BCS rankings 2013

[phork]

Don't know why anyone is shocked at our rankings. Michigan was 5-1 and unranked at one point. Almost losing to teams you should stomp will do that to you. And as far as ND goes the pundits are holding Prove It signs at ND.

 

[IrishLax]

Legit. ASU is better than us. Get over it.

 

[ickythump1225]

Don't know why anyone is shocked at our rankings. Michigan was 5-1 and unranked at one point. Almost losing to teams you should stomp will do that to you. And as far as ND goes the pundits are holding Prove It signs at ND.

We did "prove" that we are a better team than ASU on the field. There is no logic behind us being ranked behind them...none. It's not like they have a better record than us like MSU does, they have the exact same ranking and we've played mostly equivalent schedules.

 

[ickythump1225]

Legit. ASU is better than us. Get over it.

You're missing the italics.

 

[ickythump1225]

It's too bad this season is literally BCS or bust this year.

SB Nation put out their new version of bowl predictions today. They have UCF in the Sugar Bowl playing A&M and Fresno State playing in the Fiesta Bowl against Baylor.

They have us playing the Pinstripe Bowl against Cinci

Is there no scenario in which we could play in the Chick-fil-A Bowl? I would love that because I would definitely go to that game.

 

[Redbar]

Legit. ASU is better than us. Get over it.

Then why did we bother playing them? And, by the way, beating them.

 

[BabyIrish]

TBH, I wish the ranking was higher, but just keep winning and the ranking will take care of itself. I'm hoping Stanford will beat Oregon again and somehow we can pull off the upset against them

 

[ickythump1225]

TBH, I wish the ranking was higher, but just keep winning and the ranking will take care of itself. I'm hoping Stanford will beat Oregon again and somehow we can pull off the upset against them

If the Tree beats Oregon they should be ranked no lower than #4 when we play them. Beating them on the road will be worth about 6 or 7 spots in the polls in and of itself.

If we win out and still don't get a BCS bowl I won't lose any sleep over it though honestly. When Golson got suspended I kind of wrote this season off anyway and expected 9 wins (10 with a bowl win) and we're still on track for that. 11-2 (or 10-3) with a Pinstripe Bowl win or something is not a bad year all things considered. Honestly if we're not in the MNC all the bowls kind of run together for me anyway. It'd be nice to get in a BCS game and actually win one but it's not something I get up in arms about.

 

[NDhoosier]

Legit. ASU is better than us. Get over it.

I hope you were being sarcastic, because that is a pretty dumb thing to say.
No they arent, I have proof. What proof do you have?

 

[Irish#1]

I posted earlier in this thread that we weren't going to make much of a jump if any. The teams ahead of us that lose aren't getting penalized much as we did when we lost. The only was we make a significant jump is to win our last three games and two of those we need to win by about 21 or more.

 

[CanadalovesND]

I'll take the Pinstripe Bowl.

Currently, it would be Notre Dame vs Cincinnati.

Matchup normally is between #4 AAC & #7 Big 12

Only 5 Big 12 teams are currently bowl eligible.

Currently battling for 6th and 7th is Kansas State (4-4) and West Virginia (4-5). If both teams win 2 more games, well then, we ain't going to New York.

Other destination would be the Poinsetta Bowl, which this year is supposed to be Army vs a MWC team.

Army, however, is one more loss away from being ineligible, and thus, we would get the game.


*** All of this would happen if we either A) Win out but somehow don't get an At-Large selection and/or B) Lose a game ***

 

[GATTACA!]

Is there any scenario if we win out and make a BCS bowl that would could play Northern Illinois/Fresno State?

 

[johnnycando]

Is there any scenario if we win out and make a BCS bowl that would could play Northern Illinois/Fresno State?

I thought that last night

Lol.

Imagine a clean shot at a W.

Which might be wrongly inspired. They might be legit. - our luck.

 

[IrishLax]

I hope you were being sarcastic, because that is a pretty dumb thing to say.
No they arent, I have proof. What proof do you have?

All vanilla stats, advanced stats, computer metrics, and the all-important flawed eye test. ASU stomps people. We've barely eeked out wins (all but Temple and Air Force by a single score).

You all want to be about the head-to-head matchup as if that matters. It's borderline completely irrelevant, as it can't be applied consistently in evaluating teams and is simply too small a sample size. Notre Dame got beat solidly by Michigan and has the same number of losses, but I don't see anyone campaigning for the Wolverines to be ranked higher. Why? Because ND has a better body of work.

 

[Junkhead]

I'm not worried about a BCS bowl. With this many injuries, we're not beating anyone that good anyway.

