T1B

Sudden Sam wrote: Bama was ranked #2 at season's end. They beat the #1 team in the Sugar Bowl (in an incredible game, by the way). What would you suggest they do with 'em?

Award LSU the 2012 Crystal Football?

Which they clearly should not have been.

Anyway, to Dins's point, are you willing to apply that same rationale to the 2003 clusterfuck that saw USC robbed of a shot in the BCS title game despite the fact that they ended the season ranked #1 in both polls? Then, on top of that, they went out and dominated in their bowl game. As you well know, no #1 team in the coaches' poll had ever failed to win their national championship following a victory in a bowl game.

Never happened before and hasn't happened since...

...and yet somehow the coaches managed to rope themselves into having to vote against their consciences by awarding LSU a completely bogus title.

At least the Associated Press had the good sense to stick by their guns and do the right thing.

Sudden Sam wrote: Lose your CCG like the Sooners did, you don't deserve to play in the title game.

Sudden Sam wrote:

M Club wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote: Lose your CCG like the Sooners did, you don't deserve to play in the title game.

CCG. Not a regular season game...in OT...by 3.

But is you lose a regular season game...in two OTs...by 6, you're not even worthy of discussion. Gotcha.

Dinsdale wrote:
Although I'm still fuming that KSU cancels their Oregon games, then passes them in the standings doe to SoS... outrageous.

You DO inderstand why that happened, don't you? Or are you just being petulant?

BTW, I'm not giving the 'Cats a pass. But with the XII's new nine-game conference format, it left league members with only three non-cons to schedule. With Miami home-and-homes already set in stone, and Snyder-being-Snyder (widely known for scheduling FCS directionals to acclimate his teams into a new season), there was no way the Cats were about to mix it up with a second FBS power in the same pre-season.

I dunno, Sammy.

While it's true that he's the Grandfather of SEC Non-Conference Scheduling, I'm afraid that Snyder would stroke-out if faced with the prospect of playing a conference game Week 1 or 2 of a new season...

BTW, the Wizard is an advocate of adding two more teams to the XII and returning to division play - the old guy really wants that fourth non-conference game back.

Van wrote:You mean besides the fact that they were beaten by double digits at home by the very team with whom they somehow ended up sharing the title?

Yeah, that was totally legit. No media bias bullshit attached to that one at all.

I'm assuming, then, that you have a problem with Notre Dame not winning the national title in '93? At least USC got a share of the national championship in '78.

Sudden Sam wrote:

Killian wrote: I know you're not talking about 1966, Sam. That would just be silly.

Actually I was talking about 1977 when you beat #1 Texas and jumped from #5 to a NC. #3 Bama destroyed #9 Ohio State 35-6 in the Sugar Bowl and that was back in the day when you had to wait 'til the next day to see what the voters decided.

Crushing.

But yeah, '66 was much worse.

Killian explained '77 quite well earlier.

Not sure about the backstory behind the vote in '66, although I do know that ND that year was the last team to win the national championship without playing in a bowl game. Interestingly, they reversed their no bowl game policy only a few years later.

Since we are talking Oregon here (by "we," I mean "I")...

So, take a guess which team has the best red-zone defense...

Is it Oregon, or **Insert name of any of the other 124 teams**?

Or perhaps for the 1966 team, it was the fact Alabama left their own state 3 times , didn't play a ranked team, and beat Tennessee because of a last second missed field goal, all while ND beat #8 OU 38-0 and #10 USC 51-0, and tied #2 MSU 10-10, all on the road.

1969 Texas was all white, and they didn't have a problem winning the NC.

Yeah, and for Bama to have had a chance to win their third straight title it would necessarily mean that the voters had in fact already awarded titles to their previous two all-white teams.

That explanation simply doesn't wash.

Sudden Sam wrote:Your Ducks are 46th in total D. Gonna have to do better than that.

Uhm... no.

This week (since saturday), I saw the stats (can't find the link to save my life) that showed the defensive efficiency ratings, that take posessions and whatnot into account.

3 teams were ahead of the pack. They were: #1 Bama, #2 LSU, #3 Oregon, then the rest.

Maybe if you guys had a real offense, you'd understand how this shit works.

Sudden Sam wrote:

Dinsdale wrote: So, take a guess which team has the best red-zone defense...

