2012 College Football

[ghost]

Cal and Central Florida I definitely take more seriously than Savannah State.   

[Paelos]

Cal and Central Florida I definitely take more seriously than Savannah State.   

You mean the Savannah state that played an ACC and Big 12 OCC this year? Don't see the SEC on that one either.

Admit it, most of this is perception, not reality.

[ghost]

No.  The SEC has a relatively weaker schedule than the PAC or the Big Ten. 

[01101010]

I doubt those FCS schools think it is insulting when the biggest payout of the year comes with that game. The other side of the coin so to speak is the fact that if these schools never get a game with the "big boys," their programs would suffer greatly, at least financially. These schools would hardly ever get seen otherwise as well. So they play a powerhouse school, get to play on national TV, get the biggest paycheck of the year to keep their program afloat, and maybe get blown out? There is incentive on both teams' parts to schedule that game, it is not just about the big boy getting a freebee.

I'm sure their players think its insulting when they lose 56 to 10 and then don't really see any of that money.

Assumptions not withstanding, I doubt that gameday paycheck goes in someone's pocket and not to the school's athletic program - which might be the bulk of their funds. Take that away and see how many of these schools close up shop. The players might be dejected getting pounded on for a OOC game against a powerhouse, but they do get national exposure if they fit into a television spot and what competitor at that level of commitment doesn't want their shot against the best even if they have little chance? And they do have a chance at winning or even keeping it close enough to validate the program.

[01101010]

No.  The SEC has a relatively weaker schedule than the PAC or the Big Ten. 

[ghost]

No.  The SEC has a relatively weaker schedule than the PAC or the Big Ten. 

Just for clarification-  OOC only.  Full schedule SEC is still the toughest. 

[Paelos]

Well for one thing, the Big 10 plays less OOC games because they have 12 members instead of 14. However, they play one more BCS team. Here's a list of those BCS teams for the Big 10 not including doubles:

Alabama, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Boston College, Vanderbilt, UCLA, Virginia, Temple, Cal, Arizona State, Oregon State

Here's the SEC: Arizona State, Syracuse, Northwestern, Wake Forest, Michigan, Rutgers, FSU, Washington, Texas, Clemson, GA Tech, Louisville

Average power ranking of those teams for the Big 10 - 44.3
Average power ranking of those teams for the SEC - 42.6
Difference of about 4% in favor of the Big 10.

So you want to argue about 4%? That's all well and good until you consider the SoS from the conference. Big 10 PR - 39.4 and the SEC PR - 46.3

That's a difference of 17%

[Ingmar]

So.....what's your point? 

The SEC is by far and away the best league and they play a shitty ass OOC schedule.  I think it's insulting to the fans to play FCS schools and can appreciate the Big Ten and PAC 12 scheduling. 

I doubt those FCS schools think it is insulting when the biggest payout of the year comes with that game. The other side of the coin so to speak is the fact that if these schools never get a game with the "big boys," their programs would suffer greatly, at least financially. These schools would hardly ever get seen otherwise as well. So they play a powerhouse school, get to play on national TV, get the biggest paycheck of the year to keep their program afloat, and maybe get blown out? There is incentive on both teams' parts to schedule that game, it is not just about the big boy getting a freebee.

I'm sure their players think its insulting when they lose 56 to 10 and then don't really see any of that money.

They see it by the money paying for the fact that there's a program there at all. FCS environment is really nothing like the BCS level, they need those games just to stay afloat, their programs are not money machines.

[Ingmar]

Well for one thing, the Big 10 plays less OOC games because they have 12 members instead of 14. However, they play one more BCS team. Here's a list of those BCS teams for the Big 10 not including doubles:

Alabama, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Boston College, Vanderbilt, UCLA, Virginia, Temple, Cal, Arizona State, Oregon State

Here's the SEC: Arizona State, Syracuse, Northwestern, Wake Forest, Michigan, Rutgers, FSU, Washington, Texas, Clemson, GA Tech, Louisville

Average power ranking of those teams for the Big 10 - 44.3
Average power ranking of those teams for the SEC - 42.6
Difference of about 4% in favor of the Big 10.

So you want to argue about 4%? That's all well and good until you consider the SoS from the conference. Big 10 PR - 39.4 and the SEC PR - 46.3

That's a difference of 17%

I don't trust SoS in college football to be meaningful, too much media ranking feedback loop action there.

[Nebu]

I don't trust SoS in college football to be meaningful, too much media ranking feedback loop action there.

Agree, particularly in the first 4 weeks of the season.  Wasn't Arkansas ranked 8th in the early polls?  Shows you what people know early on.

[Paelos]

That's not SoS by media. That's power rankings by statfox that they use to make the lines for gamblers.

EDIT: Lowest rated team in the SEC is Kentucky at 31. Highest is Bama at 64.

Lowest in Big 10 is Indiana at 25, highest is Michigan at 51.

[ghost]

I would never argue that the overall SOS is anything but the hardest for SEC teams.  Just cherry picking the BCS schools played in the OOC schedule doesn't tell you much.  Of course I'd expect such a comparison to be similar. 

[Paelos]

I'm not cherry picking. That's all of them that are BCS.

If you want to argue the merits of Eastern Michigan v. Jacksonville St, I'm just going to laugh at you. The idea of comparing Conference USA schools v. FCS is a joke. Neither of those schools are going to challenge anybody.

[ghost]

I averaged up all of the FCS and "directional" schools for the Big Ten, SEC and PAC12. 

The SEC plays a total of 40 schools of that sort, of which most of them are FCS.  The average per SEC team is 3.33 with Mississippi State and Aggie playing 4 each.  Missouri has the least number of low quality opponents.

