So about the Big 10

WinstonSmith said:
No doubt. As an OSU fan I try to be reasonable. OSU has no leg to stand on this year. I do think arguing that Bama's resume was very weak is valid, but saying OSU deserved to get in over them really is not.
Click to expand...

Bama's resume is extremely weak, but it almost came down to who else can fill that4th spot that's worthy? UCF sure, but where was their SOS in relation to Bama? Wisconsin, okay but their SOS isn't much better and lost in the B1G title game. Ohio State, very good wins but two losses, one being very bad. USC, meh wins with two losses.
 
But also another Championship the 9th in the last 12 years ! There have been 4 different SEC teams win titles in those 12 years.
If you go back 50 years you can say 4 different big 10 teams have won titles LMAO.
 
Ts1960 said:
But also another Championship the 9th in the last 12 years ! There have been 4 different SEC teams win titles in those 12 years.
If you go back 50 years you can say 4 different big 10 teams have won titles LMAO.
Click to expand...

Yet only two of four when they have to be won in a tournament.

The funny thing is that 'Bama dominance has sent top southern recruits away from the SEC, and the rest of the league now sucks. Phony "SEC cred" skews the early season rankings and the SEC creampuffs prop the top up.
 
cabezadecaballo said:
Yet only two of four when they have to be won in a tournament.

The funny thing is that 'Bama dominance has sent top southern recruits away from the SEC, and the rest of the league now sucks. Phony "SEC cred" skews the early season rankings and the SEC creampuffs prop the top up.
Click to expand...

Alabama vs Georgia tmrw night. Nuff said...
 
taco macarthur said:
it's weird how defensive secfb is about an entire conference despite not having attended any of the schools. Never understood rooting for a conference as opposed to your favorite team. Typically fans of bad teams beat their chest on conferences.
Click to expand...
lol.
 
Taco MacArthur said:
Agreed. Bama has found a formula that has a proven track record. I'm not a fan of it, but why fix it if it ain't broke? I also get OSU's strategy, beating Oklahoma last year helped bolster their resume despite not winning their conference. But it's a riskier strategy. If they had played say a Toledo in week 2, there's a good chance they are in over Bama this year.
Click to expand...

Bama schedules a quality out of conference opponent nearly every year, same as OSU. The only difference now is the Big Ten with 9 conference games and the SEC with 8, but that's a very recent change.

2017: FSU
2016: USC
2015: Wisconsin
2014: WVU
2013: VA Tech
2012: Michigan
2010/2011: Penn State
 
Michael Bluth said:
Bama schedules a quality out of conference opponent nearly every year, same as OSU. The only difference now is the Big Ten with 9 conference games and the SEC with 8, but that's a very recent change.

2017: FSU
2016: USC
2015: Wisconsin
2014: WVU
2013: VA Tech
2012: Michigan
2010/2011: Penn State
Click to expand...

the key part is that they don't play a HOME and Home with ANYONE since 2010 with PSU.....
 
bigkat said:
the key part is that they don't play a HOME and Home with ANYONE since 2010 with PSU.....
Click to expand...
Nothing says you have to play home and home. Actually teams get a break by not having to play in Alabama's home stadium at all. Some of you OhioSt fans whine about the little things
 
Doesn’t do osu any good playing home and home when they lose the biggest game on their schedule.....at HOME !
 
adselder09 said:
But Bama has scheduled like this for years and guess what, they've made the playoff every year. So who needs to change? The committee? Bama? Or maybe everyone else.

I don't like it, I wish the committee forced teams to step out of their comfort zone and play home-home, but they haven't. So Bama has no reason to change.
Click to expand...
Right, everyone else also has every reason to copy Bama's scheduling, and college football will be worse off for it.

Who will be to blame? The CFP committee. Nice job, guys.
 
FormerWildcat said:
Right, everyone else also has every reason to copy Bama's scheduling, and college football will be worse off for it.

Who will be to blame? The CFP committee. Nice job, guys.
Click to expand...

All you have to do is play in the P5 and win the games on your schedule. ohio st lost twice and sat at home and watched last night.
 
Ts1960 said:
All you have to do is play in the P5 and win the games on your schedule. ohio st lost twice and sat at home and watched last night.
Click to expand...
Once Ohio State trades out the Oklahomas of the world for the Mercers of the world, they'll be winning more national titles, just like they did in 2014 beating Alabama in the semis. Duly noted.
 
