College Football Playoff Rankings 2015 (ND #8...)

[pkt77242]

Honestly, I disagree. The committee has basically said and shown this year and last year that if you want a shot at the playoff, schedule better. The Big 12 OoC is a punchline at this point.

I don't think you should paint all of the Big12 with the same brush. Oklahoma (Tennessee) and Texas (ND and California) both had decent OoC schedules this year.

 

[phork]

I think scheduling FCS teams should count as losses. Everyone says ND needs to join a conference. I don't get why? Our schedule is comparable to any conference schedule. In up years USC is a top10 team, Stanford is a top10 team. Texas has tradionally been a strong team. We can't help teams being down. We try to schedule the best.

 

[kmoose]

Honestly, I disagree. The committee has basically said and shown this year and last year that if you want a shot at the playoff, schedule better. The Big 12 OoC is a punchline at this point.

After THIS happened to Oklahoma, its kind of hard to blame them.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/btSGkMBrqI4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The most incredible and obvious homer job by officials that I have ever seen.........

 

[wizards8507]

Oklahoma's OOC is nowhere near as bad as Baylor and TCU

 

[Cackalacky]

I don't think you should paint all of the Big12 with the same brush. Oklahoma (Tennessee) and Texas (ND) both had decent OoC schedules this year.

I don't think I am painting them with that brush, the committee is. I guess I agree that I don't consider their OOC schedule fantastic considering how bad a conference the Big 12 is overall.

Oklahoma played Akron, Tulsa and Tennessee. .... Meh
Texas played Rice and Cal and ND.... Meh

 

[pkt77242]

I don't think I am painting them with that brush, the committee is. I guess I agree that I don't consider their OOC schedule fantastic considering how bad a conference the Big 12 is overall.

Oklahoma played Akron, Tulsa and Tennessee. .... Meh
Texas played Rice and Cal and ND.... Meh

You are kidding right? Cal is going bowling (6-4 already) and ND is 9-1. Even though Rice isn't good, they are at least 4-6. Seriously, they have 3 Ooc games and two of them are against Power 5 teams. What do you expect their OoC schedule to look like?

 

[Cackalacky]

You are kidding right? Cal is going bowling (6-4 already) and ND is 9-1. Even though Rice isn't good, they are at least 4-6. Seriously, they have 3 Ooc games and two of them are against Power 5 teams. What do you expect their OoC schedule to look like?

I Will stand corrected for Texas. FEI has their SoS at 5... True.

Okaloma is at 46. Acceptable.

 

[pkt77242]

I Will stand corrected for Texas. FEI has their SoS at 5... True.

Okaloma is at 46. Acceptable.

I would agree with that. I would also agree with you that most of the Big 12 OoC schedules are horrible. Absolute trash.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Notre Dame or Oklahoma. Some insights from the SI CFB writers.

College Football Playoff: Debating, Notre Dame vs. Oklahoma? - College Football - SI.com

 

[kmoose]

I think scheduling FCS teams should count as losses. Everyone says ND needs to join a conference. I don't get why? Our schedule is comparable to any conference schedule. In up years USC is a top10 team, Stanford is a top10 team. Texas has tradionally been a strong team. We can't help teams being down. We try to schedule the best.

Here is the big argument for conference affiliation, and why ND should be made to join one:

When you play the same teams every year (or even most years), they get to know your tendencies and/or weaknesses, and it becomes a tougher game, even if you are the better team.

What people fail to acknowledge, though, is that ND has traditionally played the equivalent of a conference schedule by playing Navy, USC, Stanford, Mich/MichSt/Purdue/NW each and every season. Those teams played ND as much as any conference teams play each other.

 

[woolybug25]

On another note. Remember when everyone was saying that we needed to "dumb down" our schedule? Quit playing Navy? Need to schedule softer?

Here we are now, hanging on for dear life with the help of the likes of historic seasons for Navy and Temple. Change them out with Georgia Southern and Citadel and we aren't in the top 4. Replace one Texas with Abilene Christian University, we aren't in the Top 4.

 

[kmoose]

On another note. Remember when everyone was saying that we needed to "dumb down" our schedule? Quit playing Navy? Need to schedule softer?

