Obviously no lover of southern football, but willing to engage in a civil discourse with anyone interested.
Doesn't change the fact that UM was picked to win the B1G preseason, buddy. Way to ignore everything else, though.
As to my obstinacy, I don't go into a debate half-cocked. Not on religion, not on philosophy, not on politics, and certainly not on college football. If I'm willing to die on a hill, it's because I've already considered the available facts from multiple angles and formed an informed opinion. This particular hill is that OSU and LSU each have as much claim to the top spot as the other. Those attacking my position are basing their argument on the premise that the SEC and/or the top 5 or so thereof is SO much better than the B1G that OSU's accomplishments to date cannot justify ranking them above LSU. That is simply not true, as quantifiable data from this season attests.
Take a look at OSU's. Being required to play 9 conference games and no FCS teams hasn't stopped OSU from putting quality competition that they didn't need to play on the schedule. Don't try to feed me some BS line that UGA can only play the likes of ND because they've got Murray St. I have absolutely zero respect for that chickensh!t scheduling. We had a P5 and 2 decent G5 opponents this year before the P5 team backed out on us. Now our OOC only has 3 wins against G5 divisional champions all playing for their conferences this weekend. Shucks. Fact is, you're choosing to close your eyes to the plain facts because they undermine what you want to believe. Also, @Tim, I missed it before, but LSU DID have 3-9 Vandy on the schedule. They gave up 38 points to that 3-9 team. Imagine if they had to add another SEC opponent instead of their pick of the finest tomato cans the FCS has to offer.
Dude, if the situations were reversed, you'd be arguing that LSU is the obvious #1 because of their dominance despite a marginally worse schedule (because "muh SEC"). I'm not even making that argument for my own team. I'm arguing that it's more than just the names on your schedule, and because of that, OSU has as valid a claim right now as LSU. To arbitrarily declare the top of the SEC significantly better than the top of the B1G at this point is wildly premature. Given their VERY comparable schedules, OSU has dominated in a very balanced fashion, while LSU has been entirely dependent on a spectacular offense that relies on a QB who's rewriting history books. I guarantee you if OSU lost Justin Fields and LSU lost Joe Burrow, LSU falls much further from what they've been the rest of the season. To say that LSU is absolutely better just because their GOAT-contender QB beat the top of the SEC with little help from his defense is absurd when OSU has been producing complete wins from week 1 on. Maybe you're right and OSU gets utterly exposed in the postseason, but I really doubt it. I expect they'll be, at the absolute worst, competitive against anybody in the country this year. Name-dropping in the meantime doesn't prove much of anything, except for your own perception (aka, your bias).
Hey, even a broken clock, you know. LOL
You're welcome, Matty. I'm obviously a fan of futile typing lol
Miami (OH) is playing for the MAC championship this week. FAU is playing for the C-USA championship. If you want to condemn wins against G5 divisional (and possibly conference) champs, then we can open the books and look at EVERY G5 opponent the SEC has on the slate, in addition to all that FCS whipped cream. The SEC's OOC scheduling is absolutely indefensible compared to the B1G's and in particular OSU's. You are right, though, that if one of these two teams wins it all, there will be no question as to whether they deserve it. They will have beaten some fantastic top-end competition.
Also, I'll remind Tim that the clear-cut favorite to win the B1G this year was... Michigan, followed by Nebraska. That was obviously based on wrong assumptions, but people legitimately believed OSU would be behind as many as 4 other teams in the B1G this year. Remind me who was expected to win the SEC. Pretty sure it was the same old Gump U, followed by UGA, followed by LSU. The same 3 in the same order that it probably should be 9 years out of 10. You guys need to relax. Nobody's saying the SEC isn't good and probably the best conference in college football. We're just saying that it's not so much better than every other conference as to support the points you want to make.
AU and UA are not both sneaking back into the top 10. You might get one in. On the other hand, Wisconsin may not drop out of the top 10 with a second loss to OSU. In that case, you're looking at 2 or 3 top ten teams for LSU to 2 for OSU (but 3 top ten wins for OSU). The realistic best-case for LSU, they have 3 top ten wins to 1 for OSU. Deserving of #1 on Sunday? Maybe. I wouldn't really argue against it if the committee went that route. Then again, LSU's had some pretty lackluster defensive showings, and a win against an FCS opponent. Average that FCS win against a top ten win, give the stink eye at them giving up almost 40 points to a couple not-good teams, and it wouldn't shock me if they kept LSU at 2. There'd be nothing wrong or conspiratorial about it.
LOL you guys have some epically bad takes. Yes, OSU is going to be at or near the top of the B1G every year for the foreseeable future and generally recruit better than the rest of the conference. As has been pointed out, though, in recent history, the B1G has been more internally-competitive than the SEC. And the reason adding a 9th conference game would matter is because y'all might just have to drop the FCS opponents if you want to go after the ND-type matchups. As far as I'm concerned, FCS matchups are purely exhibition games. Congrats to LSU on being 11-0.