The Big Ten plays a total of 26 of such schools, many of which are "directional" schools (which, due to scholarship numbers and the overall quality of athlete I DO place in a different category than FCS schools.  Average is 2.17. 

The PAC 12 plays 11 such opponents for an average of less than 1. 

Case rested. 

[Paelos]

Well if you're counting 40 of the SEC schools as directional or FCS, most of them can't be FCS since there were only 15 on the list. Simple math of 25>15. So, no.

Also, your PAC 12 number is misleading because they only play 3 OOC games, not 4. In the end, it simply doesn't matter. I don't count scheduling teams like Hawaii, San Jose State, Rice, etc as tough opponents.

I mean FFS you're honestly splitting hairs about this. NOBODY WORTH A DAMN LOSES THE NON-BCS GAMES. It doesn't matter if you schedule Memphis or Southwestern Shittown. Stanford is still going to steamroll them, and they were scheduled to be a tuneup win early in the season. Oregon could too, and USC, and Wisconsin, and Ohio State, and Michigan, and pretty much everyone that's going to at least go for the top 25.

Here are the PAC-12 losses out of that OOC schedule: LSU, Nevada, Ohio State, Missouri, BYU, Colorado State, Sacramento State, Fresno State, Utah State. The funny thing is that the last four are pretty much the fault of Utah and Colorado (aka the new kids). Other than that, you have BCS opponents and Cal tripping over it's own dick against Nevada.

SEC losses? Northwestern, Louisville, Western KY, Louisiana Monroe, Rutgers, Texas, and Clemson. Funny part there is that Western KY and LA Monroe is courtesy of our two worst programs in the league who get to battle out their shittiness this week! Arkansas v. Kentucky! WOOO! (Maybe Auburn too, but they beat LA Monroe   )

[Ingmar]

No tripping involved, Nevada is just a flat out better team than us.

[ghost]

Yeah, Nevada and some of those other non-BCS teams are decent, something Paelos is ignoring.


Addendum-  Colorado, however, is fucking putrid.    

[Paelos]

I'll give Louisiana Tech some credit, since they managed to sneak into the top 25. Good on them.

[Chimpy]

I'll give Louisiana Tech some credit, since they managed to sneak into the top 25. Good on them.

Well they did trounce Illinois by 40+ points.  Of course, junior college teams can probably accomplish that this year.

[Abagadro]

So Utes have decided to start their true freshman at UCLA today. Should be interesting. 

[ghost]

Texas is getting their asses handed to them by Oklahoma yet again.

[Paelos]

You can't be taken seriously when your defense is that shitty.

I fully expect that to bite WVA as well.

[Abagadro]

I don't know that Utah wins another game this year.

[01101010]

You can't be taken seriously when your defense is that shitty.

I fully expect that to bite WVA as well.

At least you won't have to wait long to see it. 

[ghost]

You can't be taken seriously when your defense is that shitty.

I fully expect that to bite WVA as well.

At least you won't have to wait long to see it.  

Wow.  Didn't expect that sort of ass stomping.


Addendum-  but, then again, it's clear after today that Texas is awful.  I fully expect OU and OSU to beat the fuck out of WVU, and probably K-State too.

[Paelos]

You can't be taken seriously when your defense is that shitty.

I fully expect that to bite WVA as well.

At least you won't have to wait long to see it.  

Nothing like a prediction coming true on the same day!  

EDIT: I'm interested to see Washington v. USC tonight. I won't go as far as to predict an upset, but I'm interested in seeing what I believe is a tough Washington club at home.

[01101010]

WTB offense please. Thanks.   

Well at least my tears go well with the tequila.

[ghost]

Can we revisit the idea that Kentucky is the worst team in D1 football?

[Paelos]

Can we revisit the idea that Kentucky is the worst team in D1 football?

Do you face Auburn?

[ghost]

No.  However, Auburn lost to Arky 24-7 in a full game.  Kentucky lost to Arky 49-7 in a rain shortened game-  called about 6 minutes into the third quarter. 

[Chimpy]

I am going to go with Illinois being the worst team this year.

[Paelos]

No.  However, Auburn lost to Arky 24-7 in a full game.  Kentucky lost to Arky 49-7 in a rain shortened game-  called about 6 minutes into the third quarter. 

According to my handicapper sites, you are now the worst team in the SEC. You are tied with Illinois in shittiness.

However, the worst team in D1 right now is Massachusetts. They are 0-6 on the season with losses to Uconn, Indiana, Michigan, Miami OH, Ohio, and Western Michigan. They've been beaten by a combined 178 points in those games.

[Paelos]

Oh and for the Leaders and Legends out there, the Big 10 doesn't have a single team in the BCS top 25.

The Big East and ACC are laughing at you.

[ghost]

I think this is one of the few things Colin Cowherd is completely spot on about.  The Big Ten is in a death spiral that it will never get out of.  Kids don't want to live in the rust belt.  They want to live in the South or in LA/West coast.  Outside of Ohio State, I doubt the Big Ten will ever be relevant again.

[Ingmar]

I really doubt that a huge number of people say FUCK YEAH I WANT TO LIVE IN BIRMINGHAM. The appeal of Alabama is not the where, it is the perception that it is a fast track to the NFL.

Also: Kansas State, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Louisville, Cincinnati, Boise State, Iowa State, all in the BCS top 25 standings. Half of those are in Big 10 areas geographically, the rest are in places more or less as unappealing to live in.

And I didn't even mention the Texas schools. 

Also it has to be pointed out that Ohio State *would* be in the BCS top 25, if they were not on probation.