Herbstreit's Weekly Top 4

[NorthDakota]

is that legal? can their AD go to jail for such a schedule?

No. He probably gets a big bonus if the football team gets to 10 wins.

 

[dad4aa]

I disagree. No matter what kind of beating our schedule takes, it'll be nowhere near as bad as Stephen F. Austin. I'm really not a big believer in strength of schedule as determined by final opponents' win-loss record. Stanford is a power five program and they're supposed to be at least "pretty good" year-in, year-out. It's not ND's fault if Stanford turns out to suck. Conversely, TCU knew 100% going in that they'd be able to beat Stephen F. Austin by 60. A 12-0 TCU isn't really 12-0, they're 11-0.

Similarly, I don't blame Ohio State that the Big 10 sucks. I blame Ohio State for Hawaii, Northern Illinois, and Western Michigan in consecutive home games.

Agree 100% - reps

 

[condoms SUCk]

is that legal? can their AD go to jail for such a schedule?

not sure if he can, but he definitely should.

 

[ACamp1900]

Except zero members of the selection committee stood to benefit financially from playoff revenue. Maybe you could make the case for Barry Alvarez via the Big 10 payout, but that's it.

Don't play dumb, you know that wasn't what I was referring to...

 

[irishfan]

I disagree. No matter what kind of beating our schedule takes, it'll be nowhere near as bad as Stephen F. Austin. I'm really not a big believer in strength of schedule as determined by final opponents' win-loss record. Stanford is a power five program and they're supposed to be at least "pretty good" year-in, year-out. It's not ND's fault if Stanford turns out to suck. Conversely, TCU knew 100% going in that they'd be able to beat Stephen F. Austin by 60. A 12-0 TCU isn't really 12-0, they're 11-0.

Similarly, I don't blame Ohio State that the Big 10 sucks. I blame Ohio State for Hawaii, Northern Illinois, and Western Michigan in consecutive home games.

I don't think the committee will differentiate between Stephen F Austin and UMASS.

 

[wizards8507]

I don't think the committee will differentiate between Stephen F Austin and UMASS.

UMASS = SMU, whom TCU also plays.

 

[irishfan]

UMASS = SMU, whom TCU also plays.

I'm just saying there isn't much of a difference at the bottom of their schedule when compared to ours. And there is a chance that they could have a couple huge wins on paper with the BIG-12 being so down. I mean we're trusting USC, Clemson, and GA Tech to have big seasons for our SOS.

Is there really much of a difference between TCU playing: Stephen F. Austin, SMU, Kansas, Texas Tech

and ND playing: UMASS, Wake Forest, Navy, and Temple?

The middle meat of our schedules is very similar. There is certainly a scenario where they could end the season with two Top-10 wins while we have zero.

 

[NorthDakota]

I don't think the committee will differentiate between Stephen F Austin and UMASS.

As someone who went to an FCS school(NoDak St), a really good FCS team is a lot better than UMASS. NDSU went 4-0 against FBS while I was in school. 3-0 against P5 schools.

That said...I don't advocate for scheduling those games. When one team has over 20 more scholarships to give out.. It's not a level playing field. To illustrate the difference between even G5 schools and FCS schools... Our old coach left for Wyoming... And a 400% raise.

On the bright side, it looks like those games will become a thing of the past. It hurts SOS too much to justify it.

 

[wizards8507]

As someone who went to an FCS school(NoDak St), a really good FCS team is a lot better than UMASS. NDSU went 4-0 against FBS while I was in school. 3-0 against P5 schools.

That said...I don't advocate for scheduling those games. When one team has over 20 more scholarships to give out.. It's not a level playing field. To illustrate the difference between even G5 schools and FCS schools... Our old coach left for Wyoming... And a 400% raise.

On the bright side, it looks like those games will become a thing of the past. It hurts SOS too much to justify it.

Yes, but you can't know ahead of time which FCS programs will be strong. Teams rise and fall within their tiers, but that shouldn't be held against SOS. Power 5 should all be weighted the most, then non-power FBS, then FCS.

 

[ACamp1900]

That said...I don't advocate for scheduling those games. When one team has over 20 more scholarships to give out.. It's not a level playing field.

So, the message here is,.... never play Bama....

 

[NorthDakota]

Yes, but you can't know ahead of time which FCS programs will be strong. Teams rise and fall within their tiers, but that shouldn't be held against SOS. Power 5 should all be weighted the most, then non-power FBS, then FCS.

Yep. I completely agree. That's why I would just as soon get rid of those FCS games. They are normally a waste of time. No self-respecting playoff contender should have one on their schedule.

 

[stlnd01]

As someone who went to an FCS school(NoDak St), a really good FCS team is a lot better than UMASS. NDSU went 4-0 against FBS while I was in school. 3-0 against P5 schools.