I'll tell you what, arguing that the AP and Coaches polls expose the bias in the computer algorithms is some rich stuff, my man.
I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm not saying any of that is wrong. I'm saying if LSU doesn't play Northwestern St. and beats one of the top G5 programs (e.g. Memphis, Cincy, Boise, etc.) or another average P5 program (comparable to Texas) instead, OSU's dominance probably doesn't matter. LSU's schedule at that point would probably be enough to overcome what OSU has done, because they wouldn't have gone chasing tomato cans. Maybe not; we'll never know, of course.
Unless they get completely blown out in their CCGs, which I don't see happening, both OSU and LSU are in even with a loss Saturday. The teams that'd be jockeying against them for the spot just don't compare, regardless of a CCG win. Recall that the CCG win is only a tiebreaker between comparable teams. While we're on the topic of things OSU doesn't have, Mr. Chris Wright, they had no control over not having a P5 team on the non-conference schedule, as their P5 opponent paid the contractual penalty to get out of playing. Another thing they didn't have is an FCS opponent. Every SEC, ACC, Big-12, and PAC-12 school has control over that when it comes to their own scheduling, though. Didn't stop them all from taking a heaping helping and in some cases coming back for seconds. There's no reason not to punish those schools for going out of their way to knock over piles of garbage if the question arises.
@Tim, there's plenty of room to argue for either team, but there's really no way to say that OSU DEFINITELY shouldn't be above LSU right now unless you're a huge homer. Either team at #1 is perfectly justifiable. TBH Clemson isn't undeserving either, but that schedule is just awful. People (and decent conferences) would rightly be a little miffed by that decision at this point. @Matty, for the CCGs to be first round playoff games, two things need to happen. First, there needs to be enough spots for every P5 conference. Second, the winners of the P5 CCGs would need to be guaranteed to "advance" into the "second round" of the playoff. The first only requires expansion, which I think is needed. The second requires automatic bids for teams that could realistically have 2, 3, or potentially even 4 regular season Ls, which I think is not good for the sport. If you don't guarantee the spot, then the CCGs are in no way the first round of the playoff. Instead, move to 8, and guarantee a spot for each P5 champ and the top G5 champ, provided in all cases that a guaranteed berth will only be awarded to a team with 11 or more FBS wins. Lacking those wins shouldn't disqualify a team from the playoff, but they would need to be deemed worthy of an at-large bid, i.e. be top-8. Of course, that doesn't really position the CCGs as playoff games, but the fact is that there's enough difference between the best and worst conferences, let alone the best and worst conference divisions, that actually using the CCGs as part of the playoff would let some really mediocre and undeserving teams in from time to time.
Yeah, the B1G is worse than the Southland, as everyone knows. There shouldn't be a B1G team ranked higher than 100th. There's not a quality win to be had in that conference.
"It just costs more." --SEC
Copying and pasting, since apparently either a word that starts with "h" and rhymes with "deck" or an intact url warrants moderation around here, which never actually appears to happen. Apologies if both text walls eventually post. If the SEC scheduled 9 conference games and banned FCS matchups like the B1G did, LSU would be #1 right now, assuming of course, that they still made it to 12-0. The easiest way not to lose is not to play (which is why a six-team playoff with byes is a horrible idea; just revert to the BCS at that point). The second easiest way not to lose is to schedule teams from the FCS. As to OSU’s “business” being ranked above LSU, I’d say they’ve got at least as much claim as LSU to the top spot. See the nearly unbroken line of 1s here: masseyratings[dot]com/cf/compare[dot]htm Sure, people and algorithms can be wrong, but that’s a [redacted filthy swear word that'd curl your toes and strip the paint right off the pretty little toenails] of a lot more consensus than some of Alabama’s claimed NCs. In putting OSU over LSU, the committee has sent the tiniest, most inconsequential message regarding their thoughts on deliberate schedule padding, and even then, OSU had to thrash every team on the schedule to convince them to do it. The entire South is acting like they’re ready to secede again over it. If you’re right about how good the SEC and LSU are and how fake OSU is, it won’t matter. If you’re wrong, it also won’t matter. No sense getting your blood pressure up in the meantime. Anything else sure starts to sound like the SEC fears Clemson. Put Clemson 4th or OSU 2nd. OSU won’t care. OSU owes them in a big way, and I’m sure they’re eager to see Dabo collect that debt, with interest. The SEC isn’t getting blocked out of the playoff over it (a la OSU in favor of ND last year), even if the committee is dead wrong (a la ND over OSU last year, not that OSU had much chance to have won the NCG last year, but they were undeniably better). Incidentally, and completely OT, it’s good to see Jeaux “Buckeye” Burreaux having such awesome success at his second collegiate stop. The guy always struck me as a hard worker and never a drama queen [looks in the general direction of Miami]. It’s always a bummer to see talent on the bench that never gets an opportunity to shine. Regardless of how the postseason plays out, I’m glad he’s played his way into a round 1 pick; he 100% deserves it.
