Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's a disgrace that the committee actually took a two loss Georgia team and kept them ahead of a one loss Ohio State after Ohio State dominated their own CCG. Ohio State and Oklahoma's resume's are almost identical.
If Georgia wants to be considered as a two loss team they need to quit playing Austin Peay, Middle Tennessee and UMass in the early season. I get that they don't want to play anybody because they have to play their SEC schedule and Ga Tech but the SEC east isn't and has been very good and they only have to play two in the west. The east is better this year but Kentucky, Florida and Missouri may be pretenders this year. If they beat Penn State, Michigan and Oklahoma State then I'll believe in them.
Penn State and Michigan are really good and Oklahoma State is a jeckyl and hyde team but if they come to play they are a top 25 type of team.
Edit:
As I said, I am skeptical of Florida, Kentucky and Missouri. Partly due to the fact that Missouri and Kentucky haven't been very good until recently and Florida has not been good on offense for a while. But the out of conference schedules this year were pathetic. Part of that is due to Louisville and FSU being horrible and not worthy of being able to provide a measurable assessment for Kentucky and Florida like they would be normally.
But here is the remaining OOC schedule for those three teams.
Florida had Charleston Southern, Idaho and a really bad (3-9) Colorado State team.
Kentucky had 1-11 Central Michigan, Murrray State and Middle Tennessee who was good in their conference but couldn't compete with any of the SEC teams they played. So they aren't a measurable.
Missouri had UT Martin, 6-6 Wyoming, AAC runner up Memphis and 6-6 Purdue.
So out of 12 games the best teams those SEC teams played would be Mizzou beating Memphis and Purdue.
Essentially the SEC rep right now is just based on Bama being the best team in CFB and Georgia being really good right now. But there is no real evidence that the rest of the teams are any better as a group than the rest of the teams in any other league.
Last edited by eddie gein; 12-03-2018 at 12:28 PM..
It's a disgrace that the committee actually took a two loss Georgia team and kept them ahead of a one loss Ohio State after Ohio State dominated their own CCG. Ohio State and Oklahoma's resume's are almost identical.
If Georgia wants to be considered as a two loss team they need to quit playing Austin Peay, Middle Tennessee and UMass in the early season. I get that they don't want to play anybody because they have to play their SEC schedule and Ga Tech but the SEC east isn't and has been very good and they only have to play two in the west. The east is better this year but Kentucky, Florida and Missouri may be pretenders this year. If they beat Penn State, Michigan and Oklahoma State then I'll believe in them.
Penn State and Michigan are really good and Oklahoma State is a jeckyl and hyde team but if they come to play they are a top 25 type of team.
Edit:
As I said, I am skeptical of Florida, Kentucky and Missouri. Partly due to the fact that Missouri and Kentucky haven't been very good until recently and Florida has not been good on offense for a while. But the out of conference schedules this year were pathetic. Part of that is due to Louisville and FSU being horrible and not worthy of being able to provide a measurable assessment for Kentucky and Florida like they would be normally.
But here is the remaining OOC schedule for those three teams.
Florida had Charleston Southern, Idaho and a really bad (3-9) Colorado State team.
Kentucky had 1-11 Central Michigan, Murrray State and Middle Tennessee who was good in their conference but couldn't compete with any of the SEC teams they played. So they aren't a measurable.
Missouri had UT Martin, 6-6 Wyoming, AAC runner up Memphis and 6-6 Purdue.
So out of 12 games the best teams those SEC teams played would be Mizzou beating Memphis and Purdue.
Essentially the SEC rep right now is just based on Bama being the best team in CFB and Georgia being really good right now. But there is no real evidence that the rest of the teams are any better as a group than the rest of the teams in any other league.
The selection is subjective. It would seem like an 8-team playoff could help settle the online disputes.
I went to college in the midwest and know the Big-10 very, very well. I remember when Notre Dame was dominant in the 1970s much like Alabama and Clemson are now. I am old enough that I recall Tom Cousineau of Ohio State's legendary presence in the defensive backfield.
