Sunday Morning Quarterback: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



New Blog: Five For Howling - for Coyotes fans Bar-right-arrows



Blog Pollin': Week Fourteen Ballot

BlogPoll Ballot, Week 14
This is not a power poll.
1. Missouri (11-1)
2. West Virginia (10-1)
3. Ohio State (11-1)
4. LSU (10-2)
5. Georgia (10-2)
6. Oklahoma (10-2)
7. Kansas (11-1)
8. Boston College (10-2)
9. Virginia Tech (10-2)
10. Southern Cal (9-2)
11. Illinois (9-3)
12. Florida (9-3)
13. Tennessee (9-3)
14. Oregon (8-3)
15. Arizona State (9-2)
16. South Florida (9-3)
17. Clemson (9-3)
18. Wisconsin (9-3)
19. Virginia (9-3)
20. Cincinnati (9-3)
21. Texas (9-3)
22. Hawaii (11-0)
23. BYU (10-2)
24. Auburn (8-4)
25. Connecticut (9-3)
Waiting: Michigan, Florida State, Penn State, Wake Forest, Arkansas, Boise State, Oregon State, Michigan State, Texas Tech, Texas A&M.
- - -
This week’s poll brought to you by seventies proto-glam rockers Queen, who in the server-induced demise of this week’s official poll at MGoBlog reminds readers,
Whatever happens, I'll leave it all to chance.
Another heartache - another failed romance.
On and on!
Does anybody know what we are living for?
I guess i'm learning
I must be warmer now...
I'll soon be turning round the corner now.
Outside the dawn is breaking,
But inside in the dark I'm aching to be free!

The Show must go on!
The Show must go on! Yeah!

- - -

Before these notes came up, an argument broke out in the comments based on the poll alone, begun by commenter usckb and backed by LSU partisan crepusucular, who take their cues from fearless leader (or pope; he has the hat - ed.) Les Miles in arguing that, rather than suffer for its second defeat, the Tigers should remain at the top of the polls – in reality, they argue, "LSU has tied twice," and its collection of wins marks it as "still the best team in the nation."

I’d like to politely second the comment deeming this argument "revisionist horse shit." With apologies to the New Pornographers, the rules have changed. There is an overtime system that’s been in place since today’s seniors were in elementary school; if you lose via this system you are, in fact, a loser on that specific occasion. The closeness of the score does not mitigate defeat, though it should be taken into account in assessing the value (in the case of losses, the demerits) of any game. This is why LSU is still in front of Georgia, which has a comparable or perhaps slightly better set of wins but was obliterated at Tennessee.

Margin of victory also explains West Virginia’s status ahead of Ohio State, fresh off the Mountaineers’ 45-point smackdown of the second place team in its conference in the de facto Big East Championship. I would like to stress, though, that WVU and OSU are really "2" and "2a," because if I don’t, I’m going to find myself in a lot of trouble next week.

Missouri West Virginia Ohio State
Kansas
Illinois Wisconsin
Connecticut Michigan
Cincinnati Penn State
Texas Tech Rutgers Michigan State
Texas A&M Miss. State Purdue
Colorado Maryland Northwestern
Nebraska Louisville
Kansas State East Carolina
Iowa State Washington
Ole Miss Syracuse
Western Mich. Western Mich.
Minnesota
Akron
Marshall Kent State
Illinois State Y'town State
Oklahoma
South Florida Illinois

I think Missouri is clearly out front, as clearly as it could be in the current morass, but the Buckeyes and Mountaineers are in a dead heat. I think of the rankings as an "average" of all games, and on that front, West Virginia is ahead this week because it’s played one less worthless game than OSU, basically accounting to the Buckeyes’ opener against Youngstown State. This is academic in real world terms, because the Mountaineers are in if they crush Pittsburgh as expected in the Brawl Saturday, but that game might hurt WVU’s "average" for the year incrementally enough to push Ohio State in front; the more I look at the games, the more I think Ohio State, with the best win on either schedule (Wisconsin) could be ahead right now. Then again, the Mountaineers just beat the saliva out of UConn in the biggest game of their season... It’s an absolutely arbitrary call, and I reserve the right to change my mind - er, whatever that is, exactly – based on what happens with West Virginia against Pitt.

Boston College is ahead of Virginia Tech because the Eagles beat Virginia Tech, albeit in somewhat dubious circumstances; obviously, this will be settled Saturday. Oregon is what it is, and is still sitting on a lot of decent-to-good wins like Arizona State and Michigan, plus (more importantly) doesn’t have a really terrible opponent anywhere to drag its strength of schedule into the gutter. The worst teams the Ducks have played are conference games against Stanford and Washington, and compared to the losing mid-major and I-AA teams bringing up the rear for literally all the Ducks’ competition, that’s strong. It would be stronger if Arizona State hadn’t, uh, laid an egg on Thanksgiving, putting a big black mark on Oregon’s best win, but I’m not going to disregard UO’s early success in post-Dixon pessimism. Again, academic: both Oregon and Arizona State are sliding and probably out of the BCS picture (though ASU is still clinging to an at-large spot, or an improbable USC loss to UCLA), especially if their in-state rivals have any say this weekend.

Hawaii: Florida State made me do it. If only the Seminoles had pulled an upset, maybe I could have found a way to keep FSU in the poll and the Warriors out. I wanted to, really I did. Out of principle, out of consistency, out of reaction to unthinking hype like this. But the Warriors did wreck ten-win Boise State’s six-year WAC championship streak, and – though BSU’s best win is Fresno State, and the Warriors’ entire schedule features exactly one win against a BCS school (Fresno over Kansas State Saturday) and virtually no other I-A wins outside of one another in pillow fight WAC play – Hawaii sneaks in by default. They’re joined by BYU, which won its 16th straight Mountain West game and second straight conference title by ending Utah’s seven-game win streak Saturday. Bronco Mendenhall was an obscure, bizarrely-named, eyebrow-raising hire, and he’s done a fantastic job with the Cougars after a few really lean years under Gary Crowton.

As always, everything will be completely different next week.

0 recs | Comment 35 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Terrible.....
SMQ, someone needs to have the guts to say that LSU is still the best team in the nation.  I was hoping that person would be you.  Two losses in OT shouldn't equate more than one loss, and if you look at the margin each other team has lost by (WVU by 8, Mizzou by 10, Kansas by 8, OSU by 7), no one loss team can remotely argue that they haven't been soundly beaten at least once.

LSU has tied twice.  The NCAA is the one who came up w/ the ridiculous overtime scheme.

by USCKB on Nov 28, 2007 9:46 AM EST   0 recs

"soundly beaten"?
Losing by 10 or less doesn't equate to "soundly beaten."  More like "in a close game and lost."

by osuvandy on Nov 28, 2007 10:03 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

no ties in football
This revisionist horse shit is hilarious.

These are the rules kids- there are no ties in college football.  LSU lost two extremely close games.  But you can't just decide that they were ties, or even something "less than a loss", because you feel like it.

And for comparison sake, remember that those LOSSES came against inferior competition as compared to the teams ranked above them.  And it happened TWICE.  

where every game matters... until the playoff system kills it all.

by Tim J on Nov 28, 2007 11:43 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Inferior competition?
Compared to the rankings of the teams I listed (WVU, OSU, Mizzou, etc.), which of them would you argue lost to a SUPERIOR team?

I think most would agree (Vegas included) that Mizzou lost to a superior Oklahoma team, but I don't hear anyone saying that OU belongs in the MNC game.

I'd just like to meet the sucker who would take WVU or Mizzou in the NC game.  Even if it weren't in New Orleans, I don't see any of those teams taking them down on a neutral field.

A case could be made for Ohio St., however; it's sad to think they'll win the MNC with their best win of the year being Michigan, and WVU will be on the other side with their best win being.... um, Rutgers?

Someone, please, lay out the rational argument for WVU over LSU.

by USCKB on Nov 28, 2007 11:50 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

I'll bite
The argument is that it's not September anymore.  For a variety of reasons, this isn't the same LSU team we saw manhandle Virginia Tech.  They are banged up, particularly on defense and it shows.  They gave up 201 rushing yards (at 7.2 YPC!) against Ole Miss and they got torched by Arkansas for 385 yards (at 7.3 YPC) on the ground.

I think a healthy LSU is the best all-around team in the country (with a healthy Oregon a real close second).  But it is what it is.  AT THIS MOMENT, LSU is not the best team in the country and maybe not even one of the top 10 teams in the land.  I'm not saying they should be ranked lower or anything like that, but I think West Virginia matches up extremely well against them and Mizzou's passing game would cause them fits.

by DoubleB on Nov 28, 2007 12:22 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Can't argue with that
They have been very sloppy.  I was hoping they'd manage to beat Arkansas (I knew it would be a difficult game), avoid Georgia in the SEC Title game, then heal-up and put in a dominating performance in the BCS Title game.  Obviously that's not how you would expect to feel if you really think your team is currently #1, which contrasts strongly to how I felt 4 years ago at this time.

As for Tim J's comment upthread, I don't think you can really make a strong argument that Illinois and S. Florida are better than Kentucky and Arkansas.  Without getting into specifics, all of those teams are just below the cream of the crop in each of their conferences.  I've said before that Mizzou deserves to be ranked where they are so I don't count their loss to Oklahoma in this argument.

by crepuscular on Nov 28, 2007 1:03 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Agreed
A HEALTHY USC  would need to be somewhere in this powery evaluation as well although we've seen too little of them to know for sure.

Even a Murray-less Oklahoma might have to enter the conversation although considring schedule and health one might argue they've underperformed as much or perhaps even more then LSU.

by marcillac on Nov 28, 2007 1:50 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

inferior competition
was referring to the losses in particular, not the balance of the schedule.

In other words- Illinois, South Florida, and Oklahoma are all > Kentucky and Arkansas.

What is the rational argument for LSU?  They have lost twice.  Twice, against unranked teams.  Nobody short of a fanboy or a powerpoller can really confuse this.

where every game matters... until the playoff system kills it all.

by Tim J on Nov 28, 2007 12:58 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

There's a rational argument for LSU
The best argument is that, when healthy, LSU is CLEARLY one of the top 2 teams in the country (and proved it in the first 8 or 9 games of the season).

How is Illinois better than Kentucky or Arkansas?  What is that based on?  I'll give you Oklahoma and I think South Florida is certainly in the neighborhood of those two teams, but the Big Ten is just terrible this year.  Can anyone name the Big Ten's best out of conference win?  Your choice of Washington State, Washington, or Pitt.  And oh god, the losses:  Appalachian State, Western Michigan, Iowa State, Duke.  And that doesn't include Minnesota's losses who were a borderline I-AA team this year.  The Big Ten has stunk for the past 5 years and this the worst of the five.

by DoubleB on Nov 28, 2007 1:43 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Big Ten over the past five years
Not trying to argue conference merits per se, but saying that "(t)he Big Ten has stunk for the past 5 years" is flat out wrong.  This year, the Big Ten is down, no question.  However, according the the Sagarin conference ratings, the Big Ten and SEC are almost identical from 2002-2006.  If you wish to argue that the SEC "has stunk for the past 5 years" as well, go right ahead.

by osuvandy on Nov 28, 2007 3:33 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Big Ten -- Last 5 Years
"The Big Ten has stunk for the past 5 years and this the worst of the five."

I certainly question the strength of the Big Ten along with you. But your five-year comment is a bit out of whack.

The Big Ten's record in bowls over the last five years is 16-18, which isn't that good. Oddly enough, though, they have an 8-6 record versus SEC teams during that time.

Last year, when everyone remembers the OSU-Florida debacle, the Big Ten was actually 2-1 versus the SEC, with Wisconsin beating Arkansas and Penn State beating Tennessee.

Here are the scores in Big Ten bowl matchups with the SEC in the last five years:

2002
Minnesota-Arkansas (29-14)
Michigan-Florida (38-30)
Auburn-Penn State (13-9)

2003
Auburn-Wisconsin (28-14)
Iowa-Florida (37-17)
Georgia-Purdue (34-27)

2004
Minnesota-Alabama (20-16)
Georgia-Wisconsin (24-21)
Iowa-LSU (30-25)

2005
Florida-Iowa (31-24)
Wisconsin-Auburn (24-10)

2006
Penn State-Tennessee (20-10)
Wisconsin-Arkansas (17-14)
Florida-OSU (41-14)

The Big Ten had a losing record versus the SEC in only one of those years. They tied in 2005 and had a winning record in the other three years.

