According to OSU player, Mike Thomas, we shouldn't be ranked #2

[Sabanizer]

I was under the impression that a team got credit for the game when it was played, i.e. UGA was ranked when Bama beat them so it counts as a ranked win. When did this change? If you don't count ranked wins that way then you are essentially penalizing the winning team in regard to SOS..

Agree, in theory without this logic, you could beat every top 15 team 77 - 0, knock them out and then be accused of a weak schedule.

 

[CB4]

Yep - you can build a narrative to support your beliefs very easily.

"My team sucks less than your team......My team sucks less than your team....nah...nah..nah....nah" LOL

 

[B1GTide]

We must admit that some of our "feather in the cap" wins lost their luster as the season progressed.

They only lost their luster if you don't understand (or believe in) the depth of the SECw. These pundits see all of those 3-4 loss teams in the SECw as proof that the SECw is average at best. They ignore the fact that almost all of those losses came to other teams in the SECw, and that the SECw dominated the rest of its collective schedule.

Again, the strength of your conference is no longer an advantage with the playoff. It is being used against you. If the SEC doesn't win the championship this year, this story line will become even more prevalent. The rest of the college football world wants to use the playoff as proof that your SoS is inflated and that the SEC isn't, and never was, all that great.

 

[Timberline Tide]

Who?? Never heard of him!



:wink:





No seriously, I haven't. :BigA:

 

[Displaced Bama Fan]

It must suck being on the outside looking in.

 

[cbi1972]

They only lost their luster if you don't understand (or believe in) the depth of the SECw. These pundits see all of those 3-4 loss teams in the SECw as proof that the SECw is average at best. They ignore the fact that almost all of those losses came to other teams in the SECw, and that the SECw dominated the rest of its collective schedule.

Again, the strength of your conference is no longer an advantage with the playoff. It is being used against you. If the SEC doesn't win the championship this year, this story line will become even more prevalent. The rest of the college football world wants to use the playoff as proof that your SoS is inflated and that the SEC isn't, and never was, all that great.

Doesn't help that Bama has faltered in the postseason the last 2 years.

 

[BamaDMD]

We must admit that some of our "feather in the cap" wins lost their luster as the season progressed. Still, when you look at our season as a whole objectively you realized that we played an above average team more often than not in the regular season. We didn't play any teams who finished with double-digit wins, but lets be real the teams with those kinds of wins in the top six teams have some caveats. OU beat TCU and Baylor but those teams were decimated (almost in the literal Roman sense of the word) with injuries. OSU basically had 10 gimme wins to start the season, who knows what they would have looked like if they played just a couple of the better teams on the opposite side of their conference...because they didn't really look good all season until beating up on Michigan in the last game.

Alabama's resume is built on the fact that they played a lot of good teams and came out 11-1 despite really putting themselves behind the 8-ball early in the season before the slog through their schedule got properly started. I mean, Alabama was predicted to win 9 games against their schedule in the preseason and came out winning 11 games while the SOS stayed around the preseason watermark.

Also the committee not only looks at top 25 wins but they place significance on above .500 teams. I'd say that several of our opponents are good above .500 teams. One other thing, I was watching something (I think it was Galloway on ESPN) this weekend and they were saying ND had a quality loss and using it like it was almost a win. Do they count quality losses in the committee? Is this just more BS from the talking heads?

 

[TiderMan]

I included Florida since we will play them - did not include Charleston Southern.


Ohio State opponents: 74-73 (SOS: 35)
Alabama opponents: 90-53 (SOS: 1)

Thanks for the post. That is one of the stats/metrics that the playoff committee is looking at. Also Bama has only played one team with a losing record (ULM) and will have played 11 bowl eligible teams. Pretty solid schedule.

OSU on the other hand has played 5 teams with a losing record and 7 bowl eligible teams.

 

[B1GTide]

Also the committee not only looks at top 25 wins but they place significance on above .500 teams. I'd say that several of our opponents are good above .500 teams. One other thing, I was watching something (I think it was Galloway on ESPN) this weekend and they were saying ND had a quality loss and using it like it was almost a win. Do they count quality losses in the committee? Is this just more BS from the talking heads?

Long said that they only considered losses after everything else had been taken into consideration. That is why Oklahoma was ranked higher than ND last week. So, losses might come into play, but only if everything else still has two teams really close (according to Long).

 

[tidefanbeezer]

The appropriate response to this is one that my grandmother gave from time to time.

"Well bless his heart."

 

[CrimsonForce]

So from what I can tell, at least in a historical and statistical sense, is that a team receives credit for beating a team at the time of the game. So Alabama's win over Wisconsin and Georgia count as ranked wins. Now, of course the committee (or whoever) can take into account what happened after that game when evaluating teams. I would counter though, if you look at UGA, they were undefeated when Alabama played them and they were undefeated (other than the Bama game) with Nick Chubb who was the best player on the team. Georgia ended up 9-3 but probably would have been 11-1 or 10-2 with Chubb. So, as others have pointed out in this thread, one can create whatever narrative fits their argument..

 

[BamaDMD]

Long said that they only considered losses after everything else had been taken into consideration. That is why Oklahoma was ranked higher than ND last week. So, losses might come into play, but only if everything else still has two teams really close (according to Long).

So if everything else is very close between two teams, then a loss is evaluated on its merit of who and how?

 

[B1GTide]

So if everything else is very close between two teams, then a loss is evaluated on its merit of who and how?

Yep - It makes sense if you consider some convoluted logic that can result from discussion of losses. Things like, x team lost to y team and we beat y team so we are automatically better. Well, Memphis beat Ole Miss - are they clearly better than Alabama?

Only consider teams beat unless left with nothing else to create separation.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Tweet I just sent Mike Thomas - note the irony

 

[Chukker Veteran]

They ought to give bonus points when an opponent was ranked highly going into the Bama game, only to finish the season either firing at least talking about firing their coach.

 

[BamaNation]

these OSU people are tiresome. By every objective collective statistical measure, Bama is in top 4. I always like Sagarin ratings because they're fairly simple to understand and complex in how it's calculated: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sagarin/

Bama #1
6-1 vs Top 30
#5 SOS

OSU #3
1-1 vs Top 30
#61 SOS


That's probably too much math for Mr. Thomas

 

[CrimsonTheory]

I got advice for Mike Thomas, suck it up, buttercup.

 

[JBama_in_PCOLA]

I want to know where does he get his information from. It is either outdated or he's just plain stupid.

 

[BamaHoosier]

A buddy of mine who is the ultimate Notre Dame homer posted that list on Facebook. Normally I ignore stuff like that. This time I called him out on it. Left him a lengthy response saying a lot of what you guys have said already. Mentioned our opponents win percentages, our opponents bowl eligibility, and even threw it out there that using that method of judgement, Notre Dame hadn't beaten a ranked power 5 team all season until USC barely climbed their way back in the top 25. No more than two minutes after I had commented, he deleted the post.

Butt hurt idiots want to troll, but the facts don't lie unless you do a whole lot of manipulation to them. And that's what our contemporaries in other conferences are having to do to feel better about themselves. Funny, but I don't see anyone working this hard to dispel Iowa or Oklahoma from the top 4. Just goes to show, we are still king of college football.

 

[BamaHoosier]

I want to know where does he get his information from. It is either outdated or he's just plain stupid.

It was last weeks AP poll. Which, funny thing about his standards. By his metrics, both us and them have the same record against the top 25, 0-1. Not exactly helping his case, is he.