All Forums | College Football

This committe is completely lost

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 11382
Posts: 176
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2006
Posts: 1441
Posted: #151
Anyone that takes head to head matchups as the sole factor in ranking teams is mentally lazy. I think debate is healthy and despite all the frustration good for the sport. We wouldn't be here in this thread if we all did not on some level enjoy the debate. I happen to be one that has tcu ahead of Baylor right now and that is coming from an Oklahoma fan. That doesn't mean I can't understand and appreciate the other side of the debate. Having said that , I can make a better case for Baylor than the person that simply says they won head to head and all else is moot. It is a 12 game season that cannot be simplified into one game. It isnt fair to either team. And further, knowing the season is not over yet, it would be foolish for me to sit here and say there is no way as the season progresses that I won't change my mind on Baylor or tcu.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and all opinions should be respected. I have no issues with the committee so long as they stay consistent. Nothing they have done so far cannot be explained by an intelligent person. That does not mean other intelligent people will always agree.

When you boil it all down this is a gambling website. The best part about gambling is that when you disagree with something or someone regarding the strength of a team you have the ability to try and make money off that belief.

With regard to arguing over fsu and Oregon, if they both win out there is a good chance you will all get to try and make money backing the team you are so strongly arguing for in this thread. Until then let's not all act like our own opinions and those that are like minded are the only valid opinions on this board. But at the same time, let's not be lazy and resort to name calling as opposed to further supporting that opinion in an intelligent manner.

Keep up the healthy conversation and remember why we are all here. Many will disagree with my thoughts above and I am happy to discuss my opinions further with anyone who wants more healthy debate especially as it relates to certain teams and how I can support the committee on their current rankings.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 2005
Posted: #152

Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:

You have to take into account what being the reigning champ means.....which is you are a target and get EVERYONES best shot. Miss St, TCU, Baylor.....no one expects them to keep winning (until now of course)....

THIS is an excellent point and I agree.  At what point though does this just turn into an excuse for a team that just isn't elite?  I mean even if you DO get everyone's best shot, against some teams, that shouldn't matter.  If FSU is really elite, certain teams "best" shot should still just be a shrug off the shoulder?  Personally, I can let one or two close games against worthy opponents slide like against Louisville, Clemson...but a 6 point win against a mediocre Okie St?  37-12 against citadel?  At best that should be the HALFTIME score.  NCST. was a 4 point game into the 4th.  14 point win vs. the cavs? 

On a smaller scale, can/should this logic be applied to Oregon getting the entire P12's best shot since they are the standard bearer?  Specifically against an above average, live dog (cats?) in AZ who has a marquee Thursday primetime game to show what they are made of?

This is college football, where mediocre teams can elevate their play for 4 quarters against a worthy foe.... 

So, you have the reigning champ and unbeaten Florida St, from a Power 5 conference (we arent talking WAC or Sunbelt here) behind Oregon, who lost by 35 points, @ home to a team the were supposed to beat by 3 tds....thats a 56 point swing for the #2 team in the nation.... 

I may not articulate this point correctly...but do you think AZ should have been and would be NOW a 24 point underdog?  If so, then how does that relate to Oregon? 

If -24 is because AZ is that bad, are you saying that AZ is roughly the same quality as Syracuse?  FSU was -24 against the orangemen.  AZ is probably a big step up from the Cuse right?  Maybe a smaller step up from UVA, who were +21 against the Seminoles?

Then OTOH, if it's because UO is THAT GOOD, -24 against a quality team like AZ, isn't that strong justification that UO is just as good if not better than FSU?  I understand lines aren't a true indicator of comparative team strength etc..but roughly, if you stand by that 24 point spread, I think that's more an argument that UO>FSU, even if it's only slightly.  AZ>UVA>Syracuse....

Then, they got TCU ahead of Baylor, who beat they SU. Sure it was @ Baylor. However, like Al Davis said "Just win baby." Head to head HAS TO BE THE DECIDING FACTOR if you are gonna have a "selection committee" as its the ONLY THING THAT ISNT DEBATABLE.....Team A and Team B are otherwise equal....Team A beat Team B....I know, lets send Team B JUST BECAUSE WE THINK THEY ARE BETTER....Say what!!??

Does that sound right? If the answer is yes, I am no longer able to continue this discussion.

How you put it of course it's not right...but I disagree that ALL THINGS ARE EQUAL between TCU and Baylor.  They haven't played the exact same teams/venues and they did not play each other on a neutral field.  TCU HASN'T lost to a 6-4 WV team that couldn't even beat TEXAS.  TCU was able to go to Morgantown and BEAT WVU, something Baylor was unable to do in a 14 point loss.  If this was last game of the season, TCU/Baylor both 11-0 playing the same teams, I'd fully agree with head to head is the trump card.

