2015 College Football Chatter

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rev said:
Never thought I would be happy with just making it to Bowl eligible. Its a step in the right direction. Next major one is keeping a DC so we can start recruiting.
Click to expand...

It has been a ride for sure. I honestly thought that we'd win 6-7 this year. Then we got a little momentum and my hope went a little higher. Buuuuuut it was quickly shattered about mid-year....
 
One thing that I honestly don't get is this universal acceptance that 1-loss Alabama is not in danger of falling out of the top 4 but 1-loss Notre Dame is.

ND's loss is much better than Bama's and their schedule is just as tough, IMO.

So why is ND in danger of being overtaken by OK State but not Bama?
 
1bigfan13 said:
One thing that I honestly don't get is this universal acceptance that 1-loss Alabama is not in danger of falling out of the top 4 but 1-loss Notre Dame is.

ND's loss is much better than Bama's and their schedule is just as tough, IMO.

So why is ND in danger of being overtaken by OK State but not Bama?
Click to expand...

I have explained it in the past. Bama whores and pimps.
 
Mike and Mike are talking about the committee possibly holding Baylor and TCU's injuries against Oklahoma.

I understand what they are saying but we have two recent examples of teams playing without key players and not skipping a beat.

ND this year and Ohio State last year.

So I wouldn't be so quick to diminish OU's win over Baylor and their possible win over TCU just because they're missing key players.
 
1bigfan13 said:
Mike and Mike are talking about the committee possibly holding Baylor and TCU's injuries against Oklahoma.

I understand what they are saying but we have two recent examples of teams playing without key players and not skipping a beat.

ND this year and Ohio State last year.

So I wouldn't be so quick to diminish OU's win over Baylor and their possible win over TCU just because they're missing key players.
Click to expand...

I think they are big ten proponents as well and see the possibilities of Ohio State and others cutting each other up and missing out. They want to make sure that ND and a big 10 team both get in..
 
1bigfan13 said:
Mike and Mike are talking about the committee possibly holding Baylor and TCU's injuries against Oklahoma.

I understand what they are saying but we have two recent examples of teams playing without key players and not skipping a beat.

ND this year and Ohio State last year.

So I wouldn't be so quick to diminish OU's win over Baylor and their possible win over TCU just because they're missing key players.
Click to expand...

They should count or else out Baylor back up to where they were ranked if we are playing the imagine if game.
 
1bigfan13 said:
Mike and Mike are talking about the committee possibly holding Baylor and TCU's injuries against Oklahoma.
Click to expand...

It is sort of an interesting question though. Is a win as valuable when you play the team without their best player? Of course if TCU and Baylor continue to lose without their star QB it kind of answers that question doesn't it?
 
1bigfan13 said:
One thing that I honestly don't get is this universal acceptance that 1-loss Alabama is not in danger of falling out of the top 4 but 1-loss Notre Dame is.

ND's loss is much better than Bama's and their schedule is just as tough, IMO.

So why is ND in danger of being overtaken by OK State but not Bama?
Click to expand...

The EYEBALL TEST!!!!!

This is legitimately my problem with the committee defaulting to the eyeball test argument. It's like saying "ignore the resume" and lets just put the teams we think will be best at the top. Besides, is there really any chance the committee would leave the SEC out of the playoffs? Alabama could be a two loss team and they would be in the final 4 right now.
 
11114167_10153060135525964_4691589490604158878_o.jpg


Suck it everyone!
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
It is sort of an interesting question though. Is a win as valuable when you play the team without their best player? Of course if TCU and Baylor continue to lose without their star QB it kind of answers that question doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Yes and no. Baylor and TCU are meeting the strengths of the conference now so who can say how the outcomes would have been with their starters. It may be that they would have lost anyway. That's part of the game.
 
L.T. Fan said:
Yes and no. Baylor and TCU are meeting the strengths of the conference now so who can say how the outcomes would have been with their starters. It may be that they would have lost anyway. That's part of the game.
Click to expand...

Sure and maybe they would have lost anyway. But then are those teams really any good to begin with? It's why the strength of schedule argument in college football is such a crap shoot. What looks like a good win one second doesn't look like a good win once you've beaten them. Baylor has had a tremendously weak schedule. If they then proceed to lose all the games of significance, do we still count them as a quality win for the teams who beat them?
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Sure and maybe they would have lost anyway. But then are those teams really any good to begin with? It's why the strength of schedule argument in college football is such a crap shoot. What looks like a good win one second doesn't look like a good win once you've beaten them. Baylor has had a tremendously weak schedule. If they then proceed to lose all the games of significance, do we still count them as a quality win for the teams who beat them?
Click to expand...

Who knows but take a gander at Bama' s non interference schedule and tell me why it doesn't cost them.
 
L.T. Fan said:
Who knows but take a gander at Bama' s non interference schedule and tell me why it doesn't cost them.
Click to expand...

Because the SEC is so great that every team they play in the SEC is the test of a champion.

Truth is no one's non conference schedule is great. If a team schedules a Pitt/Wisconsin or any other major conference team that's about as good as you can expect. Alabama is basically on a bye week this week while playing Charleston Southern. Not even sure why they bother playing that game. It's a joke really. Especially this time of year. I can understand sort of a tuneup game at the start of the season but at this point in the season it's totally pointless. Of course it will in no way hurt Alabama. And really why should it? It's not like playing a crappy team somehow makes Alabama worse. It is funny how people pretend like Alabama doesn't schedule cupcakes since they haven't played this game yet.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Couldn't agree more. It's basically made up bullshit so that they can justify putting a team like Ohio State in the top 4 no matter what happens. There is just this automatic assumption that traditional power schools like Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma and others have more talent then everyone else. No matter how they play on the field it doesn't matter because they have a "higher ceiling."
Click to expand...
It's definitely made up bullshit, but I think it's more because they know those teams will get higher ratings. Same reason they're trying to hard to keep Notre Dame in.

The whole thing is a sham. It's more about ratings and the ESPN conference contract tie-ins. Joel Klatt has been dead on.
 
L.T. Fan said:
Who knows but take a gander at Bama' s non interference schedule and tell me why it doesn't cost them.
Click to expand...

Are you really comparing Baylor's schedule to Bamma's?

And the SEC has more depth than the Big 12 especially this year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom