College Football -- Back in Action!

[Guynemer]

Highly disappointing, as you already pointed out. What was their biggest win of the season? The other majorly disappointing SEC team, LSU.

Overall, the SEC wasn't too impressive this year, outside of Bama and Florida.

[reismark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
That's doubtful as the final score against FSU doesn't really jump out at you.

A 30-point win doesn't jump out at you? Especially if compared against a (for argument's sake) tight game won on the last drive?

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Of course if they lose to OSU, forget everything because Texas Tech is going.

Which is a scenario that might put Texas in the national title game regardless of whether Tech wins or loses. (Certainly, we can agree there's no way Oklahoma is going if they don't win tonight.) Texas certainly goes if Tech loses, but if Tech wins, would it really be enough to elevate them past Texas again? If Tech had put up a fight against Oklahoma, I'd say yes, but with Tech getting killed last week and then struggling to win today against one of the worst teams in the conference, I dunno.

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I am sure that it'll be pointed out that Texas only beat OSU by 4.

And I'm sure it'll also be pointed out that Texas was playing its third (of four) top 12 opponent in a row. No one in the nation had to go through as hellish a stretch as Texas did, and that's a big part of why they deserve to go and Oklahoma doesn't.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Therefore, I don't see any reason why a big win over Florida State is less worthy than a big win over South Carolina.

[reismark]

BTW, Sloww:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
You drop Tech way too low.

Care to change that opinion after the way Tech performed today?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by reismark
A 30-point win doesn't jump out at you?

Not really. It is Florida State.

Which is a scenario that might put Texas in the national title game regardless of whether Tech wins or loses. (Certainly, we can agree there's no way Oklahoma is going if they don't win tonight.) Texas certainly goes if Tech loses, but if Tech wins, would it really be enough to elevate them past Texas again? If Tech had put up a fight against Oklahoma, I'd say yes, but with Tech getting killed last week and then struggling to win today against one of the worst teams in the conference, I dunno.

Um... Reis? If Oklahoma loses, then it stops being a 3 way tie. Which means the tiebreaker is head to head... which means Texas Tech.

And I'm sure it'll also be pointed out that Texas was playing its third (of four) top 12 opponent in a row. No one in the nation had to go through as hellish a stretch as Texas did, and that's a big part of why they deserve to go and Oklahoma doesn't.

That usually doesn't make an impression on voters. And IMO, shouldn't. I mean, it wasn't as if Missouri caused them much pain (and with the 3rd loss of the season today, definitely wasn't as good as advertised)

[reismark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Um... Reis? If Oklahoma loses, then it stops being a 3 way tie. Which means the tiebreaker is head to head... which means Texas Tech.

I said the national title game, not the Big 12 title game.

Let me restate it. First, look at where Tech is in the BCS. If Oklahoma loses tonight, Tech goes to the Big 12 title game. If they lose to Missouri, Texas is the only one-loss team left in the Big 12 and would almost surely go to the BCS championship, even not being the conference champ. If Tech *beats* Missouri, then Tech would be elevated in the BCS, but as I said in that last post, I don't know if it would be by enough to vault past Texas and into the BCS championship.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Ah, I see.... and that would be (I'd hope) another nail in the coffin of the BCS. No way that a non conference champ should be in the national title game.

[Guynemer]

It may yet happen with USC as well, although the Beavers aren't looking too good against the Ducks so far tonight.

It still chaps my ass that, despite all objective data, USC is ahead of Utah.

[reismark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Ah, I see.... and that would be (I'd hope) another nail in the coffin of the BCS. No way that a non conference champ should be in the national title game.

Nope, this one wouldn't be the BCS's fault. It would squarely be the Big 12's fault for how they apply their tiebreakers.

During one of the CBS games today, they compared the tiebreaking systems in the Big 12 & the SEC, and the SEC's is much more sensible: If it gets down to a situation where the BCS ranking is needed to break a three-way (or more) tie, the BCS ranking is used to eliminate the worst team rather than choose the best one, and then the system starts over with the two remaining teams. (This is EXACTLY how it's done in the NFL, BTW - when three teams or more are involved, the system eliminates one team at a time and then resets for the remaining teams.)

Were the Big 12 to use the SEC tiebreaker system, Tech would be eliminated based on the BCS ranking, leaving Texas & Oklahoma - and Texas would advance to the Big 12 title game based on the head-to-head win in the Red River.

[Naked Gents Rut]

It still chaps my ass that, despite all objective data, USC is ahead of Utah.

USC is the best team in the country.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well, Southern Cal does have a significantly higher Strength of Schedule than Utah does.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by reismark
Nope, this one wouldn't be the BCS's fault. It would squarely be the Big 12's fault for how they apply their tiebreakers.

During one of the CBS games today, they compared the tiebreaking systems in the Big 12 & the SEC, and the SEC's is much more sensible: If it gets down to a situation where the BCS ranking is needed to break a three-way (or more) tie, the BCS ranking is used to eliminate the worst team rather than choose the best one, and then the system starts over with the two remaining teams. (This is EXACTLY how it's done in the NFL, BTW - when three teams or more are involved, the system eliminates one team at a time and then resets for the remaining teams.)

Were the Big 12 to use the SEC tiebreaker system, Tech would be eliminated based on the BCS ranking, leaving Texas & Oklahoma - and Texas would advance to the Big 12 title game based on the head-to-head win in the Red River.

Regardless of how the Big 12 uses their tiebreakers, the BCS should not have non-conference champs playing for the big game. It is up to the conferences to decide who are their champs.

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Well, Southern Cal does have a significantly higher Strength of Schedule than Utah does.

And USC lost to Oregon State, who Utah beat.

AND, the Mountain West as a conference was 6-1 against the Pac-10 as a conference this year.

If fact, it would be a pretty easy argument to make that the MWC was the third best conference in the country this year, following the Big 12 (#1 by a country mile) and the SEC.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Guynemer
And USC lost to Oregon State, who Utah beat.

AND, the Mountain West as a conference was 6-1 against the Pac-10 as a conference this year.

If fact, it would be a pretty easy argument to make that the MWC was the third best conference in the country this year, following the Big 12 (#1 by a country mile) and the SEC.

According to Sagarin's rankings, USC had the 30th strongest schedule this year. Utah had the 74th.

[Guynemer]

So what? Utah won all their games, including a game against a team that beat USC, a team that may end up the Pac-10 champ.

Should the teams 1-29 in the Sagarin SOS rankings should be ahead of USC in the BCS?