You make good points bro...and in the end, it boils down to a subjective opinion on how much weight we give all the factors.  TBH, I really haven't thought too much about Oregon and where they belong prior to this post, mainly because it's too early.  You can make strong arguments either way...me personally, I'd put FSU ahead of Oregon but understand why they aren't.  FSU DOES just win so it's hard to discount them.

The common theme, and I totally agree, it's too dang early to be setting these rankings and we shouldn't get our panties in a bunch over them.  It will most likely work itself out.  But at least it leads to good discussion.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 2005
Posted: #153

One last point...if UO is to be judged solely on their one loss of the season, then shouldn't Baylor be held to that same standard?  Why shouldn't Baylor be docked MAJOR points for losing to a 1 game above .500 team in WVU?  UNRANKED both currently and at the time 6-4 WVU.  WVU that just lost to Texas by 3 possessions (doesn't matter that it was @texas right?? a loss is a loss correct regardless of venue?).

Seems like the arguments being made as to why UO shouldn't be above FSU can and should be applied to Baylor v. TCU. 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 2005
Posted: #154
@train.....missed this before...but who did Oregon lose to by 35 points at home this year? 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2011
Posts: 204
Posted: #155
But boom tcu beat w Virginia.     Jk!    
This has been entertaining to read.  It's like that game never existed because of our West Virginia flop.   The next 3 games will hopefully clear things up.   Our d is not the d rg3 had much improved. 
Good luck with this week.  
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2010
Posts: 1636
Posted: #156
Or, maybe, juuuuuust maybe we have all seen these teams play.. And we truly believe that a 2 loss team could be better than an undefeated team ? FSU has not impressed anyone... They have the easiest schedule known to CFB and they're barely getting by.. Nobody questioned them last year cause they were beating these teams by 40-50 points... Just heard a guy on the radio say "why does FSU have to be in the top 4, if they lose they'll fall outta the top 10-12, does that sound like a top 4 team" ? 

I agree with the Baylor / TCU argument ! There's no way TCU should be in front of Baylor.. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2010
Posts: 1962
Posted: #157

Quote Originally Posted by naesiy:

One last point...if UO is to be judged solely on their one loss of the season, then shouldn't Baylor be held to that same standard?  Why shouldn't Baylor be docked MAJOR points for losing to a 1 game above .500 team in WVU?  UNRANKED both currently and at the time 6-4 WVU.  WVU that just lost to Texas by 3 possessions (doesn't matter that it was @texas right?? a loss is a loss correct regardless of venue?).
Seems like the arguments being made as to why UO shouldn't be above FSU can and should be applied to Baylor v. TCU.


Naesiy, the point is that FSU has NOT LOST. Your comparison above is a terrible example. A better example would be if FSU lost to Oregon head-to-head, then Oregon lost to AZ, should FSU be ranked ahead of Oregon? Of course not, that's why this argument is so stupid. Just like the argument that unbeaten teams from Power 5 Conferences should be ranked lower than teams with losses. The name of the game is WINNING and not LOSING.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2014
Posts: 626
Posted: #158
Quote Originally Posted by chad77:

Or, maybe, juuuuuust maybe we have all seen these teams play.. And we truly believe that a 2 loss team could be better than an undefeated team ? FSU has not impressed anyone... They have the easiest schedule known to CFB and they're barely getting by.. Nobody questioned them last year cause they were beating these teams by 40-50 points... Just heard a guy on the radio say "why does FSU have to be in the top 4, if they lose they'll fall outta the top 10-12, does that sound like a top 4 team" ? 

I agree with the Baylor / TCU argument ! There's no way TCU should be in front of Baylor.. 

I don't want to live in a world where the Defending champs who haven't lost since 2012 are ranked behind a team that didn't play in the National Championship and have already lost a game this year.

Wtf is football all about then? Way too much emphasis on "strength of schedule" instead of flat out winning games. Don't care how FSU has been doing it anymore. That's literally all anybody can talk about, is how close the FSU games have been. Yeah, they've been close and they've won every single game. Including beating an SEC team in Auburn when it counted. They were behind in that game too and found a way to win. That's what FSU does they find ways to win and they get rewarded for it by dropping 2 spots without losing this year. Condi rice is on the committee? Think there aren't about 20 million more qualified MEN who've actually played snaps in their life? 

Some of you need to stop drinking the SEC koolaid at ESPN
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2006
Posts: 6245
Posted: #159

Boom - this all makes for a lot of conversation, whether it be good or bad.  The BCS was crap - this may end up crap as well - it is likely that the best thing the committee should have or could have done is simply keep their mouths shut each week, but that is not  how it is going to be. All they do is open a can of worms each week with what they have to say. 

To me, the bottomline is that the Division II and III system is the best - too bad the Division I (or whatever they are called now) can't find a way to use the same system (bowls would go away as they are now).

