What's new
By:
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.

College Football 2019-20: It'll Just Be Alabama vs. Clemson AGAIN.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: College Football 2019-20: It'll Just Be Alabama vs. Clemson AGAIN.

French Rage said:
OK, so that's where I should go now for Deadspin/Splinter/Gawker stuff, good to know.
Click to expand...

Not any more because it was within the ex-Gawker world.

I'm sure we will get word of a new clubhouse when it's built.

The only thing that worries me longterm is the Onion. I didn't know these PE morons hadn't gotten their hooks in it too.
 
alfablue said:
Gameday just talked about 4 games today that are must wins for both teams, otherwise the season is over- as in no bowl games.
One was Nebraska v Purdue.
5 of the rest 6 were SEC schools- Tennessee, Miss St, Arkansas, South Carolina, and Vanderbilt.

Think about that- the "best" conference top to bottom could have 3 of their teams eliminated this week from bowl games, and the others next weekend if they, again loose. Someone needs to remind me why that conference is so good top to bottom. Old Miss also has 5 losses.

SEC has 6 teams with 5 or more losses, B1G 4. And we all know that SEC has a LOT of cupcakes on their schedules. Like Alabama A&M, NIU, Charleston So, Portland State, etc...
Click to expand...
Counting losses is as futile as counting wins. It matters who you beat and who you lost to. Every SEC team with 5+ losses have at least 3 losses to SEC teams, so I’m not sure what that’s supposed to be telling us about the SEC’s strength relative to other conferences.
 
Re: College Football 2019-20: It'll Just Be Alabama vs. Clemson AGAIN.

LynahFan said:
Counting losses is as futile as counting wins. It matters who you beat and who you lost to. Every SEC team with 5+ losses have at least 3 losses to SEC teams, so I’m not sure what that’s supposed to be telling us about the SEC’s strength relative to other conferences.
Click to expand...

But as I pointed out, the SEC non conference wins suck, too. The best ever Alabama plays Western Carolina next week. And they have played powerhouse Mercer in game one. Other than SEC schools, their schedule is a joke- I'd be ****ed as a fan seeing the crappy games. LSU's best game is Texas, who is turning out to not be all that good.

Granted, Pedo State played my terrible Vandals in game one.

Still- to make any decent conclusions relative to other conferences, shouldn't they play a better non conference schedule?

What makes me sick now is the discussion that both LSU and Bama should get into the playoffs despite the fact (and it is a fact) that one of those two teams isn't even going to win their division. So much for the regular season mattering. Right NOW, the B1G has 3 undefeated teams. And, IMHO, Minnesota has had as tough a real schedule to the SEC, when you compare their entire non-conference schedule. Nobody is even thinking about Pedo AND OSU making it in, and I'm 100% sure that if an undefeated Minny closely beats an undefeated OSU in the B1G champ game, both teams will not be going. Let alone a 1 lost Pedo state be considered.

Then again, the reality is that outside of the SEC, not many care about them, so ESPN will suffer for eyes to watch. I've not watched the championship game....
 
Re: College Football 2019-20: It'll Just Be Alabama vs. Clemson AGAIN.

I’m not saying I disagree with your thesis, just that pointing to 5-loss teams isn’t great supporting evidence.

Many of the non-con wins are meaningless, and several of the non-con losses are real stinkers. That’s where there is hay to be made.
 
Re: College Football 2019-20: It'll Just Be Alabama vs. Clemson AGAIN.

Yeah, but based on how Oregon manhandled an Auburn team that already has 2 SEC losses...oh.

I hate the SEC as much as the rest, but it certainly is possible that Alabama and LSU actually ARE 2 of the 4 best teams. Fortunately they all still have games to play that will help answer the question. It's pretty pointless to complain about it right now.
 
Re: College Football 2019-20: It'll Just Be Alabama vs. Clemson AGAIN.

BC has 484 total yards and 44 points in the 1st half @ Syracuse.
 
Re: College Football 2019-20: It'll Just Be Alabama vs. Clemson AGAIN.

jerphisch said:
I hate the SEC as much as the rest, but it certainly is possible that Alabama and LSU actually ARE 2 of the 4 best teams.
Click to expand...

Based on what I've seen, LSU is the best team in the country. Alabama probably is a top 4 team as well. The biggest problem I have in the event both LSU and Alabama get in, is that winning your conference should matter more than it does. The real solution to all the griping about the SEC is to let each of the Power 5 conference's champions into the Playoff, and then one of the following options to fill out an eight team filed: (a) use the committee to pick the top 3 at-large bids; or (b) use the committee to pick the top 2 at-large bids, as well as the top Group of 5 conference champion. I'd prefer (b), but could live with (a).