Here we are now, hanging on for dear life with the help of the likes of historic seasons for Navy and Temple. Change them out with Georgia Southern and Citadel and we aren't in the top 4. Replace one Texas with Abilene Christian University, we aren't in the Top 4.

 

[Cackalacky]

On another note. Remember when everyone was saying that we needed to "dumb down" our schedule? Quit playing Navy? Need to schedule softer?

Here we are now, hanging on for dear life with the help of the likes of historic seasons for Navy and Temple. Change them out with Georgia Southern and Citadel and we aren't in the top 4. Replace one Texas with Abilene Christian University, we aren't in the Top 4.

Double werd. I said we had to have a tougher schedule a thousand times.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Here is the big argument for conference affiliation, and why ND should be made to join one:

When you play the same teams every year (or even most years), they get to know your tendencies and/or weaknesses, and it becomes a tougher game, even if you are the better team.

What people fail to acknowledge, though, is that ND has traditionally played the equivalent of a conference schedule by playing Navy, USC, Stanford, Mich/MichSt/Purdue/NW each and every season. Those teams played ND as much as any conference teams play each other.

I would argue it differently. If you are in a conference and you lose to another conference member, that team has to lose two games in conference before you are back ahead of them. Out of a conference you don't worry about that. That to me is the single biggest difference in the pro conference pro independent argument. Other arguments about revenue sharing, tv contracts, etc. aren't that big a deal to me.

 

[stlnd01]

Notre Dame or Oklahoma. Some insights from the SI CFB writers.

College Football Playoff: Debating, Notre Dame vs. Oklahoma? - College Football - SI.com

Pretty interesting.
A couple of the people who picked Oklahoma - especially that Chris Johnson - did so on rather legalistic terms (the committee says they value conference championships, and Notre Dame can't win one, so...)
Also OU seemed to get a lot of credit for their expected win over TCU, a win that probably won't count for as much by the time Oklahoma and Baylor are through with the Frogs.
That said, we get points for Navy, USC and even Temple that those squads haven't quite earned yet. And long run I'm not so sure we should really be hanging our playoff hopes on the "better loss" theory.
There's a strong argument for both sides. Here's hoping Ohio State or Alabama lose make it a moot point.

 

[stlnd01]

To your mother.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Pretty interesting.
A couple of the people who picked Oklahoma - especially that Chris Johnson - did so on rather legalistic terms (the committee says they value conference championships, and Notre Dame can't win one, so...)
Also OU seemed to get a lot of credit for their expected win over TCU, a win that probably won't count for as much by the time Oklahoma and Baylor are through with the Frogs.
That said, we get points for Navy, USC and even Temple that those squads haven't quite earned yet. And long run I'm not so sure we should really be hanging our playoff hopes on the "better loss" theory.
There's a strong argument for both sides. Here's hoping Ohio State or Alabama lose make it a moot point.

I agree. When it's all said and done and if things stay status quo, I just can't get past that Texas loss for Oklahoma.

 

[mick2]

We may not be able to win a conference. But we could potentially have wins over two conference champions. P12 and aac. And another game against the acc champ. And USC may be division champ in pac 12. I think that would really work in our favor.

Now saying that, I probably just jinxed it.

 

[kmoose]

I would argue it differently. If you are in a conference and you lose to another conference member, that team has to lose two games in conference before you are back ahead of them. Out of a conference you don't worry about that. That to me is the single biggest difference in the pro conference pro independent argument. Other arguments about revenue sharing, tv contracts, etc. aren't that big a deal to me.

If you are Independent, and you lose one game, you are a real long shot to make the playoffs. And winning your conference is not the point. The point is whether not conference games make for a tougher schedule, i.e.: harder to win games.

 

[T Town Tommy]

If you are Independent, and you lose one game, you are a real long shot to make the playoffs. And winning your conference is not the point. The point is whether not conference games make for a tougher schedule, i.e.: harder to win games.

Not necessarily. Most years the conference champ is not undefeated. I do agree winning the conference is not the point. But there are inherent issues for both being in a conference and not being in a conference. I just mentioned the one I think negatively impacts a team if they do actually lose a conference game. Ole Miss could have won every other conference game, lost to their OOC opponents and still represented the West in the SECCG. Notre Dame loses one game and the biggest things they have to worry about in whether another conference champ has one loss and if their SOS is enough to overtake them. That's a huge difference to me. End of the day, don't lose and we don't have to worry about those scenarios.

