The committee message is loud and clear - attn Stricklin/Mullen

[Apoplectic]

You better schedule at least 1 power 5 team to get any CFP juice even if you lose. Thats the reason TCU>Baylor and sparty/Ksu > us. They could not be more clear with the message theyre sending.

[ShotgunDawg]

You better schedule at least 1 power 5 team to get any CFP juice even if you lose. Thats the reason TCU>Baylor and sparty/Ksu > us. They could not be more clear with the message theyre sending.

I agree. The SEC is making us do this starting in 2016, so it's really a moot point, unless there's someone that opens a slot to play us next year.

[CadaverDawg]

Dumb. So playing a weak conference and scheduling a weak P5 team gets you more credit than playing a harder overall schedule without a P5 OOC opponent? Makes zero sense. A tougher schedule is a tougher schedule. Period. They need to quit "sending messages" and do their ****ing job.

[Apoplectic]

Dumb. So playing a weak conference and scheduling a weak P5 team gets you more credit than playing a harder overall schedule without a P5 OOC opponent? Makes zero sense. A tougher schedule is a tougher schedule. Period. They need to quit "sending messages" and do their ****ing job.

Well we better accept reality and adjust or be prepared to suffer the consequences.

[BLITZII]

You better schedule at least 1 power 5 team to get any CFP juice even if you lose. Thats the reason TCU>Baylor and sparty/Ksu > us. They could not be more clear with the message theyre sending.

Not to bust your chops Apoplectic.........but as stated by Shotgun, the SEC has taken care of this for us. Why in the world people(media and fans) continue to harp on this issue is beyond me. This is a 17ing moot point.

Stick some of those pansy ass (Sec Haters) in the SEC West and see how they like running that gauntlet.

[SDDawg]

Mich. State's blowout to Ohio State and loss to Oregon doesn't impress me much. Hard to argue when we played so poorly against OM, 2 broken plays literally killed us though. Darn shame.

[Dawgface]

What did you expect? AP and Coaches poll both had us at 10 too.

[SDDawg]

I expected #9, possibly #8. AP and Coaches never factored into my thinking.

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

I disagree. The committee has stated that they put out their weekly rankings on what a team has done up to that given week. Right now, TCU is ahead of Baylor because TCU beat top 10 KSU, period. Next week, if Baylor has also beaten top 10 KSU, things will be different. If it is not, then the committee should be immediately disbanded for saying that beating a shitty 8-4 Minn team is better than a head to head win over the team you are being compared to.

We are also being penalized for losing twice (not just once) late, which is the difference in us versus KSU/MSU at this point.

[ckDOG]

We looked like damnit last week while getting smoked by OM. I tend to think the drop had more to do with that than the overall body of work.

[TUSK]

why not go to a similar platform to the BIG 12?

hypo:
6 intra divisional
4 inter divisional (1 permanent & 3 rotational)
2 OOC games (1 FCS "gimmee" & 1 top 30-40 team from a Big 5 Conference)
NO SECCG.... best CFP ranked team at season's end is SECC

[Ralph]

I think another loud and clear message sent by the committee is that $$$ matters. Tcu jumping fsu, while plausible, it's highly likely the fanbase travel distance was taken into consideration. FSU should be very happy with this outcome.

[Todd4State]

You better schedule at least 1 power 5 team to get any CFP juice even if you lose. Thats the reason TCU>Baylor and sparty/Ksu > us. They could not be more clear with the message theyre sending.

The message is don't lose.

We were number one when we were undefeated and number four before the Egg Bowl. You're telling me that they would have dropped us had we won? Our OOC schedule had nothing to do with it.

[Todd4State]

why not go to a similar platform to the BIG 12?

hypo:
6 intra divisional
4 inter divisional (1 permanent & 3 rotational)
2 OOC games (1 FCS "gimmee" & 1 top 30-40 team from a Big 5 Conference)
NO SECCG.... best CFP ranked team at season's end is SECC

I would like the fact that we would get to play teams in the East more than we do currently. With 10 SEC games, we wouldn't need to play a power five team. We really don't now anyway.

[Bass Chaser]

Why does FSU keep falling even though they played not 1 but 3 OOC P5 teams?

[sandwolf]

Why does FSU keep falling even though they played not 1 but 3 OOC P5 teams?

Because none of the P5 teams that they played OOC turned out to be any good, they play in the steaming pile of dog shit that is the ACC and they have not looked dominant in any of their games.

