College Football 2016 - B1G expectations

[JonSnow4President]

Personally, I think prioritizing conference championships is bulls***.  I want the 4 best teams out there (and remember, as an Aggie, I don't think they are, or even better than Washington, although I think the resume is better).  I don't care if they're 4 Big 10 teams, 4 SEC teams, or whatever mix of whatever conference.  Now, the conference championship does provide what should be a quality matchup to add to a team's resume.  So an undefeated conference champion is much more likely to have the better resume (or one close enough that I'm deferring to the wins) anyway.  

Undefeated also doesn't do much for me with a weak schedule over a 1 loss team with a stronger schedule, and that stands true for any 1 win/loss differential. I think Wisconsin is a better team than A&M. I think just from the eye test that Ohio State is a better team than Clemson. I think Wisconsin, LSU, OU, OkSu, and Utah are better teams than Baylor, WVU, or Boise.    

I'm talking more from the general standpoint here.  As long as Trevor Knight is A&M's QB, he will have way too much bad Trevor to justify their ranking. If good Trevor ever shows up for more than a quarter's worth of snaps, I'd like this team well enough to beat anyone. 

[sperry]

A&M at 4 is a joke. They are squeaking out wins. They have one very nice win @ Auburn, but they got absolutely drubbed by Alabama. They weren't close to in the same league as that team. Aside from a close win at a very good Utah team, Washington has been dominating everyone they play.

 

We also all know that the CFP will put Washington back in front of A&M if both teams win out. So it's a moot point, but it tarnishes the whole process to put out these ridiculous midseason rankings to drum up controversy.

[Ded As Ned]

We all have to admit, that even though we know the rankings are BS at this point... we're here talking about them, and how it's BS..  So it works.  I feel dirty.

[sperry]

1 hour ago, Ded As Ned said:

We all have to admit, that even though we know the rankings are BS at this point... we're here talking about them, and how it's BS..  So it works.  I feel dirty.

 

Eh, I don't subscribe to the any publicity is good publicity camp with this one. They tarnish their credibility with this stuff.

[Kalbear]

2 hours ago, sperry said:

 

Eh, I don't subscribe to the any publicity is good publicity camp with this one. They tarnish their credibility with this stuff.

Agreed. Especially when football as a rule is declining and people are clamoring for big changes in the NCAA, anything that looks worse makes more people tune out. 

I don't think that there will be any real controversy in the top 4 one way or another. Everything has been basically fine and reasonable, and has worked itself out very well in the last two times (has it been two? I think that's right). I can see this year being something of a problem in that outside of Alabama there are no really outstanding teams, and a whole bunch of them are going to kick each other's ass, but I think that'll just likely work itself out in Alabama obliterating whatever remains of their opponents.

[S John]

Yep, especially IF A&M and Washington were to both keep on winning.  Then you have a situation where the committee is forced to jump Washington over A&M at the last minute and claim some bullshit about a '13th data point'.  When the truth is, undefeated is undefeated and that was going to be the way it would swing the whole time.

 

I think they are just trying to make it appear as though they don't care about the conference affiliations and just want the 4 best teams, but we all know that is not true.  99% of the time the spots are going to be the best team in 4 of the 5 major conferences.  The only time that won't happen is if more than one conference has a 2+ loss champion.  Last time anything like that happened was 2007, so it won't be the norm.  

[Ded As Ned]

Thought some of you might enjoy this rant. 

http://www.cardchronicle.com/2016/11/2/13504254/the-sec-fallacy

 

[Rhom]

2 hours ago, Ded As Ned said:

Thought some of you might enjoy this rant. 

http://www.cardchronicle.com/2016/11/2/13504254/the-sec-fallacy

 

But I like circus peanuts...

[Rhom]

At the risk of turning the discussion serious again...

Feds investigating Sandusky fine Penn State a record $2.4M

Quote

Federal officials looking into how Penn State handled complaints about Jerry Sandusky hit the school on Thursday with a record $2.4 million fine, saying it violated requirements about reporting campus crimes and warning people if their safety was threatened.

The fine was the result of a five-year investigation that began shortly after Sandusky's 2011 arrest raised questions about what administrators had known about the former assistant football coach, now serving decades in prison for child molestation. The report said Penn State officials disclosed in June that 45 people have claimed they were victims of Sandusky, who was convicted of abusing 10 boys.

 

[dbunting]

16 hours ago, Ded As Ned said:

Thought some of you might enjoy this rant. 

http://www.cardchronicle.com/2016/11/2/13504254/the-sec-fallacy

 

A lot of that is absolutely true, ESPN makes the SEC and select players appear better than they really are. One thing stands out for me, since I am a Michigan fan, is the Outback bowl between Michigan and South Carolina. SC was a favorite coming in, 9-2 and a SEC team taking on 8-3 lowly B1G Ten team. It was a close game that could have gone either way, but what stood out to me was the one play.

