Great Day for College Football

[MaineRed]

Is it fair to say that people use an entire different criteria when it comes to evaluating college football teams compared to college hoops?

When it comes time to talk worthy teams for the NCAA tourney, strength of schedule is the big topic of discussion.

Seems in football playing cupcakes is being advocated. Am I wrong? I see a lot of people and I don't just mean here who think KU should be rewarded "for being undefeated". Nobody wants to talk about who they play, just that they play in a "BCS" conference.

Well in basketball I remember 21 win Syracuse who gave Georgetown their only loss in their last 16 games getting shut of the tourney and nobody shed many tears as Syracuse deserved what they got because of their weak schedule. The fact thay no team from a major conference with 20 wins had ever been shut out nor the strength of the Big East mattered.

I recall some advice to the Syracuse team. Leave New York for an out of conference road game. But Kansas stayed home and played C.Michigan, SE La, Toledo and Florida Atlantic before conference play.

Serious question. Why the polar opposite approaches? Just picking up wins in basketball isn't good enough to get you into a 65 win tourney, even when you play in a premier league. But it is good enough to give you one of two spots in a championship football game?

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by MaineRed

Is it fair to say that people use an entire different criteria when it comes to evaluating college football teams compared to college hoops?

When it comes time to talk worthy teams for the NCAA tourney, strength of schedule is the big topic of discussion.

Seems in football playing cupcakes is being advocated. Am I wrong? I see a lot of people and I don't just mean here who think KU should be rewarded "for being undefeated". Nobody wants to talk about who they play, just that they play in a "BCS" conference.

Well in basketball I remember 21 win Syracuse who gave Georgetown their only loss in their last 16 games getting shut of the tourney and nobody shed many tears as Syracuse deserved what they got because of their weak schedule. The fact thay no team from a major conference with 20 wins had ever been shut out nor the strength of the Big East mattered.

I recall some advice to the Syracuse team. Leave New York for an out of conference road game. But Kansas stayed home and played C.Michigan, SE La, Toledo and Florida Atlantic before conference play.

Serious question. Why the polar opposite approaches?

It's apples and oranges. Your Bowling Green analogy doesn't hold any water because they are not in a BCS conference. Like it or not and no matter if they deserve it or not, an undefeated Kansas has to be ranked highly.

You also forget this is not for the NCAA football championship. That game will be played in Chattanooga, TN on December 14. This is for the BCS championship and they have their own rules set up.

There are probably not a lot of people who believe Kansas is a legitimate BCS championship contender but as long as there is a system like this and they meet the criteria, they have to be in. Besides, if they win the Big 12 title game, they have to be considered a very good team.

[KronoRed]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

The conference championship games are all about money, nothing else.

Please, they are more about 12 or more team conferences making sure that there is only one champion and not a ridiculous bunch of "co champs"

[MaineRed]

Bowling Green might not be in a BCS conference but they are included in the BCS rankings. Would they not be in the title game if they were 1st or 2nd?

I realize that would never happen, them being 1 or 2 but the reason for that is a weak schedule. That is my point. Kansas is playing a Bowling Green schedule. It shouldn't be rewarded.

Sure Kansas should be considered good if they win the Big 12. But what about the winners of the SEC, Pac 10 and Big Ten?

[MaineRed]

Originally Posted by KronoRed

Please, they are more about 12 or more team conferences making sure that there is only one champion and not a ridiculous bunch of "co champs"

Exactly. Either that or the Pac 10 and Big Ten have something against money.

[KronoRed]

The Pac 10 actually used the extra 12th game to start to a full round robin conference schedule, good for them.

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by MaineRed

Bowling Green might not be in a BCS conference but they are included in the BCS rankings. Would they not be in the title game if they were 1st or 2nd?

I realize that would never happen, them being 1 or 2 but the reason for that is a weak schedule. That is my point. Kansas is playing a Bowling Green schedule. It shouldn't be rewarded.

Sure Kansas should be considered good if they win the Big 12. But what about the winners of the SEC, Pac 10 and Big Ten?

It would be difficult for BG to be in the title game if they were undefeated. Boise State from last year is a perfect example. They went undefeated and got to play in a BCS bowl but couldn't play for the BCS championship because they weren't in a BCS conference. If Boise St. were in the Pac 10 and went undefeated, they would be right in there.

