BCS Rankings: LSU and Alabama in a Title Rematch; How Oklahoma State Lost; Bizarreness Everywhere Else
by cocknfire on Dec 4, 2011 10:00 PM EST
in SEC Football
Email
Print
By the time the BCS rankings were officially announced, it was something of a dud. We had all already heard that Alabama and LSU were headed for a rematch and that some bizarre bowl selections might be in the offing. But we still had not seen the final BCS Top 10, and how many other SEC teams might have made a cut that wouldn't matter with the Tigers and the Tide taking up the two bowl spots.
Turns out, there were two more teams not only in the Top 14 -- the cutoff for at-large eligibility -- but the Top 10, in the form of 10-win teams Arkansas and South Carolina. That was, by far, the most among any conference in the final regular-season edition.
1 LSU
2 Alabama
3 Oklahoma State
4 Stanford
5 Oregon
6 Arkansas
7 Boise State
8 Kansas State
9 South Carolina
10 Wisconsin
Full rankings here.
If having four teams in the BCS Top 10 isn't an argument for lifting the two-team cap, I don't know what is. Then again, the rest of the country is already sick of us for having two teams in the BCS National Championship Game, so maybe it's all for the best.
In any case, let's break down the Alabama vs. Oklahoma State matchup, which turned out something like this:
| Team | Coaches Rank | Coaches Score | Harris Rank | Harris Score | A&H | Billingsley | Colley | Massey | Sagarin | Wolfe | CPU Rank | CPU Score | BCS |
| Alabama | 2 | .9485 | 2 | .9471 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | .930 | .9419 |
| Okla St. | 3 | .9268 | 3 | .9231 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | .950 | .9333 |
As we had kind of surmised after Oklahoma State lost to Iowa State, it boiled down to whether the Cowboys could build up a big lead over the Tide in the computers and then divide the human vote closely enough to swing the results. And they came close, just not close enough to get into the national title game.
In fact, the Tide won the human polls in a landslide, picking up almost 99 percent of their possible points once LSU swept the No. 1 vote. Alabama got 2,723 points, compared to 2,760 points if they had swept the second-place votes, in the Harris Poll (98.7 percent). And the Tide got 1,399 points of 1,416 points in the coaches' poll (98.8), coasting past the Pokes in both polls.
There was actually not a bunch of really bizarre stuff in the Top 10 -- as you can see -- but things got fun later in the rankings. Virginia Tech remains ranked No. 11 in part thanks to the human voters, who are apparently all blind. The computers, who have the excuse of not being able to watch the games or take margin of victory into account, at least had the Hokies down at No. 13 on the combined ballot. But the humans put the Hokies at No. 11 despite the fact that they got clobbered twice by Clemson ... ranked 14th by the humans.
But wait -- there's more. Oklahoma clocks in at No. 14 this week. That one's on the computers; the humans had the Sooners 19th, but the chips put them at seventh overall. Seventh. They're ahead of Oregon. That helped cost TCU its spot in the Top 16, which would have given the Horned Frogs a likely Sugar Bowl berth, sparing us -- well, we'll get to that in a moment.
And then things got really, really strange. Texas is No. 24 despite having seven combined points in the human polls. Which is appropriate, because the Longhorns only have seven wins this year. But the computers' googly-eyes for the Big 12 goes to ridiculous heights in this one: Only Billingsley has Texas unranked, and two of the computer polls put the Longhorns at No. 13. Yes, Richard Billingsley has become the voice of reason among the BCS chips.
Auburn, which got not a point from the coaches' poll, still rounds out the poll at No. 25. Colley is the only computer that doesn't rank the Tigers, and Sagarin has them 14th. If you wanted to know why Sagarin wants little to do with the ELO_CHESS results, that's your answer.