Of note, UMass was a very good FCS team before they made the ill-advised jump to FBS. Played App. State for the title in 2006, and won it in 1998.
But the big leagues week-in week-out are a whole other thing. And now they're measured against BC and UConn, not UNH and Maine.
But like you said, no upside for in games w/the FCS. Or with hapless bottom feeders of FBS either.

 

[IrishLax]

Towards standardizing schedules, they need to flat out stopping counting games against FCS as anything but exhibition. That needs to be a rule for cross-divisional play.

After that, weight teams on how good they are. A big step in the right direction would be a standardized metric like RPI (except different because RPI wouldn't work for football) or otherwise ranking at least the top 50 teams. This would help compare resumes... compare record versus "RPI" top 10, top 25, and top 50 or something to that effect.

The problem right now is that there is no penalty whatsoever to playing an easy schedule if you don't lose, and the only way playing a hard schedule helps you is if you beat a top rated team. Playing a bunch of #20-#40 strength teams does nothing for you relative to playing a single top 10ish team and 11 cupcakes.

 

[wizards8507]

Towards standardizing schedules, they need to flat out stopping counting games against FCS as anything but exhibition. That needs to be a rule for cross-divisional play.

Agreed.

After that, weight teams on how good they are. A big step in the right direction would be a standardized metric like RPI (except different because RPI wouldn't work for football) or otherwise ranking at least the top 50 teams. This would help compare resumes... compare record versus "RPI" top 10, top 25, and top 50 or something to that effect.

The problem right now is that there is no penalty whatsoever to playing an easy schedule if you don't lose, and the only way playing a hard schedule helps you is if you beat a top rated team. Playing a bunch of #20-#40 strength teams does nothing for you relative to playing a single top 10ish team and 11 cupcakes.

I'm still not sure how strength of schedule should be evaluated over the course of a season. Baylor could schedule non-conference games in 2022 against Alabama, USC, and Ohio State and those teams could combine to go 11-25 that year through no fault of Baylor's. I don't like blaming teams for soft schedules if they didn't know (or at least reasonably suspect) that they were going to be soft when the schedule was made ten years earlier. That's why I think all power five opponents should be treated equally, all non-power FBS teams equally, and all FCS teams equally (or ignored as you suggest).

 

[GATTACA!]

It would never happen, but a 12-0 ND fighting with a 12-0 TCU for the #4 seed could be trouble.

There is 0% chance ND is left out in this scenario. The difference in money brought in through advertisers alone is enough for ND to get the nod.

 

[GoldenDome]

If a team's schedule turns out to be weak, they should run the table. No excuses. Take for instance FSU, who had no business being in the playoffs, but how do you leave a team out that is undefeated.

The committee stated that a huge part of them putting a team in, moreso than rankings is winning your conference championship game. ND is at a disadvantage right now because of the lack of another quality win added to their resume. An ND team that is 11-1 vs a conference champion that is 12-1 (+1 more quality win) more times than not will be taken ahead.

Big 12 had a major disadvantage in not playing a conference championship game. ND is in that same position unless we go undefeated.

 

[Luckylucci]

I personally think this is exactly how rankings should be done. Week to week based on how you looked that week and who you played. There should be very little carry over from last year and then adding FCS wins on top of that. With that said it does really nothing in the long run as we (ND) still have to win to get to where we want to go and ultimately if we do, we'll be there in the end. I guess the only thing it does in the mean time is give us more good publicity and potentially gets more gameday appearances and things like that.

 

[wizards8507]

The committee stated that a huge part of them putting a team in, moreso than rankings is winning your conference championship game. ND is at a disadvantage right now because of the lack of another quality win added to their resume. An ND team that is 11-1 vs a conference champion that is 12-1 (+1 more quality win) more times than not will be taken ahead.

Agreed. I think more interesting would be 11-1 Notre Dame versus 11-2 conference champion. Same number of quality wins, Notre Dame with one fewer loss, but the conference champion with the title "conference champion."

Also, what do you do about 11-1 Notre Dame and a 12-1 loser of a conference championship game?

Big 12 had a major disadvantage in not playing a conference championship game. ND is in that same position unless we go undefeated.

The Big 12 had two disadvantages. No championship game and shitty OOC scheduling. Notre Dame has only one of those problems.

Example:

13-0 Ohio State
12-1 Alabama
12-1 Florida State
11-2 UCLA
11-1 Baylor
11-1 Notre Dame

In that scenario, I think the playoff is seeded 1) Ohio State, 2) Alabama, 3) Florida State, 4) Notre Dame. Notre Dame beats Baylor on strength of schedule and UCLA on win-loss record. Common opponent USC could also come into play.

My biggest question mark is if you take the same situation laid out above, and let's say Alabama beat previously undefeated Georgia in the SEC championship, meaning Georgia is also 12-1. Does a 12-1 conference championship loser get in ahead of 11-1 ND?

 

[GATTACA!]

13-0 Ohio State
12-1 Alabama
12-1 Florida State
11-2 UCLA
11-1 Baylor
11-1 Notre Dame

This is a doomsday scenario for the committee.