 

[stlnd01]

If you are Independent, and you lose one game, you are a real long shot to make the playoffs. And winning your conference is not the point. The point is whether not conference games make for a tougher schedule, i.e.: harder to win games.

How do conference games make for a tougher schedule? If we were in the ACC full-time we (maybe) play Clemson, Florida State, and who? Not the likes of Stanford or USC. It's an easier schedule.
Same in the Big 12, the Big 10 West, the SEC East. What it gets you is the conference championship game as a late-season boost and some inherent bias from the "conference championship or it didn't happen" crowd.
Any objective look at quality of schedule would put ours ahead of most P5 conference teams.

 

[johnnycando]

AND FOR THE 3rd of 4th time,

The Big 12 has no conference championship game! They play 12. The boost comes from a 13th game/win.

 

[ickythump1225]

If we played in the ACC we would have an easier schedule year in and year out. Especially if we played in the one that UNC is prison raping right now.

 

[IrishinSyria]

After THIS happened to Oklahoma, its kind of hard to blame them.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/btSGkMBrqI4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The most incredible and obvious homer job by officials that I have ever seen.........

They must have replayed that 50 times and never once played it long enough to show when a player actually took possession of the ball.

 

[IrishinSyria]

AND FOR THE 3rd of 4th time,

The Big 12 has no conference championship game! They play 12. The boost comes from a 13th game/win.

This is only partly correct.

There is a boost for SOS, and playing in a championship game almost inevitably raises that.

There is also a boost for winning a conference championship.

Hypo: The SEC East and SEC West are evenly matched. Alabama and Florida play each other near the end of the regular season and Alabama wins by 14. In the SEC CG, an 11-1 Florida beats a 12-0 Alabama by 3. Both teams finish 12-1. The PAC 10, BIG 10, and ACC winners all went undefeated. Does Florida or Alabama get the last spot?

Championships matter on their own merits, the committee's been clear about that.

 

[House16]

AND FOR THE 3rd of 4th time,

The Big 12 has no conference championship game! They play 12. The boost comes from a 13th game/win.

Totally wrong. There is a boost for being conference champion, not for winning a conference championship game. Hence why Baylor jumped TCU in the last rankings of the season. (Of course, winning the CCG can serve as a boost in its own right, as pointed out above).

 

[ulukinatme]

AND FOR THE 3rd of 4th time,

The Big 12 has no conference championship game! They play 12. The boost comes from a 13th game/win.

This. While it's nice to say the Big 12 has a champion, it's effectively meaningless because we play as many 5 teams as OK St and Baylor did, and 1 less than Oklahoma and TCU. It was that 13th game where tOSU clobbered Wisconsin that pushed them past TCU and Baylor last year, leaving the Big 12 out of the playoff. "One true champion" means jack squat.

 

[ulukinatme]

Totally wrong. There is a boost for being conference champion, not for winning a conference championship game. Hence why Baylor jumped TCU in the last rankings of the season. (Of course, winning the CCG can serve as a boost in its own right, as pointed out above).

Wat?

 

[phork]

I can't be too upset if Oklahoma gets in over ND. Just going by Eye Test I would hazard a guess that ND (right now) would lose that game.

Now if by some strange miracle UM wins out including the BIG championship and slides in front of us.. Well then. I just might lose my shit.

 

[kmoose]

How do conference games make for a tougher schedule? If we were in the ACC full-time we (maybe) play Clemson, Florida State, and who? Not the likes of Stanford or USC. It's an easier schedule.
Same in the Big 12, the Big 10 West, the SEC East. What it gets you is the conference championship game as a late-season boost and some inherent bias from the "conference championship or it didn't happen" crowd.
Any objective look at quality of schedule would put ours ahead of most P5 conference teams.

This:

Here is the big argument for conference affiliation, and why ND should be made to join one:

When you play the same teams every year (or even most years), they get to know your tendencies and/or weaknesses, and it becomes a tougher game, even if you are the better team.

What people fail to acknowledge, though, is that ND has traditionally played the equivalent of a conference schedule by playing Navy, USC, Stanford, Mich/MichSt/Purdue/NW each and every season. Those teams played ND as much as any conference teams play each other.