Demand for a 13th Game

[BobbyMac]

IMO it will be the ACC. They will negotiate with the ACC so they can keep the LHN and bring some friends along(TCU,Baylor, Tech ect)

OU I think will go to the Pac or Big 10 along with Kansas.

I'm pretty sure there are state laws in Oklahoma and Kansas prohibiting OU and KU joining conferences without OSU and KSU going along.

On the flip side, the states of Florida, South Carolina and Georgia have legislation that allows only UF, USC and UGA as the only schools the SEC can take from those 3 states... even though GT was a founding member of the SEC.

 

[wizards8507]

If Florida State's patch on their uniform read S-E-C and not A-C-C they wouldn't have been moved down.

You seem to be implying that there's something wrong with that. While you're right that FSU wouldn't have fallen to number three if they were in the SEC, it has nothing to do with conference bias. The reason they wouldn't have fallen is because their "close calls" would have been against Auburn, Mississippi State, and Tennessee, not Miami, Boston College, and Georgia Tech.

 

[ickythump1225]

Alabama has proven themselves a national powerhouse over a period of years. That's why they start out in the top 5 every year, even before the first game has been played. When MSU has reached that same level of perennial success nationally, they will deserve the same level of respect. Dantonio and Narduzzi have them headed in that direction. They have a 3-year run of success on a regional basis. They just need to consistently win against national competition, both during the regular season and when given an opportunity in a bowl game.

A few things:
-When I said MSU I was referring to Mississippi State.

-I think FSU has established themselves as a national powerhouse both in terms of recruiting and in terms of winning. 29 wins in a row, 3 straight conference titles, the reigning Heisman winner and being the defending national champions is quite a run. If they win the title again this year FSU will have topped any 2 year run by Alabama during Saban's tenure. It's been almost 800 days since FSU has lost.

-Miss. St. certainly didn't have "reach the same level of perennial success nationally" before they were given all the credit in the world by the committee. They stayed #1 even when they struggled to win because they were given credit for gutting out tough victories. Yet when FSU struggled they were dropped all the way to #4 at one point, behind 3 1 loss teams.

Now in theory what you did last year, 2 years ago, etc. shouldn't matter when ranking you this year. It should be what have you done this year. The committee holds FSU to that standard very strictly, yet that standard seems to evaporate when it comes to a team from the SEC be it a national power like Alabama or an up and comer like MSU. I think FSU has earned the right to be #1, they haven't lost to anybody yet. Alabama and Oregon have both lost.

And trust me, I loathe FSU. I hate everything about that program. I despise Jimbo Fisher and hope Jameis Winston busts in the NFL. But they haven't lost since 2012. They won all of their games this year in a "Power 5" conference. What more can you ask for? Style points? F**k that.

 

[Wild Bill]

You seem to be implying that there's something wrong with that. While you're right that FSU wouldn't have fallen to number three if they were in the SEC, it has nothing to do with conference bias. The reason they wouldn't have fallen is because their "close calls" would have been against Auburn, Mississippi State, and Tennessee, not Miami, Boston College, and Georgia Tech.

Wasn't the ACC 4-1 against the SEC this year?

 

[ickythump1225]

You seem to be implying that there's something wrong with that. While you're right that FSU wouldn't have fallen to number three if they were in the SEC, it has nothing to do with conference bias. The reason they wouldn't have fallen is because their "close calls" would have been against Auburn, Mississippi State, and Tennessee, not Miami, Boston College, and Georgia Tech.

What about close calls to Kentucky and Arkansas? Both MSU and Alabama struggled with Arkansas and Kentucky had MSU in a dog fight late into their game. Neither team was downgraded for struggling against the dregs of their conference. Or are Kentucky and Arkansas secretly potential national powerhouses just being held down by the grinding SEC schedule?

 

[BobbyMac]

Wasn't the ACC 4-1 against the SEC this year?

The day they went 4-0 they were favored in 3 and it was the 4 best ACC teams against their down rivals from the SEC-E. Even the lone underdog was GT... an ACC division winner.

 

[wizards8507]

What about close calls to Kentucky and Arkansas? Both MSU and Alabama struggled with Arkansas and Kentucky had MSU in a dog fight late into their game. Neither team was downgraded for struggling against the dregs of their conference. Or are Kentucky and Arkansas secretly potential national powerhouses just being held down by the grinding SEC schedule?

No, they're not "secretly potential national powerhouses" but come on. They're better than Syracuse and Boston College.

 

[ickythump1225]

The day they went 4-0 they were favored in 3 and it was the 4 best ACC teams against their down rivals from the SEC-E. Even the lone underdog was GT... a ACC division winner.