 

[irishfan]

All vanilla stats, advanced stats, computer metrics, and the all-important flawed eye test. ASU stomps people. We've barely eeked out wins (all but Temple and Air Force by a single score).

You all want to be about the head-to-head matchup as if that matters. It's borderline completely irrelevant, as it can't be applied consistently in evaluating teams and is simply too small a sample size. Notre Dame got beat solidly by Michigan and has the same number of losses, but I don't see anyone campaigning for the Wolverines to be ranked higher. Why? Because ND has a better body of work.

Eh, I agree with you on most things, but not on this one. I think ASU is legit and our best win, but I don't see how you can rate them ahead of ND considering the head-to-head we have over them. I wouldn't want to play them again lol but I don't think you can rank them ahead of ND. We've got the same amount of losses, we beat them head-to-head (obviously), they've got 3 legit wins (USC, Wash, Wisky), we've got 3 (USC, MSU, ASU).

I have no problem with MSU over us due to their record, but I really just think you've got to go with record, head-to-head, quality wins, over comparing the teams by talent. just my opinion.

 

[Redbar]

All vanilla stats, advanced stats, computer metrics, and the all-important flawed eye test. ASU stomps people. We've barely eeked out wins (all but Temple and Air Force by a single score).

You all want to be about the head-to-head matchup as if that matters. It's borderline completely irrelevant, as it can't be applied consistently in evaluating teams and is simply too small a sample size. Notre Dame got beat solidly by Michigan and has the same number of losses, but I don't see anyone campaigning for the Wolverines to be ranked higher. Why? Because ND has a better body of work.

I get what you are saying about the sample size, so in effect, the objective head to head w/l is too narrow in college football to be relevant, so the subjective arguments that can be made over "your body of work" or the fact that you "stomp people" or how people perceive your weaker opponents like the service academies and preseason rankings become more objective than a head to head contest.
My only response is that this setup is absolutely ideal for a sports writer or sports network, any talking head. College Football needs an expanded playoff system.

 

[DillonHall]

I'm not worried about a BCS bowl. With this many injuries, we're not beating anyone that good anyway.

Every year, there are 2-3 good (not great) teams that make the BCS

 

[Dizzyphil]

I believe the Irish are right where they need to be. The offense is rated 73rd and defense is 36th right now and it shows in both categories.

GO IRISH!!!!!!
Diz

 

[irishfan]

Mark Schlabach of ESPN currently projects us to play in the Heart of Dallas Bowl against North Texas. Jerry Palm at CBS is projecting us to play against Rice in that same bowl. I'd take our chances in the BCS over playing in a bowl that no one will care about.

 

[stlnd01]

Mark Schlabach of ESPN currently projects us to play in the Heart of Dallas Bowl against North Texas. Jerry Palm at CBS is projecting us to play against Rice in that same bowl. I'd take our chances in the BCS over playing in a bowl that no one will care about.

Those projections are based on us losing to Stanford (and perhaps BYU too), as both have Stanford going BCS at-large. If we lose to Stanford - or BYU or Pitt - it is a near-lock that we will play in a bowl no one will care about, no matter what any of us would prefer. But if we win out, we should have a pretty good shot at a BCS bid. For us this year it's really that simple.

 

[Junkhead]

Every year, there are 2-3 good (not great) teams that make the BCS

True. It might sound bad, but I'd hate to get stomped in another BCS bowl. Is it better to win a lesser bowl? Who knows....

 

[stlnd01]

Legit. ASU is better than us. Get over it.

Based on what? That they beat USC by more than we did? That they win with passing and we win with defense? Big deal. We have comparable wins and the same number of losses. One of their losses happens to be to us. We also have another shot at at a common opponent in Stanford. If we lose that game, this conversation doesn't matter. But if we win it, we've beaten a team that beat them.
Will be very surprised if, at season's end, they're an at-large BCS team and we're not.

 

[IrishLax]

Based on what? That they beat USC by more than we did? That they win with passing and we win with defense? Big deal. We have comparable wins and the same number of losses. One of their losses happens to be to us. We also have another shot at at a common opponent in Stanford. If we lose that game, this conversation doesn't matter. But if we win it, we've beaten a team that beat them.
Will be very surprised if, at season's end, they're an at-large BCS team and we're not.

Again, based on all objective statistical aggregates, among other things.

To justify ND over ASU you have to:
1) Completely throw out point differential.
2) Completely throw out efficiency and all other advanced stats.
3) Heavily weight the head-to-head result of one game where ND won close.
4) Heavily weight the fact that ND has slightly better "best wins" with MSU/ASU vs. WISC/WASH.

