College Football - Championship Week

[shnsajax]

Pop Quiz question!

 

Of the 8 teams with somewhat reasonable arguments to be in the BCS championship game (Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, USC, Penn State, Utah), which has played the weakest schedule (according to Sagarin)?

 

No cheating. ;)

 

I'd say USC? PAC-10 sucks this year

USC was 5th of the 8. They played a good non-con schedule (Virginia, Ohio State, ND) to make up for some of the deficiency in the conference. Plus, UCLA hasn't factored into their schedule yet.

I'm going to say Alabama.

Correct. Alabama checks in at the 73rd toughest schedule in the country as of right now, due to an overall lousy non-con schedule (although Clemson was supposed to be good, so tough to fault them for that), and a comparatively weak SEC West (where Ole Miss was clearly the second-best team, and LSU, Auburn, Arkansas and Miss State were all either 3-5 or 2-6 in conference). Their best win on the year, by far, was their 41-30 win at Georgia, but that was a long time ago, too.

 

Of course, the SEC championship game this week will certainly vault them over Utah. Just thought it was interesting to see it at this point, though.

 

I've been saying this for some time now. Bama has had one of the weakest SEC schedules in a long time for someone who has been undefeated at this point in the season.

[Derwood]

this is why Alabama is #6 in Sagarin's ratings

[CubinNY]

Pop Quiz question!

 

Of the 8 teams with somewhat reasonable arguments to be in the BCS championship game (Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, USC, Penn State, Utah), which has played the weakest schedule (according to Sagarin)?

 

No cheating. ;)

 

I'd say USC? PAC-10 sucks this year

USC was 5th of the 8. They played a good non-con schedule (Virginia, Ohio State, ND) to make up for some of the deficiency in the conference. Plus, UCLA hasn't factored into their schedule yet.

I'm going to say Alabama.

Correct. Alabama checks in at the 73rd toughest schedule in the country as of right now, due to an overall lousy non-con schedule (although Clemson was supposed to be good, so tough to fault them for that), and a comparatively weak SEC West (where Ole Miss was clearly the second-best team, and LSU, Auburn, Arkansas and Miss State were all either 3-5 or 2-6 in conference). Their best win on the year, by far, was their 41-30 win at Georgia, but that was a long time ago, too.

 

Of course, the SEC championship game this week will certainly vault them over Utah. Just thought it was interesting to see it at this point, though.

 

I've been saying this for some time now. Bama has had one of the weakest SEC schedules in a long time for someone who has been undefeated at this point in the season.

Having a weak(er) schedule is sometimes necessary to get a team to a point where they can contend for the mythical national championship. The Big 12 teams have been doing it for years. Notre Dame recently started weakening their schedule in hope that they could compete, sorry Domers.

 

To me it's the biggest reason why they need a playoff. The talking heads keep saying the BCS are the reason the regular season is so much more important in college football than in other sports. Well kids, the regular season means less if you schedule MAC and Sunbelt teams for your non-conference games. A team like Alabama may only play one good team before the title game. If Tebow gets hurt they could luck their way into the game.

 

I will say that OU looks like one of the better teams I've seen in a long, long time. That Bradford kid is amazing.

[Derwood]

I agree. If the 6 BCS conferences get auto-berths in the playoffs, then the regular season DOES mean something.

[Hosak8]

RedFlash isn't going to like this.

 

Bammers never do.

[abuck1220]

so many people i'd like to see suffer, yet someone has to win these games...argh!!!

[hotshot13422]

I do like all the hell the BCS is getting right now. The AP awarding a different national champion would be great, and could accomplish a lot.

 

In this week's Billingsley...

 

1. Bama 325.9 (320.3 last week)

2. OU 322.9 (314.4 last week)

3. Florida 314.7 (307.7 last week)

4. Texas 313.2 (311.8 last week)

 

I have done some digging on Billingsley's weekly ratings:

 

First of all, understand that Billingsley gives and takes away points each week that you play. If you are off, your point value stays the same, regardless of what your opponents do. Here is how it works.

 

Since OU played Chattanooga in week 1, they got their little bump for playing someone, and then what Chattanooga did in Weeks 2-12 has no bearing on OU's rating.

 

In other words, what a team does after you play them is not taken into account.

 

Billingsley gives you points (or takes away points) every week depending on who you play. If you play good teams early and bad teams late, you get clobbered in this system. Conversely, play good teams late and bad teams early, and you do quite well. If we were a victim of anything, it was the order of the conference schedule. (And OU not being penalized for playing I-AA opponents.)

 

For comparison:

When we lost to undefeated Tech in Lubbock in the Billingsley, we lost 22 points because Billingsley manually makes sure that for one week, the team that wins has to be ranked above the team that loses. We had racked up so many points that the one loss absolutely killed us.

