Who to root for?

[wizards8507]

I got into a big argument with someone (Koon?) last year about who Notre Dame should root for in the Florida State - Clemson game as it related to Notre Dame's playoff chances. I'd like to start a similar discussion with a prioritized list of how a Notre Dame fan should view various potential match-ups in the coming season.

Assumption: Notre Dame will finish 11-1. If we finish 12-0 we're in regardless and if we finish 10-2 we're (probably) out regardless, so the majority of our "what if?" scenarios should be based on the "bubble" eleven-win season.

Priority 1: Michigan loses, unless they're playing an undefeated or one-loss Ohio State or Michigan State.

Priority 2: Teams ranked ahead of Notre Dame lose, even if the team is on Notre Dame's schedule.

Priority 3: Undefeated Big 12 teams lose, even if ranked behind Notre Dame. By the end of the season, our best case to get into the playoff will be ahead of a two-loss conference champion or a one-loss Big 12 champion.

Priority 4: Likely conference champions lose out-of-conference games. This increases the likelihood that teams get to their championship games already having lost.

Priority 5: Notre Dame opponents win, assuming they're not ranked ahead of us.

The bolded was my source of disagreement with Koon last year. He argued that we should want all of our opponents to win every game. While that is generally true, it's more important that teams ahead of us lose. Strength of schedule will likely only be a tiebreaker if we have an equal record to another team. It would be better if that team had just lost in the regular season, giving us the clear advantage.

 

[woolybug25]

meteor...

 

[Irish Insanity]

I'd root for Koon

 

[koonja]

That argument was more specific than that. My point was that since FSU had beaten us, them losing did us no favors, because they would still be looked at as 'superior' to us because the committee values head to head games.

So basically, we'd have no change in 'who's ahead of us', and our schedule would just look weaker. That's exactly what my point was.

 

[wizards8507]

That argument was more specific than that. My point was that since FSU had beaten us, them losing did us no favors, because they would still be looked at as 'superior' to us because the committee values head to head games.

So basically, we'd have no change in 'who's ahead of us', and our schedule would just look weaker. That's exactly what my point was.

...unless the ACC champion finished with two losses. We were still thinking 11-1 at the time (lol), and we could have gotten in over an 11-2 ACC champion that played Citadel even if we lost to them head-to-head on a controversial call.

 

[Cackalacky]

This is simple. We need every team ahead of us to lose. We also need every team we play to win except when they play us.

 

[koonja]

This is simple. We need every team ahead of us to lose. We also need every team we play to win except when they play us.

I don't think that is this simple. If there's only one team headed to a perfect season (like FSU last year), and they beat us on the way (therefore we have little/no chance to jump them IFF they were to lose), what's the point of rooting against them? Them losing doesn't move us ahead of them, and it takes away (using last year's hypothetical) our ability to say 'yeah we have 1 loss, but it was to the only undefeated team in CFB.

 

[wizards8507]

I don't think that is this simple. If there's only one team headed to a perfect season (like FSU last year), and they beat us on the way (therefore we have little/no chance to jump them IFF they were to lose), what's the point of rooting against them? Them losing doesn't move us ahead of them, and it takes away (using last year's hypothetical) our ability to say 'yeah we have 1 loss, but it was to the only undefeated team in CFB.

Let's say USC beats us, is otherwise undefeated, and the Pac-12 North all have two losses already. If USC wins out, then the Pac-12 champion will absolutely have that playoff spot. It would be better for USC to lose a regular season game and then lose the Pac-12 championship game. The Pac-12 champion would be a two-loss North member. We'd have a better claim over a two-loss Pac-12 champion than over an undefeated Pac-12 champion, regardless of whether our SOS shows USC as 11-2 or 13-0. An "up for grabs" playoff slot is much more precious than a win or two on our SOS.

 

[woolybug25]

 

[koonja]

Let's say USC beats us, is otherwise undefeated, and the Pac-12 North all have two losses already. If USC wins out, then the Pac-12 champion will absolutely have that playoff spot. It would be better for USC to lose a regular season game and then lose the Pac-12 championship game. The Pac-12 champion would be a two-loss North member. We'd have a better claim over a two-loss Pac-12 champion than over an undefeated Pac-12 champion, regardless of whether our SOS shows USC as 11-2 or 13-0. An "up for grabs" playoff slot is much more precious than a win or two on our SOS.

Sure, if you feel confident that USC is going to drop that conference championship game. I can't say I would be in this scenario, but with FSU last year, I did not see them losing a 2nd time in the conference game, so I wanted them to go undefeated since we weren't passing them.

Obviously if I knew they'd also lose the conf champ game, it'd be different.

