Did anyone else watch the BCS countdown show last night?

[oldguyfrog]

ESPN did a segment on applying the hypothetical 4-team playoff to this year. Here's probably what the seeding would look like for this year:

1. ND
2. Alabama or Georgia
3. Florida
4. Oregon

2 teams would make the Tournament despite not participating in their respective conference championship games -- Florida & Oregon. And the Big 12 champion would be left out.

I am concerned this will happen with regularity under the Big 12's nine game round-robin. The other power conferences split their depth across divisions, which by default protects "good" teams from one another. And in the case of the SEC and Big Ten, they play fewer conference games which further amplifies the effects by padding Wins and Losses with one more out of conference game.

The SEC has six teams in this week's BCS top 10. All six are highly qualified no doubt, but their W-L records are a function of the fact that they don't play each other.

Either the Tournament needs to revert to conference champions (my preference) or the Big 12 needs to expand so that we can enjoy the same scheduling benefits as everyone else.

My two cents.

 

[bscttyb]

Yes, the Big 12 needs to expand to get a Conference Champion game. Also by having 2 divisions, I would assume the Big 12 would have at least 2 if not 3 teams in the top 10 by the end of the year solely on the fact they all won't be beating up on each other all year.

 

[ReedFrawg]

Great post...

 

[weklfrog]

I think the playoff should be the top 4 rated conference champs. Conference play would consititute the first round of determining who gets in the playoff. If you don't win your conference, you don't get to play for the NC. The current format makes winning your conference meaningless and encourages the SEC type format in which top conference teams don't play each other. The full round robin is the best way to determine who is the best team in the conference.

 

[itsalizard]

I think the playoff should be the top 4 rated conference champs. Conference play would consititute the first round of determining who gets in the playoff. If you don't win your conference, you don't get to play for the NC. The current format makes winning your conference meaningless and encourages the SEC type format in which top conference teams don't play each other. The full round robin is the best way to determine who is the best team in the conference.

Maybe with the caveat that the Conference champs are ranked in the top 12. OOC scheduling should also carry significant weight.

 

[jake102]

Big 12 needs to get to 12 again... Split the divisions and have a championship game. Going to have to be creative to split the divisions though... Since UT and OU would need to be in the same division to protect their yearly game, you would have a lot of power on one side already.

 

[jmcbryde]

The SEC has six teams in this week's BCS top 10. All six are highly qualified no doubt, but their W-L records are a function of the fact that they don't play each other.

While I agree with your overall point that the Big 12 needs to expand to split up the depth of the conference, those SEC teams in the top 10 did play each other.

Bama beat LSU but lost to A&M and is about to play Georgia
Georgia lost to South Carolina but beat Flordia
Flordia beat A&M, LSU, South Carolina and lost to Georgia
LSU beat South Carolina and A&M but lost to Flordia and Georgia
South Carolina lost to LSU and Flordia but beat Georgia
A&M lost to LSU and Flordia but beat Bama

So it's not like the top SEC teams avoided playing one another. I think it's more of a factor that the overall depth of the Big 12 was better than the SEC this year. There were no Tennessees, Kentuckys, Auburns, or Arkansas's in the Big 12 this year, just Kansas. The top of the SEC was better than the Big 12 but the middle and lower tiers were not.

I do agree that the Big 12 needs to expand to at least 12 to have the same scheduling advantage the SEC has.

 

[weklfrog]

Maybe with the caveat that the Conference champs are ranked in the top 12. OOC scheduling should also carry significant weight.

It would be unusual that the top 4 rated conference champs would not be ranked in the top 12. It is possible this year but three out of four of these would have to occur: 1) KSU gets beat badly enough by UT to drop from 6th to out of the top 12 and OU Lose; 2) UCLA beating Stanford; 3) Wiscy beating Nebraska; 4) Clemson losing to North Carolina or winning but not moving from 14th to 12th in the BCS standings.

 

[KillerFrog InD KitchenSink]

I do think that there is an argument for 8 game conference schedules increasing both the number of teams in the BCS/playoff and bowl games in general (although the B-12 was able to buck that trend this year with so few nonconference losses and parity in the 3-9 slots so that a lot of teams were able to get to 3+ conference wins).

I also think that 14/16 team leagues have a better chance getting more teams in the playoff.

I don't think it makes a difference 10 versus 14 or 16 in terms of one team getting in the playoff.

 

[Bizarro Frog]

Genius of the SEC schedule is that almost every year 2 of the top 6 teams will get the schedule Alabama and Georgia got this year. They only needed to go 1-1 against division rivals to reach title game. With the current 8 game SEC schedule teams will only play 1 game a year against someone other than their non permanent rival in the other division. Majority of the teams will only play once every 6 years. Best example is that Alabama will only play Florida, Georgia, or South Carolina once every six years. This also means every 6 year cycle they will have 3 years without playing any ot them.

Alabama has benefited from Tennessee's fall the most of any team in the SEC since they play them every year. I personally think they will have to amend their sceduling because of how Florida has been screwed this year. They played LSU, A&M, Georgia, and South Carolina. In fact teams like Florida and LSU are screwed because they play every year. There has also been a push to only count division games towards for the SEC Title Game. A&M will also benefit because they have been paired with Missouri, who I think will die on the vine as they lose their TX recruits.

