View Full Version : How much should a "conf champ" count?
gravedigger
11-23-2014, 06:50 PM
Well, lets see
Osu has one loss to a 48th ranked vt. Sagarin ratings.
Msu has one loss to number 1 bama.
Big difference.
Osu's worst 5 wins are to kent ,Indiana, Illinois, navy, Rutgers.
Msu's worst 5 are tenn Martin, usm, USA, vandy, uab.
Their worst are avg rank 99 to msu's 125
Their middle 3 are @penn st, cinncinnati, at Maryland (avg rank 46)
Our middle three are uk, a&m, ark. (Avg rank 29)
Their top 2 wins are Minnesota and mich st. ( 39 and 10 respectively)
Msu's are @lsu and auburn. ( currently 12 and 17)
Their last reg season game is Michigan. Ranked 63
Om is sagarin ranked 7.
They win the battle of opponent strength of the 5 worst teams on each schedule.
We win the battle of strength of team lost to, middle 3 and top 2 wins.
I don't think a conf champ game will do it for them unless the committee is overvaluing the bottom 5 wins as opposed to the top 5. Yes we could lose the egg. In which case I don't believe we deserve to be in the conversation.
That vt loss was long ago, but it will kill them if we beat om.
ShotgunDawg
11-23-2014, 06:58 PM
Unless it's believed that the conferences are equal, conference championships shouldn't mean anything if your thinking logically
I personally believe Baylor has a much much greater case than Ohio State, and the fact the media doesn't bring this up, shows you that Ohio State is an agenda driven team.
Can you break down Baylor vs us?
Baylor's biggest issue is that they've only beaten or played 3 teams with a winning record.
GTHOM
11-23-2014, 07:01 PM
I thought it was about the 4 best teams not whether or not you won your conference. thats what the committee said they were going to do anyway. baylor has a better case than OSU but i still dont think it beats ours, their best Ws are TCU, and OU, they have 3 Ws over teams with a winning record. Our best Ws will be LSU, A&M, Arky, TSUN, Auburn. that is more than OSU, TCU, and Baylor combined.
maroonmania
11-23-2014, 07:29 PM
Here's another question. Should an overtime win be treated equally as a regulation win in the eyes of the committee? You've got Ohio State skating by Penn St. in OT, Bama getting by LSU in OT, etc., etc. I know the vast majority will say a win is a win but really OT is just a cheapened way to quickly declare a winner and is not really in the regular flow of a game. To be honest it would be easier to separate teams nowadays if there was the possibility of 3 outcomes in a game (W, L or T) rather than just two although I realize NOBODY wants to go back to the days of ties. Anyway just something I was thinking about.
GTHOM
11-23-2014, 07:32 PM
my thing is supposedly the committee punished TCU for barely beating Kansas.... then what the hell do they do with Florida State theyve barely beat EVERYONE. And theyve played a grand total of 2 ranked teams Clemson and Louisville
gravedigger
11-23-2014, 08:05 PM
Ill do that now
Here's another question. Should an overtime win be treated equally as a regulation win in the eyes of the committee? You've got Ohio State skating by Penn St. in OT, Bama getting by LSU in OT, etc., etc. I know the vast majority will say a win is a win but really OT is just a cheapened way to quickly declare a winner and is not really in the regular flow of a game. To be honest it would be easier to separate teams nowadays if there was the possibility of 3 outcomes in a game (W, L or T) rather than just two although I realize NOBODY wants to go back to the days of ties. Anyway just something I was thinking about.
fair argument... but if we discount OT wins somewhat, shouldn't we also discount late, meaningless scores?
HoopsDawg
11-23-2014, 08:34 PM
fair argument... but if we discount OT wins somewhat, shouldn't we also discount late, meaningless scores?
believe me, the national media has discounted that late score. And the committee chair gave Bama credit for "game control". Late score or not, as bad as MSU played, that game was up in the air right until Sims converted his third, 3rd and long in a row. If our DE keeps outside leverage, MSU has the ball with a chance to win the game.
gravedigger
11-23-2014, 08:37 PM
Baylor breakdown(assuming a conf champ for Baylor
Their loss is to wvu who is ranked by sagarin 27
Ours is to bama at #1
Advantage msu
Baylors bad five are smu, nw Louisiana st, buffalo, Kansas, Iowa state. Avg rank 134
MSU avg is 125
Advantage MSU
Mid three are ok state, Texas tech (assuming a Baylor win) and Texas (avg rank 53
Msu's avg 29.
Advantage MSU
Top 2 for Baylor are Oklahoma and tcu ( avg rank 8.5)
Msu's is 9
Advantage neither but well say Baylor for argument sake as this is .5 difference
Last game comparison is Kansas st (13)
Ole miss for 7 which even if it looks big ill say its a wash or advantage Baylor due to auburn victory for ksu
Advantage whatever you want to believe
In the end we had the better resume even if one goes crazy and gives the top 2 and final game advantage to Baylor it's insignificant at best.
We will be chosen unless conference title's are overblown.
A win over ole miss, unless the world thinks we only win on a game changing call, would seal our place in the final four over Baylor
believe me, the national media has discounted that late score. And the committee chair gave Bama credit for "game control". Late score or not, as bad as MSU played, that game was up in the air right until Sims converted his third, 3rd and long in a row. If our DE keeps outside leverage, MSU has the ball with a chance to win the game.
the "game control" was evident... for anyone.