But the most bizarre stuff had less to do with the rankings than on one of the bowl matches they produced. Our final BCS bowl projections were pretty close, but we apparently used too much logic on one of the guesses.
| Bowl | TSK Projection | Actual Matchup |
| BCS NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP | LSU vs. Alabama | LSU vs. Alabama |
| ROSE | Oregon vs. Wisconsin | Oregon vs. Wisconsin |
| FIESTA | Oklahoma State vs. Stanford | Oklahoma State vs. Stanford |
| SUGAR | Michigan vs. Kansas State | Michigan vs. Virginia Tech |
| ORANGE | Clemson vs. West Virginia | Clemson vs. West Virginia |
Yes, Virginia Tech somehow turned a 28-point shellacking against Clemson into an invitation to take on an arguably better opponent in what should be a higher-profile game. And that was the second time Clemson defeated them this year.
We'll have more analysis on all of the SEC bowl games later on, and much more over the next several weeks. But for now, it's hard to argue that the BCS system is not in some way broken -- and maybe irretrievably. Even a rematch opponent ought to be able to see that, right now, that's really the least of the BCS' problems.
48 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The rest of the country would rather watch Arkansas or South Carolina
than Virginia Tech, Clemson, or West Virginia. This is literally the worst Sugar Bowl matchup in my lifetime. I have zero interest in seeing a Michigan team that barely cleared the bar for BCS eligibility face a team with a ceiling of #6 in the SEC.
- is neither hyperbole nor trolling. I am confident that VPI could not defeat the top 5 of the SEC, and not entirely certain the Hokies could overcome Mississippi State or Vanderbilt. This is a team that struggled with Duke. Read that sentence again. They have one zero top 25 wins, and twice lost convincingly to the only ranked team on their schedule, a team that was blasted by South Carolina the previous week.
Virginia Tech the worst at large selection of the BCS era, and it is not even close. At least those Maryland/Wake/Pitt/Clemson teams were forced upon the bowls.
Non-affiliated fans would rather see a quality opponent. Boise State or TCU would get higher ratings, as would Arkansas or South Carolina. If nothing else, the rest of the nation would tune in in hopes of seeing Denard Robinson blow up on an SEC foe. No one outside of the Commonwealth of Virginia gives a rat’s ass about watching these Hokies.
"Lattimore, as the kids can say, can ball, and sometimes does it to the extent one might say [he] is out of control in his balling." - Spencer Hall
by GwinnettGamecock on Dec 4, 2011 10:33 PM EST reply actions
Stupid auto formatting changed "#6" to a 1 and indented
"Lattimore, as the kids can say, can ball, and sometimes does it to the extent one might say [he] is out of control in his balling." - Spencer Hall
by GwinnettGamecock on Dec 4, 2011 10:34 PM EST up reply actions
Beg to differ
The Sugar Bowl of Georgia v. Hawaii was the worse Sugar Bowl in the BCS era. At least. Michigan – V Tech has partial doubt as to the eventual winner.
this is true, albeit not much of a recommendation
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 5, 2011 12:11 AM EST up reply actions
That Sugar Bowl was funny and entertaining for many SEC fans
"Lattimore, as the kids can say, can ball, and sometimes does it to the extent one might say [he] is out of control in his balling." - Spencer Hall
by GwinnettGamecock on Dec 5, 2011 12:57 AM EST up reply actions
you hush your mouth about that Sugar Bowl
you and my bookie are the only ones that still bitch about it. One of those a year and I could quit this job.
nemo me impune lacessit
I also submit for your consideration...
… Florida vs. a Brian Kelly-less Cincinnati.
Editor, Dawg Sports.
Go Dawgs!
by vineyarddawg on Dec 5, 2011 10:11 AM EST up reply actions
The LSU/Notre Dame and LSU/Illinois games were great as well...
"Never start a fight with an old man...if he's too old to fight, he'll probably just kill you."
The rumor is
in the new contract, the BCS will only manage the NCG, and the other bowls will be managed by their respective committees. That should limit these kinds of situations in the future.
Rammer Jammer Yellow Hammer Give 'Em HELL Alabama!
by RoscoeOfAlabama on Dec 4, 2011 11:11 PM EST reply actions
I can't believe VT and Michigan got in.
that makes Two ACC teams? I DO NOT get the love for the big 12…one bit. Why did K state get left out?
uh, the Big 12 didn't get an at-large, despite being the deepest conference in the country
what love?