[dawgs]

I disagree. The committee has stated that they put out their weekly rankings on what a team has done up to that given week. Right now, TCU is ahead of Baylor because TCU beat top 10 KSU, period. Next week, if Baylor has also beaten top 10 KSU, things will be different. If it is not, then the committee should be immediately disbanded for saying that beating a shitty 8-4 Minn team is better than a head to head win over the team you are being compared to.

We are also being penalized for losing twice (not just once) late, which is the difference in us versus KSU/MSU at this point.

Tbh I get the h2h should matter, but when the losing team is the road team losing a tight game going down to the wire, I think it's fairly easy to justify why the loser might finish higher. Whether the justification is SoS, OOC schedule, eye test, common opponent results, home field advantage role, etc. now when a team loses at home or in a blowout/dominating fashion, I don't think you can make that justification.

Also, look at 1993. F$U loses to ND, then ND loses to BC, and F$U goes back to #1 and Nebraska to #2, while ND stayed #3. I'm sure there's plenty of other instances in CFB history like this too. So let's not act like the committee is off their rocker here.

[Smitty]

NC State, Kansas State, Arizona lined up.

I wish we would drop NW St and add a FBS school next year. Has to count for a little in SOS right?

South Alabama has an open date on that day now (they had UAB scheduled)

[whatever]

Because none of the P5 teams that they played OOC turned out to be any good, they play in the steaming pile of dog shit that is the ACC and they have not looked dominant in any of their games.

The ACC did go 4-0 vs the SEC Saturday and has the most wins of any conference vs the p5, so maybe they're not so bad. GT beat UGA, BC beat USC, and VaTech beat Ohio St

[deadheaddawg]

Because none of the P5 teams that they played OOC turned out to be any good, they play in the steaming pile of dog shit that is the ACC and they have not looked dominant in any of their games.

how far in advance are these made? Look at the 3 teams FSU played

Oklahoma State
Notre Dame
Florida

Whats the odds of all 3 being bad?

So we need to schedule 1 power 5. So does every other SEC team. It is probably a lot harder than we think to make sure we schedule a quality power 5 team. We have to project who will be good and fight other teams to get them on the schedule.

A crazy idea, and it will never happen, but is there anything that would keep a SEC team from scheduling another SEC team "out of conference"? Kinda like the Mayor's Trophy in baseball. Doesn't count as a conference game. Would anyone here like playing Bama twice a year, every year? Auburn? LSU? Ole Miss? What about one of the SEC East teams "out of conference"

[Todd4State]

how far in advance are these made? Look at the 3 teams FSU played

Oklahoma State
Notre Dame
Florida

Whats the odds of all 3 being bad?

So we need to schedule 1 power 5. So does every other SEC team. It is probably a lot harder than we think to make sure we schedule a quality power 5 team. We have to project who will be good and fight other teams to get them on the schedule.

A crazy idea, and it will never happen, but is there anything that would keep a SEC team from scheduling another SEC team "out of conference"? Kinda like the Mayor's Trophy in baseball. Doesn't count as a conference game. Would anyone here like playing Bama twice a year, every year? Auburn? LSU? Ole Miss? What about one of the SEC East teams "out of conference"

Other than rare occasions back in the 50's and 60's when SEC teams would play each other in bowls, I can't think of a reason. I personally would rather us play Georgia home and home as an OOC or any other SEC East team than Arizona or Kansas State.

[Smitty]

The ACC did go 4-0 vs the SEC Saturday and has the most wins of any conference vs the p5, so maybe they're not so bad. GT beat UGA, BC beat USC, and VaTech beat Ohio St

And GT over UGA was the only upset. People pushing that logic are idiots. Line us up with any conference from top to bottom and we will probably get 10-11 wins.

[Johnson85]

Dumb. So playing a weak conference and scheduling a weak P5 team gets you more credit than playing a harder overall schedule without a P5 OOC opponent? Makes zero sense. A tougher schedule is a tougher schedule. Period. They need to quit "sending messages" and do their ****ing job.

If you want a playoff that isn't a playoff of the best four conference champions, you need some interconference games between the power 5 during the season. Otherwise there's not much way to tell who has the toughest schedule other than eye test, which basically nobody other than coaches breaking down film can really apply.

At least one OOC power 5 matchup needs to be required by each of the power five conferences, and the Committee needs to greatly discount in-conference losses in conferences that dominate the interconference matchups. The SEC really needs to push to schedule these matchups early in the season, before the SEC has beaten itself up. Hopefully then when the SEC W starts cannabalizing itself the committee will take into account that those teams are losing to teams that would be top three in any of the other 5 major conferences.