Also, if you just consider OSU's record in the bowls, they went 4-1 in those five years. If you consider just the BCS bowls, they've played in 5 of them in the history of the BCS and won 4. OSU and USC are the only two teams with 4-1 records in the BCS. Those are the two best BCS records in college football.

You can certainly question the strength of the Big Ten this year, as do I. But the conference is stronger over these last years than they're often made out to be.

by TallBill on Nov 28, 2007 3:38 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

The last 5 years . .
. . . includes this year, so let's leave 2002 out of it.  Hell, Ohio State became the first team to go perfect and win 14 games that season, one of the more unheralded feats of the past 25 years in the college game.

Now let's look at 2003-2006 with regards to bowls:  

The Big Ten bowl record is 11-17.
The Big 12 is 14-17.
The Pac-10 is 13-9.
The SEC is 17-11.
The ACC is 17-11.
The Big East is 7-8.

The poster above you mentioned Sagarin rankings.  These are the averaged Sagarin rankings from 2003-2007 in order.

SEC       78.27
Pac 10    77.97
ACC       77.74
Big 10    76.93
Big 12    76.67
Big East  75.36

If you take out 2005, the Big 10 would be last in those rankings, which is the only time they've ranked higher than 3rd in this decade.

by DoubleB on Nov 28, 2007 8:18 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

I have an idea...
Let's take out data from years where the SEC does better than the Big Ten and use that instead.  I like it better.

Point is, your original comment is still wrong.

by osuvandy on Nov 28, 2007 11:40 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Great facts in that post
This isn't about the SEC.  It's about the Big Ten not being very good lately.

by DoubleB on Nov 29, 2007 12:54 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Thanks...
Bottom line, however, is that the facts don't support your assertion that the Big Ten has stunk for the past five years.

by osuvandy on Nov 29, 2007 1:58 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

five-year record
Five years ago today would be November 29, 2002. So all the 2002 bowl games were played within the last five years.

Also, as the bowl records I posted vs. the SEC show, the Big Ten has a winning record against the SEC last year, and in two of the last three years, with the other year being a tie. You have to go back to 2003 to find a year when the SEC posted a winning bowl record versus the Big Ten.

Like you, I'm not sure the 2007 Buckeyes are legit national title contenders. But this wasn't supposed to be our year. It was clearly a rebuilding year, given our losses to the NFL. In that context, you have to decide whether to be impressed by OSU or not. On the one hand, I think the OSU D is for real. They are young, but very good. On the other hand, the passing part of the offense collapsed in the last couple games of the season. Do they have a diverse offense, at this point? Boeckman may not have matured enough in his first year as a starter to use the weopons at his disposal.

My personal perspective on all that is that the program has risen to a perennial contender in college football. They reload with excellent local and national talent every year, they have good coaching, and they play an elite out-of-conference game almost every year to put themselves to the test. The last two years it was Texas, home-and-home (including the Vince Young national title team), and the next two years it is USC. This is the odd year where our key OOC game is a mediocre opponent.

What do you call a team that plays an elite OOC opponent most years, and plays in BCS games almost every year, winning 4 out of 5 of them? A team that has earned respect in college football.

by TallBill on Nov 29, 2007 11:03 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Huh?
Really Bill, that's what you thought I meant when I said last five years?  I can understand thinking last five COMPLETE seasons.  I should have clarified that in the original post.  I did clarify it in a subsequent post and apparently you think last five years means the 2002 bowl games (and apparently conference championship games) with the 2007 regular season.

Your rant is about Ohio State, not the Big Ten which was the comment in the original post.  Ohio State is clearly the preeminent program in the Big Ten right now and has been for this decade.  But that doesn't change the fact that the Big Ten hasn't been very good for much of this decade and actually seems to be declining in play.

by DoubleB on Nov 29, 2007 1:16 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

2 ties = 1 loss?
Sorry, but even if you accept the fact that LSU "tied" twice, that's one more close game than most of these teams have been in - and against Kentucky and Arkansas, no less, teams which other SEC squads haven't had much of a problem knocking off. (Disclaimer - I'm a Gator, and therefore extremely biased against LSU)

by GUF on Nov 28, 2007 11:26 AM EST   0 recs

Best wins....
Would someone please tell me the win that gives any team above LSU the credibility to play for the MNC?