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 5, 2011 12:01 AM EST up reply actions
Did you read CocknFires post.
They got love. OU stayed ahead of Oregon and Texas even after getting their salad tossed against baylor stayed in the top 25.
ah, sorry
thought you were referring to selectors, not computers.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 5, 2011 12:39 AM EST up reply actions
and I don't really mind the Big 12 love
I think the Big 12 is really good this year. I mind the Oregon hate, and I find it ridiculous that Texas keeps staying ahead of Missouri. Missouri is a borderline top 25 team this year. Texas lost to Missouri 17-5. yet which one is getting top 25 votes?
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 5, 2011 12:45 AM EST up reply actions
Can anyone think of a worse at-large pick than Virginia Tech? Ever?
Not sure whether Boise or K-State got screwed, but one of them did.
Also, I’m mad at the Cotton Bowl for ruining my dream matchup of Arkansas/Oklahoma by picking a team that lost 58-17 to Oklahoma. At home.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 5, 2011 12:00 AM EST reply actions
I don't like BSU
but they should have been there instead of VT. VT basically had the same SOS of BSU.
You can make an argument that Boise's toughest two games (UGA, TCU) were tougher than either of VT's toughest (Clemson)
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 5, 2011 12:40 AM EST up reply actions
And that argument would be correct.
"Lattimore, as the kids can say, can ball, and sometimes does it to the extent one might say [he] is out of control in his balling." - Spencer Hall
by GwinnettGamecock on Dec 5, 2011 12:58 AM EST up reply actions
Without the AQ and 2-team limits
I imagine we’d see something like this:
BCS NCG: LSU vs. Alabama
Sugar: Arkansas vs. Kansas State
Orange: South Carolina vs. Boise State
Rose: Oregon vs. Wisconsin
Fiesta: Oklahoma State vs. Stanford
As for what we’re getting…I simply have no words. Virginia Tech has not traveled well to a game further than the Peach Bowl in years. The 2007 & 2008 ACCCGs were jokes, and the 2008, 2009, & especially 2011 Orange Bowls did not have good sales on the Hokies’ side.
As you point out, the fact that Billingsley has become the voice of reason means something is seriously screwed up here. How did the computers put Oklahoma seventh after they got shellacked by Oklahoma State? And the margin of victory computation doesn’t help; Sagarin has OU fourth with that added in.
On the flip side, the two conferences which benefited the most from the BCS this year are the SEC and ACC, the only two conferences to support a plus-one the last time it was brought up. Jim Delany might want to consider that before he begins blasting away at these bowl games. (Chuck Neinas gets a pass since he wasn’t commissioner then.)
even the 2009 Peach Bowl was mostly orange
and I don’t mean VT orange.
as far as Oklahoma goes, they beat a top fifteen team by 41 points on the road and shellacked a couple other borderline top 25 teams. That’ll help you in computers. Helps them in my own perception too—I just can’t put Kansas State ahead of the Sooners. Our preliminary BlogPoll ballot at RTT has Oklahoma 9th.
Also, without the AQ and 2-team limits, how can you say Boise gets picked ahead of VT and Michigan? Haven’t we proven that isn’t the case?
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 5, 2011 1:40 AM EST up reply actions
I was assuming replacing it with a top 10 rule.
But I never managed to get that into my post. A top 10 rule would probably never get past the Pac-12 and Big Ten anyways because of the Rose Bowl.
Also, I can’t really see who the Orange Bowl would pick over Boise. Michigan maybe? VT is a constant disappointment. If they took USC, they probably wouldn’t take Clemson. Boise might be a better ratings draw than Baylor.
by BrotherFlounder on Dec 5, 2011 1:52 AM EST up reply actions
they'd take Michigan in a heartbeat
TV sets and travel
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 5, 2011 1:54 AM EST up reply actions
The Pac-12 and Big Ten have agreed in principal to a Plus One
So long as the Big Ten/Pac-12 are always paired up. Every five years, the Rose Bowl would get to host the plus one game.
