling it and they have some really good WR's and TE's. It would be interesting to see if the line could get to the QB in time also I want to see how deep your Lb's could drop to help out your secondary. Plus UT's D is huge upfront but there secondary sucks so I would like to see ND O vs UT's D.


I just cant see ND moving the football on Florida. Score would be probably 17-6 maybe 17-10 that's me thinking your defense creates a turnover and you guys score off a short field.

The scary thing is aren't you still missing Ronald Powell?

 

[ahommell]

It is simply stunning that no one has mentioned ND this season. ND had hands down the toughest looking schedule week 1. Yet, now it is tough, but not impossible by any means. And where is ND? In the top ten!

The key here is this. SOS has become a more telling factor for teams not in the top 15 to start the season. LSU gets to barely beat the Towson's of the world and remain in the glorified positions because they are "undefeated." Once defeated by someone in their conference, that foe is vaulted as a new "top dog."
Notre Dame is disadvantaged because we play the same teams who are not always the top dogs in their conference. Michigan and Michigan State are not "bad" teams. They just are looked at as bad after their losses to ND. Was Miami really "bad" with 1 loss in their schedule? No. However, if they win out the rest of their schedule they will barely get a sniff of the top 25 at all. Maybe in the bottom 5 if they get lucky.
This article isn't perfect, but definitely asks readers to question the way we do things currently with the preseason polls. They are mostly hogwash anyways.
Do I think Alabama is the number 1 team in the country? Sure. But do I think that they are "far and away the best and that the rest of the SEC is screwed?" No. Alabama could be beat by Georgia, South Carolina, Florida (I know a stretch) and on a really bad day, LSU.

 

[ALLGATOR]

Are you serious right now? I just gave you 3 articles as a specific anecdote of what I'm talking about.

The first illustrates exactly how an athletic director at a major university is doing the EXACT OPPOSITE what you're suggesting. The Ohio State AD is saying specifically that the new playoff format weighting SOS will make them drop MAC teams and schedule harder opponents in the future.

The next article details the new arrangement... showing that he followed through on what he said he would do.

Then the final one has a headline talking about how college football powers are going to be returning to scheduling big marquee matchups because of the new format weighting SOS.

I don't understand how it is even open interpretation. You're flat out wrong in what you said. Athletic directors across the country are looking to improve OOC games because if they don't they will get left out of the playoff due to poor SOS.... and are working on scheduling those games as we speak. Ohio State is the first example of this already happening mere weeks after the college football playoff system was announced.

what reason do schools like Miss state and UNC have? Do those seem like football powers?

4 teams are going to get into the playoff thats it. Realistically how many AD's actually think their team is going to be in the top 8 at the end of the year and are scared of not getting in the playoff?

Do you think SEC Ad's believe they have to strengthen their OCC schedule to make it in the playoffs? Or do you think they believe if they win the conference they will be in the playoff?

So how many teams are we really talking about Lax?

 

[ALLGATOR]

The scary thing is aren't you still missing Ronald Powell?

Yes we are missing Powell he is not going to play this year had a set back with the knee. Lerentee McCray has filled in nicely as the pass rusher and the freshmen have added needed depth. The most exciting part is seeing Muschamps plan producing and knowing how much better we will be in a few years. I know you guys probably feel the same way about Kelly.

 

[irishog77]

I think it's cute that allgaytor comes on here and patronizes us by telling us how we can't stack up against Florida and the SEC. Quick math check-- didn't Florida win a whopping 15 games the past two seasons? But hey, Florida's put up a good showing against LSU and Bowling Green this year, so obviously they are an elite team...that ND COULD play close, if we get some breaks and turnovers. And he lets us know we'd be a good match up with Tennessee-- an also-ran team for 10 years.

"Does a flake know he's a flake?" Seems like an appropriate question regarding the article in the OP and this chump's posts in here. After all, if we keep telling ourselves the same thing over and over, it has to be true. Correct?

 

[IrishLax]

Good response! Seriously.

what reason do schools like Miss state and UNC have? Do those seem like football powers?

