USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
- Thread starter Spartanforlife4
- Start date
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
It helps the big ten get everyone into a bowl by not having us in the orange bowl.
It helps the big ten get everyone into a bowl by not having us in the orange bowl.
bronconick
Yep, still here
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
Broncos going to play in Bronco Stadium.
Broncos going to play in Bronco Stadium.
French Rage
NICKERSON HAS [CENSORED]
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
Stanford plays Maryland in the Foster Farms Bowl at Levi's Stadium. Good news for me as I can walk and take public transit the whole way!
Stanford plays Maryland in the Foster Farms Bowl at Levi's Stadium. Good news for me as I can walk and take public transit the whole way!
JF_Gophers
2147483647
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
Wow.
Minnesota gets Missouri in the Citrus Bowl on Jan. 1.
Finally a good bowl game!
Wow.
Minnesota gets Missouri in the Citrus Bowl on Jan. 1.
Finally a good bowl game!
Spartanforlife4
Generic Catchy Message
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
I noticed that. Hope it doesn't throw off competitive balance for the other bowls. It would be nice for the Big Ten to have a winning record for once.
I noticed that. Hope it doesn't throw off competitive balance for the other bowls. It would be nice for the Big Ten to have a winning record for once.
MinnesotaNorthStar
Minding the gap
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
They do that...they're in.
Not lose to Baylor...
They do that...they're in.
JF_Gophers
2147483647
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
Sour grapes from art briles. He knew they were in trouble when manning left the committee because only 1 other was from the south. But of course only says it now.
Weak.
Sour grapes from art briles. He knew they were in trouble when manning left the committee because only 1 other was from the south. But of course only says it now.
Weak.
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
Realistically, TCU isn't a "little guy" anymore. BSU is, as their change to the Big East was a bust. But TCU is playing by the rules as is very long time B12 member Baylor.
So many complain about the B1G being weak, nobody seems to remember that the B12 ended up ony having 3 teams in the top 5- Baylor, TCU, and K-State. For the most part, their season was a disaster. Had others in the B12 had better seasons, the TCU/Baylor schedule would look a lot better, even with the poor non conference schedules. Depending on the ranking, the B1G was barely better in the 4/5 position than the B12- and that does matter.
Had OSU's B1G championship finished with a crappy win over Michigan (hurts to say that)- no way they would have gotten in.
Anyway, TCU is a Power 5 conference now. Not a Little Guy by any means.
Realistically, TCU isn't a "little guy" anymore. BSU is, as their change to the Big East was a bust. But TCU is playing by the rules as is very long time B12 member Baylor.
So many complain about the B1G being weak, nobody seems to remember that the B12 ended up ony having 3 teams in the top 5- Baylor, TCU, and K-State. For the most part, their season was a disaster. Had others in the B12 had better seasons, the TCU/Baylor schedule would look a lot better, even with the poor non conference schedules. Depending on the ranking, the B1G was barely better in the 4/5 position than the B12- and that does matter.
Had OSU's B1G championship finished with a crappy win over Michigan (hurts to say that)- no way they would have gotten in.
Anyway, TCU is a Power 5 conference now. Not a Little Guy by any means.
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
Only 4 teams had either no losses or 1 quality loss. This should have been a no-brainer. NC$$ money grab for themselves and networks. And how TCU falls below Baylor is beyond me! Played a tougher non-conference schedule and losing at Baylor by 3 is a hell of a lot better than losing at West Virginia by 14.
Only 4 teams had either no losses or 1 quality loss. This should have been a no-brainer. NC$$ money grab for themselves and networks. And how TCU falls below Baylor is beyond me! Played a tougher non-conference schedule and losing at Baylor by 3 is a hell of a lot better than losing at West Virginia by 14.
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
Of course we saw in D2 how a one loss Pittsburg State got moved ahead of an undefeated UMD team there, so who knows if something similar would have happened with a two loss SEC team?
That would have been a whole lot of fun to see what they did with that!
Of course we saw in D2 how a one loss Pittsburg State got moved ahead of an undefeated UMD team there, so who knows if something similar would have happened with a two loss SEC team?