 

[koonja]

What is this for?

 

[IrishLion]

Because he loves you and Wiz so much that when a debate that doesn't have a clear answer pops up, and you two are at the center of it, it's too much for him to handle and he just has to let go of life.

 

[Cackalacky]

I don't think that is this simple. If there's only one team headed to a perfect season (like FSU last year), and they beat us on the way (therefore we have little/no chance to jump them IFF they were to lose), what's the point of rooting against them? Them losing doesn't move us ahead of them, and it takes away (using last year's hypothetical) our ability to say 'yeah we have 1 loss, but it was to the only undefeated team in CFB.

Barring a crazy set of circumstances (several on loss or two loss conference champions) a 11-1 ND is not gonna get into the playoff. Especially with our schedule this year. ND has to be undefeated. That being the case, my posted scenario is the best path forward. We don't need to root for anyone.

 

[koonja]

Barring a crazy set of circumstances (several on loss or two loss conference champions) a 11-1 ND is not gonna get into the playoff. Especially with our schedule this year. ND has to be undefeated. That being the case, my posted scenario is the best path forward. We don't need to root for anyone.

I disagree that it'd take a crazy set of circumstances for a 11-1 ND team to make the playoffs. And there will be a 2-loss conference champ I bet.

If we lose on a last second FG to Clemson and win out, that's a hell of a resume against our schedule, which I think you're underselling.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Barring a crazy set of circumstances (several on loss or two loss conference champions) a 11-1 ND is not gonna get into the playoff. Especially with our schedule this year. ND has to be undefeated. That being the case, my posted scenario is the best path forward. We don't need to root for anyone.

That's interesting. Herbstreit, Folwer and Howard were talking about ND on ESPN last night and Herbie said if we can get to 10-2, with our schedule, we'll have a strong chance of getting in.

You don't think we'll get in even at 11-1 unless the chips fall our way. I guess we'll see how it plays out (and usually these scenarios never play out).

 

[koonja]

I'll bet all my vbucks that a 11-1 ND team gets into the playoffs as long as the loss is by no more than 10, and happens in the first 6 games (which is easily the half of our schedule where a loss is most likely).

 

[irishfan]

I think the argument really depends on the scenario and it's pretty much always going to be unique. I think the main argument last year was that FSU going 11-2 wasn't realistic with their weak schedule.

Let's just say Clemson were slotted above us in the Top 25 instead of a spot below us....would you really want them to lose before they played us? I want them as highly ranked as possible. If we're 10-1 and on the bubble, would you rather have Stanford be 11-0 or 10-1 for that final game? Because I'm picking 11-0. I want our wins (or losses) to look as good as possible.

I get what you're saying in that if we 11-1, we could finish #5 while Clemson could go 12-1, beat us, and finish #4. But the committee seems to value top-25 wins so much that it seems more probable than not (ha) that if Clemson had gone 10-2 or 11-2 (instead of 12-1) we would get jumped for the 4th spot by an 11-1 or 11-2 conf champ with a more impressive win on their resume.

 

[Cackalacky]

I disagree that it'd take a crazy set of circumstances for a 11-1 ND team to make the playoffs. And there will be a 2-loss conference champ I bet.

If we lose on a last second FG to Clemson and win out, that's a hell of a resume against our schedule, which I think you're underselling.

Our strength of schedule is ranked preseason at #61. Even then, Clemson has lost several key players and they are vastly over rated. Our season ends two weeks before conference championship games and if other teams playing in the those games play well, there is good chance an 11-1 ND team could get passed by the Committee being idle. There are far too many what ifs.... I am underselling nothing. Our schedule is not great. Manageable, but nothing exceptional. Definitely nothing that the committee will get excited about, unless we beat everyone and they do well at the same time.

 

[Cackalacky]

That's interesting. Herbstreit, Folwer and Howard were talking about ND on ESPN last night and Herbie said if we can get to 10-2, with our schedule, we'll have a strong chance of getting in.

You don't think we'll get in even at 11-1 unless the chips fall our way. I guess we'll see how it plays out (and usually these scenarios never play out).

A 10-2 ND team will not be ranked in the top 4. Especially being idle for two weeks before the selection. I must exist in a parallel universe somewhere... lol

 

[RDU Irish]

Research project, how many conference champs have had two or more losses in the last ten years? Might give some perspective on how likely it is to happen going forward. You could argue power conferences shying away from FCS games will lead to more 2 loss champs. Big 12, one loss pretty much has you behind an 11-1 ND at this point.

 

[koonja]

Can we just focus on Texas.