The reality is that the SEC West has been dominant. They may schedule a couple of "freebies" every year but generally when push comes to shove, and SEC team has won the championship the past decade.
Notre Dame most likely would have lost a few games in the SEC conference. They had their hands full with Ball State and almost lost to Vanderbilt.
I like it that Ohio State scheduled Texas in the early 2000s and then TCU recently. As for the SEC East, Georgia is dominant right now and may be the only team that could realistically beat Alabama in a rematch. I think Clemson's quarterback is too slow for Alabama but will annihilate Notre Dame's secondary. Oklahoma should be able to score on Alabama but not as much as they normally would so could still lose by 10 points.
As a guy who spent 4 years in the midwest as an undergraduate, my advice would be to stop complaining about football and the SEC's dominance. The Big 10 is very, very dominant in NCAA Division 1 wrestling. The SEC doesn't even have wrestling. To me, wrestling is harder than football. It's the oldest sport since the dawn of humanity throughout the world. The best SEC football player would get pinned in Big 10 wrestling tournaments. When Big 10 fans complain about the SEC football dominance, I feel like they forget about their own strength. You have heavyweight wrestlers over there in the mat room who could beat any of the SEC athletes one-on-one - a mismatch for a conference that doesn't even have wrestling. Why complain about the SEC's better football teams when they would just get annihilated in wrestling dual meets? Go figure.
You are completely wrong. UCF should be in the playoffs.
Why? So we would have to watch them get shut down and waxed? They do not have the depth to even remotely play with at that level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie gein
It's a disgrace that the committee actually took a two loss Georgia team and kept them ahead of a one loss Ohio State after Ohio State dominated their own CCG. Ohio State and Oklahoma's resume's are almost identical.
If Georgia wants to be considered as a two loss team they need to quit playing Austin Peay, Middle Tennessee and UMass in the early season. I get that they don't want to play anybody because they have to play their SEC schedule and Ga Tech but the SEC east isn't and has been very good and they only have to play two in the west. The east is better this year but Kentucky, Florida and Missouri may be pretenders this year. If they beat Penn State, Michigan and Oklahoma State then I'll believe in them.
Penn State and Michigan are really good and Oklahoma State is a jeckyl and hyde team but if they come to play they are a top 25 type of team.
Edit:
As I said, I am skeptical of Florida, Kentucky and Missouri. Partly due to the fact that Missouri and Kentucky haven't been very good until recently and Florida has not been good on offense for a while. But the out of conference schedules this year were pathetic. Part of that is due to Louisville and FSU being horrible and not worthy of being able to provide a measurable assessment for Kentucky and Florida like they would be normally.
But here is the remaining OOC schedule for those three teams.
Florida had Charleston Southern, Idaho and a really bad (3-9) Colorado State team.
Kentucky had 1-11 Central Michigan, Murrray State and Middle Tennessee who was good in their conference but couldn't compete with any of the SEC teams they played. So they aren't a measurable.
Missouri had UT Martin, 6-6 Wyoming, AAC runner up Memphis and 6-6 Purdue.
So out of 12 games the best teams those SEC teams played would be Mizzou beating Memphis and Purdue.
Essentially the SEC rep right now is just based on Bama being the best team in CFB and Georgia being really good right now. But there is no real evidence that the rest of the teams are any better as a group than the rest of the teams in any other league.
Here we go again with the complaining about the few cream puff games the SEC teams play. I get it, they are a waste of time and we would rather have a good game instead of playing teams like Autin Peay, Middle Tennessee, Chattanooga, The Citadel and the rest of those small schools they schedule every year. However, those complaining really need to take a look at their own schedule. A lot of the conference teams in these other conferences suck and probably couldn't beat the cream puff teams the SEC schedules. For example, Oklahoma played Florida Atlantic, UCLA, Army, Kansas, Texas Tech, and Baylor. That is six cake walk games on their schedule. So how is that any better than say Georgia or Alabama's schedule? Even the better teams like Iowa State, TCU, Kansas State, Oklahoma State and West Virginia are not all that challenging.
