Oct 6 | Virginia Tech

[Wild Bill]

Bama's opponents defensive rankings:
L'Ville - 96
Arkansas State - 82
Ole Miss - 126
Texas AM - 52
Louisiana - 119
Arkansas - 55

They finish against
Mizzou - 85
Tennessee - 37
LSU - 32
Miss State - 11
Citadel - irrelevant
Auburn - 16
Probably Georgia - 6

Yes, they have a great offense but it'll be interesting to see how efficient they are against a team that isn't outside of the top 50 with respect to team defense.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

Bama's opponents defensive rankings:
L'Ville - 96
Arkansas State - 82
Ole Miss - 126
Texas AM - 52
Louisiana - 119
Arkansas - 55

They finish against
Mizzou - 85
Tennessee - 37
LSU - 32
Miss State - 11
Citadel - irrelevant
Auburn - 16
Probably Georgia - 6

Yes, they have a great offense but it'll be interesting to see how efficient they are against a team that isn't outside of the top 50 with respect to team defense.

Are those their opponents current ranks, or ranks when they played? Bama going off for 80 points and 1800 yards is gonna drop your D a few spots lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Yeah, my issue with them is that Tua seems like an unstoppable force of nature. I just have no clue how you even try to defend that team... they can beat you in so many different ways.

No doubt. He looks incredibly composed, I wonder if you can rattle him by getting pressure. He just hasn't experienced much pressure in his brief career as a starter. Time will tell.

 

[NDRock]

Bama's opponents defensive rankings:
L'Ville - 96
Arkansas State - 82
Ole Miss - 126
Texas AM - 52
Louisiana - 119
Arkansas - 55

They finish against
Mizzou - 85
Tennessee - 37
LSU - 32
Miss State - 11
Citadel - irrelevant
Auburn - 16
Probably Georgia - 6

Yes, they have a great offense but it'll be interesting to see how efficient they are against a team that isn't outside of the top 50 with respect to team defense.

I'm seeing them at 23rd nationally in total defense (yards) and 30th in scoring defense. That's pretty damn impressive since it includes Bama, Clemson, and Kentucky. He who shall not be named must be doing a pretty good job there.

 

[Wild Bill]

I'm seeing them at 23rd nationally in total defense (yards) and 30th in scoring defense. That's pretty damn impressive since it includes Bama, Clemson, and Kentucky. He who shall not be named must be doing a pretty good job there.

I just went back to the same website - NCAA.com - and they do have Texas A&M at 23 now. I'm guessing that they were updated after this weekend's games right after I posted, or maybe I'm just losing my mind. Both are equally likely.

Are those their opponents current ranks, or ranks when they played? Bama going off for 80 points and 1800 yards is gonna drop your D a few spots lol.

I believe my numbers included all games played prior to Saturday.

Bama blowing the doors off each team certainly doesn't help their stat line.

That was yardage per game as well.

By points, ESPN has them listed as follows:

L'Ville - 98 @ 32.7
Arkansas State - 85 @ 29.2 ppg
Ole Miss - 106 @ 36.5 ppg
Texas AM - 30 @ 20.2 ppg
Louisiana - 114 @ 37.2 ppg
Arkansas - 112 @ 36.8

They finish against
Mizzou - 84 @ 28.8 ppg
Tennessee - 63 @ 25.6 ppg
LSU - 15 @ 17 ppg
Miss State - 1 @ 12.7 ppg
Citadel - irrelevant
Auburn - 6 @ 14.3 ppg
Probably Georgia - 2 @ 13 ppg

With the exception of Texas AM, their opponents gave up huge points to relatively mediocre teams, Georgia Tech hung 66 on Louisville, LSU and Southern Illinois scored 40 plus against Ole Miss, Arkansas gave up 44 to North Texas and 34 to Auburn and their offense is horseshit.

I agree that Bama looks unbeatable and that's the team I would least want to play but we should get a better idea of how good they really are in the back half of the schedule when they start playing teams that tackle and cover.

 

[Circa]

Just anyone but Bama. We cannot beat Bama. I think we have a shot against anyone else.

Exactly why I posted earlier about Bama and being in with 2 loses. I just don't see a playoff without them. I think we can and will.
We need all of our mojos, but they have such a soft schedule we could Charlie Weis them....

 

[Bishop2b5]

I agree it’s way too early to speculate b/c it almost always works itself out. I do think they keep UCF out no matter what. Fair or not, I haven’t heard any analyst who believes an undefeated UCF will get in.

I don't think it's particularly unfair if an undefeated UCF doesn't get in. 12-0 or 13-0 in of itself isn't a guarantee of being playoff worthy. They aren't playing the level of opposition most Power 5 programs face across an entire season. I don't think there's 1 chance in 100 that UCF would go undefeated against a typical Power 5 team's schedule. The bottom line for the committee is to pick the 4 teams they think are the best. W/L record, SOS, eye test, etc. are all just factors in that. I don't think you could make a reasonable case that a 12-0 UCF would be favored against any of the likely top 6 or 7 teams, let alone the 4 the committee selects for the playoff.