 

When OU lost to us on a neutral field? OU lost 3 points...that's it..3 points...Why? We were already close in the computers so he didnt have to move us very far. But that also means there are huge inequitable point swings versus common opponents as the season progresses.

 

That's already a 19 point discrepancy between just those two games.

 

(We are 9 points behind OU today in the Billingsley that determined our Big 12 South fate.)

 

Remember, Billingsley's ranking system is cumulative..so we lost a net 19 points in that transaction.

 

When we beat Baylor, we picked up 1.5 points. When OU beat Baylor, they picked up 3+. Why? Because Baylor had more losses when they played us and whatever they do after OU doesn't matter to OU, but it sure matters to us, at least until they play us. Another net loss of points for us.

 

WHEN you play someone matters in the Billingsley. BIG TIME. Playing Chattanooga didnt hurt OU's rating at all. In fact, Florida got fewer points for beating Citadel in November than OU received for beating Chattanooga in Week 1. Head to Head? Citadel 24, Chattanooga 21, but that doesn't matter at all. OU had already played them.

 

When OU beat A&M, it was earlier than our game vs A&M, so OU got more points (+4) than we did (+1.4) because we played them late and Aggy had lost more games after the OU game. Another net point loss based solely on the order of games on the Big 12 schedule.

 

When it comes down to single points in computer rankings, to be handing out tens of points inequitably for beating the same teams is just absurd.

 

If you are going to take a critical look at fairness in the BCS computer rankings, you can start with one that has subjective adjustments each week.

 

If you value Billingsley's contributions as a fan fine, give him a Harris vote. Let his vote reflect his archaic rating system. But don't let it determine 1/3 of the BCS formula.

 

One last item. If the points we lost for losing to Tech on the road by 6, and the points that OU lost for losing to us on a neutral field by 10 were equal, (In other words, take the 19 point discrepancy out and penalize us equally.) we finish first in the Billingsley and OU finishes 4th.

 

If that had happened, it would have completely wiped out OU's computer advantage, and by 5 human votes we would be in Kansas City on Saturday.

 

That is how screwed up this system is.

 

I love it

 

+1000

Pure Awesome

[ELCABALLO45]

Bama 27

Florida 24

[rchap24]

Bama 27

Florida 24

 

I think its going to be like 30 something to 13 or 17 in favor of Florida

[ELCABALLO45]

Bama 27

Florida 24

 

I think its going to be like 30 something to 13 or 17 in favor of Florida

 

In my head I think its going to be a Florida blowout, I just figured its going to be RedFlash vs. Everyone so I felt bad and picked Bama.

[Guest]

Bama 27

Florida 24

 

I think its going to be like 30 something to 13 or 17 in favor of Florida

 

In my head I think its going to be a Florida blowout, I just figured its going to be RedFlash vs. Everyone so I felt bad and picked Bama.

 

That's what makes me feel better picking against Alabama.

[rchap24]

Bama 27

Florida 24

 

I think its going to be like 30 something to 13 or 17 in favor of Florida

 

In my head I think its going to be a Florida blowout, I just figured its going to be RedFlash vs. Everyone so I felt bad and picked Bama.

 

haha hes probably going to be the only prediction that Bama wins

[ELCABALLO45]

Bama 27

Florida 24

 

I think its going to be like 30 something to 13 or 17 in favor of Florida

 

In my head I think its going to be a Florida blowout, I just figured its going to be RedFlash vs. Everyone so I felt bad and picked Bama.

 

That's what makes me feel better picking against Alabama.

 

:cry:

[bukie]

I'll go ahead and guess that Florida wins on Saturday 41-30.

[SouthSideRyan]

System QB and the speedy gimmick-ettes: 41

PHYSICAL TOUGHNESS: 21

[Guest]

Joakim Noah - 38

Latrell Sprewell - 21

[dew1679666265]

I despise Florida with a passion. But I also utterly despise Bama too.

 

I'm torn on who I want to win this one.

 

Florida will win, though. Not much doubt there.

 

Crocs 31

Bama 14

[jame.gumb]

The Texas, OU, Tech nonsense gives me tired head. As a Texas fan, the only thing that REALLY frustrates me is the BCS rankings used as a tiebreaker. Why not conference or division point differential? That takes out the opinions of the incapable coaches who think Texas Tech should be ranked ahead of the team that beat them by more than 40 points about 10 days ago and an undefeated SEC team (despite their weak schedule).

 

Also, Bob Stoops is a great big, fat person.

[SouthSideRyan]

As a Texas fan, the only thing that REALLY frustrates me is the BCS rankings used as a tiebreaker.

 

It's to make sure the conference has its best chance at making the title game. If you have the #3 BCS team getting passed up in favor of the #15 team due to the #15 team running up the score in conference play it wouldn't help the conference at all.

[Guest]

As a Texas fan, the only thing that REALLY frustrates me is the BCS rankings used as a tiebreaker.