Last year, under option (a):
1. Alabama v. 9. Washington
2. Clemson v. 7. Michigan
3. Notre Dame v. 6. Ohio State
4. Oklahoma v. 5. Georgia

Last year, under option (b):
1. Alabama v. 9. Washington
2. Clemson v. 8. UCF
3. Notre Dame v. 6. Ohio State
4. Oklahoma v. 5. Georgia

2017 (a):
1. Clemson v. 8. Southern Cal
2. Oklahoma v. 7. Auburn
3. Georgia v. 6. Wisconsin
4. Alabama v. 5. Ohio State

2017 (b):
1. Clemson v. 12. UCF
2. Oklahoma v. 8. Southern Cal
3. Georgia v. 6. Wisconsin
4. Alabama v. 5. Ohio State

2016 (a):
1. Alabama v. 8. Wisconsin
2. Clemson v. 7. Oklahoma
3. Ohio State v. 6. Michigan
4. Washington v. 5. Penn State

2016 (b)
1. Alabama v. 15. Western Michigan
2. Clemson v. 7. Oklahoma
3. Ohio State v. 6. Michigan
4. Washington v. 5. Penn State

I'd even be okay with incorporating the traditional bowls for the Quarterfinals and reseed after for the Semifinals. For example, last year, under option (b):

Rose Bowl (B1G v. Pac 12): 6. Ohio State v. 9. Washington
Orange Bowl (ACC Champion): 2. Clemson v. 8. UCF
Sugar Bowl (SEC v. Big 12): 1. Alabama v. 4. Oklahoma
Fiesta Bowl (At-Large/Notre Dame): 3. Notre Dame v. 5. Georgia
 
Last edited:
Re: College Football 2019-20: It'll Just Be Alabama vs. Clemson AGAIN.

dxmnkd316 said:
Every known advanced computer ranking system as a composite:

https://masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm

Note the conference rankings at the bottom
Click to expand...

I wouldn't put much stock into those rankings. As to specific teams, I'm not sure there is enough of a sample size to justify the rankings. For example, I don't believe anyone would argue that Baylor is better than Clemson and Alabama, yet there are models that say just that. And then there are models that say Baylor is the 44th best team. Similarly, there is at least one model that puts Utah at #2, and another model has them at #45. One model puts SMU at #3, and another has them at #61. I get that the site averages the rankings, but when you have rankings that are so wildly off base that tends to skew the results.
 
Re: College Football 2019-20: It'll Just Be Alabama vs. Clemson AGAIN.

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
I wouldn't put much stock into those rankings. As to specific teams, I'm not sure there is enough of a sample size to justify the rankings. For example, I don't believe anyone would argue that Baylor is better than Clemson and Alabama, yet there are models that say just that. And then there are models that say Baylor is the 44th best team. Similarly, there is at least one model that puts Utah at #2, and another model has them at #45. One model puts SMU at #3, and another has them at #61. I get that the site averages the rankings, but when you have rankings that are so wildly off base that tends to skew the results.
Click to expand...

But that’s the point. They all evaluate teams based on different criteria and usually very different methods. They also incorporate predictive and non-predictive models. So it’s taking into account a bevy of stats, results (some are even result agnostic, which is interesting), schedules, geographies, and a few are purely human. So by evaluating from so many aspects, it’s a good, well-rounded model.

The only critique you could have is that some of the models might be over-represented because they’re similar.

The outliers are fine to include because it’s looking at a different way of evaluating the teams. I don’t see that as a negative, rather, that’s a positive feature.
 
dxmnkd316 said:
But that’s the point. They all evaluate teams based on different criteria and usually very different methods. They also incorporate predictive and non-predictive models. So it’s taking into account a bevy of stats, results (some are even result agnostic, which is interesting), schedules, geographies, and a few are purely human. So by evaluating from so many aspects, it’s a good, well-rounded model.

The only critique you could have is that some of the models might be over-represented because they’re similar.

The outliers are fine to include because it’s looking at a different way of evaluating the teams. I don’t see that as a negative, rather, that’s a positive feature.
Click to expand...

So including obviously incorrect polls is a good thing?
 
Re: College Football 2019-20: It'll Just Be Alabama vs. Clemson AGAIN.

The team aggregates look fairly ok not a lot to argue against, but the conference one at the bottom seems off. I count (2?) BIG12 teams in the Top 20 but it's the #1 conference?
 
Re: College Football 2019-20: It'll Just Be Alabama vs. Clemson AGAIN.

While the big ten may suffer, whatever keep psu irrelevant is a-ok with mookie
 
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
I wouldn't put much stock into those rankings. As to specific teams, I'm not sure there is enough of a sample size to justify the rankings. For example, I don't believe anyone would argue that Baylor is better than Clemson and Alabama, yet there are models that say just that. And then there are models that say Baylor is the 44th best team. Similarly, there is at least one model that puts Utah at #2, and another model has them at #45. One model puts SMU at #3, and another has them at #61. I get that the site averages the rankings, but when you have rankings that are so wildly off base that tends to skew the results.
Click to expand...

Utah
First in Mormons, second in football:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top