Especially after the travesty of this year’s 1 vs. 2 pairing, the plus one will be a reality before too much longer.
when they say "paired up"
does this mean “paired up conditional on each conference having a team in the top four”? It was a little ambiguous
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 5, 2011 1:48 AM EST up reply actions
I think
that they want the Rose Bowl to be exempt from being one of the semifinal games but have Pasadena host the National Championship every 5 years. Except in years where the Big 10 and Pac-12 champs are in the top 4, and the Rose Bowl would host the semifinal game. It’s very confusing.
by BrotherFlounder on Dec 5, 2011 1:59 AM EST up reply actions
I think that’s almost right. The way I read it, the Rose Bowl forfeits any right to a semifinal game. Ever. However, in return, it gets a Big Ten vs Pac 12 pairing every year, and every 5 years it gets to host the championship game.
This scenario is a lot like what would happen if the Big Ten or Pac 12 teams were in the NC game currently. If one or both is in the top 4, they’re replaced by the runner-ups in the Rose Bowl while the champions go on to the semifinal games.
Actually, I'd be ok with it if the Rose Bowl hosted the championship game every year.
It’s the oldest bowl and the one with the most history. With the size of LA, it is also the easiest of the big bowl sites to get a hotel room or a decent flight into.
Either that, or have it in Dallas. That stadium has the highest capacity of any non-college stadium. It would seem you’d want to get as many people into the national title game as possible. It’s also in a great location.
Me, too.
Kleph would have to write a sequel.
"The same things win today that have always won, and they will win years from now. The only difference is the losers have a whole new bunch of excuses why they don’t win or can’t win."-Bear Bryant
Robot Chicken Star Wars should be canon.
by the thin red line on Dec 5, 2011 7:28 AM EST up reply actions
Either that or open it up for bids like the Super Bowl.
Like you say, the Rose Bowl is unquestionably the most historic bowl, and it’s still one of the best. (It’s also the only bowl I really have an interest in going to just to see it once.) And if it were the permanent host, I’d probably be okay with that.
But I’d much rather see them open the game up for bids, even by cities which don’t normally host bowls (like Indianapolis) or host non-BCS bowls (like Atlanta, Dallas, Charlotte, and Tampa). It would help to erode the monopoly that the BCS bowls have over the sport right now.
by BrotherFlounder on Dec 5, 2011 4:23 PM EST up reply actions
The BCS
You will get no argument from me that LSU has earned its current ranking, nor that Alabama belongs somewhere in the top 5. But as someone in the comments of Bobothevol’s fan post pointed out, Alabama’s chief claim to #2 is that they didn’t get blown out by LSU…at home. That is a pretty thin basis for their selection.
And its substance may be represented by little more than the fact that Alabama is the only team not named Northwestern St. or Western Kentucky to have not lost the turnover battle against LSU, having broken even. LSU’s otherwise statistically inferior game against Oregon compared to the final score does much and more to illustrate the power of turnovers, and based on the season’s trajectory, simply breaking even may constitute a reversal of fortune for this LSU team. Still, you need look no further than OkSt vs Iowa St to discover how fickle and unreliable a path to success that can be. Meaning, if Alabama isn’t up to matching LSU in turnovers in the rematch, or if LSU finally loses its edge, it could get as ugly as Arkansas. My money is on the former.
One final note. The content you all put out is excellent, but even as you point out the ridiculous results the final BCS standings produced you continue to appeal to that authority as evidence for the SEC’s superiority. Just an observation.
The final BCS rankings are yet further evidence that additional money and exposure should flow to the SEC:
If having four teams in the BCS Top 10 isn’t an argument for lifting the two-team cap, I don’t know what is. Then again, the rest of the country is already sick of us for having two teams in the BCS National Championship Game, so maybe it’s all for the best.Except when the BCS rankings are not merely inscrutable, but wildly off-base:
….Virginia Tech remains ranked No. 11 in part thanks to the human voters, who are apparently all blind. The computers, who have the excuse of not being able to watch the games or take margin of victory into account, at least had the Hokies down at No. 13 on the combined ballot. But the humans put the Hokies at No. 11 despite the fact that they got clobbered twice by Clemson … ranked 14th by the humans.
