2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

[J.D.]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

looking at the final rankings. top 25 wins:

1. Alabama: 4
2. Oregon: 4
3. Florida State: 3
4. Ohio State: 3
5. Baylor: 2
6. TCU: 2

[dxmnkd316]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

Not really sure how MS St jumps three spots over MSU without playing... but I don't really care. Orange vs GaTech and Cotton vs Baylor is about the same to me, plus it's another game for the coaching staff to try to figure out a high powered offense before next year when we have to play Oregon and OSU again. GaTech would've just been preparing for Air Force.

It helps the big ten get everyone into a bowl by not having us in the orange bowl.

[bronconick]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

Broncos going to play in Bronco Stadium.

[French Rage]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

Stanford plays Maryland in the Foster Farms Bowl at Levi's Stadium. Good news for me as I can walk and take public transit the whole way!

[JF_Gophers]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

Wow.
Minnesota gets Missouri in the Citrus Bowl on Jan. 1.

Finally a good bowl game!

[Spartanforlife4]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

It helps the big ten get everyone into a bowl by not having us in the orange bowl.

I noticed that. Hope it doesn't throw off competitive balance for the other bowls. It would be nice for the Big Ten to have a winning record for once.

[MinnesotaNorthStar]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

In the future, do we see TCU go for 80 against Iowa State in a similar scenario? What else can they do seeing as their schedule did them in?

Not lose to Baylor...

They do that...they're in.

[Slap Shot]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

@FauxPelini's exchanges with the Belk Bowl twitter account - priceless.

[JF_Gophers]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

Sour grapes from art briles. He knew they were in trouble when manning left the committee because only 1 other was from the south. But of course only says it now.

Weak.

[alfablue]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

Another point I'm seeing brought up:

The committee went with tOSU because they have the following/tradition/better ratings... If that's the case (I don't buy that line of thinking personally), why not go for TCU... They can then say that the "Little Guy" can make it in this system... Boise/TCU would have never gotten this in the old system... Why not play that card if you have it in your hand?

Realistically, TCU isn't a "little guy" anymore. BSU is, as their change to the Big East was a bust. But TCU is playing by the rules as is very long time B12 member Baylor.

So many complain about the B1G being weak, nobody seems to remember that the B12 ended up ony having 3 teams in the top 5- Baylor, TCU, and K-State. For the most part, their season was a disaster. Had others in the B12 had better seasons, the TCU/Baylor schedule would look a lot better, even with the poor non conference schedules. Depending on the ranking, the B1G was barely better in the 4/5 position than the B12- and that does matter.

Had OSU's B1G championship finished with a crappy win over Michigan (hurts to say that)- no way they would have gotten in.

Anyway, TCU is a Power 5 conference now. Not a Little Guy by any means.

[johnk]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

Only 4 teams had either no losses or 1 quality loss. This should have been a no-brainer. NC$$ money grab for themselves and networks. And how TCU falls below Baylor is beyond me! Played a tougher non-conference schedule and losing at Baylor by 3 is a hell of a lot better than losing at West Virginia by 14.

[Bob Gray]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

I wonder how much of a cluster******** there would have been if Missouri had somehow squeaked by Alabama? That would put Baylor and TCU in the conversation, along with a 2 loss SEC champ in Missouri that didn't exactly win convincingly, a 2 loss Alabama, and you could have arguments for a few other squads as well. For those of us wanting Chaos so that they're more likely to expand the playoffs, that would have been ideal. Darn pity it didn't.

That would have been a whole lot of fun to see what they did with that!

Of course we saw in D2 how a one loss Pittsburg State got moved ahead of an undefeated UMD team there, so who knows if something similar would have happened with a two loss SEC team?

[Spartanforlife4]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

Only 4 teams had either no losses or 1 quality loss. This should have been a no-brainer. NC$$ money grab for themselves and networks. And how TCU falls below Baylor is beyond me! Played a tougher non-conference schedule and losing at Baylor by 3 is a hell of a lot better than losing at West Virginia by 14.

Because, 1) same record 2) head to head 3) head to head meant Baylor was technically the conference bowl rep, and therefore more of the "official" conference champ for the comittee, so they got the bump. Plus the quality win against KSU made their resume better than a game against ISU.

I really don't think people would've had a problem with the committee if they hadn't been doing weekly rankings and just came out with a final poll, but because they did the last minute switch is it's causing all the controversy.

[johnk]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

Because, 1) same record 2) head to head 3) head to head meant Baylor was technically the conference bowl rep, and therefore more of the "official" conference champ for the comittee, so they got the bump. Plus the quality win against KSU made their resume better than a game against ISU.

I really don't think people would've had a problem with the committee if they hadn't been doing weekly rankings and just came out with a final poll, but because they did the last minute switch is it's causing all the controversy.

I agree that if they had Baylor ahead all along there would be less controversy but you cannot argue that TCU's overall resume isn't better than Baylor's.

[pgb-ohio]

Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World

Realistically, TCU isn't a "little guy" anymore. BSU is, as their change to the Big East was a bust. But TCU is playing by the rules as is very long time B12 member Baylor.

TCU is an innocent victim in one respect. To the extent the B12 is being penalized for not having a conference championship game, the Horned Frogs had no role in that. By joining the league, they were attempting to be part of the solution. Explaining all the movement between conferences is way beyond the scope of this comment. But just focusing on the B12, a major part of the story is the unequal division of TV revenue, which heavily favors Austin. That was clearly a factor for the 4 schools who departed. TCU wasn't present during those events. Not that they would have been strong enough to make a difference if they had been. I'm just saying they aren't responsible for problems that arose before they joined.

Part me says the B12 should be granted a waiver from the 12 team requirement for a conference title game. Numerically Ironic? Yes. But if title game results are going to be a key factor for playoff selection, then the 12 team rule has suddenly become unfair.

So many complain about the B1G being weak, nobody seems to remember that the B12 ended up ony having 3 teams in the top (25)- Baylor, TCU, and K-State. For the most part, their season was a disaster. Had others in the B12 had better seasons, the TCU/Baylor schedule would look a lot better, even with the poor non conference schedules. Depending on the ranking, the B1G was barely better in the 4/5 position than the B12- and that does matter.

Agreed, and yet I'm surprised it factored in. I went to bed Saturday night certain we'd be on the outside of the playoff looking in. Clearly the win over the Badgers was a tour-de-force, something Buckeye fans will cherish for a long time. But I found it impossible to believe that it was going to leapfrog us over TCU, who had also won big. When I first saw an online headline that the Buckeyes had been selected for the "Sugar Bowl," my reaction was: Not bad; that's better than the Peach; the Sugar has a much greater tradition. Then I wondered who the opponent would be. It took me a long moment to grasp that we had actually been selected for the four team playoff.

Had OSU's B1G championship finished with a crappy win over Michigan (hurts to say that)- no way they would have gotten in.

I agree that without the tour-de-force on Saturday, the Buckeyes don't get chosen. But the rivalry game will always be a special season unto itself -- with enormous value whether or not there are playoff implications. By definition it can't be crappy.