Hello Bama Fans. Let me tell you about Washington

B1GTide · Dec 8, 2016

GoZags said:
Been "nice" visiting with you. Looking forward to a good game in Atlanta. Sure can't (and won't) pop off about Alabama. But it's funny how the SEC and ACC take the easy way out and only schedule 8 conference games (and then take the ostrich approach when called on it).

Man, I am an Ohio State fan and I think that sounds petty.

edwd58 · Dec 8, 2016

GoZags said:
Actually I "question" any Power 5 conference that only schedules 8 league games. If the Pac 12 had that set up they'd have up to 6 fewer losses in the conference each season. It is what it is, but only scheduling 8 league games (and having 4 OOC games including a powderpuff game in mid November) is weak sauce in my opinion. (And the opinion of Power 5 conferences that schedule 9 league games.

I fail to see how playing an extra conference game makes the PAC-12 any stronger. More times than not, that 9th conference game is against a weaker conference foe. Also, I quite often hear on College Sports (XM radio) how practically every PAC coach would vote in a heartbeat to switch back to 8 games. Even the conference brass has questioned the benefit of playing 9 as it lends to eliminating potential playoff teams from contention. But if y'all want to puff up and beat your chest about it, by all means let me get out of the way.

teamplayer · Dec 8, 2016

GoZags said:
Been "nice" visiting with you. Looking forward to a good game in Atlanta. Sure can't (and won't) pop off about Alabama. But it's funny how the SEC and ACC take the easy way out and only schedule 8 conference games (and then take the ostrich approach when called on it).

Try playing 8 SEC teams year in and year out and talk about how easy it is. By the way, one of our non-conference cupcakes that we pounded into submission beat you guys like a rented mule. Yes, yes, I know USC was playing better when you guys played them, but look at the overall ratings of the schedules in most years, and the SEC normally rates very highly because we have to play eight other SEC teams. You can't expect these kids to play the game of the century every week. They need a few cupcakes to work out some kinks and get some backups some game experience. Good luck to you in Atlanta, though.

rgw · Dec 8, 2016

UDub played 9 conference games yet still ended up with a much worse SOS than Alabama who wasted a week playing UTC from the FCS.

thinkingfaceemoji

westide · Dec 8, 2016

Maybe Bama should try to beef up their schedule by playing Portland State.

NationalTitles18 · Dec 8, 2016

It almost always plays out the same: It's just whether it happens quickly or slowly. That's why I enjoy rarities like B1GTIDE.

rgw · Dec 8, 2016

I happen to have a lot of respect for UDub's team. I think they've got more than just a puncher's chance in this game. But arguing about Alabama's schedule is just an absolute joke. The second best team we played out-of-conference (Western Kentucky) is probably better than several of the teams they played in-conference.

crtide · Dec 8, 2016

What's up with all the parentheses and quotation marks?

GoZags said:
I watched the Clemson/North Carolina State game as well as the ACC final. Sure, that was just "2" games but both left me unimpressed with Clemson. And I'm willing to bet that's at least 1 more game than Clemson fans watched Washington this year. To me, a 31 point conference championship game win over #8 trumps a 7 point championship game win over #23.

Also, this "weak" schedule argument. At the end of the season, UW's schedule was something like 14 or 15 (out of the 128). They played 10 conference games plus 3 OOC. The big whining was from the Big Can't Count to 10 pundits/shills (can Ohio State get any more guys on ESPN?). UW's first game was against Big 10 Rutgers (who was 9-4 when the game was scheduled). In the meantime, Michigan was hurting their shoulders patting themselves on the back for scheduling Colorado (and won at home when the CU qb was injured in the 3rd quarter ... with the lead). Colorado was 12th in the Pac 12 three years running when THAT game was scheduled. So ... I understand ... UW's OOC ranked 127 out of 128 ... and until they played ranked Utah on the road (late in the season), ranked Washington State on the road (late in the season) and Colorado in the Pac 12 Championship, their OVERALL schedule was weak, too. But they PLAYED those games (and won those games). They also played (and lost) to USC at home (NOT a "pretty" sight that night). But the "meme" didn't change. So Washington went 12-1 with a Top 15 schedule and were "treated" as if they went 12-1 with the 127th ranked schedule.