Spartanforlife4
Generic Catchy Message
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
Because, 1) same record 2) head to head 3) head to head meant Baylor was technically the conference bowl rep, and therefore more of the "official" conference champ for the comittee, so they got the bump. Plus the quality win against KSU made their resume better than a game against ISU.
I really don't think people would've had a problem with the committee if they hadn't been doing weekly rankings and just came out with a final poll, but because they did the last minute switch is it's causing all the controversy.
Because, 1) same record 2) head to head 3) head to head meant Baylor was technically the conference bowl rep, and therefore more of the "official" conference champ for the comittee, so they got the bump. Plus the quality win against KSU made their resume better than a game against ISU.
I really don't think people would've had a problem with the committee if they hadn't been doing weekly rankings and just came out with a final poll, but because they did the last minute switch is it's causing all the controversy.
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
I agree that if they had Baylor ahead all along there would be less controversy but you cannot argue that TCU's overall resume isn't better than Baylor's.
I agree that if they had Baylor ahead all along there would be less controversy but you cannot argue that TCU's overall resume isn't better than Baylor's.
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
Part me says the B12 should be granted a waiver from the 12 team requirement for a conference title game. Numerically Ironic? Yes. But if title game results are going to be a key factor for playoff selection, then the 12 team rule has suddenly become unfair.
TCU is an innocent victim in one respect. To the extent the B12 is being penalized for not having a conference championship game, the Horned Frogs had no role in that. By joining the league, they were attempting to be part of the solution. Explaining all the movement between conferences is way beyond the scope of this comment. But just focusing on the B12, a major part of the story is the unequal division of TV revenue, which heavily favors Austin. That was clearly a factor for the 4 schools who departed. TCU wasn't present during those events. Not that they would have been strong enough to make a difference if they had been. I'm just saying they aren't responsible for problems that arose before they joined.
Part me says the B12 should be granted a waiver from the 12 team requirement for a conference title game. Numerically Ironic? Yes. But if title game results are going to be a key factor for playoff selection, then the 12 team rule has suddenly become unfair.
Agreed, and yet I'm surprised it factored in. I went to bed Saturday night certain we'd be on the outside of the playoff looking in. Clearly the win over the Badgers was a tour-de-force, something Buckeye fans will cherish for a long time. But I found it impossible to believe that it was going to leapfrog us over TCU, who had also won big. When I first saw an online headline that the Buckeyes had been selected for the "Sugar Bowl," my reaction was: Not bad; that's better than the Peach; the Sugar has a much greater tradition. Then I wondered who the opponent would be. It took me a long moment to grasp that we had actually been selected for the four team playoff.
I agree that without the tour-de-force on Saturday, the Buckeyes don't get chosen. But the rivalry game will always be a special season unto itself -- with enormous value whether or not there are playoff implications. By definition it can't be crappy.
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
You're going to get me in trouble talking about D2 here.
That selection of the PSU Gorilla's over the UMD Bulldogs is just going to show how much more important Strength Of Schedule is in D2football, and how much having your league play non-conference games is going to be. UMD was stuck in the NSIC north that was outright lousy and the schedule makers had them not playing some of the stronger NSIC teams. Sure fire way to end up with a lousy SOS. Had Duluth had one less game against one of the NSIC South teams and had picked up a non-con game like say Michigan Tech or Northern Michigan perhaps, they likely would have stayed ahead of Pittsburg.
As for how it relates to D1-A here, I think its also going to show the importance of your conference scheduling tough games as well. Sooner or later they're going to make it a lot harder for teams to schedule D1-AA cupcakes to fill out the schedule. Even if you're tangling with a D1-AA powerhouse, things are going to get set up where you're better off bringing in a program like Eastern Michigan that's really bad.
That would have been a whole lot of fun to see what they did with that!
Of course we saw in D2 how a one loss Pittsburg State got moved ahead of an undefeated UMD team there, so who knows if something similar would have happened with a two loss SEC team?
You're going to get me in trouble talking about D2 here.
