|
Replies: 52
| visibility 1,813
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
Clemson and a 4 team playoff...
Jun 4, 2012, 1:36 PM
|
|
There are a lot of scenarios out there.. but I would like show why I believe Clemson would be left out of a 4-team playoff. To me, with the way things are headed, the only way Clemson could get in is if they are undefeated and there aren't 2 other teams that are undefeated as well. Now, how many times are you banking on Clemson going undefeated in the next 100 years?
Here goes...
Last year... the last week (after conf championships) the bcs rankings were as follows:
#1- LSU 13-0
#2- Bama 11-1
#3- Oklahoma St 11-1
#4- Stanford 11-1
Let's say that we went 12-1. There is NO WAY we get into a 4 team playoff in that scenario. They were willing to put LSU and Bama in a National title game with Bama NOT winning their conference. You better believe they'll put multiple SEC teams in a 4 team playoff. And if that's the case, Ok St and Stanford would get the nod over us. That is where STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE will KILL us if we are in the ACC.
SOS rankings for those teams:
LSU- #8
Bama- #29
Ok State- #6
Stanford- #22
Clemson- #32 (and that's with playing 2 OOC SEC teams)
Bama had the "weakest" SOS and they STILL got into the NC. And you also have to think about the Big Ten. What happens when they have an undefeated or one loss team added to that equation?
Bottom line is... I don't want to have to go undefeated to get a shot at a 4 team playoff... and it doesn't look like a one loss Clemson would get in the playoff staying in the ACC.
|
|
|
|
 |
Oculus Spirit [82946]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80103
Joined: 11/29/99
|
We'd have gotten in at 12-1. We were ahead of Stanford
Jun 4, 2012, 1:43 PM
|
|
when both of us were undefeated on Oct. 23. If we lose to GT but beat State and USC, and Stanford gets blown out by Oregon (they did), we're in there.
BCS Standings
RK TEAM RECORD
1 LSU 8-0
2 Alabama 8-0
3 Oklahoma State 7-0
4 Boise State 7-0
5 Clemson 8-0
6 Stanford 7-0
7 Oregon 6-1
8 Kansas State 7-0
9 Oklahoma 6-1
10 Arkansas 6-1
11 Michigan State 6-1
12 Virginia Tech 7-1
13 South Carolina 6-1
14 Nebraska 6-1
15 Wisconsin 6-1
16 Texas A&M 5-2
17 Houston 7-0
18 Michigan 6-1
19 Penn State 7-1
20 Texas Tech 5-2
21 Arizona State 5-2
22 Georgia 5-2
23 Auburn 5-3
24 Texas 4-2
25 West Virginia 5-2
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
you've got to look at the standings after conference
Jun 4, 2012, 1:44 PM
|
|
championships were done.
there's no way we would have got in with that scenario. sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82946]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80103
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Oregon won PAC 12 not Stanford. We get in over
Jun 4, 2012, 1:47 PM
|
|
Stanford. What was USC ranked when we played them. We beat them and State we're in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
LSU won the SEC... Bama still got in the NC!!!
Jun 4, 2012, 1:49 PM
|
|
It doesn't matter that Oregon won the conference... Stanford was still ahead of them in BCS rankings... we wouldn't have gotten in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82946]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80103
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Imo, we get ahead of Stanford just based on those old
Jun 4, 2012, 2:01 PM
|
|
standings that had us ahead. We'd have beaten USC who was better than anyone they beat. Plus, VT again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19352]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 22266
Joined: 4/25/04
|
Re: Clemson and a 4 team playoff...
Jun 4, 2012, 1:45 PM
|
|
my question to the ACC defenders is why do you want to handcuff Clemson by not giving us an "oops" game.
A one loss ACC school will be left out while a 1 loss SEC or BIG school will be in.
Why should we handicap ourselves by not not having this same ability?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82946]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80103
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Wouldn't have been left out last year. It does help we'd
Jun 4, 2012, 1:50 PM
|
|
have two tough SEC wins on schedule.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19352]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 22266
Joined: 4/25/04
|
Re: Wouldn't have been left out last year. It does help we'd
Jun 4, 2012, 1:51 PM
|
|
and if we go to a 9 team ACC schedule then the chances of us having 2 good OOC games to strengthen our schedule drops a good bit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
That is another GREAT point... we go to a 9 game ACC
Jun 4, 2012, 1:53 PM
|
|
schedule, and our SOS drops EVEN MORE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82946]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80103
Joined: 11/29/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19352]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 22266
Joined: 4/25/04
|
Re: I like 9 game schedule. it gives the more talented teams
Jun 4, 2012, 2:10 PM
|
|
and gives us a weaker SOS /facepalm
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82946]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80103
Joined: 11/29/99
|
But we were ahead of Stanford week 8. I'm assuming they
Jun 4, 2012, 2:03 PM
|
|
had strength of schedule on us then.
Message was edited by: josephg®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2683]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2750
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Because it's not worth it
Jun 4, 2012, 2:09 PM
[ in reply to Re: Clemson and a 4 team playoff... ] |
|
A move to the big 12 makes no sense geographically, and I like our history and rivalries in the ACC. I can see where others have a different opinion.