But wait — there’s more. Oklahoma clocks in at No. 14 this week. That one’s on the computers; the humans had the Sooners 19th, but the chips put them at seventh overall. Seventh. They’re ahead of Oregon. That helped cost TCU its spot in the Top 16, which would have given the Horned Frogs a likely Sugar Bowl berth, sparing us — well, we’ll get to that in a moment.
And then things got really, really strange. Texas is No. 24 despite having seven combined points in the human polls. Which is appropriate, because the Longhorns only have seven wins this year. But the computers’ googly-eyes for the Big 12 goes to ridiculous heights in this one: Only Billingsley has Texas unranked, and two of the computer polls put the Longhorns at No. 13. Yes, Richard Billingsley has become the voice of reason among the BCS chips.
Auburn, which got not a point from the coaches’ poll, still rounds out the poll at No. 25.
Other than the idea that a team should win it's conference to get into the title game...
What is the basis for saying OSU is better than Alabama? Anyone who says Bama’s claim to fame this year was not getting blown out by LSU hasn’t watched very much college football this year.
Alabama destroyed every one of its opponents with the exception of LSU. LSU destroyed every one of its opponents with the exception of Bama. In fact, Bama played the overall better game against LSU and lost because of its own miscues…..and no, I am not saying LSU didn’t deserve to win. LSU is the unanimous #1 and they should be. If we agree that they are #1 then some credence should be given to how other teams played.
Obviously, OSU is very good team and I would love it if more teams got a shot at the BCS title. The BCS is certainly flawed, but no one wants to make any concrete argument that the accolades that the SEC has received this year are unwarranted. The SEC isn’t as good as it normally is top to bottom this year, but it appears the same could be said for all the other major conferences out there. I’ve seen a lot of bad football by teams that people say are the in the top tier of their respective leagues. There is no league that has an exception to that this year.
The SEC has in large part dominated the national championship game the last 5 years and until our league proves otherwise, there should be credence given to that as well. Any argument that OSU is better than Bama is arbitrary. If someone else out there has a good reason then I’d like to hear it, but I haven’t seen anyone come up with one yet.
OSU beat better teams
I think that’s been the general argument, at least. Resume vs. Eyeball test, essentially.
In all kinds of weather we'll all stick together
I think it's actually superior losses vs superior wins (or quantity of good wins)
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 5, 2011 8:28 AM EST up reply actions
Incipient_Senescence has it right
But I’ll add on anyway.
Yes, that is the Alabama claim to fame, or at least inclusion in the NC game. Bobothevol wrote an entire fan post about it. Typing here I can’t remember whether or not you spoke up in support of it or not. Nonetheless, it basically went, Alabama deserves to be in the national championship because everyone else blew their chances…worse. The force of that argument is that Oklahoma State, despite being an undisputed conference champion in the #1 or #2 conference, despite playing (and beating) seven teams with winning records to Alabama’s three, and five teams in the BCS Top 25 to Bama’s two, had a loss so egregious in comparison to Alabama’s that every other advantage on OSU’s resume should be ignored.
If Alabama were a conference champion, I think I could go along with that. But not only did they fall short of that standard, they were runner-up in their division too.
Part of the problem is that Arkansas, Bama’s premier win, looks mostly like a paper tiger razorback, not just for the margins of its defeat against the two undisputed heavyweights on its schedule but also the margins of its victories against its weakest opponents. Even Kentucky beat Ole Miss by more in Oxford. Moreover, Arky’s two best victories came against one team that has just fired its coach and another who lost its best player and legitimate game-changer to a torn ACL two weeks prior to them playing. Which leaves 9-3 Penn St, who also fired its coach this year (albeit for very different reasons). Still, looking at Penn St.’s schedule, I count two wins over I-A teams with winning records: Temple and Iowa. Not too impressive.
This year’s Bama team reminds me of nothing so much as 2008 USC, who may have been the only other team this decade with a defense approaching Bama’s ability. But because they blew their chance @ Oregon St (a weekend or two before Florida blew its shot at home against Ole Miss) and the Pac was worse than is typical, their SOS was not enough to carry them into the top two slots so they “settled” for the Rose Bowl. The point being, sometimes if you F*** up, you don’t get a do over.