That selection of the PSU Gorilla's over the UMD Bulldogs is just going to show how much more important Strength Of Schedule is in D2football, and how much having your league play non-conference games is going to be. UMD was stuck in the NSIC north that was outright lousy and the schedule makers had them not playing some of the stronger NSIC teams. Sure fire way to end up with a lousy SOS. Had Duluth had one less game against one of the NSIC South teams and had picked up a non-con game like say Michigan Tech or Northern Michigan perhaps, they likely would have stayed ahead of Pittsburg.
As for how it relates to D1-A here, I think its also going to show the importance of your conference scheduling tough games as well. Sooner or later they're going to make it a lot harder for teams to schedule D1-AA cupcakes to fill out the schedule. Even if you're tangling with a D1-AA powerhouse, things are going to get set up where you're better off bringing in a program like Eastern Michigan that's really bad.
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
You went to bed too early. After the OSU game, the talking heads shifted a lot- from being more a TCU in by 10-1 to OSU jumping them by 8-2 or so. They saw that win as a big one- I think OSU was under-rated due to the quarterback issue before the game, and almost over rated due to the quarterback issue after the game. Really, I think the apprehension of losing a heisman candidate was holding your team down more than TCU or Baylor being that good- weren't the Badgers favored going into the game?
(be honest- some of those TD passes were horribly underthrown- had the back been paying attention.... well, let me put it this way- when Gardner finished the season a few years ago- he won even doing that, too. Good thing you have a few weeks to help his play, but I dunno)
You went to bed too early. After the OSU game, the talking heads shifted a lot- from being more a TCU in by 10-1 to OSU jumping them by 8-2 or so. They saw that win as a big one- I think OSU was under-rated due to the quarterback issue before the game, and almost over rated due to the quarterback issue after the game. Really, I think the apprehension of losing a heisman candidate was holding your team down more than TCU or Baylor being that good- weren't the Badgers favored going into the game?
(be honest- some of those TD passes were horribly underthrown- had the back been paying attention.... well, let me put it this way- when Gardner finished the season a few years ago- he won even doing that, too. Good thing you have a few weeks to help his play, but I dunno)
Fighting Sioux 23
New member
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
This is the issue. I get that people like to have talking points during the last half of the season, but perhaps a better approach would be to have the committee simply have a group of teams "in the mix" or "contenders" and not have numerical rankings (that is what the polls are for anyway). That might start out at 15-20 teams midway through the season, but it would have dwindled down to 6-8 by the final selection show. It would give the committee some wiggle room to avoid what looks like an absurd result (TCU dropping 3 spots after crushing Iowa State), yet it would still give the talking heads plenty to debate about during the season.
This is the issue. I get that people like to have talking points during the last half of the season, but perhaps a better approach would be to have the committee simply have a group of teams "in the mix" or "contenders" and not have numerical rankings (that is what the polls are for anyway). That might start out at 15-20 teams midway through the season, but it would have dwindled down to 6-8 by the final selection show. It would give the committee some wiggle room to avoid what looks like an absurd result (TCU dropping 3 spots after crushing Iowa State), yet it would still give the talking heads plenty to debate about during the season.
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
Bottom line on all of this? The Buckeyes in general, and Cardale in particular, were rewarded for greatly exceeding expectations. Long term, I'm not sure if this is a good or bad precedent. But it certainly helped this Buckeye team.
True enough; I fell asleep during the postgame show.
Another factor is that I listen to/watch local broadcasts almost exclusively during the postgame period, not the national talking heads. As you're aware, we get almost saturation coverage here on Buckeye Football. And whether celebrating or licking wounds, I prefer to spend the time right after the game within the tribe.
Yes, but that wasn't unreasonable. Nationally, Cardale was a total unknown. And because J.T. had to step up so suddenly last August, his back-ups got less practice reps than you'd usually expect over the course of the season. Predicting that the third-stringer would struggle due to lack of experience was a rational take.
Bottom line on all of this? The Buckeyes in general, and Cardale in particular, were rewarded for greatly exceeding expectations. Long term, I'm not sure if this is a good or bad precedent. But it certainly helped this Buckeye team.
Speaking only for myself, overconfidence in the playoffs will be a total non-issue.
MavHockey14
New member
Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
It's absurd to think FSU shouldn't have gotten in.
It's absurd to think FSU shouldn't have gotten in.