I don't think the Big 12 is all that great. It has Oklahoma, Texas, and some fair-to-middling programs, and some doormats. Heck, a year ago everyone was saying the Big 12 was going to break apart.
Admittedly, Clemson-Syracuse doesn't get me that excited (although revenge for the McNabb Gator Bowl would be nice, and I have a lot of relatives in upstate NY). But neither does Clemson - (anybody in the Big 12 other than Tx and Ok).
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
Missouri and TAMU doesn't make much sense
Jun 4, 2012, 2:11 PM
|
|
geographically to the SEC but they did it.
And the Big 12 always has a higher overall ranking then the ACC. It's usually 2nd to the SEC. You can guess as to where the ACC is....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2683]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2750
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Missouri and TAMU doesn't make much sense
Jun 4, 2012, 2:28 PM
|
|
I think, eventually, Missouri and TAMU are going to regret their move.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [551]
TigerPulse: 48%
Posts: 403
Joined: 7/28/11
|
Re: Missouri and TAMU doesn't make much sense
Jun 4, 2012, 2:29 PM
|
|
every time they count those millions the regret will slip away
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47091
Joined: 3/18/07
|
Oh yea, Ole Miss, Miss St, Tennessee, Kentucky, &
Jun 4, 2012, 2:30 PM
|
|
Vanderbilt are certainly enjoying it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
I'm sure Clemson loves seeing USuC get
Jun 4, 2012, 2:32 PM
|
|
an @ss load more than we do... and it's just gonna get worse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Knight: My last post on this thread then I've gotta find
Jun 4, 2012, 2:37 PM
|
|
something else to do.
No doubt the landscape is changing in college football. And we should keep a close eye on that. It is waaaaaay too early say we need to jump NOW or that the ACC is doomed. Should we consider the Big this or SEC or Pac whatever or big that if they come a knockin? YES WE SHOULD. I agree.
Is SEC money creating a gap between us and USuC that matters? NO IT IS NOT. They are a big-time college program with resources and so are we. Bottom line is they are outperforming us (last 3 yrs) on the field and SEC revenue has exactly nothing to do with that.
And yes we can play for a NC while in the ACC.
I'm signing off,
-luvdemtgrs
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1895]
TigerPulse: 74%
Posts: 3258
Joined: 7/24/10
|
I disagree with your reasoning.
Jun 4, 2012, 1:47 PM
|
|
First every one of those teams were ranked ahead of us preseason. That has nothing to do with the ACC and everything to do with finishing '10 6-7.
Second, neither Bama nor Stanford even won their divisions. I have a hard time believing that two non conference champions get in over a one loss conference champion.
Third, a one loss Clemson team would have met a one loss VT team in the conference championship game. That would have been a game between possibly #5 and #6 in a week where Stanford and Alabama did not play (I believe OK St. played OU that week.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
why do you have such a hard time believing it when they
Jun 4, 2012, 1:51 PM
|
|
were willing to put a Non division, and non conference winning Alabama in a National Championship??? That was bad enough... now there will be a bigger chance for those types of scenarios to keep happening with a 4 team playoff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1895]
TigerPulse: 74%
Posts: 3258
Joined: 7/24/10
|
Re: why do you have such a hard time believing it when they
Jun 4, 2012, 1:55 PM
|
|
Alabama was a very unique situation. They were the defending national champions and preseason #2 team and had only one loss in a close game against the undefeated #1 team in the nation.
Not at all the same with Stanford. Especially considering we were ranked ahead of them at one point during the season. And also considering we played a top-10 USCe team and #5 Virginia Tech team.
Stanford wouldn't have kept us out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1895]
TigerPulse: 74%
Posts: 3258
Joined: 7/24/10
|
Won MNC in '09 obviously***
Jun 4, 2012, 1:56 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
ok.. so you're fine with banking on Clemson going
Jun 4, 2012, 1:58 PM
[ in reply to Re: why do you have such a hard time believing it when they ] |
|
13-0, 12-1 every year so we can have great preseason rankings to help...
OK.. that's cool.
I, personally, want Clemson to be in a world where that won't matter.
Also, look at the other side of the argument... what happens when there's an undefeated or one loss BigTen school in the picture? Our odds SUCK compared to other conferences. THAT is the bottom line.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47091
Joined: 3/18/07
|
We're going to have a semi-high pre-season ranking this
Jun 4, 2012, 1:59 PM
|
|
coming season...
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
yes, we will! and that's great. Just don't want that
Jun 4, 2012, 2:04 PM
|
|
to have to be the case year in and year out...
With a playoff, it shouldn't matter if you went 3-9 the year before... I just want Clemson to have the highest odds of getting a seat at the table... and right now, Clemson could only be guaranteed that chance by going undefeated while staying in the ACC. I. Don't. Want. That.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47091
Joined: 3/18/07
|
A 1-loss Clemson team will always be in the mix***
Jun 4, 2012, 2:05 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
I don't want us to "be in the mix"... I don't want to be
Jun 4, 2012, 2:06 PM
|
|
on the bubble if we have 1 loss...
