College Football Off Topic

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: College Football Off Topic

Alabama also played Fresno State and Mercer
Georgia also played App State and Samford
Auburn also played Georgia Southern, Mercer, and Louisiana-Monroe
South Carolina also played Louisiana Tech and Wofford
Clemson played Kent State and The Citadel
Miami played Bethune-Cookman and Toledo
Notre Dame played Temple and Miami (OH)
Oklahoma played UTEP and Tulane
Ohio State played UNLV and Army
Wisconsin played Utah State, FAU, and BYU
USC played Western Michigan
Penn State played Akron and Georgia State
UCF played FIU, Maryland, and Austin Peay
Washington played Montana and Fresno State
TCU played Jackson State and TCU
Stanford played Rice

There's your Top 15 and their stellar OOC schedules.

All well and good until you start comparing in-conference schedules. Overcoming that is why mid-majors are held to a different standard for OOC in the first place. Because they have a lot of ground to gain by not playing the most talented teams 8 and 9 times per season.

Weird to see that TCU played themselves, but good info. Even if you're purposely omitting all the strong opponents from that list--like not mentioning that OU and Ohio State played each other, lol. So selective it hurts.

[TripleCrown9]

Re: College Football Off Topic

All well and good until you start comparing in-conference schedules. Overcoming that is why mid-majors are held to a different standard for OOC in the first place. Because they have a lot of ground to gain by not playing the most talented teams 8 and 9 times per season.

Weird to see that TCU played themselves, but good info. Even if you're purposely omitting all the strong opponents from that list--like not mentioning that OU and Ohio State played each other, lol. So selective it hurts.

Lol I was purposely posting the weak teams that everyone played, so that is in fact what I was doing.

It was said that UCF didn't play enough quality OOC opponents. Neither did most of the other 24 ranked teams.

[KSUowls]

Re: College Football Off Topic

Alabama also played Fresno State and Mercer
Georgia also played App State and Samford
Auburn also played Georgia Southern, Mercer, and Louisiana-Monroe
South Carolina also played Louisiana Tech and Wofford
Clemson played Kent State and The Citadel
Miami played Bethune-Cookman and Toledo
Notre Dame played Temple and Miami (OH)
Oklahoma played UTEP and Tulane
Ohio State played UNLV and Army
Wisconsin played Utah State, FAU, and BYU
USC played Western Michigan
Penn State played Akron and Georgia State
UCF played FIU, Maryland, and Austin Peay
Washington played Montana and Fresno State
TCU played Jackson State and TCU
Stanford played Rice

There's your Top 15 and their stellar OOC schedules.

And here are the in conference opponents that UCF isn't getting because they aren't part of the P5.

-Georgia also played Auburn (twice) and South Carolina in conference
-Clemson played Miami, VT & NC State in conference
-Miami played Clemson and VT in conference
-Notre Dame doesn't have a conference but they played Georgia, USC, Stanford, NC State & Miami
-Oklahoma played TCU & Oklahoma State in conference
-Ohio State played Penn State, Mich State, Wisconsin in conference

-Wisconsin played OSU in conference (interestingly, Wisconsin was also a team that despite being in the P5 and undefeated for most the year the committee did not give a lot of credit to because their schedule was crap until their CCG)
-USC had Wash State and Stanford in conference
-Penn State had OSU and Mich State in conference
-Washington had Wash St & Stanford in conference
-TCU had Oklahoma and OK State in conference
-Stanford had USC (2x), Washington, Wash State in conference


It's not that OOC is the end all be all. It's that UCF needs 2 or 3 high quality OOC matchups to equal what all of those top 15 teams are getting inside their own conferences (before any big OOC games those teams may be scheduling on top of it).

[KSUowls]

Re: College Football Off Topic

I think you meant South Bend. I would remember a UGA-Michigan game, lol. Point is still well taken. People trying to extrapolate 1 game Bama played against Mercer into a 'nobody plays good teams OOC' position is baffling and very obviously selective.

Oops. I saw your avatar and Michigan was in my head lol.

[TripleCrown9]

Re: College Football Off Topic

It's not that OOC is the end all be all. It's that UCF needs 2 or 3 high quality OOC matchups to equal what all of those top 15 teams are getting inside their own conferences (before any big OOC games those teams may be scheduling on top of it).

The one place I'd say it is their fault is that their OOC schedule is crap. If they went undefeated while playing LSU, Michigan and USC in a season instead of FIU, Maryland and Austin Peay then then it would be much harder to keep them out. Those big OOC schools don't want to do a home/home with UCF though so UCF doesn't want to schedule them....Sorry, if want to be be included in the party then you're going to have to go on the road and play a big OOC schedule even if it means you don't get a home date with that team later on.