[defiantdog]

I'd like to see Michigan State play an SEC West schedule

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

Tbh I get the h2h should matter, but when the losing team is the road team losing a tight game going down to the wire, I think it's fairly easy to justify why the loser might finish higher. Whether the justification is SoS, OOC schedule, eye test, common opponent results, home field advantage role, etc. now when a team loses at home or in a blowout/dominating fashion, I don't think you can make that justification.

Also, look at 1993. F$U loses to ND, then ND loses to BC, and F$U goes back to #1 and Nebraska to #2, while ND stayed #3. I'm sure there's plenty of other instances in CFB history like this too. So let's not act like the committee is off their rocker here.

I don't think you can make the justification in this era of the playoffs at all. If so, what is the point of playing the games? The Big12 screwed Baylor more than anything with their backtracking from all of that talk of "one champion". Baylor wins Saturday, and they have WON the Big12 because they have the tiebreaker on TCU. End of story.

[sandwolf]

The ACC did go 4-0 vs the SEC Saturday and has the most wins of any conference vs the p5, so maybe they're not so bad. GT beat UGA, BC beat USC, and VaTech beat Ohio St

No, the ACC is absolute dog shit.

[SheltonChoked]

You realize the Power 5 conferences have a rule starting next year, that forces this right?


Just checking.

[Maroonthirteen]

Y'all need to take off the Bham blinders. 4-0 vs the SEC this weekend. You can say it was against te east but guess what....that is 50% of the conference. If we are only going to judge a conference by its better teams. UL, Tech, Clemson and FSU are all good to very good. GaTech won at UGA. UGa was 2-0 vs the west but 1-1 vs the acc. Also with the player makers FSU has.... They would be 11-1(L at Bama) with our schedule.

The ACC has some very good teams.

[CadaverDawg]

Y'all need to take off the Bham blinders. 4-0 vs the SEC this weekend. You can say it was against te east but guess what....that is 50% of the conference. If we are only going to judge a conference by its better teams. UL, Tech, Clemson and FSU are all good to very good. GaTech won at UGA. UGa was 2-0 vs the west but 1-1 vs the acc. Also with the player makers FSU has.... They would be 11-1(L at Bama) with our schedule.

The ACC has some very good teams.

So the SEC dominates that conference all year every year and in Bowl Games, yet you want to choose the one weekend where they finally beat us in 4 games to draw your conclusions? Did you know that Clemson was favored over SC? Did you know that Florida State was favored over Florida? Did you know Louisville was favored over Kentucky? Georgia was the only good SEC team that played an ACC team and lost last weekend....so let's not get carried away. You are using 3 of the best ACC teams vs 3 of the worst SEC teams to make a point that the ACC is a solid conference. Line up 1-14 with the equivalent ACC team and tell me the ACC is solid.

Florida State vs Bama
Georgia Tech vs Mississippi State
Clemson vs Georgia
Louisville vs Ole Miss
Duke vs Auburn
Boston College vs LSU
NC State vs A&M
North Carolina vs Florida
Pittsburgh vs Arkansas
Miami vs Tennessee
Virginia Tech vs South Carolina
Virginia vs Kentucky
Syracuse/Wake vs Vanderbilt

I honestly would favor the SEC team to win every single one of those games except maybe Miami/Tennessee and whoever Vandy plays.....but even those two could win. Hell, even Danny Kannell said people were reading too much into the ACC's wins over the SEC Saturday, because "3 of the games were top half ACC vs bottom half SEC".

[CadaverDawg]

If you want a playoff that isn't a playoff of the best four conference champions, you need some interconference games between the power 5 during the season. Otherwise there's not much way to tell who has the toughest schedule other than eye test, which basically nobody other than coaches breaking down film can really apply.

At least one OOC power 5 matchup needs to be required by each of the power five conferences, and the Committee needs to greatly discount in-conference losses in conferences that dominate the interconference matchups. The SEC really needs to push to schedule these matchups early in the season, before the SEC has beaten itself up. Hopefully then when the SEC W starts cannabalizing itself the committee will take into account that those teams are losing to teams that would be top three in any of the other 5 major conferences.

So what you're saying is that us beating Kansas would say a lot to the committee about the SEC vs the Big 12? I think the argument is ridiculous, and it only penalizes the teams that play in a tougher conference. Sure Michigan state can step out and play an Oregon....why? Because Jacksonville State, Eastern Michigan, and Wyoming are their games surrounding it. Let's take a look at Michigan State, which people are praising for playing Oregon, vs Mississippi State, which people are bashing for our "weak schedule"....