I was joking about the TD being "meaningless"... It's what kept MSU in the running for the final 4...
It was the right move on Smart and Saban's part to go zone, for sure.
gravedigger
11-23-2014, 09:08 PM
In case anyone wonders how a (summarized) comparison might go we're MSU and Oregon compared:
Our loss to bama is a 30 ranking difference to Oregons loss to Arizona.
Our weak five is 23 ranking worse than Oregon.
Our mid is 9 ranking better than Oregon ( insigignificant difference)
Our top 2 is 3.5 better than Oregon (again insignificant)
Our last is much better than Oregon state who is 70.
The conclusion would be that a conference champ for Oregon vs us not going to Atlanta SHOULD put them in over us if they were ranked 5th right now.
Just my opinion.
LiterallyPolice
11-23-2014, 09:29 PM
fair argument... but if we discount OT wins somewhat, shouldn't we also discount late, meaningless scores?
That TD wasn't meaningless even in the context of the game. I'd rather score with 13 secs left then throw an INT trying to score quickly.
gravedigger
11-23-2014, 09:33 PM
The tcu comparison is interesting and ,ignt explain their #5 ranking.
We wash with them on loss. Baylor is #3.
We have a slight disadvantage on lowest 5 where their opponents rank 111 to our 125
We have slight advantage on middle 3 with them having a 41 ranking avg to our 29
Insignificant on best 2 with ksu and ok ranked avg 11
Texas is significantly worse than om (or maybe not) at 35 vs om's 7.
Their conf champ might be enough to overtake us.
Between tcu and Baylor. I want Baylor to win that so we are compared to them and not tcu
That TD wasn't meaningless even in the context of the game. I'd rather score with 13 secs left then throw an INT trying to score quickly.
excellent observation... my (MSU) guest & I wondered why Mullen was burning so much time with TOs remaining...
I think he knew there was 0 chance of winning, but hedged his "bets", as it were.
ShotgunDawg
11-23-2014, 09:38 PM
Good work Gravedigger. There is literally no excuse for us not being in, unless they blow the conference championships of unequal conferences out of proportion
maroonmania
11-23-2014, 09:49 PM
fair argument... but if we discount OT wins somewhat, shouldn't we also discount late, meaningless scores?
Was mainly just wondering if perhaps a regulation win and an OT win should be differentiated but if late, meaningless scores are going to be brought into the argument can we get credit for a 24 point win in Baton Rouge? But seriously, maybe it should just remain a win is a win but there is something to at least consider if a game ends regulation in a tie. And its just a general argument, wasn't trying to specifically pick on Bama. And I guess teams would have to know in advance that an OT win wasn't considered as good because, if so, teams might play slightly differently at the end of a game.
LiterallyPolice
11-23-2014, 09:55 PM
excellent observation... my (MSU) guest & I wondered why Mullen was burning so much time with TOs remaining...
I think he knew there was 0 chance of winning, but hedged his "bets", as it were.
Sorry, maybe I was unclear.
You said that TD was only meaningful in the sense it kept us in the top 4, implying Dan was just trying to keep it close.
I say that is false; that TD was meaningful in that it gave us a chance to win THAT game. You could make the argument it was bad clock mgmt, but we still had a chance to win after the TD. Therefore, not meaningless.
Sorry, maybe I was unclear.
You said that TD was only meaningful in the sense it kept us in the top 4, implying Dan was just trying to keep it close.
I say that is false; that TD was meaningful in that it gave us a chance to win THAT game. You could make the argument it was bad clock mgmt, but we still had a chance to win after the TD. Therefore, not meaningless.
Understood... I would literally agree that if yall had ball possession trailing by =< 1 score yall would have had a "chance"...
we cool.
LiterallyPolice
11-23-2014, 10:13 PM
Understood... I would literally agree that if yall had ball possession trailing by =< 1 score yall would have had a "chance"...
we cool.
Dude what are talking about? If that's how you feel... Then we don't agree.
You said that Dan was just trying to keep it close for the playoff committee. I think he was doing what he needed to do to give us a chance to win THAT game. That is not agreeing. That is, in fact, called disagreeing.
Sure, the chance was small; but crazier things have happened.... cough cough iron bowl cough...
Dude what are talking about? If that's how you feel... Then we don't agree.
You said that Dan was just trying to keep it close for the playoff committee. I think he was doing what he needed to do to give us a chance to win THAT game. That is not agreeing. That is, in fact, called disagreeing.
Sure, the chance was small; but crazier things have happened.... cough cough iron bowl cough...
I may be 100% wrong, but if I'm not, Dan's clock management was Les Miles-ish...
actually, after I thought about it, "laying up" made a lot of sense to me....
regardless, it's way "too soon" to pull the "kick 6" card... I'm still recovering... (shoulda been 3peat)...
touche.
HoopsDawg
11-23-2014, 11:00 PM
I may be 100% wrong, but if I'm not, Dan's clock management was Les Miles-ish...
actually, after I thought about it, "laying up" made a lot of sense to me....
regardless, it's way "too soon" to pull the "kick 6" card... I'm still recovering... (shoulda been 3peat)...
touche.
Honestly, Dan has always struggled in the 2 minute offense and clock management which is strange b/c we go up tempo at times and Dan is a bright guy.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.