[KSUowls]

Re: College Football Off Topic

Lol I was purposely posting the weak teams that everyone played, so that is in fact what I was doing.

It was said that UCF didn't play enough quality OOC opponents. Neither did most of the other 24 ranked teams.

No, it was said that UCF didn't play enough quality opponents period, because unlike the P5 teams they don't have them on their schedule by default. Nearly all of the top 25 teams from the P5 had 2, 3, or even 4 more quality opponents just within their own conference. UCF doesn't get them in conference so they have to get them elsewhere.

[KSUowls]

Re: College Football Off Topic

Below

That's a cop out response that is used by the Power 5, and playoff committee, to keep teams like UCF out of the chance to play for a National Championship.

They can't help the conference they are in. They can't help that schedules are made years in advance. They can't help if a Power 5 team decides to buyout a game vs them rather than risk taking a loss to an "inferior" team.

The conference a team plays in doesn't, at least it shouldn't, equate to the worthiness of a team to play for a National Championship.

UCF beat every team that was put before them, including a team from the powerhouse SEC.

What more are they supposed to do?

They don't control the lack of quality opponents in their conference. They can control who they schedule OOC.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: College Football Off Topic

Lol I was purposely posting the weak teams that everyone played, so that is in fact what I was doing.

It was said that UCF didn't play enough quality OOC opponents. Neither did most of the other 24 ranked teams.

They didn't and also didn't play enough quality conference opponents either, because they play in a 2nd tier conference. I'm not sure why this is so difficult for people to understand: a strong OOC schedule is needed to overcome a weak conference schedule--kinda like how Notre Dame does it in overcoming a no-conference schedule. Yet, UCF's OOC schedule was arguably worse than any playoff contender's was. In addition to having the weak conference schedule.

So, now here we are blaming other teams for not scheduling UCF and blaming the committee for not giving UCF the benefit of a doubt when they didn't earn it. Especially not before the playoff teams had to be decided on. Move that Auburn win before bowl season and it's potentially a whole different animal. If Bama or UGA or OU or Clemson had gone 12-0 against UCF's schedule, the CFB world would've been set ablaze with hot takes about a ridiculously weak schedule. And none of them would've got in either, probably. In college football, it's not just about 'did you win'? It's also heavily about 'against whom did you win'?

As for you posting just the bad parts of OOC schedules, that could've been made clearer what your intent was. You seemed to be just wanting to lampoon the other teams with no acknowledgement that they, almost without exception, played 1 or 2 stronger OOC opponents than UCF did. So it came off as disingenuous or as an attempt to obscure, imo.

[TripleCrown9]

Re: College Football Off Topic

Below




They don't control the lack of quality opponents in their conference. They can control who they schedule OOC.

Except the OOC opponents are scheduled YEARS in advance (except for FCS teams, idk). Ohio State has a home and home with Boston College in 2026 and 2027.

When UCF scheduled Maryland, Maryland could've been good (which, fun fact and not super relevant to this conversation at all, Maryland also decided to claim a national championship after being the only team to finish undefeated and not finish #1).

[dickey1331]

College Football Off Topic

It’s also hard to schedule good OOC teams when a lot of the better P5 teams won’t play good non P5 teams. Why would Alabama want to play UCF when they can play say Idaho for example and still make the playoffs. Alabama could play all FCS team OOC and still make the playoffs if the NCAA didn’t have that rule about only 1 FCS win counting. It’s an unfair advantage and has been pretty much forever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[countryboy]

Re: College Football Off Topic

For those claiming that strength of schedule matters and there is no bias in the selections, let me ask this:

How do you explain Alabama getting in over Ohio State based on these credentials:

* Ohio State won the Big 10. Alabama not only didn't win the SEC, they didn't even win their division

* Ohio State had a stronger strength of schedule than Alabama.

Or even Alabama getting in over Auburn when Auburn had the tougher ranked schedule and beat Alabama head to head?

The selection process and the credentials needed are an uneven playing field. What is required of one team to get in is not required of another.

Forget UCF and teams from the group of 5, the selection process isn't even fair/even amongst the power 5 conferences.

[KSUowls]

Re: College Football Off Topic

Except the OOC opponents are scheduled YEARS in advance (except for FCS teams, idk). Ohio State has a home and home with Boston College in 2026 and 2027.