Mizzou - Illinois (Kansas is a joke - they also have no wins over relevant competition).
WVU - Rutgers?  Maryland?
Ohio St. - Michigan (really?  that's the best they can claim?)
UGA - couldn't win division
Kansas - couldn't win division (no relevant wins)
VT - lost by 41 to LSU

Looking at the total body of work, there's not a real strong argument against the team that has beaten Florida and VT, which are the two best wins out of all the teams listed.

by USCKB on Nov 28, 2007 11:53 AM EST   0 recs

yup
That's pretty much the point I was making on an earlier thread.  Except, not trying to make a case for the current 2 loss team, I pointed out that the neutral fan should be lamenting the falls of LSU and Oregon since they have each at least beat a couple of top 10 teams.  OSU and WVU can't even claim a single top 14 win.  Mizzou I've got no problem with.  But as an LSU partisan, I can almost understand people not looking at my argument rationally.

by crepuscular on Nov 28, 2007 12:03 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Mizzou over Kansas
If you're going to argue that Mizzou's win over Kansas doesn't matter because Kansas has "no wins over relevant competition," I feel compelled to point out that the two teams LSU LOST to have no wins over relevant competition either (assuming, as you do, that a win over Texas A&M is irrelevant) - Kentucky's best is Vandy (they beat Arkansas, but they beat LSU, so that's out); Arkansas' best is Miss St. or South Carolina, both of which have nothing on A&M.

by osuvandy on Nov 28, 2007 2:11 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

you can't just judge by best wins
You have to take into account the TWO LOSSES (note: not ties) to mediocre opponents

by enzo on Nov 28, 2007 12:09 PM EST   0 recs

I agree
That's what makes this so difficult, essentially comparing apples to oranges as far as quality wins vs. number of losses.  I believe the number of losses category is typically given too much weight but obviously that's just my opinion.  

For another approach to ranking teams at this point, I'd recommend envisioning the number of losses you would expect WVU and OSU to have if they played LSU's schedule and vice versa.  Does anyone believe either of those teams escapes that with fewer than 2 losses?

I would concede that LSU doesn't have a strong argument to be ranked above WVU and OSU.  But I don't feel they have a strong argument to be ranked above LSU either.

by crepuscular on Nov 28, 2007 12:21 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

I think you're picking-and-choosing arguments here
And you can't list include Florida on LSU's list of the "two best teams" anyone in contention has beaten, because Georgia also beat them, and also have two losses.

Look: it sucks.  LSU plays in a minefield of a schedule and, generally speaking, they played awesome throughout it.  I don't doubt that they're the best team in the country.  The fact that the BCS ranks a 2-loss VT (who lost by 41 to LSU) over them is, from an outsider's perspective, hilarious; from an insider's perspective, I imagine it's pretty infuriating.

So argue on the basis of the impossible schedule.  Argue on the basis on WVU's lack of a resume.  But the two-ties-equals-one-loss thing is silly.  Say what you want about Kansas, but at very least, they are a top 12-to-15 team, and a Missouri win over them should be considered a good win.  

And say what you want about all the great teams LSU played, but they bottom line is that they lost to two teams who are, sadly, unranked.

by derekcnelson on Nov 28, 2007 12:45 PM EST   0 recs

The two ties=1 loss tie idea is absurd
I very much doubt that LSU is the best team in the country but have a hard time identifying anyone better than the Bayou Bungles in talent or on-field performance, WFVU most emphatically included.

While the narrow wins contained an abundance of some seriously sloppy play LSU's ability to win in the end showed that they had not only the talent but the heart of a champion.  Against Ar-Kansas that heart was obviously missing.  Yes the defense is a physical rack, McFadden is Humanity Advanced and Bo Pellini's brain is 3/4 in Lincoln but a true champion makes enough plays to win that game.

by marcillac on Nov 28, 2007 2:04 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Voting
On my BlogPoll ballot, I voted for Georgia and LSU at 1 and 2. I'm sure it is wrong. But it was liberating to just give in to my heart- despite rational arguments above- and just accept the SEC is the best League- and the best teams in it are the best teams, period.