The SEC has in large part dominated the national championship game the last 5 years…
Exactly. And how have they earned it? By beating other conferences’ champions, over and over again.
..and until our league proves otherwise, there should be credence given to that as well.
And how will other leagues prove otherwise if they aren’t given a chance to play the SEC’s titans? Or have we passed that point and are now just in a feedback loop?
Any argument that OSU is better than Bama is arbitrary.
I’m not really arguing that OSU is better than Bama right now, but I think they are more deserving.
You are right about one thing though:
…hasn’t watched very much college football this year.
Damn Fall Weddings.
by Nashville on Dec 5, 2011 11:40 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I must have missed bobthevol's post.
Anyway, I think we have to go to the final breakdown of the BCS poll:
Alabama defeated 3 top 25 teams( #6 Arkansas 38-14, #22 Penn State 27-11, #25 Auburn 42-14)
OSU defeated 4 top 25 teams (#8 Kansas State 52-45 which is not as convincing as Bama’s top win, #12 Baylor 59-24, #14 Oklahoma 44-10, #24 Texas 38-26 which is solid but not dominate)
Looking at the Big 12 overall this year you see that the entire conference didn’t really have any strong OOC wins. The SEC had several which again lends credence to the fact that the SEC is strongest overall.
Alabama had a key OOC victory over Penn State which up until a couple of weeks ago had only one loss(Bama) and was well on its way to playing for the B1G title. I’m not saying they would have won it, but you have to think all the distractions played a role in their late season demise. OSU, by contrast, didn’t play any significant OOC competition. They played 4-8 Arizona who shortly thereafter fired their coach. Their best OOC win came against 8-4 Tulsa and while that’s nice that they had a winning record they also lost to every good team they played. They are C-USA after all and you can’t hang your hat on beating a team like that.
OSU defeated 8 teams that had at least 6 wins and 2 of those were Tulsa and La-Lafayette. Alabama defeated 7 teams with at least 6 wins and one of them was Ga Southern. So, both Bama and OSU defeated 6 BCS teams with at least 6 wins.
The only real overlap we have in OSU and Bama’s schedule this year is not a common opponent, but a Big 12/SEC match-up in Arkansas and A&M. OSU beat A&M by 1 point while Arkansas had a 4 point win. Not much difference there and you have to forgive me for thinking that Arkansas was good enough to win the Big 12 this year, but they had the misfortune of playing in a better conference.
With all that said, I would have still favored OSU going over Bama had OSU gone undefeated, but they lost to 6-6 Iowa State. That’s the same Iowa State team that needed a last minute TD to pull out a 1 point win over Northern Iowa and also only beat a hapless Kansas team by a FG. By contrast, Bama did not struggle in any serious way with inferior competition. Bama’s close loss to LSU does help Bama in a way and it should, but I don’t see how OSU has a better resume than Bama.
First of all, neither Texas nor Auburn should count as a Top 25 team just because of computers that can’t take MOV into account, but that about cancels out.
Second, I didn’t believe that Penn State was very good at that point of the season and I don’t now. They might be the worst nine-win team in the country right now, and that includes mid-majors.
It’s a bit ridiculous to compare Tulsa and Louisiana-Lafayette, who are decent mid-majors and FBS teams, to Georgia Southern, which is an FCS team.
I don’t think that victory chains should be taken into account, at least not by isolating three games from the rest of the evidence we have. But that’s a personal opinion.
Either team would have been deserving of the spot in the national championship game. I still don’t see why people seem to think that Bama’s case is overwhelming.
Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.
although I was Team OSU, I agree with this
Either team would have been deserving of the spot in the national championship game
I thought Alabama’s case was overwhelming until this weekend, because OSU hadn’t shown that they weren’t all offense. But they held Oklahoma to 3 meaningful points (it was 44-3 after three quarters). Oklahoma scored 38+ in NINE of twelve games this year. They won by double digits in both other instances that they were held in the 20s. Both their other losses came when they scored 38 points. Holding Oklahoma’s offense down is pretty impressive in my book, and it’s what shifted my opinion. Not that OSU’s defense is better than Bama’s (or even close), but it’s good enough to put them in the national championship when coupled with that offense.
