NCAA Football, 2014-2015

[Valmy]

The nice thing about a Big 12 schedule is you will always have Kansas to be your patsy.  In the PAC 12 you may not always have Colorado on your schedule.

[alfred russel]

Why would we only consider LSU or Auburn?

We don't have to imagine any of this. The numbers are right there.

LSU SOS in 2013: 25
Auburn SOS: 13
Alabama: 39
Arkansas: 12
Missouri: 24

Stanford: 1
Oregon: 29
UCLA: 7
Washington: 17
Arizona State: 2


Is the schedules in the Pac-12 tougher? Survey says: Uhh, duh. It isn't even very close. Nor should you expect it to be - how could replacing a conference opponent with some patsy result in anything else?

A lot depends on how you compute strength of schedule, but regardless, that shows exactly what I thought it would. Some SEC teams have tougher schedules than some Pac 12 schools, and vice versa. If the strength of schedule is the same this year, and Oregon is making a run at a playoff, they should be disadvantaged against everyone in that list except Alabama.

[Berkut]

...but overall, 9 Pac-12 conference games versus 8 SEC conference games plus a patsy is going to result in a much tougher SOS for the Pac-12. Not in every case of course, since the particulars matter, but in general that is true.

The other advantage of the 9 conference game schedule is consistency. That fourth OOC game is going to vary a lot I imagine, but adding another conference opponent is not going to vary as much, and will also mean that there is less chance of a team getting a much harder or easier conference schedule in some given year based on who they get lucky enough to "miss" that year.

Not that any of that matters to the SEC of course. They don't much care about competitiveness of quality of football compared to their need to make sure they get into at least two BCS game every year for that sweet, sweet pile of cash.

[Berkut]

Why would we only consider LSU or Auburn?

We don't have to imagine any of this. The numbers are right there.

LSU SOS in 2013: 25
Auburn SOS: 13
Alabama: 39
Arkansas: 12
Missouri: 24

Stanford: 1
Oregon: 29
UCLA: 7
Washington: 17
Arizona State: 2


Is the schedules in the Pac-12 tougher? Survey says: Uhh, duh. It isn't even very close. Nor should you expect it to be - how could replacing a conference opponent with some patsy result in anything else?

A lot depends on how you compute strength of schedule, but regardless, that shows exactly what I thought it would. Some SEC teams have tougher schedules than some Pac 12 schools, and vice versa.

The question you asked though is:

So are 6 games in the SEC West, 1 game against Florida or UGA, and 1 random game in the SEC East more challenging than 9 in the Pac 12?

And the answer is rather definitively "No".

[alfred russel]

I disagree. LSU having to play Texas A&M, Alabama, Auburn, and Florida every year is a rather formidable conference slate. Their rating last year is going to be hurt by not playing anyone good out of conference, and in general Pac 12 schools play stronger out of conference schedules.

Strip out the out of conference games from the rating system, and then we can discuss exactly how the rankings are being produced. Then you might start to have a definitive case to make. My subjective opinion, and I think the opinion of most people that follow the sport, is that LSU running the conference schedule is at least as difficult as a generic Pac 12 team doing the same.

[Valmy]

LSU having to play Texas A&M

Yeah they have really sweated that one the past three years.

[Berkut]

I disagree. LSU having to play Texas A&M, Alabama, Auburn, and Florida every year is a rather formidable conference slate.

And Oregon having to play Stanford, UCLA, and USC is not? The numbers say that in fact it is just as formidable.

And more importantly, Oregon does not get to replace a game against Stanford or Washington or Arizona State with a game against Southeast Mississippi State School of Mines.

Their rating last year is going to be hurt by not playing anyone good out of conference

Yeah, it hurts the SOS schedule rating for all the SEC teams. Replacing a good BCS team with a terrible FCS team will do that.

, and in general Pac 12 schools play stronger out of conference schedules.