 

Always like to read your perspectives on things - keep hammering the books.

 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2009
Posts: 1472
Posted: #160
Quote Originally Posted by Boom_Boom:

On a side note here about FSU:


I hear this alot about FSU......This isn't the same team, this team isn't as good as the last years team...

yeah and yeah. No arguments from most people.

But does that mean that FSU should be slighted? All these guys do is win...They know HOW to win.


Was the same people complaining when Miss st needed a last second stop to beat a Arkansas team who hasn't won a conference game in almost 3 years?

What about when bama needed the " luck of the Irish " just to beat that same Arkansas team..


Or even when Oregon lost to a unranked team at the time in Arizona SU as 24 point favorites?

What about how TCU choked away a huge lead against Baylor....all I hear people say is how it was only a 3 point win....Since did wins get slighted like that??? So does the Bama win over Arkansas become slighted?


The point is.............the way FSU is being disrespected  by people only shows me that those individuals have a vested opinion and want FSU to go down.





Facts  
You and Train make great points.  It will work itself out. There might be a couple debates on Dec 7, but I would bet it will be a clear picture.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2006
Posts: 2915
Posted: #161
FSU hasnt lost thats the only thing that bothers me about the system. How do you drop when you have not lost a game since 2012 thats just mind boggling to me.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 6840
Posted: #162
please stop with the have not lost since 2012 crap. everything prior to Aug / Sept 2014 means nothing in terms of this years rankings. NOTHING.

Instead focus on the fact that they have not lost this season.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2014
Posts: 57
Posted: #163
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:

You have to take into account what being the reigning champ means.....which is you are a target and get EVERYONES best shot. Miss St, TCU, Baylor.....no one expects them to keep winning (until now of course)....

This is college football, where mediocre teams can elevate their play for 4 quarters against a worthy foe....

So, you have the reigning champ and unbeaten Florida St, from a Power 5 conference (we arent talking WAC or Sunbelt here) behind Oregon, who lost by 35 points, @ home to a team the were supposed to beat by 3 tds....thats a 56 point swing for the #2 team in the nation....

Then, they got TCU ahead of Baylor, who beat they SU. Sure it was @ Baylor. However, like Al Davis said "Just win baby." Head to head HAS TO BE THE DECIDING FACTOR if you are gonna have a "selection committee" as its the ONLY THING THAT ISNT DEBATABLE.....Team A and Team B are otherwise equal....Team A beat Team B....I know, lets send Team B JUST BECAUSE WE THINK THEY ARE BETTER....Say what!!??

Does that sound right? If the answer is yes, I am no longer able to continue this discussion.


God bless you Trainer, but they are not/would not be "the same."  TCU will have beaten Minnesota and most importantly TCU will not have lost by 14 to a 4 to 6 loss team...TCU has looked a contending team every week where Baylor has a genuine turkey on its resume. 

Legitimate points to be made on both sides of this debate but totally disagree with the lack of nuance when people say its open/shut...feeble-minded analysis in my opinion (even though i'm a big fan of both you and Boom).  Anyway, God bless!
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2014
Posts: 57
Posted: #164
if head-to-head is all that matters....why schedule P5 out of conference games?  TCU should buy out their upcoming games vs. Arkansas, Ohio State, and Arkansas and replace them with the Buffalos and Incarnate Words of the world that Baylor has scheduled for years and still has scheduled through around 2020.  Certainly corrosive to the fabric of the game to disregard OOC as the Baylor boosters want to do...you can say they'd surely beat Minnesota etc. and this is likely true, but ask Ohio State about OOC P5 teams, can't just credit wins for these teams who refuse to play as a matter of strategy...play that game and go undefeated or pray for help, seems fair to me
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2014
Posts: 57
Posted: #165
final point: the Baylor game was at least as much ref-aided as FSU's win over ND.  Questionable (incorect) no-call an TCU's crucial 4th and 3 play, then charitable, game-cliniching PI call against TCU on Baylor's subsequent possession.  Not sure why this has been so overlooked (Deadspin, twitter etc. were fairly up-in-arms about it in immediate aftermath), but wouldn't be surprised if the committee noticed...
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2014
Posts: 626
Posted: #166
Quote Originally Posted by mattbrot:

please stop with the have not lost since 2012 crap. everything prior to Aug / Sept 2014 means nothing in terms of this years rankings. NOTHING.

Instead focus on the fact that they have not lost this season.
No, I'm not going to stop with the have not lost since 2012 crap. If you don't think that's relevant to rankings this year then you're a moron. Them not losing since 2012 and Oregon losing just this October but passing Florida States in the rankings shows just how fcked up the ranking system is.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2005
Posts: 1067
Posted: #167
Quote Originally Posted by mattbrot:

please stop with the have not lost since 2012 crap. everything prior to Aug / Sept 2014 means nothing in terms of this years rankings. NOTHING.