 

[Cackalacky]

Research project, how many conference champs have had two or more losses in the last ten years? Might give some perspective on how likely it is to happen going forward. You could argue power conferences shying away from FCS games will lead to more 2 loss champs. Big 12, one loss pretty much has you behind an 11-1 ND at this point.

Just a cursory look through of final records for the last few years, the top 5-7 teams all had 1 loss or less. Last year, the top 7 teams were all 11-1. I just can't see how ND gets in with a 11-1 record and no conference championship and being idle the last two weeks before selections unless they were supremely impressive throughout the whole year, plus an early loss and high ranking after their last game.

 

[RDU Irish]

2005 - 9-2 Georgia won the SEC, 2006 Arkansas made the championship game with 2 losses, 2007 winning LSU had 2 losses and their opponent Tennessee had 3 losses, 2010 So. Car had three losses (but lost), 2011 Georgia lost their first two games (and the SEC championship), 2014 Mizzou had two losses (including one to Indiana) before losing to Bama in the 'ship

That is just the SEC, you could say a 20% chance of a two loss team in the "best conference" that has had some of the more dominant teams of the last decade. We just forget it because it hasn't happened since 2007 even though there have been seven two-loss teams that have had a shot in ten year (35% of participants) - regardless of dozens of FCS schools propping up their non-conference schedules.

B1G - 2012 Wisconsin regular season finished 7-5, 2011 Wisconsin regular season 10-2, 2009 OSU went 10-2, 2008 OSU split the title with a 10-2 regular season, 2005 OSU again with a 9-2 regular season

B1G didn't have a title game for most of those years but all of those teams either won the title or split it so good chance B1G submits their Champ with 2 or more losses on the ledger at the end of the year. Not to mention their 2013 MSU champ lost to a less than impressive ND team and the 2014 OSU's loss to Va Tech should have pushed their playoff spot to a Big 12 team. Call it 40% of the time they are a two loss champ (I suspect that probability is higher now that they will play a championship game that invariably will give a shot to another team with two or more losses).

Now the PAC12 - 2014 Oregon beat 2 loss ASU, 2013 Stanford and ASU both came in with 2 losses, 2012 Stanford had 2 losses and UCLA 3, 2011 Oregon had 2 losses and UCLA was an unranked 500 team with 6 losses (finished the season with 8 losses, yikes), 2009 Oregon won with 9-2 record, 2007 USC and ASU split the title with 2 each, 2006 USC had 2 losses to Cal's 3 losses, 2005 vacated USC can suck it. - Overall, seems like over 50% chance of a two loss conference champ from here.

Too lazy to tackle the ACC right now but the probability of NO 2 loss conference champs seems a lot less than 50% to me.

 

[Cackalacky]

2005 - 9-2 Georgia won the SEC, 2006 Arkansas made the championship game with 2 losses, 2007 winning LSU had 2 losses and their opponent Tennessee had 3 losses, 2010 So. Car had three losses (but lost), 2011 Georgia lost their first two games (and the SEC championship), 2014 Mizzou had two losses (including one to Indiana) before losing to Bama in the 'ship

That is just the SEC, you could say a 20% chance of a two loss team in the "best conference" that has had some of the more dominant teams of the last decade. We just forget it because it hasn't happened since 2007 even though there have been seven two-loss teams that have had a shot in ten year (35% of participants) - regardless of dozens of FCS schools propping up their non-conference schedules.

B1G - 2012 Wisconsin regular season finished 7-5, 2011 Wisconsin regular season 10-2, 2009 OSU went 10-2, 2008 OSU split the title with a 10-2 regular season, 2005 OSU again with a 9-2 regular season

B1G didn't have a title game for most of those years but all of those teams either won the title or split it so good chance B1G submits their Champ with 2 or more losses on the ledger at the end of the year. Not to mention their 2013 MSU champ lost to a less than impressive ND team and the 2014 OSU's loss to Va Tech should have pushed their playoff spot to a Big 12 team. Call it 40% of the time they are a two loss champ (I suspect that probability is higher now that they will play a championship game that invariably will give a shot to another team with two or more losses).

Now the PAC12 - 2014 Oregon beat 2 loss ASU, 2013 Stanford and ASU both came in with 2 losses, 2012 Stanford had 2 losses and UCLA 3, 2011 Oregon had 2 losses and UCLA was an unranked 500 team with 6 losses (finished the season with 8 losses, yikes), 2009 Oregon won with 9-2 record, 2007 USC and ASU split the title with 2 each, 2006 USC had 2 losses to Cal's 3 losses, 2005 vacated USC can suck it. - Overall, seems like over 50% chance of a two loss conference champ from here.

Too lazy to tackle the ACC right now but the probability of NO 2 loss conference champs seems a lot less than 50% to me.