Why? So we would have to watch them get shut down and waxed? They do not have the depth to even remotely play with at that level.
Here we go again with the complaining about the few cream puff games the SEC teams play. I get it, they are a waste of time and we would rather have a good game instead of playing teams like Autin Peay, Middle Tennessee, Chattanooga, The Citadel and the rest of those small schools they schedule every year. However, those complaining really need to take a look at their own schedule. A lot of the conference teams in these other conferences suck and probably couldn't beat the cream puff teams the SEC schedules. For example, Oklahoma played Florida Atlantic, UCLA, Army, Kansas, Texas Tech, and Baylor. That is six cake walk games on their schedule. So how is that any better than say Georgia or Alabama's schedule? Even the better teams like Iowa State, TCU, Kansas State, Oklahoma State and West Virginia are not all that challenging.
All Power 5 conference should be required to play a 9 game conference schedule and a minimum of 5 true road games.
Not sure why you're singling out the Big 12. SEC has plenty of weak teams. Look at Ole Miss, Arkansas, Auburn, Tennessee and Vanderbilt. ACC as well.
All Power 5 conference should be required to play a 9 game conference schedule and a minimum of 5 true road games.
Not sure why you're singling out the Big 12. SEC has plenty of weak teams. Look at Ole Miss, Arkansas, Auburn, Tennessee and Vanderbilt. ACC as well.
Look, the way it will stop is when an Alabama or someone doesn't make the playoffs BECAUSE of those weak teams.
Look at Ohio State this year. 5 wins over top 20 teams (including #4) with a loss to an unranked team and they still got left out. While Oklahoma had 2 wins against top 20 teams (none top 10) and a loss to #19.
If the committee is going to say signature wins count.. Then they need to make them count. Based on the opponents.. Ohio State probably should have made it over Oklahoma.
I'm not saying that Ohio State SHOULD have made it.. But..
UCF hosed again by the dull BCS.
This team already beat a ranked SEC team last year in bowl game.
Yet here they are, same match-up wearing different colors.
UCF hosed again by the dull BCS.
This team already beat a ranked SEC team last year in bowl game.
Yet here they are, same match-up wearing different colors.
If they beat a ranked SEC team THIS YEAR.. Then maybe it would mean something. As it stands, they beat one ranked team, which was ranked #24. But they beat teams that were a combined 70-76 (One game cancelled)
We complain a bit about Alabama having a soft schedule, but they beat 4 top 20 teams. And their opponents were 85-72.
Clemson? Weak ACC this year.. Their opponents were 89-66
If they had scheduled, played and beaten a quality opponent.. They'd be in the discussion. They were on the edge of it even with such a horrible schedule. They did TRY, I think.. They had UNC scheduled, but cancelled and Pitt.. It's just.. Hey.. Pitt made the ACC Championship game.. But they were not ranked. Play more ranked teams and they'll get consideration.
All Power 5 conference should be required to play a 9 game conference schedule and a minimum of 5 true road games.
Not sure why you're singling out the Big 12. SEC has plenty of weak teams. Look at Ole Miss, Arkansas, Auburn, Tennessee and Vanderbilt. ACC as well.
I singled out the Big 12 because I was replying to someone from Oklahoma that was doing the whining. lol Regardless, the Big 12 has basically 2, possibly 3 decent to good teams. The rest is weak and for the most part no better than the easy schools the SEC schedules. If they scheduled games with Kansas, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State and beat them by 30 and the third string played nearly the entire second half would everybody still complain? I really don't see what the difference is what team it is if everybody is playing crap teams whether they are in conference or not.
Some of the SEC teams schedule opening week kickoff games against notable teams from other conferences on neutral fields for their first game of the season and pretty much always win them. The first game of the season is a game that matters. Why does that always seem to be forgotten? For example, this year Auburn (who you state is a weak team) beat Washington in their first game. Washington is the best team in the PAC 12 and won their conference championship. The only other two games they lost were to PAC 12 teams and the games were extremely close. Auburn had a bad conference year and got waxed a few times by SEC conference opponents. So what does that tell us?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