The SEC Title game itself will mean virtually nothng to the conference because both teams playing will usually only have 0 or 1 loss and the winner and possibly the loser will qualifiy for the Playoff. The SEC will not care which team makes it.

I have no clue what is best for the conference with regards to size but we better keep on how the SEC and Big Ten/14 use these scheduling advantages.

 

[gohornedfrogs]

I think it's more of an indictment of how and when you lose, and who you lose to. If KSU had only lost to OU back in Sept. then they would be top 4.

A mid-November thrashing by unranked Baylor (who had a losing record at the time), was enough to cast serious doubt.

 

[masterfrog]

You can't really plan this stuff with scheduling. Look at the Big 10 this year. Nebraska won their division and the three teams they played from the other division were Ohio State, Penn State and Wisconsin. Those are the top 3 finishers in the other division. Nebraska's schedule may get a lot easier for the next two years, but they played every team that even had a pulse in the Big 10 this year.

 

[GlendarrochFrog]

I think it's more of an indictment of how and when you lose, and who you lose to. If KSU had only lost to OU back in Sept. then they would be top 4.

A mid-November thrashing by unranked Baylor (who had a losing record at the time), was enough to cast serious doubt.

Alabama lost at home on November 10 and they only dropped to #4. KSU lost on the road and dropped to #7. Georgia lost by 28 points and that didn't seem to hurt them at all as they are on the doorstep of the National title game. The bottom line is that, right or wrong, the SEC plays by different rules. I heard an announcer say after the Notre Dame win this weekend that this year the system got it right because they are going to settle the title between the two best teams on the field. It is assumed that a one loss team out of the SEC is superior to every other one loss team in the country. It is not even up for debate if a 1 loss Oregon or KSU should be in the title game.

It is insane to me that if you look at all the different 1 loss, 2 loss, 3 loss teams in the rankings, there will always be 2 or 3 SEC teams before you get to another team. The SEC is always the top ranked team at whatever record they have. The SEC has the top 3 ranked 1 loss team and three of the top four 2 loss teams.

 

[jake102]

Alabama lost at home on November 10 and they only dropped to #4. KSU lost on the road and dropped to #7.

KSU got beat by a terrible Baylor team by 30 points or something. aTm is #9 and beat them by one score.

 

[Aloha Frog]

The whole problem is that the SEC is thought of too highly. Florida, at #3 in the scenario, is nonsense. They almost lost to Louisiana-Lafayette. If they had, another one loss SEC team would have been #3 and Florida would have dropped all the way to #9 or so. They would still be in front of a two loss Oklahoma. The SEC rules the world. They can cheat. They can manipulate their schedules. They can do whatever they want to do and the media love them. I'm sick of those guys.

 

[jmcbryde]

The whole problem is that the SEC is thought of too highly.

Win the 6 BCS championships in a row and that will happen.

 

[Aloha Frog]

Win the 6 BCS championships in a row and that will happen.

Put a Big 12 team in every year, and two Big 12 teams some years, and see how many championships the Big 12 has. If over half the teams on average come from one conference, the conference is going to look better than it is.

 

[Gunner]

AllI know is, a middle of the road Big 12 team is now dominating the SEC.

 

[NubomTurk]

While I agree with your overall point that the Big 12 needs to expand to split up the depth of the conference, those SEC teams in the top 10 did play each other.

Bama beat LSU but lost to A&M and is about to play Georgia
Georgia lost to South Carolina but beat Flordia
Flordia beat A&M, LSU, South Carolina and lost to Georgia
LSU beat South Carolina and A&M but lost to Flordia and Georgia
South Carolina lost to LSU and Flordia but beat Georgia
A&M lost to LSU and Flordia but beat Bama

So it's not like the top SEC teams avoided playing one another. I think it's more of a factor that the overall depth of the Big 12 was better than the SEC this year. There were no Tennessees, Kentuckys, Auburns, or Arkansas's in the Big 12 this year, just Kansas. The top of the SEC was better than the Big 12 but the middle and lower tiers were not.

I do agree that the Big 12 needs to expand to at least 12 to have the same scheduling advantage the SEC has.

I was told there would be no math...

 

[jake102]

AllI know is, a middle of the road Big 12 team is now dominating the SEC.

FWIW, they are kind of having a perfect storm of factors this year...

1) 5 seniors starting on offense
2) Their 2 OTs are juniors, but will both be Top 15 picks in the NFL draft this year (Joeckel a Top 5 pick)
3) Found a diamond in the rough with Manziel
4) Total of 7 players starting on their offense will be gone after this year.

5) 5 seniors on their defense
6) Their best player is DE Demontre Moore who is a junior... he will leave and be a Top 15 NFL draft pick
7) Total of 6 starters on defense will be gone.

8) First time the SEC has had to deal with a legitimate spread offense type attack and first year playing aTm


Without looking at their schedule, I predict aTm will be 8-4 next year... possibly worse.