Michigan State opponent/MIssissippi State comparable

Jacksonville State/UT Martin
Eastern Michigan/Southern Miss
Wyoming/South Alabama
Purdue/UAB
Rutgers/Vanderbilt
Indiana/Kentucky
Michigan/Arkansas
Penn State/Texas A&M
Maryland/LSU
Nebraska/Auburn
Ohio State/Ole Miss
Oregon/Alabama

Which schedule would you rather play? Hell, let them swap out A&M, LSU, and Auburn next year for Penn State, Maryland, and Nebraska for us. We'd take that shit in a heartbeat.

Michigan state lost at home to Ohio State by 12, and got destroyed at Oregon by 20. Their next toughest game was at home against Nebraska, and they won by 5.

Mississippi State lost on the road to Bama by 5, and on the road to OM by 14. Their next toughest game was at home vs Auburn, and we won by 15.

Take a look at those schedules, and those resumes, and those wins/losses, and where they occurred...and tell me one good reason why we should be getting penalized for not scheduling a Maryland when we are having to play AT LSU instead. Michigan State's schedule is still not as tough as ours even after they played a road game at Oregon....yet we're supposed to schedule tougher? That's garbage. Michigan State HAD to schedule Oregon to keep their schedule from being laughed at. And let's not forget, they got smoked by Oregon....so is it about scheduling teams OOC, or do you also have to compete with them? Because Michigan State didn't compete with Oregon, yet they are getting great praise for playing them. It is ridiculous, and is simply a talking point for those conferences that don't have a tough enough in conference schedule.

And this isn't an attack on you, Johnson85...it's towards the media and the committee, which are attempting to brainwash and use propaganda to push people into thinking one way over the other.
I'm simply pointing out that Mississippi State beating Purdue instead of UAB, doesn't really prove or change a dang thing....yet the committee and the media is trying to act like it does just so they can discredit SEC teams. At the end of the day, you can line up all these teams like Michigan state that played a tough OOC game, and they still don't surpass the toughness of a typical SEC schedule, even when the SEC team has 4 OOC cupcakes.

And that's not even getting into the fact that we have to be ready for a gauntlet of @LSU, Auburn, A&M, back to back AND THEN still have Bama, OM, and Arkansas on the schedule.....while Michigan State only has 3 teams on their schedule each year that could cause them problems that they truly have to get UP for.

[Maroonthirteen]

I'm saying the ACC is decent. Not better than the SEC but higher than dog shit for sure.

But I'll play along, sure Vegas would favor Bama and State in those matchups. But I wouldn't bet on either to win. I think they are toss up games on a neutral field.

[CadaverDawg]

I'm saying the ACC is decent. Not better than the SEC but higher than dog shit for sure.

But I'll play along, sure Vegas would favor Bama and State in those matchups. But I wouldn't bet on either to win. I think they are toss up games on a neutral field.

Right, and that's what these media members want you to focus on....the top 2 teams in the ACC, Big 10, etc....why? Because they don't want to look at the depth from top to bottom and how the SEC blows everyone else away when you do.

Florida State has slept walked through their schedule this year. You can't do that in the SEC because you play a good team that is capable of beating you damn near every week. In the ACC, Florida State can sleep walk for 10-11 games throughout the season and only have to get up for a few. The SEC deep gauntlet takes a toll, and I think you are doing a disservice if you don't look at the depth and quality of the conference, not just focusing on how teams schedule out of conference. Hell, for Clemson...that SC game was probably the 3rd biggest game on their schedule behind....yep, Georgia and Florida State. For FSU...the Florida game was one of the toughest games on their schedule, so I'm sure they got up for it too. For Louisville, the Kentucky game was one of the bigger games on their schedule, so they got up for it (and still barely won). When you've been through the SEC gauntlet....playing Clemson if you are South Carolina, isn't in the top 4-5 games on your schedule, except for it being a rivalry game.

[Johnson85]

At the end of the day, you can line up all these teams like Michigan state that played a tough OOC game, and they still don't surpass the toughness of a typical SEC schedule, even when the SEC team has 4 OOC cupcakes.

That's without a doubt true but the only way the Committee can know that is for teams to play OOC matchups. Many of them won't tell a whole lot, but each game provides more information. We know from bowl games that the SEC is generally stronger year in and year out, but there still needs to be some validation in the year they are picking. If LSU doesn't play Wisconsin, our LSU win is a lot less valuable. It sucks because it does result in SEC West teams playing much, much more difficult schedules than pretty much anybody else, but I think that's the price we pay to avoid a playoff of conference champions.