 

It's to make sure the conference has its best chance at making the title game. If you have the #3 BCS team getting passed up in favor of the #15 team due to the #15 team running up the score in conference play it wouldn't help the conference at all.

 

If there is a three-way tie for first in a conference in the section here for high school football, the first is head-to-head and the second is point differential in the games among the tied teams with a maximum of 13 points per game. I like the tiebreaker because it only uses the results of the games among the three tied teams and doesn't reward running up the score.

[bukie]

As a Texas fan, the only thing that REALLY frustrates me is the BCS rankings used as a tiebreaker.

 

It's to make sure the conference has its best chance at making the title game. If you have the #3 BCS team getting passed up in favor of the #15 team due to the #15 team running up the score in conference play it wouldn't help the conference at all.

 

If there is a three-way tie for first in a conference in the section here for high school football, the first is head-to-head and the second is point differential in the games among the tied teams with a maximum of 13 points per game. I like the tiebreaker because it only uses the results of the games among the three tied teams and doesn't reward running up the score.

If the Big 12 used that system, then Oklahoma would still be going to the title game.

[jame.gumb]

As a Texas fan, the only thing that REALLY frustrates me is the BCS rankings used as a tiebreaker.

 

It's to make sure the conference has its best chance at making the title game. If you have the #3 BCS team getting passed up in favor of the #15 team due to the #15 team running up the score in conference play it wouldn't help the conference at all.

 

If there is a three-way tie for first in a conference in the section here for high school football, the first is head-to-head and the second is point differential in the games among the tied teams with a maximum of 13 points per game. I like the tiebreaker because it only uses the results of the games among the three tied teams and doesn't reward running up the score.

If the Big 12 used that system, then Oklahoma would still be going to the title game.

 

If the Big 12 went by conference point differential instead of BCS ranking, Texas would be in.

 

And if a team ranked No. 15 outscored the same (or virtually the same) opponents and had the same record as the No. 3 team, maybe the rankings system and not the point differential should be called into question.

 

Texas beat virtually the same opponents by a larger margin than Oklahoma and Texas Tech. To me, that means Texas should represent the Big 12 South. I know everyone's on the Oklahoma bandwagon because they're playing better right now, but Texas was THE team about a month ago. The polls should judge the entire season weighted equally, imo.

[imb]

As a Texas fan, the only thing that REALLY frustrates me is the BCS rankings used as a tiebreaker.

 

It's to make sure the conference has its best chance at making the title game. If you have the #3 BCS team getting passed up in favor of the #15 team due to the #15 team running up the score in conference play it wouldn't help the conference at all.

 

If there is a three-way tie for first in a conference in the section here for high school football, the first is head-to-head and the second is point differential in the games among the tied teams with a maximum of 13 points per game. I like the tiebreaker because it only uses the results of the games among the three tied teams and doesn't reward running up the score.

If the Big 12 used that system, then Oklahoma would still be going to the title game.

 

i was going to say, in that case texas' 4 point win at home over a team we beat by 20 on the road and their 3 point loss to a team we beat by 44 or whatever is not going to help them

[jame.gumb]

As a Texas fan, the only thing that REALLY frustrates me is the BCS rankings used as a tiebreaker.

 

It's to make sure the conference has its best chance at making the title game. If you have the #3 BCS team getting passed up in favor of the #15 team due to the #15 team running up the score in conference play it wouldn't help the conference at all.

 

If there is a three-way tie for first in a conference in the section here for high school football, the first is head-to-head and the second is point differential in the games among the tied teams with a maximum of 13 points per game. I like the tiebreaker because it only uses the results of the games among the three tied teams and doesn't reward running up the score.

If the Big 12 used that system, then Oklahoma would still be going to the title game.

 

i was going to say, in that case texas' 4 point win at home over a team we beat by 20 on the road and their 3 point loss to a team we beat by 44 or whatever is not going to help them

 

That wouldn't, but it should be cumulative rather than picking a few games.

 

I'm not arguing the results as much as the process, though. If OU had a larger point differential and went to the Big 12 Championship instead of Texas, I'd be OK with it. It bugs me that a game like Florida v. Florida St. can have an impact on the Big 12 (by Florida possibly taking some of OU's first place votes, reducing their lead in the Coach's Poll).

[bukie]

Texas beat virtually the same opponents by a larger margin than Oklahoma and Texas Tech. To me, that means Texas should represent the Big 12 South. I know everyone's on the Oklahoma bandwagon because they're playing better right now, but Texas was THE team about a month ago. The polls should judge the entire season weighted equally, imo.

 

Of the computer ratings that weight the entire season equally, Oklahoma leads Texas by a narrow margin.

 

It's hilarious that apparently Oklahoma would have a better argument had they not beaten TT by so much to rule them out of the discussion.