When UCF scheduled Maryland, Maryland could've been good (which, fun fact and not super relevant to this conversation at all, Maryland also decided to claim a national championship after being the only team to finish undefeated and not finish #1).

It's not an easy fix for sure. Most OOC games are scheduled at least a year or 2 (in some cases even several years), but that is the kind of proactive scheduling a G5 team is going to need if they want a legitimate shot at a title.

And unless they scheduled Maryland at the turn of the century when they had a string of 10+ win seasons then it's not going to cut it scheduling teams that have only managed even 9 wins twice in the last 14 years (with the most recent occurrence being 2010).

Had they been able to play the GT game then that would just be bad luck since GT is usually an above average team, but there isn't any excuse for having FIU & a FCS School to round out the non-conference schedule.

It's not fair for the talented group of kids who went 13-0 against the schedule their administration gave them, but it would hardly be fair for UCF or any G5 team to be able to go through a conference schedule where you're lucky if you have 1 or at most 2 other teams which barely crack the top 25.

It’s also hard to schedule good OOC teams when a lot of the better P5 teams won’t play good non P5 teams. Why would Alabama want to play UCF when they can play say Idaho for example and still make the playoffs. Alabama could play all FCS team OOC and still make the playoffs if the NCAA didn’t have that rule about only 1 FCS win counting. It’s an unfair advantage and has been pretty much forever.

It's only unfair in the sense that the default schedule of a team like Alabama provides them an inside track to getting a shot at the title if they have a good season while a good season by a team like UCF doesn't have that inside track. All things are not equal though because while Alabama has that inside shot advantage by the default schedule, it's much more difficult for them to have that good season because of the default schedule.

[KSUowls]

Re: College Football Off Topic

For those claiming that strength of schedule matters and there is no bias in the selections, let me ask this:

How do you explain Alabama getting in over Ohio State based on these credentials:

* Ohio State won the Big 10. Alabama not only didn't win the SEC, they didn't even win their division

* Ohio State had a stronger strength of schedule than Alabama.

Or even Alabama getting in over Auburn when Auburn had the tougher ranked schedule and beat Alabama head to head?

The selection process and the credentials needed are an uneven playing field. What is required of one team to get in is not required of another.

Forget UCF and teams from the group of 5, the selection process isn't even fair/even amongst the power 5 conferences.

-Ohio State had 2 blowout losses (1 of them at home against a good team, 1 on the road against an average team). IMO that's what it ultimately came down to.
-Alabama lost 1 game on the road, at night, against a top 10 team.
-Alabama decimated every team on the schedule until the finally week of the season.
-Auburn had 3 losses at that point
-And Alabama has street cred. Like it or not they earned it, but even still a lot of teams had to lose in front of them to make that happen.

[countryboy]

Re: College Football Off Topic

-Ohio State had 2 blowout losses (1 of them at home against a good team, 1 on the road against an average team). IMO that's what it ultimately came down to.
-Alabama lost 1 game on the road, at night, against a top 10 team.
-Alabama decimated every team on the schedule until the finally week of the season.
-Auburn had 3 losses at that point
-And Alabama has street cred. Like it or not they earned it, but even still a lot of teams had to lose in front of them to make that happen.

- Ohio State lost at home to Oklahoma by 15. I don't consider that a blowout loss, but whatever. They lost at home to a playoff team. The loss at Iowa is bad no matter what.

- Alabama did only lose one game, to Auburn, who won the division that night.

- Alabama beat FSU by 17 after FSU lost their starting QB. They beat Miss St by 7, Texas A&M by 8. I wouldn't call that decimating their entire schedule minus the loss to Auburn.

- One of Auburn's 3 losses was the championship game against Georgia. So they had an extra loss because they had to play an extra game that Alabama didn't have to play. Auburn also lost to Clemson, who was a playoff team. And they beat Alabama head to head.

- Alabama does have street cred and that is exactly my point. Street cred shouldn't have anything to do with whether or not a team is worthy of playing for a National Championship.

My point for posting what I did is that the credentials for getting into the playoffs are so flexible that the committee can manipulate them to make the credentials fit their selection, not the selection fit the credentials. And that is a problem.

But hey, its not changing. The committee will continue to manipulate their credentials and rankings to make their selections fit the criteria. And the highest level of college football will continue to crown a National Champion of a sport being played on an unequal playing field.

[BleacherBum2310]

Re: College Football Off Topic

Yeah Bama's only real case this year was Best Team. if resume or strength of schedule was real they wouldn't of gotten close.