 

[Irish YJ]

I don't think it's particularly unfair if an undefeated UCF doesn't get in. 12-0 or 13-0 in of itself isn't a guarantee of being playoff worthy. They aren't playing the level of opposition most Power 5 programs face across an entire season. I don't think there's 1 chance in 100 that UCF would go undefeated against a typical Power 5 team's schedule. The bottom line for the committee is to pick the 4 teams they think are the best. W/L record, SOS, eye test, etc. are all just factors in that. I don't think you could make a reasonable case that a 12-0 UCF would be favored against any of the likely top 6 or 7 teams, let alone the 4 the committee selects for the playoff.

There is a decent chance that UCF could go undefeated while beating 3 future ranked teams, and they did beat the team last year that beat Bama.... if those teams do end up being ranked when UCF plays them, I can see them getting in.

And the big thing is.. last year they just entered the polls at 25. They are already at 12 this year.

 

[Bishop2b5]

There is a decent chance that UCF could go undefeated while beating 3 future ranked teams, and they did beat the team last year that beat Bama.... if those teams do end up being ranked when UCF plays them, I can see them getting in.

And the big thing is.. last year they just entered the polls at 25. They are already at 12 this year.

You could be right. As for ND, as somebody else said above, there's still a lot of ball to be played and it will all work its way out. You guys sure appear to be legit this year and have a good shot at 12-0. If so, I just can't see any realistic scenario where you'd get left out. There's almost no chance that Bama/UGA, Clemson, WVU and OSU are all going undefeated.

 

[Irish YJ]

You could be right. As for ND, as somebody else said above, there's still a lot of ball to be played and it will all work its way out. You guys sure appear to be legit this year and have a good shot at 12-0. If so, I just can't see any realistic scenario where you'd get left out. There's almost no chance that Bama/UGA, Clemson, WVU and OSU are all going undefeated.

I hope for chaos, and all of the teams going undefeated. With ND getting in of course.
UCF started out so much better this year. It will be interesting. Hard to leave them out two years in a row if they are undefeated. Houston, Cinci, USF, and even Temple could be ranked when UCF plays them.

 

[BGIF]

I don't think it's particularly unfair if an undefeated UCF doesn't get in. 12-0 or 13-0 in of itself isn't a guarantee of being playoff worthy. They aren't playing the level of opposition most Power 5 programs face across an entire season. I don't think there's 1 chance in 100 that UCF would go undefeated against a typical Power 5 team's schedule. The bottom line for the committee is to pick the 4 teams they think are the best. W/L record, SOS, eye test, etc. are all just factors in that. I don't think you could make a reasonable case that a 12-0 UCF would be favored against any of the likely top 6 or 7 teams, let alone the 4 the committee selects for the playoff.

Sagarin has undefeated UCF rated #26 with a Strength of Schedule 145. None of the 25 teams Sagarin rates above UCF has a S.O.S. 84, that's Miami who Sagarin rates 19th as a team. #10 Wisconsin has an S.O.S of 78. #11 (Sagarin) WVU has the 70th Strongest Schedule. #4 UGA has the 62nd Toughest.

At the other end #20 Utah (Stanford killer) has the 4th Toughest Schedule. #16 Texas has the 8th Toughest. #14 LSU has the 8th Toughest. Sagarin #9 ND has the 18th Toughest Schedule

UCF's Best Win to Date is over Sagarin's #75th ranked team, Pitt. Their next opponent is Memphis, a team UCF has beaten 9 out of 10 times.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

Sagarin also has Michigan two spots ahead of ND, so theres that.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RDU Irish]

I don't think it's particularly unfair if an undefeated UCF doesn't get in. 12-0 or 13-0 in of itself isn't a guarantee of being playoff worthy. They aren't playing the level of opposition most Power 5 programs face across an entire season. I don't think there's 1 chance in 100 that UCF would go undefeated against a typical Power 5 team's schedule. The bottom line for the committee is to pick the 4 teams they think are the best. W/L record, SOS, eye test, etc. are all just factors in that. I don't think you could make a reasonable case that a 12-0 UCF would be favored against any of the likely top 6 or 7 teams, let alone the 4 the committee selects for the playoff.

Nice groundwork for your eventual "two SEC teams in the playoff" argument. Any undefeated should make it in before a second team from any conference. I would argue conference champs (or ND) would need 2 losses to be jumped by a conference non-champ.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Nice groundwork for your eventual "two SEC teams in the playoff" argument. Any undefeated should make it in before a second team from any conference. I would argue conference champs (or ND) would need 2 losses to be jumped by a conference non-champ.