That said, it’s still a very, very tough call, and I’m not sure how some people seem to see it so clearly one way or the other.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 5, 2011 7:13 PM EST up reply actions
I’m on board with that. For me the defining difference is that Oklahoma St won its conference outright and as you and CF note, did so with a more impressive resume. But Alabama is a damn good team all the same.
As to OkSt’s defensive capabilities, Oregon had a terrible ‘statistical’ defense last year, but on a per play basis it was not all that bad. Proof being that defense held Auburn without a TD in the second half and to one its season lows in points (I think Miss St actually held them to lower). Oklahoma St has a similar tempo and number of offensive plays, which is why total defense is not the best means by which to evaluate them. Also, though there’s a fair component of luck there, the Cowboys have an even more opportunistic defense than does LSU, which is probably their real secret. If you miss a possession or two against that offense, it is very, very difficult to catch-up without creating a few of your own.
I don't know necessarily that AU or Texas should count as top 25 either, but if we are going to use top 25 wins as a measure then we have to use the top 25.
One could also say that Penn State isn’t that good. I don’t particularly think anyone in the Big 12 is that good with the exception of OSU. If we are going to go by the eye test than I still say Bama is better than OSU regardless of who either of the teams played.
I don’t think it’s ridiculous to compare Ga Southern, who is one of the best 1-AA teams, with La Lafayette who is in the Sun Belt. Is there really any measurable difference in the level of competition there? Teams on those levels pretty much recruit the same players. You are about as likely to see a good 1-AA team upset a BCS team as you are one of the schools in the lower ranks of the FBS. See the fact that Northern Iowa almost took out Iowa State.
I’m not really comparing Tulsa to Ga Southern, but the point I was trying to make is that giving OSU a lot of credit for beating a CUSA team with a winning record doesn’t hold much water. Does anyone think that Tulsa would hold their own in a BCS conference? I don’t. So, in that vein I don’t really see why it matters that Tulsa has 8 wins against a bunch of bad teams.
I don’t necessarily think victory chains should be taken into account either unless a consistent pattern can be established. In that case, I think it becomes much more relevant. Big 12 teams didn’t really attempt to play much strong OOC competition this year. OU played FSU and A&M played Arkansas and that’s about it. I think it’s pretty well established that the SEC is stronger overall than the Big 12 is. The Big 12 has done nothing this year to demonstrate otherwise.
I agree that OSU was deserving of a spot in the national title game. I’ve never said Bama’s case is overwhelming. What I don’t understand is the people that say OSU is the clear cut choice.
it's difficult to compare schedules because of lack of common opponents
but I think Oklahoma State may have 5 wins more impressive than Bama’s 2nd best win (Penn State). Oklahoma, Baylor, and K-State are obviously better. Texas A&M kinda spiraled out of control towards the end of the season, but OSU played them when they were top ten (which I think was overrated), a week before they played Arkansas within 4 points (which I think accurately shows their ability level) and three weeks before they beat (now #15) Baylor by 27 (which also shows their ability level). Penn State’s best win is 20-14 over a 6-6 Ohio State team. That or 13-3 over a 7-5 Iowa team (that lost to Iowa State). Personally, I’m more impressed by Missouri shutting down Texas 17-5 than either of those, and I’d put the Tigers ahead of the Nittany Lions.
Obviously Alabama has a better loss, but people are dismissing Iowa State too quickly. They aren’t a terrible team. They’re an inconsistent team, but their resume is roughly on par with someone like Auburn. If Alabama were 11-1 with a loss to Auburn, they’d still have a strong argument. So Oklahoma State’s loss to Iowa State can’t be the thing that knocks them out
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 5, 2011 7:09 PM EST up reply actions
Well, we're talking about 2 different situations.
If Alabama was 11-1 with a loss to Auburn then that means they would have also beaten LSU. In that case they would have gone to the SEC championship and probably beaten UGA. In that case, they would probably be a consensus #1 and would have beaten as many top 25 teams as OSU has.