FormerWildcat said:
Once Ohio State trades out the Oklahomas of the world for the Mercers of the world, they'll be winning more national titles, just like they did in 2014 beating Alabama in the semis. Duly noted.
Click to expand...

Get a better argument already. osu had their cupcake in UNLV. Bama also played Florida State, who was overinflated but #3 at the time. They also played Fresno State (10-4) and Colorado State (7-6) both bowl teams. Bama had a SOS of #12, osu was #17 and UCF was #46.
 
redskin17 said:
Get a better argument already. osu had their cupcake in UNLV. Bama also played Florida State, who was overinflated but #3 at the time. They also played Fresno State (10-4) and Colorado State (7-6) both bowl teams. Bama had a SOS of #12, osu was #17 and UCF was #46.
Click to expand...
Your argument really sucks. You even bothered to mention Florida State? You mean the Florida State that went 7-6, right? Who cares what their ranking was at the time of the game? It's how you end up that counts.

You're really going to trot Frenso State and Colorado State out there as well? That's laughable.

Any formula that had Bama's schedule as #12 is a complete joke. The only good team they played in the regular season was Auburn, and that was literally it.
 
FormerWildcat said:
Your argument really sucks. You even bothered to mention Florida State? You mean the Florida State that went 7-6, right? Who cares what their ranking was at the time of the game? It's how you end up that counts.

You're really going to trot Frenso State and Colorado State out there as well? That's laughable.

Any formula that had Bama's schedule as #12 is a complete joke. The only good team they played in the regular season was Auburn, and that was literally it.
Click to expand...

I guess impartial numbers hurt your argument, so they suck? Good to know.

That 7-6 FSU team had an RPI ranking of 41. outside of Mercer Bama played no one ranked in the 100s, osu and ucf both with 3 teams.

Again impartial computer generated numbers.
 
FormerWildcat said:
Right, everyone else also has every reason to copy Bama's scheduling, and college football will be worse off for it.

Who will be to blame? The CFP committee. Nice job, guys.
Click to expand...

Ok, so now the season is over, let's look at Bama's schedule vs. Ohio States.

Bama played... Florida State/ LSU/ Miss St. / Auburn/ Clemson/ Georgia. They lost to Auburn, ranked #10 at the time at Auburn by 12 points.

OSU played Oklahoma/ Penn State/ Mich State/ Wisconsin/ USC They lost to Oklahoma, at home, by 15 points.

So all in all, fairly comparable, except the Buckeyes lost at home by double digits. But wait, there is more. Here is the defining moment. Ohio State lost to an unranked Iowa team, on the road, by 31 points. This would have been like Bama losing at Texas A&M by 30 points, or at Arkansas. This is why it's good for the committee to have some discretion on whom they put into the final four. Remember last year when, going into the Ohio State/ Michigan game, there was a movement to both of them in the playoff?? The Buckeyes, who got drilled by Clemson and Michigan, who still have not found a quarterback. My closing point is that Buckeye fans always point to Bama's schedule, I'd say if Ohio State played Bama's schedule this year, they lose 3-4 games, and that's not including the playoffs.
 
redskin17 said:
I guess impartial numbers hurt your argument, so they suck? Good to know.

That 7-6 FSU team had an RPI ranking of 41. outside of Mercer Bama played no one ranked in the 100s, osu and ucf both with 3 teams.

Again impartial computer generated numbers.
Click to expand...
Now, you're touting a team that was ranked 41st? :laugh:

Ohio State beat teams ranked 8th and 15th before you get to Bama's best regular season win of 17th, according to your treasured RPI rankings. :laugh:
 
Last edited:
14Red said:
Ok, so now the season is over, let's look at Bama's schedule vs. Ohio States.
Click to expand...
The discussion was about regular season schedules; pay attention.

14Red said:
I'd say if Ohio State played Bama's schedule this year, they lose 3-4 games, and that's not including the playoffs.
Click to expand...
Once again, Ohio State beat teams ranked 7th, 8th, and 15th before you get to Bama's best non-playoff win of 17th, according to redskin's beloved RPI rankings.
 
Last edited:
FormerWildcat said:
Now, you're touting a team that was ranked 41st? :laugh:

Ohio State beat teams ranked 7th, 8th, and 15th before you get to Bama's best regular season win of 17th, according to your treasured RPI rankings. :laugh:
Click to expand...