 

[GoldenDome]

This is a doomsday scenario for the committee.

It would be more interesting to add an 12-1 ORE in the equation as well, with their one loss being to UCLA in the championship game.

 

[wizards8507]

It would be more interesting to add an 12-1 ORE in the equation as well, with their one loss being to UCLA in the championship game.

I already included a 12-1 Georgia having lost to Alabama in the championship game, you masochist.

 

[GoldenDome]

I already included a 12-1 Georgia having lost to Alabama in the championship game, you masochist.

So we have Georgia and ORE both 12-1 but losing in their respective conference championship games.

13-0 OSU
12-1 ALA (conference champion)
12-1 FSU (conference champion) SOS 45
11-2 UCLA (conference champion) SOS 30
11-1 Baylor (no conference title game) SOS 50
11-1 ND (no conference title game) SOS 10
12-1 ORE (loss in conference title game) SOS 15
12-1 Georgia (loss in conference title game) SOS 16

Pick your top 4. lol With a new wrinkle of SOS.

I know two are in. Who are the last two?

 

[GATTACA!]

So we have Georgia and ORE both 12-1 but losing in their respective conference championship games.

13-0 OSU
12-1 ALA (conference champion)
12-1 FSU (conference champion) SOS 45
11-2 UCLA (conference champion) SOS 30
11-1 Baylor (no conference title game) SOS 50
11-1 ND (no conference title game) SOS 10
12-1 ORE (loss in conference title game) SOS 15
12-1 Georgia (loss in conference title game) SOS 16

Pick your top 4. lol With a new wrinkle of SOS.

I know two are in. Who are the last two?

OSU ALA & FSU are in as 1 loss conference champions.

ORE AND Georgia are out because of a late loss and not winning their conference.

ND is ahead of Baylor because both teams are basically the same with ND having a clear advantage in SOS.

So I think it comes down to UCLA and ND. ND gets the nod because we have one less loss and a stronger SOS (Unless UCLA beats USC convincingly and that's our one loss, then things could get hairy.)

#1 OSU
#2 ALA
#3/4 FSU/ND

 

[stlnd01]

So we have Georgia and ORE both 12-1 but losing in their respective conference championship games.

13-0 OSU
12-1 ALA (conference champion)
12-1 FSU (conference champion) SOS 45
11-2 UCLA (conference champion) SOS 30
11-1 Baylor (no conference title game) SOS 50
11-1 ND (no conference title game) SOS 10
12-1 ORE (loss in conference title game) SOS 15
12-1 Georgia (loss in conference title game) SOS 16

Pick your top 4. lol With a new wrinkle of SOS.

I know two are in. Who are the last two?

OSU
Alabama
Georgia (better loss than Oregon, more wins than UCLA).
Fourth is either Baylor or us, depending on quality of our wins/loss. Also I think it's unlikely we finish with that high a SOS ranking without USC or Clemson/GT winning their conference.

 

[kmoose]

I don't know. Undefeated 13-0 is better than undefeated 12-0.

tOSU didn't get in over TCU and Baylor just because they played 13 games. It was that they hammered Wisconsin's d!cks into the dirt like bent fvcking nails, with their 3rd string QB. If they had squeaked one out, I'm not sure they would have made it in.

 

[wizards8507]

How does a "good" FCS opponent affect strength of schedule? Does it go beyond opponent's win-loss record, or is beating 10-2 Jacksonville State just as good as beating 10-2 Michigan State?

 

[koonja]

How does a "good" FCS opponent affect strength of schedule? Does it go beyond opponent's win-loss record, or is beating 10-2 Jacksonville State just as good as beating 10-2 Michigan State?

Serious question? Of course the 10-2 MSU, or FBS school trumps beating a 10-2 FCS. Maybe I misunderstood something.

 

[wizards8507]

Serious question? Of course the 10-2 MSU, or FBS school trumps beating a 10-2 FCS. Maybe I misunderstood something.

I'm not talking about how a person with a brain looks at it. I'm talking about the computer-generated "strength of schedule" ratings.

 

[T Town Tommy]

The "eye" test apparently was a big factor last year in the eyes of the committee. Just barely beating opponents you should dominate may apparently hurt your team's chances in the end. Win all the tough games, beat down the middling teams, and everything takes care of itself. Lose and you are probably going to need some help along the way. The rest takes care of itself. Too early to be worrying about "what ifs."

 

[wizards8507]

Just barely beating opponents you should dominate may apparently hurt your team's chances in the end.

It didn't seem to hurt TCU with the AP voters or the coaches.

Win all the tough games, beat down the middling teams, and everything takes care of itself.

The problem with that is that some teams don't even have tough games to win. Baylor, Ohio State, and TCU have a total of three tough games between them.

Lose and you are probably going to need some help along the way. The rest takes care of itself. Too early to be worrying about "what ifs."

I don't think it's too early, because early is when TCU and Baylor are playing SMU, Wofford, and Lamar.