I don’t think it’s obvious at all that the Big 12 teams you listed are better than Penn State. In that case as well there are not very many common opponents. The Big 12 as a whole played a pretty weak OOC slate this year. They didn’t give us much opportunity to judge them against the best.
As I said before, if we are going to go by the eye test then I think it’s clear that Bama is better than OSU and maybe that is my subjective opinion. It is also the subjective opinion of others that the teams OSU beat are clearly superior to the teams that Bama beat.
I’ve never thought Bama’s case is overwhelming. I’m not sure I’ve heard even Bama fans say that. What I have disagreed with though is the idea that OSU’s case is overwhelming. We keep hearing people say OSU has a better resume and there hasn’t been any case made for that other than the subjective “I think this team is better than that team” or the arbitrary “you have to win your conference.”
Personally, I’d prefer some type of playoff to settle questions like this.
I certainly don't think OSU's case is overwhelming
it’s damn near even, with perhaps a slight edge to the ’Pokes
Of course the Auburn case provides a different situation, but it shows what it was meant to show. If good wins would make an 11-1 Alabama team the consensus #1 even with a loss to Auburn, then a loss to Iowa State can’t be the thing that sends Oklahoma State out of the picture.
I agree that it’s hard to judge Penn State vs the Big 12, but that’s not because of the Big 12 schedule, it’s because of Penn State’s schedule. The best team they beat was Ohio State. But I’ve been a Penn State skeptic all year, and if we go by quality wins, they definitely have no argument over A&M, Missouri, or Kansas State.
Heel for school, Vol for life!
Bolts, Preds, Canes (childhood team, home state team, hometown team). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity!
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 6, 2011 10:48 AM EST up reply actions
Fall weddings definitely suck.
All my friends plan around football season though….even the women….so it’s usually not a problem.
The final BCS rankings are yet further evidence that additional money and exposure should flow to the SEC …
Except when the BCS rankings are not merely inscrutable, but wildly off-base:
Which would be nice, if that really resembled what I had said. My point was merely that if you’re going to use this formula to determine the eligibility for BCS bowls, and one conference has four teams in the Top 10 of that formula, then it’s a little bit ridiculous to say that only half of those teams should be allowed to appear in the pool of 10 teams that go to the BCS bowls. It can still be a horribly flawed formula, but you should have to follow the formula with more consistency if that’s going to be the basis for seeding the bowls.
And I doubt that Virginia Tech’s ranking would have affected anything if Arkansas would have been available for the Sugar Bowl.
Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.
Which would be nice, if that really resembled what I had said. My point was merely that if you’re going to use this formula to determine the eligibility for BCS bowls, and one conference has four teams in the Top 10 of that formula, then it’s a little bit ridiculous to say that only half of those teams should be allowed to appear in the pool of 10 teams that go to the BCS bowls.
On the one hand there’s not much you can really argue with here, right? All the teams agreed to play by the rules of the BCS and if its black box produces 4 teams from one conference in the top 10, then it is almost punitive that only two of those teams would be permitted to participate in the 5 highest profile games.
But while I find points of agreement with your overall premise, I think it’s a little odd that you readily accept the errors outside of the top 10 of the BCS but don’t think mistakes could have occurred anywhere else. More precisely, I don’t accept that all teams have an equal likelihood of upside/downside error, which in my view is the necessary condition for accepting your conclusion. There is a tremendous amount of shared error in the human polls. Some teams are most certainly the beneficiary of the conferences in which they play.
But leaving the above possibility aside, I really think there’s another reason not to allow more than 2 teams from a given conference and it’s illustrated by nothing better than Virginia Tech’s selection this year. For the bowls, this is a business, but for the teams, it’s supposed to be a reward. Those two incentives do not align. If you start to allow more than two teams from one conference into BCS games, you will find that teams with worthier seasons but lesser traditions or fan bases will consistently be excluded in favor of those that do. And that would really be a mistake.
I was wrong...
LSU is far superior to UGA.
Carry on.
Oh, and I hope the Tigers smack the Tide around in the championship.
Tiger bait!
GATA!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