Ohio State shouldn't have been "Top 3" as they sat on their duffs during "Championship" Saturday. They didn't even win their division.

THAT is why I felt Washington was a "bit" undersold.

And don't get me started on Barry Alvarez's "Committee". Stanford can't stand Washington. Tyrone Willingham (Washington's 0-12 disaster of a coach who was too busy playing golf to recruit/coach is STILL questioning why he was let go). Then there's Condi Rice. Hmmm .... 2 from Stanford "representing" the west. Right.

Let's just say I'm happy to make the playoffs .... and am looking forward to the next few weeks.

I've "read" a bit about UW just being lucky to be here. I have a feeling the Huskies are going to be around for awhile.

cuda.1973 · Dec 8, 2016

B1GTide said:
Cry me a river.

Site of the Crimean War.

TIDE-HSV · Dec 8, 2016

cuda.1973 said:
Site of the Crimean War.

Which one?

OreBama · Dec 9, 2016

LA4Bama said:
Is that you, Dr. Evil?

Yeah, I hope U-Dub does not use a "laser".

That's the problem with new money teams, they have no idea how to handle some success. And, yes, I mean that as snobby as possible.

RTR91 · Dec 9, 2016

GoZags said:
My "google" of the words "College Football Rankings Strength of Schedule" led me to this as the first option ... a "betting" website where #15 Washington's SOS is sandwiched between Ole Miss and Florida. I don't claim to be an expert, but I was curious where Washington ranked AFTER they played their later games against ranked opponents (1 at home, 2 on the road and one at a neutral site).

https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/schedule-strength-by-other

Now that I'm at a computer, I took a look at the rankings myself. This is what I found

Sagarin:
Alabama 12
Washington 41

NCAA (based on opponent's winning %):
Alabama 4 (62%)
Washington 42 (53.2%)

TeamRankings Basic Method:
Alabama 12
Washington 60

TeamRankings Season SOS:
Alabama 2
Washington 7

TeamRankings SOS Power Rankings:
Alabama 3
Washington 15

Wish TeamRankings actually explained their method to better understand how their basic method has Washington at 60 but then the power rankings shoot them up 45 spots.

B1GTide · Dec 9, 2016

RTR91 said:
Wish TeamRankings actually explained their method to better understand how their basic method has Washington at 60 but then the power rankings shoot them up 45 spots.

It doesn't matter. Alabama = weak sauce. Only played 8 SEC games during the regular season. :biggrin:

92tide · Dec 9, 2016

B1GTide said:
It doesn't matter. Alabama = weak sauce. Only played 8 SEC games during the regular season. :biggrin:

and if we wouldn't have done the things we did to beat ole miss, we would have lost.

GoZags · Dec 9, 2016

RTR91 said:
Now that I'm at a computer, I took a look at the rankings myself. This is what I found

Sagarin:
Alabama 12
Washington 41

NCAA (based on opponent's winning %):
Alabama 4 (62%)
Washington 42 (53.2%)

TeamRankings Basic Method:
Alabama 12
Washington 60

TeamRankings Season SOS:
Alabama 2
Washington 7

TeamRankings SOS Power Rankings:
Alabama 3
Washington 15

Wish TeamRankings actually explained their method to better understand how their basic method has Washington at 60 but then the power rankings shoot them up 45 spots.

Hey, thanks for the UW/Alabama SOS comparison. Not sure why you felt compelled to share that as I've never once compared UW to Alabama. The context for my remarks was the request for me to "justify" why I felt UW should have been in the 2 or 3 slot ... and my comparison/comments have been UW v Clemson (not UW v Alabama). No sane person anywhere would attempt to make a case for UW over Alabama.