An aside to SMQ. Kudos for this preview- we kicked it around at the time. It is dead right. Again. We are designed to win three, four games no matter what happens:

http://www.sundaymorningqb.com/story/2007/3/12/17050/4097

by FrankMc01 on Nov 28, 2007 1:09 PM EST   0 recs

Bad, bad logic
>>> But it was liberating to just give in to my heart- despite rational arguments above- and just accept the SEC is the best League- and the best teams in it are the best teams, period.

Even if you accept that the SEC is the best league (I'm far less sure of that than I was a few weeks ago), that doesn't mean the best team in it is the best team in the nation. If you swapped LSU and Georgia for two random Sun Belt teams, the SEC would still be a better league than the Sun Belt, but the Sun Belt would have two teams better than any in the SEC.

by SpartanDan on Nov 28, 2007 7:02 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Mizzou worthy if they beat OU
If Missouri beats OU on Saturday, I don't see how anyone could argue that another team is better.  They will have finished the season with 7 consecutive wins, knowing the whole time that a single loss would make it impossible to achieve even the smallest of their goals.  They will be the only BCS team that has beaten every team they have faced (going 1-1 against OU).  They will have THREE wins over BCS top 15.  They have the best QB in the country, the best offense in the country, and the best overall defense and rushing defense in the Big XII.  They rolled through the BIG XII with an average margin of 42-21 (including their 10pt loss to OU, where they led in the 4th quarter)  

Now West Virginia?  Still not sure about them.  Can somebody give an argument for them?

If you have multiple losses you are not the best football team in the country. Period.

by BigMOman on Nov 28, 2007 1:19 PM EST   0 recs

WVU Resume
The obvious answer to your question about WVU is that nobody has a better resume.  But let's take a look at their merits:

Nothing too special on the out of conference resume although, other than LSU, they were the only team to blow out Mississippi State (were up 28-0 after one quarter in that game).

In conference they've handled everyone they've played, except South Florida.  Louisville and Cincinnati got close at the end due to some turnovers as much as anything else.  With regards to the USF loss, they outgained them by 150 yards but turned it over 6 times and played with their backup QB on the road (this was an SMQ "inside the box score").  They MIGHT be the only team in the country to be able to say that they've outplayed everyone on their schedule (Mizzou might be able to as well).

by DoubleB on Nov 28, 2007 1:58 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

A thought...
How different is the BCS system to a playoff really?  I mean, look at all the teams come tournament time in basketball that we say are the top teams, yet they lose in early rounds and are eliminated.  The same thing is happening here.  The BCS system even puts undue emphasis on late-season losses (just as a playoff system would).  I find it funny that the biggest advocates for a playoff right now are LSU fans.  Hey LSU fans, what makes you think a playoff system would benefit you?!  You just lost AT HOME to an unranked team with the entire season on the line!

When you look at a whole body of work (in this case an entire football season) you have a better idea of who really is the best, and can choose a national champion (or at least a NC game) accordingly.  

Can someone please point out what I'm missing? (as if I have to ask...)

If you have multiple losses you are not the best football team in the country. Period.

by BigMOman on Nov 28, 2007 2:01 PM EST   0 recs

Deserve? Credibility?
Now we've entered the asinine stage of the season where words like "deserve" and "credibility" come out as everyone argues their team's case. The associated mental gymnastics trying to cover over the 2 losses that LSU hit towards the end of the season are splendid examples of this.

No-one doubts that LSU is a good team - I've enjoyed watching them to no end - but you have to win out or have not more than one loss to seriously claim that you are in contention. I like to think that USC is shaping up well at the end of the season but they shouldn't be anywhere near an MNC discussion because they LOST TWICE, starting with Stanford, for heaven's sake.

This phenomenon is symptomatic of trying to have a defensible national championship bolted on top of an anachronistic conference structure that makes if difficult to assess how comparable teams really are - the sample sizes are small and not comparable. So we argue by analogy and metrics based on numbers being assigned to make it look rigorous.