 

[IrishLion]

All vanilla stats, advanced stats, computer metrics, and the all-important flawed eye test. ASU stomps people. We've barely eeked out wins (all but Temple and Air Force by a single score).

You all want to be about the head-to-head matchup as if that matters. It's borderline completely irrelevant, as it can't be applied consistently in evaluating teams and is simply too small a sample size. Notre Dame got beat solidly by Michigan and has the same number of losses, but I don't see anyone campaigning for the Wolverines to be ranked higher. Why? Because ND has a better body of work.

That's like saying a National Championship is irrelevant... sure they are the top two ranked teams, but if they only play once and it's a close game, do we "really" know who the champ should be?

I understand your argument, but you must also consider the trajectory of the teams in question. ASU and ND are on a "similar" trajectory in that they both keep winning (though, as you noted, ASU is destroying people). However, Michigan is trending downward. I think ND would beat ASU again as the offense continues to improve... I also think ND would beat Michigan if they played again, for the same reason. So I don't think Michigan should be ranked ahead of ND.

 

[stlnd01]

Again, based on all objective statistical aggregates, among other things.

To justify ND over ASU you have to:
1) Completely throw out point differential.
2) Completely throw out efficiency and all other advanced stats.
3) Heavily weight the head-to-head result of one game where ND won close.
4) Heavily weight the fact that ND has slightly better "best wins" with MSU/ASU vs. WISC/WASH.

OK. But I can make these counter-arguments:
1) Point differential is a crude stat biased against teams that win with defense.
2) Efficiency and advanced metrics are nice but frankly most voters don't pay attention to that stuff. Certainly not the voters who care about point differential.
3) We beat them. That matters. And that was really a ten-point game with a cheap score by them at the end.
4) Both our "best" wins are ranked ahead of either of theirs. And they were extremely lucky to beat Wisconsin.

There are cases to be made for both teams. This is no slam dunk.
But in the long run it doesn't matter. If Arizona State finishes the season with two losses, they will almost certainly have won the Pac-12 (they would have beaten UCLA and Arizona to win the Pac-12 South and then Oregon in the Pac-12 title game) and be playing in the Rose Bowl. If they lose another game, they're almost surely out of the at-large hunt. If we lose another game, so are we.
It's possible we're both in BCS bowls. It's more likely neither of us are. But it would take a lot of things to happen before ASU beats us out for an at-large slot.

 

[gkIrish]

I agree generally with Lax's premise and think ASU is better on the eye test. However, we basically beat them by 10 and we have a superior best win. Plus we have a longer current winning streak. And they beat Wisconsin on terrible officiating. Other than their relatively more impressive win over USC and margin of victory, not much to debate.

 

[philipm31]

If we are counting USC as a good win for ND, should we not also count it for ASU?

In which case, ASU has just as much argument to be where they are, above us, since they would have more "quality wins".

Win out though and I think we would be fine. Lose any game between now and Stanford and this is all moot anyway.

Which is kinda why coaches preach NOT to get ahead of yourselves. It is nice to speculate and to also be given the benefit of hindsight and all, but there is solid evidence that can only be in ND's favor should it win out and ASU does not. If both were to win out, though....

 

[philipm31]

OK. But I can make these counter-arguments:
1) Point differential is a crude stat biased against teams that win with defense.
2) Efficiency and advanced metrics are nice but frankly most voters don't pay attention to that stuff. Certainly not the voters who care about point differential.
3) We beat them. That matters. And that was really a ten-point game with a cheap score by them at the end.
4) Both our "best" wins are ranked ahead of either of theirs. And they were extremely lucky to beat Wisconsin.

There are cases to be made for both teams. This is no slam dunk.
But in the long run it doesn't matter. If Arizona State finishes the season with two losses, they will almost certainly have won the Pac-12 (they would have beaten UCLA and Arizona to win the Pac-12 South and then Oregon in the Pac-12 title game) and be playing in the Rose Bowl. If they lose another game, they're almost surely out of the at-large hunt. If we lose another game, so are we.
It's possible we're both in BCS bowls. It's more likely neither of us are. But it would take a lot of things to happen before ASU beats us out for an at-large slot.

Sure the game was a bigger win for the Irish than the point differential would indicate...but then again, the ND win against FSU was 14 points until Kez McCorvey made a ridiculous 4th down catch to cut it to seven....and ND lost their bid for a split title that year because of the BC loss AND because people thought they barely were better than FSU, when they were clearly just as good as the Noles that year.

Head to head matters a lot, but it is NOT the deciding factor, nor should it be.

 

[BobD]

We just need to worry about beating Pitt.