[dawgs]

I'll just say this, we have 1 more season with dak as our QB, and hopefully with another offseason of improvement, he'll be better next year. If you have a stud QB, you have a shot at something special if everything else is merely adequate. This might be the last season we have a stud QB for a long time. We spent pretty much my entire life getting ecstatic when we merely had a serviceable QB. I'd be absolutely sick to my stomach if we went 11-1 or 12-1, and somehow missed out because we were too big of a ***** to play minnesota or West Virginia. If we lost to one of those teams, we aren't a playoff caliber team anyway, but if we win, it's an insurance against OOC scheduling being a deciding factor (or the sec west regressing - it will happen one day just like the east has, and the easy will rise up again). That's how I view it, and I feel like playing 4 non-conference cupcakes is playing with fire and inviting ourselves to get burned out of competing for a natty with the only positive difference maker I've seen taking snaps at msu. Strickland, find us a game with someone half assed decent from a P5 conference and drop one of our cupcakes. The days of scheduling to get to bowl eligibility are over. Many of you disagree, and I'm not going to argue against your points, i'm merely saying i'd rather be safe than sorry.

[CadaverDawg]

That's without a doubt true but the only way the Committee can know that is for teams to play OOC matchups. Many of them won't tell a whole lot, but each game provides more information. We know from bowl games that the SEC is generally stronger year in and year out, but there still needs to be some validation in the year they are picking. If LSU doesn't play Wisconsin, our LSU win is a lot less valuable. It sucks because it does result in SEC West teams playing much, much more difficult schedules than pretty much anybody else, but I think that's the price we pay to avoid a playoff of conference champions.

I can agree with that....I just think it's unfair to middle of the pack teams like us. Bama doesn't have to play Bama every year for example. And I think it's total bullshit for the committee and media to blindly ignore things like that, and not be able to admit that by asking us to schedule Arizona in order to prove ourselves, you are actually asking for us to do more than any other team from any other conference in order to make the playoff. That's not right or fair, but I guess it is the World we live in and we'll just have to deal with it. I just hate how they try and paint it as us having a weak schedule, or scheduling poor OOC, instead of admitting that we shouldn't have to schedule tougher, but they want to see that to help make comparisons which will in turn cause teams from the SEC to play an even tougher overall schedule each year. I guess I just want to see some ownership and facts in place of all of the politics, propaganda, and opinions we are getting this year.

To be honest, we would be much better off if the BCS computers picked the Top 4 teams for the playoff, as well as the other 4 major bowl games. And those Top 12 teams, should be the 12 best teams according to the BCS computers....and should play 5 vs 12, 6 vs 11, 7 vs 10, and 8 vs 9....with the only changing up of teams being to avoid Conference rematches, but no teams should be allowed in outside of the Top 12. That's my opinion anyway...but I'm a big proponent of being fair, and wanting to see the best teams playing each other in the biggest games...so that will never happen.

[dawgs]

That's without a doubt true but the only way the Committee can know that is for teams to play OOC matchups. Many of them won't tell a whole lot, but each game provides more information. We know from bowl games that the SEC is generally stronger year in and year out, but there still needs to be some validation in the year they are picking. If LSU doesn't play Wisconsin, our LSU win is a lot less valuable. It sucks because it does result in SEC West teams playing much, much more difficult schedules than pretty much anybody else, but I think that's the price we pay to avoid a playoff of conference champions.

Agreed 100%. Auburn winning @k state and lsu beating wisconsin were huge early Ws to establish the sec west. OM beating boise, arkansas beating tx tech, and Bama beating wvu all also helped to a lesser extent. without those early season OOC Ws, we could all talk about how awesome the sec west is, but wouldn't have anyway to prove shit except beating each other.

[maroonmania]

If you want a playoff that isn't a playoff of the best four conference champions, you need some interconference games between the power 5 during the season. Otherwise there's not much way to tell who has the toughest schedule other than eye test, which basically nobody other than coaches breaking down film can really apply.

At least one OOC power 5 matchup needs to be required by each of the power five conferences, and the Committee needs to greatly discount in-conference losses in conferences that dominate the interconference matchups. The SEC really needs to push to schedule these matchups early in the season, before the SEC has beaten itself up. Hopefully then when the SEC W starts cannabalizing itself the committee will take into account that those teams are losing to teams that would be top three in any of the other 5 major conferences.

I wish they would just bite the bullet and go to an 8 team playoff that includes the Power 5 champions plus 3 wildcards. I would have the first round be held at the home of the top 4 seeds 2 weeks after the conference championship games (this year would land on 20 December) and then the final 4 can play just like they are playing now. Losers of those first 4 games could be pre-slotted into 4 other major bowls. That's just one extra game for 8 teams and would cover eveery conference getting a chance plus allow slots for independents and other conference teams that are deserving.