Official 2012-2013 NCAA Football Thread

[fathom]

Texas is irrelevant to the rankings after next week's games.

 

Because? Also, what happens to ND's SOS if USC loses to UCLA this weekend.

[LittleHurt05]

Navy wins more against the same schedule than those teams. That's what makes them higher-rated. A team that goes 8-4 against a crap schedule is better than a team that goes 4-8 against the same schedule.

 

Last season 4 Sun Belt & 5 MAC team won 7 or more games. Navy went 5-7.

[cabiness42]

Because? Also, what happens to ND's SOS if USC loses to UCLA this weekend.

 

Because after next weekend, neither team will have played Texas, and ND's SOS will still be ahead of KSU even if USC loses to UCLA, but not by as much.

[fathom]

Because after next weekend, neither team will have played Texas, and ND's SOS will still be ahead of KSU even if USC loses to UCLA, but not by as much.

 

Forgot KSU wasn't playing next week (you could have just said they were off right away ). However, it would still mean after the regular season, K St. is very likely to have a higher SOS.

Edited November 15, 2012 by fathom

[cabiness42]

Last season 4 Sun Belt & 5 MAC team won 7 or more games. Navy went 5-7.

 

Well, last year ND's SOS wasn't very relevant, and the MAC teams winning all those games aren't getting on the schedules of Top 25 teams. If NIU calls up Alabama, Alabama hangs up on them and calls back Akron instead.

[fathom]

Well, last year ND's SOS wasn't very relevant, and the MAC teams winning all those games aren't getting on the schedules of Top 25 teams. If NIU calls up Alabama, Alabama hangs up on them and calls back Akron instead.

 

NIU played Alabama about 10 years ago

[farmteam]

This squabbling seems pointless. If Notre Dame (or any team, really) and their fans really want to consider their team elite, then they should be walking all over the Navies and Eastern Michigans. Sure, maybe they'd beat Eastern Michigan by 30 and and Navy by only two touchdowns, but the point is either way they should easily win the game.

 

Fortunately, I don't have this problem, since my Big Ten team loses to Ball State and Navy. Woo hoo!

[cabiness42]

NIU played Alabama about 10 years ago

 

And NIU won, which is why Alabama will never play them again.

[cabiness42]

This squabbling seems pointless. If Notre Dame (or any team, really) and their fans really want to consider their team elite, then they should be walking all over the Navies and Eastern Michigans. Sure, maybe they'd beat Eastern Michigan by 30 and and Navy by only two touchdowns, but the point is either way they should easily win the game.

 

Fortunately, I don't have this problem, since my Big Ten team loses to Ball State and Navy. Woo hoo!

 

Margin of victory isn't really a test of a team being elite. It's very misleading, especially depending on a team's style. ND is a team built on running and defense. There are fewer possessions in their games so they don't win by as many points.

 

This is how Oregon fools everybody into thinking they are so awesome until they go get crushed by an SEC team or the likes in a bowl game. They play an up-tempo game that produces lots of possessions and points and their margin of victory impresses idiot voters.

 

The skillset required to beat average-to-good teams by a ton of points isn't necessarily the skillset required to beat the other elite teams.

[LittleHurt05]

Well, last year ND's SOS wasn't very relevant, and the MAC teams winning all those games aren't getting on the schedules of Top 25 teams. If NIU calls up Alabama, Alabama hangs up on them and calls back Akron instead.

 

NIU was on BIG 10 champion Wisconsin's schedule last year on a neutral field.

Toledo played at Ohio State.

Western Michigan played at Michigan last year. Michigan won the Sugar Bowl.

 

And Akron is playing @ South Bend in 2015.

[RockRaines]

Margin of victory isn't really a test of a team being elite. It's very misleading, especially depending on a team's style. ND is a team built on running and defense. There are fewer possessions in their games so they don't win by as many points.

 

This is how Oregon fools everybody into thinking they are so awesome until they go get crushed by an SEC team or the likes in a bowl game. They play an up-tempo game that produces lots of possessions and points and their margin of victory impresses idiot voters.

 

The skillset required to beat average-to-good teams by a ton of points isn't necessarily the skillset required to beat the other elite teams.