Instead focus on the fact that they have not lost this season.

But there are preseason rankings.  So last year does matter.  Miss St getting credit for beating 3 "top 10" schools early on is all about last year.  The preseason rankings set up the entire SEC bias and is the reasoning behind all of the controversy.

FSU will open against Ole Piss and end with UF in 2016.  Luckily that will put an end to the "FSU would lose to the entire SEC" bullshhit.  Last I checked, they beat the best in the SEC for the National Championship.

So many hypothetical situations being stated as facts in this thread.  All you can do is laugh. 
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2002
Posts: 55587
Posted: #168

Quote Originally Posted by naesiy:

@train.....missed this before...but who did Oregon lose to by 35 points at home this year? 
I had Az St on the brain

Oregon lost by 7 @ home to a team they were supposed to beat by 3 tds.....

 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 2005
Posted: #169
Quote Originally Posted by Sabanade:



Naesiy, the point is that FSU has NOT LOST. Your comparison above is a terrible example. A better example would be if FSU lost to Oregon head-to-head, then Oregon lost to AZ, should FSU be ranked ahead of Oregon? Of course not, that's why this argument is so stupid. Just like the argument that unbeaten teams from Power 5 Conferences should be ranked lower than teams with losses. The name of the game is WINNING and not LOSING.

I think I understand you.  If I'm not mistaken, your argument leads us to Marshall>Oregon, correct?

I am to disregard all other aspects of wins and losses right?  SOS doesn't matter right?  SOS, FSU=55th, Oregon=22nd <----non factor.  got it.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 2005
Posted: #170
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:

I had Az St on the brain

Oregon lost by 7 @ home to a team they were supposed to beat by 3 tds.....

 


I was just being a jerk  .

But seriously though...

(1) does that change your stance and

(2) do you really believe that a spread from week 5, that is looking to be obviously skewed, is some indication of how bad a loss was?
 
(3) Do you think there is a better chance that at the end of the season, the AZ game will look moreso a quality loss than a bad loss to a legitimate 24 point dog?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 2005
Posted: #171
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:

I had Az St on the brain

Oregon lost by 7 @ home to a team they were supposed to beat by 3 tds.....

 


Applying this to your argument of point differential:

UO v. AZ .....-24 spread + 7 point loss =31 point differential.

FSU v. Citidel....-56.5 spread...FSU 25 point win = 31 point differential....

I know...L v. W...no argument...just illustrating the folly of using point differential to somehow deem a result good or bad.

Citadel man.  Citadel.  
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2010
Posts: 1962
Posted: #172
Oregon lost, at home. Enuff said.....
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 6840
Posted: #173
Quote Originally Posted by Smitty92:

No, I'm not going to stop with the have not lost since 2012 crap. If you don't think that's relevant to rankings this year then you're a moron. Them not losing since 2012 and Oregon losing just this October but passing Florida States in the rankings shows just how fcked up the ranking system is.

it is wrong that they jumped them. but this is due to FSU being undefeated in 2014 season.

Absolutely nothing to do with 2012 and 2013.

So ONCE AGAIN CUT THE CRAP.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2008
Posts: 451
Posted: #174
Quote Originally Posted by mattbrot:


it is wrong that they jumped them. but this is due to FSU being undefeated in 2014 season.

Absolutely nothing to do with 2012 and 2013.

So ONCE AGAIN CUT THE CRAP.

 

EXACTLY.  What teams have done in past years have ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the current year.  But, two points I would like to make:

1.  I agree that they should not have been jumped by Oregon, because while they haven't looked impressive in games and dominated, they still have a "0" in the loss column. But, in their defense, they had a special team last year and after losing all kind of talent to the NFL, maybe our expectations of them were too high. 

2.  Right now, the way the teams look, Oregon would win in a head to head matchup (my opinion).  But, at the end of the day, as someone has mentioned on TV and maybe on this thread, whether you are ranked #2 or #3 only matters due to the color of the uniform you would wear.....NOTHING ELSE. 

 

 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2014
Posts: 1587
Posted: #175
For those arguing that FSU should be ranked ahead of teams like Oregon or Bama or even TCU or Baylor, for that matter... consider this:

FSU is favored by a FG or less against Miami... what would Alabama or Oregon be favored by in this same matchup?  Answer:  at least 7 points!

So while you want to bash the committee for telling you that FSU isn't as good as those teams... rest assured, every bookmaker on the planet would tell you the same thing...
All Forums | College Football
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gambling
Betting Sites
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
810,221
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 30 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
21+
Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER
Help Privacy Terms of Service Cookies Sitemap Forum
Covers is verified safe by:
Evalon Logo Logo GPWA Logo GDPR logo Logo GeoTrust logo Logo PCI DSS logo Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2026 CS Media Ltd. All Rights Reserved.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.