So because the ACC had better teams than the SEC those wins shouldn't be counted? Is that what I'm reading out of this? Because that actually seems to enhance the point that SEC from top to bottom isn't vastly superior to every other team in college football. The ACC had 4 better teams than the SEC...hmm that's weird. Here I thought Arkansas and Kentucky would run roughshod all over the ACC...so I've been told anyway.

 

[ickythump1225]

No, they're not "secretly potential national powerhouses" but come on. They're better than Syracuse and Boston College.

But if BC or Syracuse switched conference affiliation and kept the same exact teams and then Alabama struggled against one of them it would be shrugged off as "another typical SEC slugfest." But when FSU plays them it's "oh they suck for struggling against them despite the fact that they won."

 

[Wild Bill]

The day they went 4-0 they were favored in 3 and it was the 4 best ACC teams against their down rivals from the SEC-E. Even the lone underdog was GT... an ACC division winner.

Not getting into the SEC vs everyone else nonsense. Facts are facts, though.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Yeah they didn't look at MSU any differently, that was my point. Even when they had a few close calls against vastly inferior teams (at least in the eyes of the polls, the rankings of the committee, and the general opinion of the media) they didn't get punished by the committee. Yet Florida State kept winning too and they kept sliding down the rankings because of things like "the eye test" and "game control." If Florida State's patch on their uniform read S-E-C and not A-C-C they wouldn't have been moved down. When Alabama had a close shave with Arkansas they weren't knocked down.

Hell 2 one loss teams are ranked ahead of FSU still because A) the SEC and Pac-12 are very well represented on the committee and B) the ACC is not respected as a conference to the same degree the Pac-12 and especially the SEC is. Which is why I don't want ND to saddle up with ACC though it looks like we will at some point.

Fish ain't biting today icky...

 

[wizards8507]

But if BC or Syracuse switched conference affiliation and kept the same exact teams and then Alabama struggled against one of them it would be shrugged off as "another typical SEC slugfest."

Except that wouldn't happen. Alabama would likely crush either team.

I'll stop arguing because Florida State would be my number one anyways. An undefeated team in a major conference deserves at least that much. However, I do understand why they fell to number three and it doesn't have anything to do with conference bias.

 

[BobbyMac]

So because the ACC had better teams than the SEC those wins shouldn't be counted? Is that what I'm reading out of this? Because that actually seems to enhance the point that SEC from top to bottom isn't vastly superior to every other team in college football. The ACC had 4 better teams than the SEC...hmm that's weird. Here I thought Arkansas and Kentucky would run roughshod all over the ACC...so I've been told anyway.

No, that's not what I'm saying. I was just pointing out the obvious as a reminder. GT had a good win against UGA. FSU should have won, Clemson should have won and Louisville should have won.

UK wouldn't run over anybody. Arkansas will by '16.

The ACC hopes will always rest on, FSU, Miami, Clemson, Va Tech with GT as a maybe.

It seems anybody can be good in the SEC except Vandy and UK.

.

 

[Wild Bill]

No, that's not what I'm saying. I was just pointing out the obvious as a reminder. GT had a good win against UGA. FSU should have won, Clemson should have won and Louisville should have won.

UK wouldn't run over anybody. Arkansas will by '16.

The ACC hopes will always rest on, FSU, Miami, Clemson, Va Tech with GT as a maybe.

It seems anybody can be good in the SEC except Vandy and UK.

.

Agreed.

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1683493/leswax.gif

 

[NorthDakota]

Didn't read any of this thread other than the first few sentences of the original post.

Notre Dame will do whats best for Notre Dame. Notre Dame joining a conference would not be the end of the world, but the Irish are fine at this point.

5 ACC games.
4 Navy, SC, Stanford, Purdue
3 games left for probably a cupcake, a couple decent-good teams and one very good team.


Personally, I want Michigan State on every year. Its normally a great game and helps take care of one of the "decent-good" games. Can't remember the last time they were bad, always at least a decent team and sometimes very good(a bit like Notre Dame honestly).

 

[Crazy Balki]

Didn't read any of this thread other than the first few sentences of the original post.

Notre Dame will do whats best for Notre Dame. Notre Dame joining a conference would not be the end of the world, but the Irish are fine at this point.

5 ACC games.
4 Navy, SC, Stanford, Purdue
3 games left for probably a cupcake, a couple decent-good teams and one very good team.


Personally, I want Michigan State on every year. Its normally a great game and helps take care of one of the "decent-good" games. Can't remember the last time they were bad, always at least a decent team and sometimes very good(a bit like Notre Dame honestly).

Back in the 2000's they were essentially Michigan of this decade. They'd be good against ND and have a good start and then sh*t the bed the rest of the way. Their best record in the 2000's was 9-4, and that was after a few 4, 5 or 6 win seasons.

 

[zelezo vlk]

In 2012 Michigan State was 6-6. They lost their 5 of those games by something like a combined 13 points, but it still ain't a pretty record. Bell was their entire offense that year.