Well, what do teams play for? A conference championship? Playoffs? You raise a good question... you can still compete for a conference championship without doing anything to your OOC schedule. So if you decide that you don't care about playoffs..... then I guess it would have no effect? But would any ADs really concede not competing for a championship in a given sport? Hard to imagine... anyone can go from the basement to being a "power" seemingly overnight. Just look at Stanford. They went from 1-11 to BCS in ~4 years.... and have basically no fan base/care about football. So I'd imagine that all ADs will move towards dropping FCS and low-tier FBS schools.... but I could be wrong. You might only see it from about 6-8 teams per conference... so about 40 or so schools is all you can guarantee in terms of actively trying to beef up schedule.

4 teams are going to get into the playoff thats it. Realistically how many AD's actually think their team is going to be in the top 8 at the end of the year and are scared of not getting in the playoff?

Probably more than you think. Or at least more than you think would strive for it. Let's look at the SEC for a second... how many of those teams do you think are willing to forgo competing for a playoff spot? Kentucky? Mississippi State? Vandy? Ole Miss? That's only 4 of the 14 teams. Any more that you would add?

Do you think SEC Ad's believe they have to strengthen their OCC schedule to make it in the playoffs? Or do you think they believe if they win the conference they will be in the playoff?

So how many teams are we really talking about Lax?

The first place SEC, no. But what about the second place SEC team? That's the team you should be thinking about. Teams will beef up their OOC schedule because they want to be able to get in if they go 12-1 with an SEC championship game loss over a 12-1 champ from the Big Ten.... put yourself in, say, Georgia's shoes. Are they going to want to leave all three of Buffalo, FAU, and Georgia Southern on their roster and risk getting left out if they lose to 'Bama in the SEC championship game? Very doubtful. They're likely to drop at least one of those teams in favor of a bigger OOC game.

 

[ALLGATOR]

I think it's cute that allgaytor comes on here and patronizes us by telling us how we can't stack up against Florida and the SEC. Quick math check-- didn't Florida win a whopping 15 games the past two seasons? But hey, Florida's put up a good showing against LSU and Bowling Green this year, so obviously they are an elite team...that ND COULD play close, if we get some breaks and turnovers. And he lets us know we'd be a good match up with Tennessee-- an also-ran team for 10 years.

I was asked a question I answered it I also never said ND "cant stack up against Florida and the SEC."

 

[UmphreakDomer]

what reason do schools like Miss state and UNC have? Do those seem like football powers?

4 teams are going to get into the playoff thats it. Realistically how many AD's actually think their team is going to be in the top 8 at the end of the year and are scared of not getting in the playoff?

Do you think SEC Ad's believe they have to strengthen their OCC schedule to make it in the playoffs? Or do you think they believe if they win the conference they will be in the playoff?

So how many teams are we really talking about Lax?

i think the article is saying that as of the system in place right now, they dont. no one does, but especially the SEC.

with a playoff system, maybe the other conferences will have to play the OOC "game" to catch up to the SEC, maybe the SEC adds one BCS conference game and calls it good. we will have to see.

regardless, the argument of the SEC to have more than just the conference champion in the playoff (meaning you get your alabama and a 1 loss LSU or UF or whoever and maybe more than only one). that part is bullshit as well. and is still slanted towards ESPN's overall goal of getting its "home" conference into the biggest game(s).

 

[irishog77]

I was asked a question I answered it I also never said ND "cant stack up against Florida and the SEC."

Most ND fans have this trait called "intelligence." I know this is new to you, as you're probably used to hanging out in your jorts and mullet watching the game with you're knocked-up girlfriend, out-of-work-brother-in-law, chain-smoking sister, and Vienna sausage-eating uncle who is home early on the account of good behavior [interesting sidestory-- in the above scenario, 4 other people are mentioned, but there are actually only 3 people with him watching the game], but simply because you don't say something specifically, doesn't mean you didn't imply a connotation or outcome. Do you need to be explained your Michael Deeb behavior again?