Average regular season rating was 58-63.

I am not "touting" anyone, but to think osu's schedule was head and shoulders above Bama or to even really try and diss Bama's scheduled is a stretch.
 
redskin17 said:
Average regular season rating was 58-63.

I am not "touting" anyone, but to think osu's schedule was head and shoulders above Bama or to even really try and diss Bama's scheduled is a stretch.
Click to expand...
You conveniently threw that 100 cutoff out there when Tennessee was 97th, Arkansas was 87th, and even Colorado State (your wonderful bowl participant) was 86th. You can't tell me for a second that there's any substantive difference between 86th, 87th, 97th, and 100th.

The main point is that no Power 5 conference team has any incentive to play anyone in the top 25 (or hell, even top 50) on their nonconference slate any more, if the CFP committee won't penalize them for it. In fact, not only should Ohio State not schedule Oklahoma any more, I guess it's not worth their time to schedule Army any more either, since they were 28th, according to the RPI. Just go find some nice, but not so good teams, in the 35-60 range, and call it a day.
 
Last edited:
FormerWildcat said:
You conveniently threw that 100 cutoff out there when Tennessee was 97th, Arkansas was 87th, and even Colorado State (your wonderful bowl participant) was 86th. You can't tell me for a second that there's any substantive difference between 86th, 87th, 97th, and 100th.

The main point is that no Power 5 conference team has any incentive to play anyone in the top 25 (or hell, even top 50) on their nonconference slate any more, if the CFP committee won't penalize them for it. In fact, not only should Ohio State not schedule Oklahoma any more, I guess it's not worth their time to schedule Army any more either, since they were 28th, according to the RPI. Just go find some nice, but not so good teams, in the 35-60 range, and call it a day.
Click to expand...

Depends upon the year, OOC schedule got the Buckeyes in 2016, out in 2017; but the reality is that the OOC schedule is not the reason why Ohio St was out of the playoffs, losing by 31 to Iowa is the albatross around the Buckeyes neck this year, not Oklahoma.
 
FormerWildcat said:
You conveniently threw that 100 cutoff out there when Tennessee was 97th, Arkansas was 87th, and even Colorado State (your wonderful bowl participant) was 86th. You can't tell me for a second that there's any substantive difference between 86th, 87th, 97th, and 100th.

The main point is that no Power 5 conference team has any incentive to play anyone in the top 25 (or hell, even top 50) on their nonconference slate any more, if the CFP committee won't penalize them for it. In fact, not only should Ohio State not schedule Oklahoma any more, I guess it's not worth their time to schedule Army any more either, since they were 28th, according to the RPI. Just go find some nice, but not so good teams, in the 35-60 range, and call it a day.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what they should do. Why are you acting like this is a huge conspiracy. Ohio State's wins were better than Bama. Ohio State's losses were worse than Bama. Ohio State had 2 losses, Bama had 1. What is so hard to figure out here? :shrug:
 
adselder09 said:
That's exactly what they should do. Why are you acting like this is a huge conspiracy. Ohio State's wins were better than Bama. Ohio State's losses were worse than Bama. Ohio State had 2 losses, Bama had 1. What is so hard to figure out here? :shrug:
Click to expand...
Why are you complaining at me? I agreed with your previous post, and everyone else got bent out of shape about it. Go bicker with them.
 
FormerWildcat said:
Why are you complaining at me? I agreed with your previous post, and everyone else got bent out of shape about it. Go bicker with them.
Click to expand...

It seems you're complaining about the fact that no team with playoff aspirations should consider playing a non-conference foe ranked in the top 25 because of Bama's resume this year. I agree that would suck for CFB fans, but if that's the way the system is going to be run, then so be it. Do what you gotta do. If that means scheduling cupcakes at home for big paychecks then go for it.
 
Honest assessment:

2014 If TCU or Baylor is named Oklahoma or Texas and had the exact same resume, Ohio State doesn't get in.

2016 If Ohio State and Penn State's resumes were reversed, Ohio State would still have gotten in.

2017 If Alabama has the same resume, and is named Mississippi, Mississippi State, Arkansas etc. , Ohio State would have gotten in.

The schools with the largest fanbases will always get the benefit of the doubt.

Truth be told, Alabama is the national brand, and probably the only team that gets in with that resume this year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top