For the majority of that game Clowney was owned by Michigans LT Taylor Lewan. Clowney makes one good play and that was all you heard about. The clip was played over and over again and the announcers of the game were actually saying he should be the game MVP. MVP, even though that was really the only play he made the whole game!

[Rhom]

59 minutes ago, dbunting said:

A lot of that is absolutely true, ESPN makes the SEC and select players appear better than they really are. One thing stands out for me, since I am a Michigan fan, is the Outback bowl between Michigan and South Carolina. SC was a favorite coming in, 9-2 and a SEC team taking on 8-3 lowly B1G Ten team. It was a close game that could have gone either way, but what stood out to me was the one play.

For the majority of that game Clowney was owned by Michigans LT Taylor Lewan. Clowney makes one good play and that was all you heard about. The clip was played over and over again and the announcers of the game were actually saying he should be the game MVP. MVP, even though that was really the only play he made the whole game!

To be fair... that was a monster hit.

[Ded As Ned]

1 hour ago, dbunting said:

For the majority of that game Clowney was owned by Michigans LT Taylor Lewan. Clowney makes one good play and that was all you heard about. The clip was played over and over again and the announcers of the game were actually saying he should be the game MVP. MVP, even though that was really the only play he made the whole game!

I agree with much of the facts of the article, but this is not a good example.  Announcers do this kind of thing all the time to drum up the drama and excitement, and it's across the board.  As Rhom pointed out, that WAS a monster hit.  You don't often see a player's helmet fly 5 yards back the opposite way he was running.  Hell I just replayed it 3 times.  

Don't take this as me defending the existence of SEC bias, because I'm not.  It's just the nature of the beast.  ESPN owns the SEC network.  They have a strong financial interest in the success of the SEC nationally, so of course they're going to influence things in that direction the best they can.  Just wait until the ACC network gets rolling in a couple years, then their narrative will change to be all about the Big Power 2 and drum up all the hype they can for both conferences.  (Note the B1G network is jointly owned by the B1G and Fox.  Thus not much hype on the ESPN networks.)

 

[Rhom]

1 hour ago, Ded As Ned said:

Don't take this as me defending the existence of SEC bias, because I'm not.  

I am!

S-E-C!

S-E-C!!

S-E-C!!!!!!!

 

[dbunting]

1 hour ago, Rhom said:

To be fair... that was a monster hit.

Yep, but it was ONE play. And it led the ESPN shows and the talk was about how great he played when in reality he didn't. He got owned by Lewan, who BTW has gone on to have a better career as of now. They made it sound like Clowney was dominating him. I am obviously biased and aware of it, I just took it as a SEC bias from ESPN.

[JonSnow4President]

By contrast, you have a certain crowd that swings the pendulum too far the other way in their "the SEC is overrated" shit.  The West is the best division in football right now.  The 4th team in the division, depending on if you call it LSU or Auburn, has gone toe to toe with legitimate top 10 teams (Wisconsin and Clemson).  The conference as a whole has the best OOC record, and with winning records against every other conference.  The numbers say they're a better conference, at least over the past decade (any individual year is obviously it's own unique case), especially when it comes to the middle of the pack.

That's not to say A&M should be favored over Washington (although at this immediate point in time, their resume is better IMO, although any idiot can look at A&M play and know Washington would win the majority of those games), or that Ohio State should fear Ole Miss, the rough mid-point of the conference.  But the SEC is the best group of 10-14 teams around, although the Big 10 looks like it's closing the gap significantly. 

 

[Michael Seswatha Jordan]

2 hours ago, JonSnow4President said:

By contrast, you have a certain crowd that swings the pendulum too far the other way in their "the SEC is overrated" shit.  The West is the best division in football right now.  The 4th team in the division, depending on if you call it LSU or Auburn, has gone toe to toe with legitimate top 10 teams (Wisconsin and Clemson).  The conference as a whole has the best OOC record, and with winning records against every other conference.  The numbers say they're a better conference, at least over the past decade (any individual year is obviously it's own unique case), especially when it comes to the middle of the pack.

That's not to say A&M should be favored over Washington (although at this immediate point in time, their resume is better IMO, although any idiot can look at A&M play and know Washington would win the majority of those games), or that Ohio State should fear Ole Miss, the rough mid-point of the conference.  But the SEC is the best group of 10-14 teams around, although the Big 10 looks like it's closing the gap significantly. 

 

You clearly have SEC bias and were utterly blind to it. If there is two undefeated teams and 3 1 loss teams, one of them being an SEC, that team will get in regardless of strength of schedule, OOC games and whatever else should be factored in. Its SEC over the other teams regardless and they'll give a BS excuse why, that doesn't make any sense at all. Its is a great conference, and no one can be serious and not admit that. But, the bias is obvious to everyone, at least you can admit that, no?