 

[ALLGATOR]

IrishLax I think a ton of AD'd understand "their place" in college football. They try to change it but they understand how things work. I believe many will choose the extra home game revenue over adding another big game. BIG10 Big east ACC might want to think about their schedule though but it would need to be one of the perennial powers. Maybe they can do some more of those Neutral site games.


In the SEC they only talk about one thing when it comes to goals. That goal is to get the Atlanta (SEC championship). People are not thinking about "well what is we are 2nd or 3rd place in the SEC will we get into the playoff?"

 

[IrishLax]

IrishLax I think a ton of AD'd understand "their place" in college football. They try to change it but they understand how things work. I believe many will choose the extra home game revenue over adding another big game. BIG10 Big east ACC might want to think about their schedule though but it would need to be one of the perennial powers. Maybe they can do some more of those Neutral site games.


In the SEC they only talk about one thing when it comes to goals. That goal is to get the Atlanta (SEC championship). People are not thinking about "well what is we are 2nd or 3rd place in the SEC will we get into the playoff?"

I think that's incredibly off base. You think Utah doesn't care about competing for a playoff spot? Boise? TCU? These are little time schools that are going to absolutely have leadership that expects to compete. Maybe some will choose the "extra revenue" but remember they have to pay those cupcakes to come to town and play to begin with... I think the tradeoff between splitting a neutral site game purse and bringing Bethune-Cookman to town isn't as big as you think.

Well, maybe that's the mentality. I'm not an SEC guy. But realize what you're saying... adding a big OOC game doesn't affect that goal of getting to the SEC championship whatsoever. All it does is help you get in the playoff. So there is only positives and no negatives to adding that game against a good team and not a 3rd cupcake. If your point is that they're going to lose money by adding that game... well, I'd really like to see the math on that. But I don't have any to say you're wrong either. Clearly, big time schools don't really care though based on public comments, Ohio State's actions, etc. The mid tier schools? You might have a point there. I'm not sure.

 

[ALLGATOR]

I think that's incredibly off base. You think Utah doesn't care about competing for a playoff spot? Boise? TCU? These are little time schools that are going to absolutely have leadership that expects to compete. Maybe some will choose the "extra revenue" but remember they have to pay those cupcakes to come to town and play to begin with... I think the tradeoff between splitting a neutral site game purse and bringing Bethune-Cookman to town isn't as big as you think.

Well, maybe that's the mentality. I'm not an SEC guy. But realize what you're saying... adding a big OOC game doesn't affect that goal of getting to the SEC championship whatsoever. All it does is help you get in the playoff. So there is only positives and no negatives to adding that game against a good team and not a 3rd cupcake. If your point is that they're going to lose money by adding that game... well, I'd really like to see the math on that. But I don't have any to say you're wrong either. Clearly, big time schools don't really care though based on public comments, Ohio State's actions, etc. The mid tier schools? You might have a point there. I'm not sure.

Utah's goal right now is to win the Pac 10 not to get to the playoff/ Same with TCU they need to be worried about winning the Big 12. If I am Boise's AD I set up a neutral site game. Paying cupcakes $500,000 is still a good investment for a team that has a large fan base.

Good point on the losing some OCC game doesnt affect wining the SEC. But Losing an OCC does affect getting into the playoffs.

Gene Smith is a liar so whatever he says I take with a grain of salt. Also didn't Ohio state play Texas a few years ago in a home and home what was the reason then?


I just dont see it having that big of affect on OCC scheduling we will have to wait and see. I also think you point would be more valid if it was an 8 or 16 team playoff.

 

[Grahambo]

Lax vs Gator:

 

[johnnykillz]

Lax vs Gator:

That's some violent ****. Damn.

Lol.

 

[ALLGATOR]

Lax vs Gator:

what?

 

[UmphreakDomer]

Lax vs Gator:

and i guess thats me on the bike.

 

[Grahambo]

what?

It's a joke to lighten the mood in this thread. Didn't say who represented who. Just a good ol' street fight between the both of you in this thread.

 

[Grahambo]

That's some violent ****. Damn.

Lol.

That's how I kinda view some of these threads. It's like they use words as ninja stars.