The system is designed to keep teams that aren't in a BCS conference and are not Notre Dame out. Kansas may be playing a BCS schedule but going undefeated in a BCS conference makes them part of the conversation.

The winners of the other conferences shouldn't have lost any of their games. Then they would have made the Kansas situation moot.

[MaineRed]

I know it would be "tough" for a team from outside of a big conference to play in the title game. But that wasn't what you said before. You seemed to be implying that it was against some rule or something.

Teams such as MAC teams get penalized because they play in weaker conferences. And that is why the SOS is down in the 100s. They don't get the respect, don't get the votes and the computers knock them down as well, because of the SOS. But teams like Kansas who just happen to be playing a MAC schedule, despite being in a BCS conference get this extra respect.

I have great respect for teams in the BCS and agree they should be the only teams who get title shots. If in basketball we just picked a final 4 every year, George Mason would never get in. What I'm saying is lets not be blind and give Kansas credit they have not earned. It is all fine and dandy that they are listed on paperwork in the Big 12 office. But they lucked out with their schedule and don't have to play Texas and Oklahoma. I'm sorry, the conference you are in shouldn't be part of the argument if you don't play the top two powers in said league (in the regular season).

Wouldn't we be arguing about the schedule if there were 3 undefeated teams from BCS conferences? But since we are down to 2 we just assume the two undefeated teams are the best and move on? It doesn't matter who you play, so long as you go unbeaten?

Chip, your comment that the other conference champs just shouldn't have lost a game is pretty short sighted. LSU couldn't play a schedule as easy as Kansas unless they left the SEC.

I think you are going to be pretty disapointed with the title game if Oregon and LSU don't lose another game while OSU stays unbeaten. The BCS has their own rules and one loss teams are allowed in, even when there is a team with no losses from a BCS conference.

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by MaineRed

I know it would be "tough" for a team from outside of a big conference to play in the title game. But that wasn't what you said before. You seemed to be implying that it was against some rule or something.

Teams such as MAC teams get penalized because they play in weaker conferences. And that is why the SOS is down in the 100s. They don't get the respect, don't get the votes and the computers knock them down as well, because of the SOS. But teams like Kansas who just happen to be playing a MAC schedule, despite being in a BCS conference get this extra respect.

I have great respect for teams in the BCS and agree they should be the only teams who get title shots. If in basketball we just picked a final 4 every year, George Mason would never get in. What I'm saying is lets not be blind and give Kansas credit they have not earned. It is all fine and dandy that they are listed on paperwork in the Big 12 office. But they lucked out with their schedule and don't have to play Texas and Oklahoma. I'm sorry, the conference you are in shouldn't be part of the argument if you don't play the top two powers in said league (in the regular season).

Wouldn't we be arguing about the schedule if there were 3 undefeated teams from BCS conferences? But since we are down to 2 we just assume the two undefeated teams are the best and move on? It doesn't matter who you play, so long as you go unbeaten?

Chip, your comment that the other conference champs just shouldn't have lost a game is pretty short sighted. LSU couldn't play a schedule as easy as Kansas unless they left the SEC.

I think you are going to be pretty disapointed with the title game if Oregon and LSU don't lose another game while OSU stays unbeaten. The BCS has their own rules and one loss teams are allowed in, even when there is a team with no losses from a BCS conference.

I'm not saying it's against the rules for a non-BCS school that isn't Notre Dame to get into the championship game but the deck is stacked very heavily against them.

I understand my comment about those other teams not losing a game are shortsighted. But that's the way the rules are unfortunately. Is a 1 or 2 loss LSU team better than an undefeated Kansas team? More than likely. But since there is no playoff, LSU can't redeem themselves and Kansas gets to play in the championship game. And if Kansas does go undefeated, they have to win the Big 12 championship game where they will play Oklahoma. Nobody would be arguing about Kansas right now if LSU had beaten Kentucky. Right now a loss to Kentucky by LSU still trumps a Kansas win over Iowa St. or Kansas St. or Nebraska. But if LSU loses another game, and Kansas keeps winning, LSU is out of the picture.

I just think it's a shame it's never going to be settled on the field.