Is it Oregon, or **Insert name of any of the other 124 teams**?

Damn. Only 12 trips to the red zone for Bama opponents. Guess the Tide needs more practice keepin' 'em out. :grin:


Your Ducks are 46th in total D. Gonna have to do better than that.

ND only has allowed 13 trips to the red zone all year. 14 if you count Stanford's OT possession.

In the most important defensive stat (points allowed), ND has given up only 66 in seven games. I believe that's second in the country, behind only Alabama.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:In the most important defensive stat (points allowed)

Not really. The most important defensive stat is % of times the defense holds the opposing offense to less points than your offense.

I get that, Sam.

What you don't seem to get is that Old Man Offenses are going to give up less points.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/feidef2012

I except southerners to be able to decipher stats.

Oregon is #4 in both adjusted (tosses out taking a knee into half, and whatnot) and unadjusted (doesn't) defensive efficiency. Factor in TOP, and their rating goes up. By comparison, Bama is #1 and #2 in those respective categories.

And Oregon is #1 in red zone defense.

Oregon plays better offenses than Bama. Bama plays better defenses than Oregon. Factor those things in, and Oregon's defense is possibly the most impressive of any team, and Bama's offense can certainly be considered underrated by statistical measure.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:In the most important defensive stat (points allowed), ND has given up only 66 in seven games.

Hmmm. Navy, Purdue, Sparty, Michigan, Miami (of Florida), Stanford, and BYU. And not a single one of 'em a XII school. You DO realize six of the top 10 offenses in the country reside in that league, correct?

Sixty-six is just a number, Ter, and completely meaningless in XII Country. Hell, it's a half-time score some days.

There's a reason why they sing "Roll Oklahoma, roll Oklahoma, roll OklahoMAAHH" on average eight times a game at Gaylord Family.

Don't be surprised if the Land Thieves double up on your li'l stat. They WILL - If they can. It's what they do. BOOMER.

*Edit* And welcome back, Killian.

Truman wrote:You DO inderstand why that happened, don't you?

Sorry, thought I had posted to this, Tru... must have been an alcohol issue.

Yes, I do. It was Oregon that started it, but they buckied up cash to KSU, fair and square. It was a H&H starting last year. Oregon cancelled for a fat check to play LSU, but under the idea that this season was still on. KSU backed out to upgrade their game to Missouri State.

Not quite the same dealio.

Dinsdale wrote:

Truman wrote:You DO inderstand why that happened, don't you?

Sorry, thought I had posted to this, Tru... must have been an alcohol issue.

Good point, Dins. Either you were drunk when you thought you wrote it, or I read it and was simply too drunk to remember it. I'm not ruling out either scenario.

Yes, I do. It was Oregon that started it, but they buckied up cash to KSU, fair and square. It was a H&H starting last year. Oregon cancelled for a fat check to play LSU, but under the idea that this season was still on. KSU backed out to upgrade their game to Missouri State.

Interesting. I read another take

To give Snyder full credit isn’t fair to Oregon, which ducked the contract just as much as K-State did; so much so that the universities walked away from the agreement with no buyout money exchanging hands. With Pac-12 expansion (and its impending scheduling impact) in full-swing, Oregon’s then new athletic director Rob Mullens saw much less of a need for games/series like with K-State, which saw the possibility of nine Big 12 games on its horizon.

Then, less than two months after Oregon mutually agreed to part ways with both K-State and New Mexico, Georgia and the Ducks canceled a series for 2015-16, again with no buyout.

http://curtiskitchen.com/on-oregon-k-state-canceling/

I heard it a little different (from the beat writer in Eugene). I thought he said they bought out of the first game, in order to take the fat Jerry Jones check (which certainly wouldnt be chickening out), and were under the assumption game 2 was still on.


I do know that the Georgia cancellation was 100% Georgia's doing. You'd think with the alleged SoS weighting coming with the playoff, teams wouldn't be so shy about playing good teams.

D1 scheduling sucks right now. How many big time OOC games have their been this year (I don't really include ND and BYU, since they're all OOC, but I appreciate good team scheduling them)?

Sudden Sam wrote:Bama has Michigan State scheduled OOC for the near future.

So does Oregon.

MSU aren't pussies when it comes to OOC. Boise St., Oregon, Bama, and whoever else they've got coming up. Good on MSU.