[JonSnow4President]

4 hours ago, Michael Seswatha Jordan said:

You clearly have SEC bias and were utterly blind to it. If there is two undefeated teams and 3 1 loss teams, one of them being an SEC, that team will get in regardless of strength of schedule, OOC games and whatever else should be factored in. Its SEC over the other teams regardless and they'll give a BS excuse why, that doesn't make any sense at all. Its is a great conference, and no one can be serious and not admit that. But, the bias is obvious to everyone, at least you can admit that, no?

It depends.  I know Baylor and UT fans that will rip on A&M for having an easy OOC schedule, while completely ignoring that the division grind makes A&M's schedule harder than their own teams' (and that Baylor has the cupcakiest of all cupcake OOC schedules). There isn't a division in football where the 6th team is expected to beat Ole Miss, or the 4th team LSU/Auburn.  As long as an SEC (west) team has an adequate OOC schedule, they probably do have an overall tougher schedule. 

Does a team like Wisconsin have a little bit of an argument there?  Yeah.  I think A&M has the tougher conference grind, but LSU is a big upgrade over UCLA, and the FCS school is a downgrade from the Sun Belt, Wisconsin's worst cupcake (although A&M's previous FCS team was a perennial title contender, and would probably beat Georgia State more often than not). But I hear it too often from fans of teams whose best team played wouldn't place in the middle of the SEC west. It doesn't help that I live in what is predominantly Big12 country, with Big 12 family members and work colleagues.  

If we look at OSU, Washington, and Louisville (easiest possible 1 losses to compare to), only OSU has a prayer of standing up to A&M's schedule thanks to the OU game looking a hell of a lot better than the UCLA game. Washington's OOC is worse than A&M's, and Louisville's doesn't stand up with Houston fading.  

[Rhom]

I am watching two things today.  Can Kentucky beat a suddenly sliding Georgia team in Lexington tonight?  The fact that I'm even seriously contemplating this issue is amazing to me. 

The second thing I'm watching... Can Arkansas beat Florida in Fayetteville? 

If both those things happen, then the absolutely unthinkable happens... (because I'm working on the solid assumption that LSU will beat Florida later in the season in Baton Rouge) Kentucky goes to Tennessee next week with an appearance in the SEC championship on the line.   Between injury and turmoil, Tennessee suddenly does not look invincible either. 

[Michael Seswatha Jordan]

11 hours ago, JonSnow4President said:

It depends.  I know Baylor and UT fans that will rip on A&M for having an easy OOC schedule, while completely ignoring that the division grind makes A&M's schedule harder than their own teams' (and that Baylor has the cupcakiest of all cupcake OOC schedules). There isn't a division in football where the 6th team is expected to beat Ole Miss, or the 4th team LSU/Auburn.  As long as an SEC (west) team has an adequate OOC schedule, they probably do have an overall tougher schedule. 

Does a team like Wisconsin have a little bit of an argument there?  Yeah.  I think A&M has the tougher conference grind, but LSU is a big upgrade over UCLA, and the FCS school is a downgrade from the Sun Belt, Wisconsin's worst cupcake (although A&M's previous FCS team was a perennial title contender, and would probably beat Georgia State more often than not). But I hear it too often from fans of teams whose best team played wouldn't place in the middle of the SEC west. It doesn't help that I live in what is predominantly Big12 country, with Big 12 family members and work colleagues.  

If we look at OSU, Washington, and Louisville (easiest possible 1 losses to compare to), only OSU has a prayer of standing up to A&M's schedule thanks to the OU game looking a hell of a lot better than the UCLA game. Washington's OOC is worse than A&M's, and Louisville's doesn't stand up with Houston fading.  

Question and Im just curious, so those middle of the pack SEC team have a high winning % of their bowl games? In too lazy or wouldn't even know where to find that info. I remember when we (WVU) played Georgia innt think the Sugar Bowl and was never given a shot. Georgia barely lost the SEC championship that year. We blew them out, besides some garbage time points that made the game a lot closer than what it really was. I just find it unrealistic to think that the top teams in other conferences couldn't and wouldn't compete in the SEC. I think they would do just fine, given a few years to adjust. To me, it's a media bias created by ESPN, because the SEC is the ESPN's moneymaker.

[Ded As Ned]

1 hour ago, Rhom said:

I am watching two things today.  Can Kentucky beat a suddenly sliding Georgia team in Lexington tonight?  The fact that I'm even seriously contemplating this issue is amazing to me. 

The second thing I'm watching... Can Arkansas beat Florida in Fayetteville? 

If both those things happen, then the absolutely unthinkable happens... (because I'm working on the solid assumption that LSU will beat Florida later in the season in Baton Rouge) Kentucky goes to Tennessee next week with an appearance in the SEC championship on the line.   Between injury and turmoil, Tennessee suddenly does not look invincible either. 

Yep these have been the only two things on my mind for a week now!  C-A-T-S CATS CATS CATS!  Suddenly, and I never thought I'd be saying this, but I'll be a bit disappointed at this point if we wind up 6-6.

Go CATS!  Go Razorbacks!!!