Not to dismiss all this hard work but being a conference champion is not all that there is with the committee. Is it possible a two loss team is ranked in the top 4 by the committee? Sure. How about five 2-loss teams? Sure. If ND is 11-1 they should be ranked ahead of a two loss team, however that depends on how much weight the Committee will give to those losses. Is it possible a 12-0 team is ranked outside of the top 4? For sure. After last year, I am just not at all sure in the committee's selection process and their ranking.

I looked at the last 5 years for final records and the final ranking and the top teams all had 1 loss or less. (I think Stanford may have had a 2-loss record and finished #5).

 

[kmoose]

A 10-2 ND team will not be ranked in the top 4. Especially being idle for two weeks before the selection. I must exist in a parallel universe somewhere... lol

That depends on how the rest of the season plays out. If I had said, last year, that tOSU would lose to Virginia Tech, yet still make the playoffs, people would have rightly called me crazy.

And Herbstreit didn't say that we would make the playoffs at 10-2, he said that we would have a strong case. Again, that would depend on how the season shook out for us, but it's certainly possible that we would be a serious candidate for the playoffs at 10-2.

 

[GATTACA!]

Our strength of schedule is ranked preseason at #61. Even then, Clemson has lost several key players and they are vastly over rated. Our season ends two weeks before conference championship games and if other teams playing in the those games play well, there is good chance an 11-1 ND team could get passed by the Committee being idle. There are far too many what ifs.... I am underselling nothing. Our schedule is not great. Manageable, but nothing exceptional. Definitely nothing that the committee will get excited about, unless we beat everyone and they do well at the same time.

It's kinda pointless to use preseason SOS. The whole point of the debate is whether or not we should be rooting for our opponents to boost our resume.

 

[Cackalacky]

It's kinda pointless to use preseason SOS. The whole point of the debate is whether or not we should be rooting for our opponents to boost our resume.

I understand the point of this thread. I made a point earlier that IMO makes it simple and does not require us to have to "root" for anyone. People disagreed. That's fine. There are far too many scenarios to even worry about this discussion really.

But our preseason SOS this year is by far the lowest its been since BK has been here and Clemson is already waaaay overvalued at this point in time. None of that matters until the committee rolls out its first poll though, so again, there will be 6 games played before that happens.

 

[Cackalacky]

That depends on how the rest of the season plays out. If I had said, last year, that tOSU would lose to Virginia Tech, yet still make the playoffs, people would have rightly called me crazy.

And Herbstreit didn't say that we would make the playoffs at 10-2, he said that we would have a strong case. Again, that would depend on how the season shook out for us, but it's certainly possible that we would be a serious candidate for the playoffs at 10-2.

Of course we have to see how the rest of the season plays out, but the statistics are unlikely to fall in NDs favor. OSU lost their first game and they dominated everyone the rest of the season... and they had a conference championship.... and they were ranked high at the end of the season. The majority of this discussion hinges on the committee's values for each team's records, and based on last year there is no indication it was consistent nor standard.

Plus I don't think people are considering what all will happen in CFB after ND's last game. They will be idle for 1 or 2 weeks (2 I think though not certain). There is a good chance that even if ND is ranked near or in the TOP 4, they could get passed by hot teams that played a conference championship game and won. I would not put it past the committee based on the explanations they used last year to justify their rankings.

 

[kmoose]

Of course we have to see how the rest of the season plays out, but the statistics are unlikely to fall in NDs favor.

I don't have any problem with that view. But my post was in response to this statement:

A 10-2 ND team will not be ranked in the top 4.

I'm not saying that they WILL, I am merely saying that Herbstreit's contention that ND would have a strong case is not outlandish.

 

[phgreek]

Of course we have to see how the rest of the season plays out, but the statistics are unlikely to fall in NDs favor. OSU lost their first game and they dominated everyone the rest of the season... and they had a conference championship.... and they were ranked high at the end of the season. The majority of this discussion hinges on the committee's values for each team's records, and based on last year there is no indication it was consistent nor standard.

Plus I don't think people are considering what all will happen in CFB after ND's last game. They will be idle for 1 or 2 weeks (2 I think though not certain). There is a good chance that even if ND is ranked near or in the TOP 4, they could get passed by hot teams that played a conference championship game and won. I would not put it past the committee based on the explanations they used last year to justify their rankings.

...which is why I think ND pretty much has to go undefeated. Assuming we'll not have a bunch of two loss conference champions, and ND is 11-1. Seems pretty hard to ignore a 1 loss conference champ, fresh off the conquest to put an idle ND team in. ND needs to play someone over that span to reinforce their standing...put BYU back on the schedule in that spot, and it may help.