|
I think it was a positive. They got smacked by a previously-undefeated team (though one that hadn't played a top 20 team yet), lost the turnover battle badly, made adjustments at halftime and took control of the game, running for nearly 300 yards. Syracuse didn't even threaten to score in the second half.
We shouldn't get too consumed by the score.
So what do you do when teams plays such widely variant schedules? Look at Oregon. Class of the Pac-12 now, that's clear. But when they went up against Georgia, it wasn't pretty. Ohio State hasn't played anyone tougher than Notre Dame, which isn't the same Notre Dame as last year. Michigan has dominated every game, but the scores don't all reflect that, plus their non-conference schedule ended up being laughable, for once.
It takes 10-12 games before you get a good picture of all of this. I find myself uninterested in the rankings themselves at this point. Why even try and separate Michigan and Ohio State when they play each other in a month?
It's easy to imagine the scenario at the end with three one-loss SEC teams all in the playoff, despite one not playing in the SEC championship. That seems to be the bigger problem. Maybe they all deserve to considered playoff-worthy. Once the playoff door was opened, the lack of a balanced schedule made it a beauty contest regardless.
If we need to settle all this, then let's drop the pretensions that this is an amateur sport, pay the players, get a CBA, and draw up a new league with a balanced schedule, no more non-power-five opponents, and do it properly.
|