[MaineRed]

Originally Posted by Chip R

Is a 1 or 2 loss LSU team better than an undefeated Kansas team? More than likely. But since there is no playoff, LSU can't redeem themselves and Kansas gets to play in the championship game.

I don't follow. Kansas gets to play in the title game? Only if they finish 2nd and right now that spot is occupied by LSU. Plus they'd have to jump over Oregon. You seem to be implying that because Kansas is unbeaten it is their spot, no matter what the BCS standings say. That just isn't true.

When it comes to Kansas vs. LSU or LSU vs. anyone for that matter, not named Ohio State, the Tigers have redeemed themselves. They are number 2 and comfortably ahead of number 4 Kansas in the BCS standings.

I'm not saying it's against the rules for a non-BCS school that isn't Notre Dame to get into the championship game but the deck is stacked very heavily against them.

I'm not disputing that. I agree the deck is stacked against them. That is my point. The deck is stacked against them because they play weak schedules. They don't play big boy college football so they don't get the respect and like I said earlier, they don't get the votes.

My point is, Kansas is playing a Bowling Green schedule. They are in the Big 12 but they got lucky with the schedule and avoided the Michigan and Ohio State of the league. They officially are in the cushy BCS conference but it isn't enough to just say, they are in a BCS conference and LSU is in a BCS conference when talking their schedules. There is more to it than that.

To this point Kansas is getting respect that they have not earned when looking at how teams before them were evaluated. If Kansas can be number 4 playing a MAC schedule then there is no reason whatsoever a MAC team that was unbeaten couldn't get that high or as high as you expect Kansas to go.

Save me the "its how the rules work". I get that. I just happen to disagree with it.

[Johnny Footstool]

There is an ESPN Insider article available now on this very subject. I can't get the entire article, but the title blurb insinuates that yes, Kansas might indeed be able to leapfrog LSU by winning out.

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by MaineRed

I don't follow. Kansas gets to play in the title game? Only if they finish 2nd and right now that spot is occupied by LSU. Plus they'd have to jump over Oregon. You seem to be implying that because Kansas is unbeaten it is their spot, no matter what the BCS standings say. That just isn't true.

When it comes to Kansas vs. LSU or LSU vs. anyone for that matter, not named Ohio State, the Tigers have redeemed themselves. They are number 2 and comfortably ahead of number 4 Kansas in the BCS standings.

If LSU loses another game then if Kansas wins out they can jump them is all I'm saying. Yes, there is Oregon but Oregon could slip up or Kansas could pass them just because they are undefeated and Oregon isn't.

[paintmered]

From my viewpoint, strength of schedule is so dynamic from week to week, that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to gauge the true strength of a team by their SOS until the regular season is over.

[OnBaseMachine]

Originally Posted by KronoRed

The Pac 10 actually used the extra 12th game to start to a full round robin conference schedule, good for them.

Yup. I love the round robin within the conference. I wish all conferenes could do it, but it woud be nearly impossible for the conferences with 12 teams to do it.

[MaineRed]

Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool

There is an ESPN Insider article available now on this very subject. I can't get the entire article, but the title blurb insinuates that yes, Kansas might indeed be able to leapfrog LSU by winning out.

No doubt. I just find it unlikely unless Kansas really takes Mizzou and OU out behind the woodshed while LSU narrowly wins a couple of their remaining games. Kansas needs help from a lot of voters.

Originally Posted by Chip R

If LSU loses another game then if Kansas wins out they can jump them is all I'm saying. Yes, there is Oregon but Oregon could slip up or Kansas could pass them just because they are undefeated and Oregon isn't.

Again, I know all the scenarios. I know how the system works. I know lots of things COULD happen. But you mentioned a one loss LSU team and then claimed that "Kansas gets to play in the championship game."

Only an idiot would think a two loss LSU team is going to stay in front of Kansas. That aspect is of no relevance and simply doesn't need to be discussed. Nobody is going to claim a two loss LSU team deserves to be ahead of Kansas. Its a one loss LSU team that is the issue. And when you claim that Kansas gets to go to the title game because LSU doesn't get to redeem themselves it just doesn't make any sense.

It isn't breaking news to anyone that LSU will slip if they lose.