But ... since both Sagarin and ESPN have been brought up .... it's interesting to note that UW is ranked ahead of Clemson in both Sagarin AND the ESPN Power Index. Sure, UW is still 4, but Clemson is behind them ... at 5. So both those "recognized" entities felt that UW's season (and resume) was better than Clemson's ... and that if their "rankings" were taken instead of the Committees, then Clemson should have been left out.

That's the point I was attempting to make.

Again, I don't recall making a single comment vis a vis Alabama .... other than to say I'm actually pleased that the UW/Alabama game will be played first (with a month for both teams to prepare).

B1GTide · Dec 9, 2016

GoZags said:
But ... since both Sagarin and ESPN have been brought up .... it's interesting to note that UW is ranked ahead of Clemson in both Sagarin AND the ESPN Power Index. Sure, UW is still 4, but Clemson is behind them ... at 5. So both those "recognized" entities felt that UW's season (and resume) was better than Clemson's ... and that if their "rankings" were taken instead of the Committees, then Clemson should have been left out.

You seem to be cherry picking stats from various services and polls to back up your point of view. I don't fault you for that - it is what fans do. Just recognize that the vast majority of stats and polls put Washington behind both Clemson and Ohio State.

crimsonaudio · Dec 9, 2016

GoZags said:
Been "nice" visiting with you. Looking forward to a good game in Atlanta. Sure can't (and won't) pop off about Alabama. But it's funny how the SEC and ACC take the easy way out and only schedule 8 conference games (and then take the ostrich approach when called on it).

And yet your SOS is far worse than Bama's...

RTR91 · Dec 9, 2016

GoZags said:
Hey, thanks for the UW/Alabama SOS comparison. Not sure why you felt compelled to share that as I've never once compared UW to Alabama. The context for my remarks was the request for me to "justify" why I felt UW should have been in the 2 or 3 slot ... and my comparison/comments have been UW v Clemson (not UW v Alabama). No sane person anywhere would attempt to make a case for UW over Alabama.

But ... since both Sagarin and ESPN have been brought up .... it's interesting to note that UW is ranked ahead of Clemson in both Sagarin AND the ESPN Power Index. Sure, UW is still 4, but Clemson is behind them ... at 5. So both those "recognized" entities felt that UW's season (and resume) was better than Clemson's ... and that if their "rankings" were taken instead of the Committees, then Clemson should have been left out.

That's the point I was attempting to make.

Again, I don't recall making a single comment vis a vis Alabama .... other than to say I'm actually pleased that the UW/Alabama game will be played first (with a month for both teams to prepare).

Fair point about your original SOS comment.

But you did indirectly bring Alabama into the conversation by discussing playing 9 conference games. So even with your wonderful 9 conference games, you still have a worse SOS than Alabama's measly 8 conference games.

crimsonaudio · Dec 9, 2016

RTR91 said:
But you did indirectly bring Alabama into the conversation by discussing playing 9 conference games. So even with your wonderful 9 conference games, you still have a worse SOS than Alabama's measly 8 conference games.

And one of our non conference games was against one of their conference powerhouses.

So yah, we could have played Vandy instead, would that have been 'better'?

Intl.Aperture · Dec 9, 2016

GoZags said:
Been "nice" visiting with you. Looking forward to a good game in Atlanta. Sure can't (and won't) pop off about Alabama. But it's funny how the SEC and ACC take the easy way out and only schedule 8 conference games (and then take the ostrich approach when called on it).

It's a fair point, but it hasn't kept the conference or Alabama from winning national championships. So we could really care less.

I don't think most people would care about the difference of a single conference game if they had won as many NC's as this team or conference.

Hello Bama Fans. Let me tell you about Washington

TideFans Legend

All-American

Hall of Fame

Suspended

All-SEC

TideFans Legend

Suspended

1st Team

Hall of Fame

Senior Administrator

All-American

Super Moderator

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

BamaNation Citizen

TideFans Legend

Administrator

Super Moderator

Administrator

All-American

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!