Strip out the out of conference games from the rating system, and then we can discuss exactly how the rankings are being produced. Then you might start to have a definitive case to make. My subjective opinion, and I think the opinion of most people that follow the sport, is that LSU running the conference schedule is at least as difficult as a generic Pac 12 team doing the same.

Got it - so if we ignore the shitty teams they play because their system encourages them to play shitty teams, then their strength of schedule is pretty good.

Why is that? Because the SEC is so OSSUMSAUCIMZOMG! How do we know that? Because they win so many games against that weak schedule we should ignore!

The numbers are there - the SEC is the #1 conference overall, but it is by a pretty narrow margin. A given SEC is team is not far and away better than a given Pac12 team, and the numbers make that clear.

Playing 8 SEC teams and 1 terrible team is by every rational and objective measure, easier than playing 9 Pac12 teams.

Again, this is pretty damn obvious. I don't even know why you are arguing it, except that you really, really have faith that those West Coast Pac12 teams can't really be all that good, so the numbers must all be wrong...

The summation of your argument is that we should ignore the objective data, and just take your word that, well, the Pac12 really isn't THAT good, despite what the numbers say, and having to play SEC teams is just plain more difficult than playing Pac12 teams.

[CountDeMoney]

I for one applaud Berkut's ability to maintain consistency in sanity by debating someone who "ages" Miami teams.

As an aside, the Dish Network commercial with Matt Leinhart and Heath Shuler is brilliantly priceless.

"We're going back to college."
"Take me with you."

[Valmy]

Was it Brian Bosworth who came in at the end?  That was hilarious.

[CountDeMoney]

Lol, yeah.  Awesome commercial.

[Eddie Teach]

I for one applaud Berkut's ability to maintain consistency in sanity by debating someone who "ages" Miami teams.

Heh, Berkut lives for this stuff. And the FSU win has revitalized him.

You watch, if the champ this year comes from the ACC, Big 10 or Big 12, he'll be out there next year arguing the Pac is clearly the best conference.

[Berkut]

I for one applaud Berkut's ability to maintain consistency in sanity by debating someone who "ages" Miami teams.

Heh, Berkut lives for this stuff. And the FSU win has revitalized him.

You watch, if the champ this year comes from the ACC, Big 10 or Big 12, he'll be out there next year arguing the Pac is clearly the best conference.

The best conference is not defined by who produces the NC, especially given a system that has in the past been clearly setup to create adverse results.

I would certainly not trade being a Pac12 fan for being a SEC fan. Maybe Big 10 if not Pac12.

If all college football was run like the Pac12 and Big10, it would be a greatly improved product. If it was all run like the SEC, I would quit watching.

[alfred russel]

And Oregon having to play Stanford, UCLA, and USC is not? The numbers say that in fact it is just as formidable.

And more importantly, Oregon does not get to replace a game against Stanford or Washington or Arizona State with a game against Southeast Mississippi State School of Mines.

What numbers are you talking about? What scenario are we talking about?

If we are talking about the challenge of qualifying for a national title game, the you are talking about the odds of achieving perfection or close to it. That is very different than the odds of getting into a bowl game.

I would think that for a national title contender, replacing Washington And Arizona State with Alabama and the Southeast Mississippi State School of Mines would be a bad trade (from the perspective of ease of running the table). 

[alfred russel]

I for one applaud Berkut's ability to maintain consistency in sanity by debating someone who "ages" Miami teams.

Not today, but we should revisit that someday. When I deleted all my threads, I left that one because I knew history would prove me right.

I still remember Berkut going nuts in multiple posts about the stupidity of my assertion that the WR trio Santana Moss, Reggie Wayne, and Andre Johnson was more talented than the top three trio on most NFL teams.

[alfred russel]

If all college football was run like the Pac12 and Big10, it would be a greatly improved product. If it was all run like the SEC, I would quit watching.

They are all run the exact same way. It's all about $$$ with a bit of college politics and PR posturing.