I'll respectfully disagree. The committee's stated mission is to identify the four best teams, period. I'm not concerned with whether they put 2 teams or no teams in from the SEC or any other conference. Just select the best 4 teams.

 

[RDU Irish]

I'll respectfully disagree. The committee's stated mission is to identify the four best teams, period. I'm not concerned with whether they put 2 teams or no teams in from the SEC or any other conference. Just select the best 4 teams.

I equate "best" with winning. Particularly at season's end when Championships are supposed to be on the line - especially coming off of a scrimmage week. Bama lost to Auburn last game of the year who then lost to Georgia and UCF back to back. But they beat a team that lost to Troy, an overrated FSU team that needed to reschedule a game against UL-Monroe to get to bowl eligible and a perpetually overrated Miss State (31-24 win for Bama compared to MSST losing 31-3 to UGA and 49-10 to Auburn).

So "best" is nice code for Bama is in regardless of earning it on the field. I would have given UCF their spot.

 

[koonja]

Nice groundwork for your eventual "two SEC teams in the playoff" argument. Any undefeated should make it in before a second team from any conference. I would argue conference champs (or ND) would need 2 losses to be jumped by a conference non-champ.

I'll respectfully disagree. The committee's stated mission is to identify the four best teams, period. I'm not concerned with whether they put 2 teams or no teams in from the SEC or any other conference. Just select the best 4 teams.

I also respectfully disagree with RDU Irish. Look at it from a college basketball perspective. I won't use "undefeateds" because that just doesn't happen there, but...

If ND went 28-7 in the ACC and some sunbelt team went 33-2, who do you think should get into the NCAA tournament if it were down to these 2?

 

[RDU Irish]

.

 

[NDRock]

I also respectfully disagree with RDU Irish. Look at it from a college basketball perspective. I won't use "undefeateds" because that just doesn't happen there, but...

If ND went 28-7 in the ACC and some sunbelt team went 33-2, who do you think should get into the NCAA tournament if it were down to these 2?

Hard to use basketball, as they have so many teams in the tournament no real title contender is ever left out. The fact is, if Bama loses a couple of one point games this year to LSU and Georgia in the SEC title game, they would still be a "better" team than a 12-0 Notre Dame. Doesn't mean they should get in the playoffs over them. That's the whole problem with committees picking teams over earning it on the field. No real fix other than including more teams.

 

[NDRock]

I equate "best" with winning. Particularly at season's end when Championships are supposed to be on the line - especially coming off of a scrimmage week. Bama lost to Auburn last game of the year who then lost to Georgia and UCF back to back. But they beat a team that lost to Troy, an overrated FSU team that needed to reschedule a game against UL-Monroe to get to bowl eligible and a perpetually overrated Miss State (31-24 win for Bama compared to MSST losing 31-3 to UGA and 49-10 to Auburn).

So "best" or "eye test" is nice code for Bama IN regardless of earning it on the field.

I would have given UCF their spot.

I bet if a team like Miss. State had Bama's exact season, they would not have gotten in. Name brand means a lot in college football.

 

[koonja]

Hard to use basketball, as they have so many teams in the tournament no real title contender is ever left out. The fact is, if Bama loses a couple of one point games this year to LSU and Georgia in the SEC title game, they would still be a "better" team than a 12-0 Notre Dame. Doesn't mean they should get in the playoffs over them. That's the whole problem with committees picking teams over earning it on the field. No real fix other than including more teams.

So I don't think Alabama will lose 2 games because they "look really good", but they haven't played anyone.

So if they play a total of 3 good teams this year and lose to 2 of them, they are NOT better than ND, let alone deserving of that spot. There's no way in hell they'd be better than ND in that case.

Does that happen? Doubt it. But if it does, Alabama is not who you think they are.

 

[RDU Irish]

I also respectfully disagree with RDU Irish. Look at it from a college basketball perspective. I won't use "undefeateds" because that just doesn't happen there, but...

If ND went 28-7 in the ACC and some sunbelt team went 33-2, who do you think should get into the NCAA tournament if it were down to these 2?

That is a farcical comparison. You have 68 teams in the tourney - BOTH would be in. Once you hit the bubble teams - none are realistically expected to win it all. You need to string six wins together to win a title and it frequently goes to someone who is not the "best". Cut it to an 8 team tourney and we would only have Duke, UNC, Kentucky and a few others in there b/c, you know, eye test and all.

But let's use your analogy. IF those losses are late in the season it works more against you than if they are early. IF you play good late, it works to your advantage in the bubble discussion. IF you lay an egg on the bubble its on you - especially coming off of a scrimmage game.

 

[NDRock]

So I don't think Alabama will lose 2 games because they "look really good", but they haven't played anyone.

