Bowl Season - Proof of the SOS Pudding?

The closer the game gets the more confident I am in us giving a "Big Time" whooping to the Tigers.

TIDE-HSV said:

Bama played eight teams which played in bowls and beat seven (Ole Miss, of course, which won). Of all of Clemson's wins, of the eight which went to bowls, exactly six lost. Only Louisville and Appy St. won. The Clemson man behind the curtain (plus the usual heads) don't want you to pay attention to that...

Click to expand...

I hear you, but IMO, it's tough to read too much into bowl game results. No one is ever really sure where a team stands going into some bowl game. Certainly the Alabama fan base has played that card in the past a few times. (Not really motivated & etc..)

TIDE-HSV said:

Bama played eight teams which played in bowls and beat seven (Ole Miss, of course, which won). Of all of Clemson's wins, of the eight which went to bowls, exactly six lost. Only Louisville and Appy St. won. The Clemson man behind the curtain (plus the usual heads) don't want you to pay attention to that...

Click to expand...

I thought someone said we have played 10 or 11 bowl teams this year and now more after MSU but I may be mistaken.

That is an amazing W-L stat with Clemson and if Allen or Murray had stuck around for the bowl game A&M would have beat Louisville, which means the only team they beat who won a bowl game would have been Appy State who was playing Samford in league play 2 years ago.

TIDE-HSV said:

No, but when the results get spread over a number of games, you can infer something about the strength of the ACC...

Click to expand...

Oh, make no mistake, I think the ACC is incredibly weak, & thought so well before the bowl games were played (As I'm sure you did as well). I just don't think bowl games are a good way to show it. Each individual team / player would have it's own issues (good or bad) toward the respective bowl game.

TIDE-HSV said:

No, but when the results get spread over a number of games, you can infer something about the strength of the ACC...

Click to expand...

Exactly. Houston destroy FSU and that's what Clemson hangs their hat own. But what about ND, ODU destroy led them.

It's not that the teams are losing, it's that they are losing big.


Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

Bama Czar said:

I hear you, but IMO, it's tough to read too much into bowl game results. No one is ever really sure where a team stands going into some bowl game. Certainly the Alabama fan base has played that card in the past a few times. (Not really motivated & etc..)

Click to expand...

I agree to an extent, but with a sampling size of 8 there might be some sort of a pattern.

Con said:

I agree to an extent, but with a sampling size of 8 there might be some sort of a pattern.

Click to expand...

2 points here.

1) We probably all agree that the ACC was weak even before the bowl games were played. Therefore, we should have all concluded they the ACC may not fair well in the post season any way across the board with all other things / motivation being equal.

2) I don't really subscribe to the "number of games" thing, as each team / player would have its / his own issues related to motivation in playing a bowl game (outside of the playoff games).

This is why I like Sagarin, he's a little off sometimes but he sure paints a pretty clear picture by the end of the season. Alabama has an SoS of #1, Clemson has an SoS of #30 (bolstered by the playoff game they already played). Those are just two completely different seasons, it's almost like one team played in the big leagues and the other team played in the minor leagues.

Having said that, it doesn't take away the danger that Clemson poses. I think Alabama clearly is a better team, but sometimes the ball just doesn't bounce your way.

KrAzY3 said:

This is why I like Sagarin, he's a little off sometimes but he sure paints a pretty clear picture by the end of the season. Alabama has an SoS of #1, Clemson has an SoS of #30 (bolstered by the playoff game they already played). Those are just two completely different seasons, it's almost like one team played in the big leagues and the other team played in the minor leagues.

Having said that, it doesn't take away the danger that Clemson poses. I think Alabama clearly is a better team, but sometimes the ball just doesn't bounce your way.

Click to expand...

Sounds like the 33rd team in the NFL vs the 33rd team in NCAA

TIDE-HSV said:

Well, as to #2, as Con says, after a while, a pattern appears, so it's no longer on a game by game isolated by itself, but Ole Miss could happen again, as KK says, where your own receiver's helmet, plus 5 turnovers, loses the game for you. However, I think it will take that...

Click to expand...

I certainly like the odds of that not happening again.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

TIDE-HSV said:

Well, as to #2, as Con says, after a while, a pattern appears, so it's no longer on a game by game isolated by itself, but Ole Miss could happen again, as KK says, where your own receiver's helmet, plus 5 turnovers, loses the game for you. However, I think it will take that...

Click to expand...

Dang, that's a lot of commas.....

Snuffy Smith said:

I certainly like the odds of that not happening again.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

I hope my odds are better if winning the lottery than that happening again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SOS comparisons are a tough call. Sometimes it can delineate a great team from a fraud. Sometimes a weaker SOS can deceive you. OSU had a poorer SOS than us last year but they were the better team that night. The big thing is that maybe Clemson isn't quite as battle tested as their big games indicate and Alabama clearly had just the kind of gauntlet we thought this schedule would be like in the preseason.

rgw said:

Sometimes a weaker SOS can deceive you. OSU had a poorer SOS than us last year but they were the better team that night.

Click to expand...

High SoS can tell you for sure whether or not a team is good. We know Alabama is very, very good. Low SoS can only tell you that a team might not be as good as they appear. Low SoS of course does not mean a team is not good. I do think it matters in terms of resumes as well though. If you didn't play anyone, you didn't beat anyone, and if you didn't beat anyone, do you deserve a place in the playoffs? I'd say Clemson did but it shouldn't be automatic that just winning puts you there.

But... with Ohio State... even Boise State, and Alabama, SoS also means something else in my opinion. With Ohio State last year, they played a soft schedule most of the year, and they also stayed healthy. I see the two as having a link, not necessarily one that is always the case, but if you play a soft schedule it's easier to stay healthier than if you play a tough one. In the case of last year Alabama was beaten up, Ohio St. despite the quarterback issues was one of the healthiest teams in the country. That mattered on the field, for instance at linebacker Alabama ends up with a true freshman in there due to multiple injuries, and that leads to one of Ohio State's biggest plays. Also, with Boise State we saw a team that by no means demonstrated the ability to navigate a tough schedule, but like a car tuned for drag racing, showed great ability in bursts.

So, there this hidden value sometimes as well. We can for certain if a team is good based on SoS, but also much like a player who has been well rested throughout the season, there's that fresh legs off the bench type scenario that can play out as well. If I had to choose, I'd prefer Alabama have a bit soft SoS to be honest.

I agree that SOS means something and most of the other stats I have compiled favor Bama. But I can't get comfortable because I still have nightmares about Stephen Garcia, Johnny Football and some others. IMO those games were lost by our OFFENSE and not our Defense. I am certain Mr Watson will score some points, so we have to score more than he does. I know our HC says sometimes even the best DB give up big plays. I am hoping our O can rise to the occasion and not wait till mid-second quarter to start playing.

It is a straight fact that Alabama has played a more difficult schedule, but that doesn't mean that Clemson is a weaker team. It only means that Alabama is more battle tested. That said, has anyone seen an analysis that shows how each performed vs team averages? How many more points did their offense score than opponents allowed, and how many points their defenses allowed vs. average points scored per game?