Oregon has a BCS win at least, I wouldnt harp on a team that has been much more successful than Notre Dame has over the last 20 years. They've been to back to back to back BCS games including a title game. Pretty sure they aren't "fooling" anyone.

[cabiness42]

NIU was on BIG 10 champion Wisconsin's schedule last year on a neutral field.

Toledo played at Ohio State.

Western Michigan played at Michigan last year. Michigan won the Sugar Bowl.

 

And Akron is playing @ South Bend in 2015.

 

The Big Ten teams are more willing to play the top MAC teams than other conferences, I will give them that. The Big Ten seems to play fewer FCS schools compared to other conferences as well.

 

That Akron game must have been stuck on the schedule 30 years ago by Gerry Faust or something. I have no other explanation as to why we would be playing Akron.

[cabiness42]

Oregon has a BCS win at least, I wouldnt harp on a team that has been much more successful than Notre Dame has over the last 20 years. They've been to back to back to back BCS games including a title game. Pretty sure they aren't "fooling" anyone.

 

No disputing ND's past, just pointing out that Oregon's style of play tends to leave them overrated by poll voters due to inflated victory margins.

[RockRaines]

No disputing ND's past, just pointing out that Oregon's style of play tends to leave them overrated by poll voters due to inflated victory margins.

Yeah, I dont buy that at all. When have they been overrated exactly? They had a very real chance to win a national title (lost by 3 points), they won the Rose bowl last year and were beat by a top tier defense the the 2010 Rose Bowl by only 9 points.

[cabiness42]

Yeah, I dont buy that at all. When have they been overrated exactly? They had a very real chance to win a national title (lost by 3 points), they won the Rose bowl last year and were beat by a top tier defense the the 2010 Rose Bowl by only 9 points.

 

Yes, they lost 2 of 3 bowls against tough teams in low scoring games after running up scores all season long, thus proving that their huge margins of victory didn't mean a whole lot. They weren't any better than Big Ten teams that had been winning a lot of games by smaller margins.

 

[RockRaines]

Yes, they lost 2 of 3 bowls against tough teams in low scoring games after running up scores all season long, thus proving that their huge margins of victory didn't mean a whole lot. They weren't any better than Big Ten teams that had been winning a lot of games by smaller margins.

How does that make them overrated? Those teams had months to prepare for their offense and by definition title games or bowl games are going to have very talented teams in them.

[LittleHurt05]

Yes, they lost 2 of 3 bowls against tough teams in low scoring games after running up scores all season long, thus proving that their huge margins of victory didn't mean a whole lot. They weren't any better than Big Ten teams that had been winning a lot of games by smaller margins.

 

 

Wisconsin's 11 wins last year came by an average of 33.5 points, while Oregon's 11 wins came by an average of 28.1 points.

 

2009 Ohio State's 10 wins came by an average of 21.6 points, while Oregon's 10 wins came by an average of 18.9 points.

[cabiness42]

How does that make them overrated? Those teams had months to prepare for their offense and by definition title games or bowl games are going to have very talented teams in them.

 

If I recall correctly, in their two Rose Bowls, they were ranked higher and significant favorites and lost one and barely won the other. So they were perceived as being significantly better than teams they were pretty even with.

[SexiAlexei]

Yes, they lost 2 of 3 bowls against tough teams in low scoring games after running up scores all season long, thus proving that their huge margins of victory didn't mean a whole lot. They weren't any better than Big Ten teams that had been winning a lot of games by smaller margins.

I don't understand what point you're trying to make, as your arguments have been flying in every direction.

 

So, when Oregon plays garbage teams, they rack up large margins of victory, but when they play teams equal to them, it's a close game? That only makes sense... I don't expect them to throw up 70+ points against an equal team.

 

Look at Alabama. They play the run first win with defense game (the argument you made for ND), and the only close games they have are against LSU and TAM. They blow out these middle of the pack teams. They aren't winning in the 3OT because the other team missed a gimmie FG.

 

 

[cabiness42]

So, when Oregon plays garbage teams, they rack up large margins of victory, but when they play teams equal to them, it's a close game? That only makes sense... I don't expect them to throw up 70+ points against an equal team.