Can't get an argument out of a B1G fan. They've seen the wanton destruction OSU wreaks and want no part of it. Anyone with an IQ higher than room temperature knows better than to step in front of the freight train.
I'm sorry, I thought this was America, not communist Georgia.
Yeah, LSU will jump to the top with a win, of course. They'll have the indisputably best record at that point, to such an extent that dominance or eye test won't matter for a while. They could switch again in a few weeks after OSU-PSU, and possibly AGAIN back in favor of the SEC champ following championship week, since I think beating Georgia would be valued more highly than Minnesota or Wisconsin in the respective CCGs. Exact seeding doesn't particularly matter, of course, as long as you end up in at the end. The top five are all in good shape, obviously. Game 4 is a little deep to still be calling it the beginning of the season, but it's still in the first third, I guess. Michigan didn't figure some very key things out until halftime against PSU in game 7, for crying out loud, and seem to be a much better team all around since, so I won't deny that LSU's defense could be much better since then. I'm sure we'll get the biggest test of that theory of the regular season this weekend. I'm hoping to see a great game. Joe Burrow's still very much loved by many if not most OSU fans, so it'd be pretty awesome to see him leave that stadium with such a meaningful win.
I've been considering that, as well. Both the B1G and the SEC could conceivably produce two 12-1 teams and an 11-1 team by the end of the last CCG, potentially with the 11-1 B1G East runner-up having a win over the conference champ out of the West (that'd be PSU over Minnesota this week, who beats a 12-0 OSU in the CCG). Pretty unlikely, but if the top two conferences produce six 1-loss teams between them and those are some good, close games, along with a 13-0 Clemson out of the otherwise uninspiring ACC and a 1-loss champion from both the Big 12 and PAC 12, get ready for an eight team system as soon as next season but probably more like the 2021 season. I think at least three and quite possibly four of the P5 conferences would range from at least somewhat unhappy to really upset in the above scenario, no matter how you arranged it. The ACC leadership would be the only ones guaranteed to have nothing they could complain about, since Clemson would have to get in and nobody else in the conference has a whiff of the playoffs. Again, pretty unlikely with a month+ of football remaining to be played, but not totally outside the realm of possibility.
LSU has an argument, sure, and opinions can differ, but @Texas? You really think @Texas helps that argument? The fact of the matter is, if you could strip the names off every team and compare them on a purely statistical basis, INCLUDING the assessment of the quality of their respective schedules on a purely statistical basis, at this point in the season there would be a pretty clear #1, a close but definite #2, and everybody else. I'd bet the overall best team you'd pick out of that mess of numbers would be OSU, not LSU. I know that because virtually every computer model, looking at football from every angle except "what's your name?" is already putting OSU at the top. Through eight games, they are the consensus computer #1. The only things anybody takes seriously that disagree with that are the AP and Coaches Polls, which should never be taken too seriously. The writer for my local rag has an AP vote; these guys aren't THAT expert in their opinions. With a win over Alabama this week, LSU would pass OSU in both the computers and the CFP poll, and they should in that case. If OSU wins out, they'll probably jump right back over LSU in a few weeks, only to probably be jumped again after the CCGs are played. It's fluid, man. The Committee has shown to usually be much less prone to giving teams inertia and being unwilling to shuffle things dramatically week to week. OSU was 16th in the inaugural CFP Poll, made it to the playoff and won it all, if you recall. Being ranked 2nd or 3rd or even 5th right now is in no way a slight or anything that will prevent a team from winning the NC. Unbeaten Minnesota is sitting there at 17th with clear control of their destiny. They're obviously not expected to manage it, but if their playoff status is "win and you're in" starting out of it by 13 spots, everyone in the top five is sitting pretty.
Ehh, still can't breathe, cold meds or not. I really appreciate the thought, though. In the end, it'll work itself out. I think OSU, two SEC teams, and Clemson in one order or another is what the field will ultimately be. It's all pretty pointless right now, but arguing football beats the hell out of arguing politics, though, so why not indulge a little on my day off stuck on the couch lol
That's fair, and it's not like there aren't arguments to be made, especially because of the committee's inability to really pin down criteria. The outright dismissal of THIS year's OSU team by some because they haven't played a 2-loss top-10 team is almost astonishing, though. A list of stats, rather than a list of names, puts OSU's resume to date on par with anybody's. LSU's record will clearly separate them next week if they beat Alabama, and at that time, there won't be a question. Later in the season, things could very well shift again. It's really not as big a deal as people are making out of it as long as you win. In a few weeks, the discussion will rightly turn to the battle for #4, which is ultimately way more meaningful than who's #1.