I recognize that there are arguments against moving away from the old conference / bowl setup on the grounds of tradition, and I understand that: I'm always happy to see USC playing in the Rose Bowl. But if you want an actual champion, as opposed to an ice-dancing champion, then a playoff is the way to go. Just take the winners of each conference and let them have at it. Or take the top 2 teams from each conference and seed 1s against 2s, and have at it, if you want more games. How would you identify the top teams? By their record.

Again, it all depends on what you want. If you like the existing structure and arguing about piffle like how losing in overtime doesn't count, that's great. But find one real sport - aside from maybe boxing - that runs a championship this way. Utter and arrant nonsense.

Not that I have any feeling on the subject.

by DC Trojan on Nov 28, 2007 2:27 PM EST   0 recs

If any two of LSU and USC
or Cal(LOL)or Tennessee or Georgia or Oregon had made it through the season undefeated I would been perfectly comfortable calling them the two best teams in the country and playing them of - in a regular Bowl to determine the champion.  I would have not the slightest hint of a reservation keeping even an undfeated WFVU completely out of the conversation.

This year there is no best team and any playoff winner would simply the team that won the playoff.
True if the winner happened to be USC I would acknowledge them as valid champions (and at this moment they would certainly have to be considered the favorites in a playoff with Georgia on their heels - Rose Bowl anyone? {if Missou looses and tOSU plays WFVU} - LSU would need several weeks to get healthy and enter into this discussion).  

by marcillac on Nov 28, 2007 2:47 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Come on, SMQ
You set me up as a straw man, then knock me down.  Read over my comments again and see if you still think I'm claiming that LSU should be ranked #1 or even #2.  In so many words, I've merely said that OSU and WVU are no more deserving.  And only a partisan of those two teams would try to claim that they are.

by crepuscular on Nov 28, 2007 2:43 PM EST   0 recs

And..
I never participated in the overtimes are really ties debate.  I'd appreciate it if you edited your comments to reflect that.

by crepuscular on Nov 28, 2007 2:46 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Ohio State > West Virginia
And as a BE honk, it pains me to say it.

I would suggest West Virginia is probably better than Ohio State, and if they played ten times on a neutral field WVU would probably win six, maybe seven times.  If Ohio State thought the Illinois spread was frustrating, wait until they see Slaton, White and Devine run by them on a regular basis.  And while OSU's D is solid, WVU's is very, very good as well.

But if the idea is to compare resumes, it is critical to look at the body of work for both teams.  I usually break it down simply - when two teams from different conferences with the same record are compared head-to-head, you need to look at common opponents first.  

If there are none, then you need to look at the three best wins on each team's schedule.  Because really, after you get past the top three wins, it becomes a muddle - most of the next tier of victories for a 11-1 team would be over middling teams that would be hard to separate.  But usually, there's some legitimate separation between the best wins for one time vs. another.  (Which is why Missouri - especially if they beat Oklahoma - would be the clear #1 - wins over Oklahoma, Kansas, and Illinois are better than anything WVU or OSU could muster this season.)

So what are the top-three wins for each team:

West Virginia: Cincinnati, Connecticut, Rutgers

Ohio State: Wisconsin, Michigan, Penn State

The "best win" is relatively close - Cincinnati is probably comparable with Wisconsin, and in fact was two maddening losses against lesser foes from being an 11-1 potential BCS team.  

But then the spread widens some, as it would be hard to argue that UConn is better than Michigan or even Penn State, perhaps in the most kind assessments you could argue that MAYBE the Huskies are the relative equal of Penn State. And Rutgers is likely a small notch below Penn State.

It just gets hard to look objectively at WVU's schedule and believe that it was better, week and week out, to OSU's - even though I think the Big Ten is significantly down this year.

by sodakboy93 on Nov 28, 2007 11:38 PM EST   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

College Football Coverage

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Tucsonroyal_small
Question: What percentage of teams win based on the Vegas point spread?
Javierbardem-no-country-for-old-men_small
It doesn't have to be Sunday to talk about the sham that is the BCS!
Small
OU 42 UT28
Small
College Football Question: Penn State University
Small
Tiger Walk
Small
USC Song Girls
Small
College Football Question: The Big East
Small
College Football Question: Thursday Night Football
Small
The New Location for SMQ!
Rockmnation_small
Beyond the Box Score: SEC Edition (Part Two)

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Site Meter