 

Not quite that. Oregon plays a faster pace that produces a lot more possessions. The bigger the gap between them and their opponent, the more it inflates their margin of victory.

 

Oregon is going to beat bad teams by 40 when ND and KSU are going to beat them by 20.

 

Oregon is going to beat decent teams by 20 when ND and KSU are going to beat them by 10.

 

This is going to make Oregon look like they're a lot better than ND and KSU when they really aren't, and that is borne out in the bowl games when they play evenly matched games against teams that they have been made significant favorites against because of their style of play.

[LittleHurt05]

Not quite that. Oregon plays a faster pace that produces a lot more possessions. The bigger the gap between them and their opponent, the more it inflates their margin of victory.

 

Oregon is going to beat bad teams by 40 when ND and KSU are going to beat them by 20.

Oregon is going to beat decent teams by 20 when ND and KSU are going to beat them by 10.

 

This is going to make Oregon look like they're a lot better than ND and KSU when they really aren't, and that is borne out in the bowl games when they play evenly matched games against teams that they have been made significant favorites against because of their style of play.

 

ND only beat Purdue, BYU, & Pitt by 3 points each.

[SexiAlexei]

Not quite that. Oregon plays a faster pace that produces a lot more possessions. The bigger the gap between them and their opponent, the more it inflates their margin of victory.

 

Oregon is going to beat bad teams by 40 when ND and KSU are going to beat them by 20.

 

Oregon is going to beat decent teams by 20 when ND and KSU are going to beat them by 10.

 

This is going to make Oregon look like they're a lot better than ND and KSU when they really aren't, and that is borne out in the bowl games when they play evenly matched games against teams that they have been made significant favorites against because of their style of play.

 

KSU beat ISU by 6 and Oklahoma by 5.

 

Oregon beat USC by 11.

 

These are their closest wins, not one of these went to OT.

 

KSU, UO, and ND have all beaten the teams on their schedules. ND has had the hardest time beating the middle of the pack teams. As pointed out above, Purdue, BYU, and Pitt by 3.

 

ND's struggles against these lesser teams is why a lot of people are not putting them above KSU or UO. When you consistently struggle to beat these middle teams, what are the odds you'll struggle against the best teams?

Edited November 15, 2012 by SexiAlexei

[RockRaines]

Not quite that. Oregon plays a faster pace that produces a lot more possessions. The bigger the gap between them and their opponent, the more it inflates their margin of victory.

 

Oregon is going to beat bad teams by 40 when ND and KSU are going to beat them by 20.

 

Oregon is going to beat decent teams by 20 when ND and KSU are going to beat them by 10.

 

This is going to make Oregon look like they're a lot better than ND and KSU when they really aren't, and that is borne out in the bowl games when they play evenly matched games against teams that they have been made significant favorites against because of their style of play.

Kelly's offense at Cincy was a fast paced scoring machine, so its not scheme. I think what you are saying is ND doesnt have a good offense, certainly not as good as those teams. I dont think Kelly's design is to only beat teams by a little.

[cabiness42]

KSU beat ISU by 6 and Oklahoma by 5.

 

Oregon beat USC by 11.

 

These are their closest wins, not one of these went to OT.

 

KSU, UO, and ND have all beaten the teams on their schedules. ND has had the hardest time beating the middle of the pack teams. As pointed out above, Purdue, BYU, and Pitt by 3.

 

ND's struggles against these lesser teams is why a lot of people are not putting them above KSU or UO. When you consistently struggle to beat these middle teams, what are the odds you'll struggle against the best teams?

 

ND didn't struggle against the best team on their schedule. The Oklahoma game wasn't close. How is that less indicative of how they would fare against KSU than their 3-point win over Purdue? You're cherry-picking results to support your hatred of ND.

 

 

[cabiness42]

Kelly's offense at Cincy was a fast paced scoring machine, so its not scheme. I think what you are saying is ND doesnt have a good offense, certainly not as good as those teams. I dont think Kelly's design is to only beat teams by a little.

 

ND's offense is more run-oriented and thus runs more clock, resulting in fewer possessions. The goal of coaches is to win games, and they really care zero about margin of victory.