@CFB Believe me, we know all about the inconsistency of the committee. We've been on both ends of it. With such an inconsistent process, it's hard to have faith that the best four teams will actually make it in any given year. That's the case for an 8-team playoff. It's not so you get the best eight; it's so you know you got the best four, so that you know you got the best. No Baylors or TCUs left out despite a strong argument. No UCFs never getting a shot, despite consecutive undefeated seasons. I don't think teams in those positions are THE best every year, but I think they're good enough to warrant a shot to prove they are. Eight teams let's you do that in a way four never will.
"And, changing gears, how many top 10 teams does LSU have to beat to impress somebody?" Considering that as of now they've beaten one, and they'll take the top spot if they beat two, I'm going to go with two. It's not that hard to figure out unless you're such a dim bulb that you think we should all still be losing our minds over a team giving up 38 to unranked Texas (and Vandy BTW). I get it, though. Acknowledging that OSU has been statistically better against a schedule with a better average opponent and smaller standard deviation from that average and that that's ample justification for putting them in front of LSU at this time in spite of LSU having slightly-to-moderately better top level opponents probably doesn't play well on this site.
I swear to God I'm not stalking your posts, but the more of them I read, the more I'm convinced I might be suffering from undiagnosed multiple personality disorder. Eight teams is the number. It's always been the number. We've just been collectively too afraid of what such a radical shift might mean for CFB. It must happen, however, and it will happen eventually. What people don't get about an 8-team playoff is that it's really not about giving the eight best teams a shot at the title. It's about ensuring at least the best four do get in. Eight teams allow you to be extremely confident that the best four really are all in there while also giving a true shot to any team. I don't subscribe to the UCF back-to-back champs line as anything other than a joke, but no one can tell me that a team that goes undefeated for over two straight seasons doesn't deserve their shots, regardless of the level of competition. At least, that's what the Clemson fans are saying.
It's not the margins. Just the one against UNC. That, coupled with how mediocre the ACC is outside Clemson, that Clemson's OOC is not particularly impressive, and the fact that Lawrence has not looked quite the same this season for the most part, is why the committee put them at #5 in poll 1 behind four teams with two pairs that have to play each other still. They're sending the message that Clemson is in if they go 13-0 since two in front of them will drop, but almost certainly out if they drop a single game since a top-4 team should not lose once against that schedule. That seems fair. A 1-loss team in the SEC West or B1G East would have a better claim at being one of the best four teams than a 1-loss Clemson this year, unless they get blown out. A 1-loss Big 12 or PAC 12 champ would have something to say about it in that scenario, as well. I wouldn't worry about it too much, though. From a stats perspective, they're the closest to OSU in terms of sheer dominance on both sides of the ball. I don't see Clemson dropping anything on their schedule from here on out. Besides, we still owe Dabo.
I fully expect OSU to be jumped by this week's winner, as they should. I'm not some fan blinded by loyalty. Barring the unexpected, LSU/Bama will jump to #1, then OSU will jump back to #1 following the PSU game most likely, then, assuming the SEC West winner takes the conference, they will probably retake #1 in the final poll, because a likely win over Georgia will probably look better than a rematch against Wisconsin, or a game against possibly Minnesota or Iowa, for the B1G title. And that's fine. It makes no real difference where you end up seeded in this playoff format, as long as you're in. And before you talk to much trash, I should correct you since you clearly haven't been paying attention to OSU over the last few years. They HADN'T been dominating teams, for the most part. They'd have their weeks, but the past two years, entirely too many teams kept it far closer than they had any right to on paper. Then OSU would drop one to a team that schemed their matchups perfectly and basically confirm the narrative that OSU is a team with problems. By contrast, this OSU team is the most thoroughly and consistently dominant OSU I've seen in my life, including the one that rolled your sorry @$$es en route to the NC. If you want to talk about what is ultimately ancient history in college football, might as well talk about how embarrassed the Tide would have been if not for your punter having the night of his life. I'm sure you got Jim Tressel's motor going with those 70 yard punts to save your defense from what otherwise would've been countless untenable positions, though OSU's dominating, aggressive offense surely was a bit of turn off for him. "RollTide_N_Colorado" lol weakest handle I've seen on here yet, girl.
Wisconsin has a terrible defense? OK, you remember what I said about ignorance? Go reread that bit while I discard your entire opinion and have a good laugh at your expense. It's not worth having a dialog with you if you can't look and see that UW still has a statistically great defense even after OSU had their way with it. That is willful ignorance, and you can't enlighten the person who refuses to learn.