So if they play a total of 3 good teams this year and lose to 2 of them, they are NOT better than ND, let alone deserving of that spot. There's no way in hell they'd be better than ND in that case.

Does that happen? Doubt it. But if it does, Alabama is not who you think they are.

That was the argument last year, Bama played one team that loss less than 4 games in the regular season and lost to them. They still got in based on the eye test and then won the whole thing.

 

[koonja]

That was the argument last year, Bama played one team that loss less than 4 games in the regular season and lost to them. They still got in based on the eye test and then won the whole thing.

They only had 1 loss. Having a 2nd loss against arguably the same schedule as 2017 would uncover a lot more weaknesses than that 2017 team had.

There's a massive difference between 1 and 2 loss in this case.

 

[RDU Irish]

So I don't think Alabama will lose 2 games because they "look really good", but they haven't played anyone.

So if they play a total of 3 good teams this year and lose to 2 of them, they are NOT better than ND, let alone deserving of that spot. There's no way in hell they'd be better than ND in that case.

Does that happen? Doubt it. But if it does, Alabama is not who you think they are.

Let's say Bama and UGA go undefeated and only produce on loss between them when they play in the SEC championship. Does the loser deserve to go to the playoffs - potentially getting another shot at a team that already bested them on a neutral field? Beyond whether the loser is better than anyone else out there it is absolutely unfair to the WINNER. Last year had a nice out with the two not playing b/c BAMA couldn't even win their division, let alone their conference. The inference there they EARNED a #3 spot in the conference which is not adequate to qualify for the playoffs. Why even play conference championships if they don't matter?

 

[NDRock]

They only had 1 loss. Having a 2nd loss against arguably the same schedule as 2017 would uncover a lot more weaknesses than that 2017 team had.

There's a massive difference between 1 and 2 loss in this case.

Not really, the second loss in my scenario is coming in the SEC championship game against #1 and undefeated Georgia. Last year, they didn't get to play that game because they finished 2nd in their division. Essentially, it's better not to win your division if you're Bama and play an "easier" schedule.

 

[RDU Irish]

Not really, the second loss in my scenario is coming in the SEC championship game against #1 and undefeated Georgia. Last year, they didn't get to play that game because they finished 2nd in their division. Essentially, it's better not to win your division if you're Bama and play an "easier" schedule.

All the folks who wring their hands over ND not having a 13th game crack me up when they go to bat for Bama.

 

[Irish#1]

Hard to use basketball, as they have so many teams in the tournament no real title contender is ever left out. The fact is, if Bama loses a couple of one point games this year to LSU and Georgia in the SEC title game, they would still be a "better" team than a 12-0 Notre Dame. Doesn't mean they should get in the playoffs over them. That's the whole problem with committees picking teams over earning it on the field. No real fix other than including more teams.

Not with two losses.

 

[NDRock]

Not with two losses.

Guarantee they would still be favorites over ND on a neutral site field.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

I equate "best" with winning. Particularly at season's end when Championships are supposed to be on the line - especially coming off of a scrimmage week. Bama lost to Auburn last game of the year who then lost to Georgia and UCF back to back. But they beat a team that lost to Troy, an overrated FSU team that needed to reschedule a game against UL-Monroe to get to bowl eligible and a perpetually overrated Miss State (31-24 win for Bama compared to MSST losing 31-3 to UGA and 49-10 to Auburn).

So "best" is nice code for Bama is in regardless of earning it on the field. I would have given UCF their spot.

I also respectfully disagree with RDU Irish. Look at it from a college basketball perspective. I won't use "undefeateds" because that just doesn't happen there, but...

If ND went 28-7 in the ACC and some sunbelt team went 33-2, who do you think should get into the NCAA tournament if it were down to these 2?

I disagree with both of you. What if it comes down to an undefeated UCF who plays no one higher than a team ranked #40 and ND with 1 loss, who played 2-4 top 25 teams.

Undefeated means d1ck if you didn't play anybody. They don't deserve a chance at the throne if they don't clash with the kings.

That basketball analogy is garbage for a number of reasons but the number of games played/losses muddies the water. Keep it related to football and post all of the hypotheticals.

I don't think the 2012 team would've deserved a playoff spot last year even though they were undefeated. The stats would've shown we didn't have the offensive fire power to compete.

It's a difficult task but UCF should never be considered until they scheduled multiple ranked p5 programs and beat them.

 

[Bishop2b5]

All the folks who wring their hands over ND not having a 13th game crack me up when they go to bat for Bama.

I don't think not having a 13th game helps ND, but it's probably not critical in most cases. It's just a 13th data point, no more and no less. If you've clearly shown you're a top 4 team against your first 12 opponents, the committee probably won't give a flip about the lack of a 13th victim. The only time it might hurt you is if you're a borderline case for a playoff spot and the only significant difference between ND and another team hoping for that spot is a 13th game.