I want it to be guaranteed. And it's too risky being the ACC with the way things are headed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47091
Joined: 3/18/07
|
ALL teams with the exception of the SEC will be in the
Jun 4, 2012, 2:10 PM
|
|
mix with 1-loss. It's not a guarantee everywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [551]
TigerPulse: 48%
Posts: 403
Joined: 7/28/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47091
Joined: 3/18/07
|
It's not faith, it's simple logic, but okay.***
Jun 4, 2012, 2:11 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [551]
TigerPulse: 48%
Posts: 403
Joined: 7/28/11
|
Re: It's not faith, it's simple logic, but okay.***
Jun 4, 2012, 2:11 PM
|
|
no...i think its more faith brotha
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
that logic is being ripped apart by people who
Jun 4, 2012, 2:12 PM
[ in reply to It's not faith, it's simple logic, but okay.*** ] |
|
do this stuff for a living...
almost EVERYONE is saying the ACC will be on the outside looking in with the way things are headed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47091
Joined: 3/18/07
|
Clemson was in the talk for going to the national
Jun 4, 2012, 2:15 PM
|
|
championship last year with our one loss...
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
key word.. "was"...
Jun 4, 2012, 2:18 PM
|
|
THINGS ARE CHANGING.
Message was edited by: KNIGHTIGER®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47091
Joined: 3/18/07
|
If no team from the ACC goes to the Big XII, then what
Jun 4, 2012, 2:19 PM
|
|
things are changing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
"Do this stuff for a living"
Jun 4, 2012, 2:18 PM
[ in reply to that logic is being ripped apart by people who ] |
|
You mean create sports news stories? What else do they have to talk about?
I've yet to hear a single college football coach or AD say that if they aren't in one of 4 conferences they will be on the "outside looking in". Those are the folks that do this stuff for a living.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
I'm talking about college football analysts
Jun 4, 2012, 2:20 PM
|
|
jackhole. You know, the people who get paid to know "what is and what isn't" in college football. With the way things are changing, the ACC will be on the outside looking in, in almost all scenarios. You people are impossible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47091
Joined: 3/18/07
|
"you people are impossible"
Jun 4, 2012, 2:22 PM
|
|
Because we're not running around like chickens with our heads cut off?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
no because you refuse to believe that the landscape of
Jun 4, 2012, 2:24 PM
|
|
college football, as we've known it, IS CHANGING. and i'm not just talking about a team jumping to another conference. it's not just that.
And i'm not running around like a chicken with my head cutoff... but I also don't have my head in the sand like a lot of ACC defenders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1895]
TigerPulse: 74%
Posts: 3258
Joined: 7/24/10
|
Because you make no sense.
Jun 4, 2012, 2:28 PM
|
|
In the time before a 4 team playoff ACC teams have a chance to play for the MNC, but when it changes from the top 2 to the top 4 they dont have a chance?
Makes no sense at all
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47091
Joined: 3/18/07
|
I was told that is faith, not logic
Jun 4, 2012, 2:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16209]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12764
Joined: 11/14/09
|
"College football analysts" exist for the pure sake of
Jun 4, 2012, 2:32 PM
[ in reply to I'm talking about college football analysts ] |
|
stirring controversy and selling ratings. 90% of them have an outward agenda to begin with and no clue as to what the big picture has in store. They don't get paid to "know what is going on," they get paid to tell stories in the media and keep people tuned in.
No need to panic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1895]
TigerPulse: 74%
Posts: 3258
Joined: 7/24/10
|
Preseason ranking has always mattered.
Jun 4, 2012, 2:00 PM
[ in reply to ok.. so you're fine with banking on Clemson going ] |
|
And of course you ignore the part where we get in over Stanford.
Its ironic that you would bring up a B1G team considering that Wisconsin had an SOS worse than ours last season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
I get that... agreed. But my point is that scenarios
Jun 4, 2012, 1:59 PM
|
|
like that are going to happen more often when you introduce a playoff. if they were willing to that for Bama for a NATIONAL TITLE, you better believe they won't hesitate to do that for a seat at a 4 team playoff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
See I don' t think "they did that". I think bama was
Jun 4, 2012, 2:05 PM
|
|
deserving to go based on one loss being to #1. No other 1 loss team could say that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47091
Joined: 3/18/07
|
Clemson would've finished #4 in the country with our
Jun 4, 2012, 1:48 PM
|
|
1-loss to Georgia Tech last year. There was even a very distinct possibility of getting #2.
We were ranked ahead of Stanford by two rankings when we both had 1-loss, the team in between us was VT, which we dismantled in the ACCCG. Not to mention with a win over highly ranked USC, we would've been definitely #4.
There was no way Stanford was going to jump us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47091
Joined: 3/18/07
|
Oh hey, I'll just thumb this down because I realize I was
Jun 4, 2012, 1:58 PM
|
|
wrong and will continue to thumb down anyone who is against whatever delusion I believe!!
--derp TDer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16209]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12764
Joined: 11/14/09
|
If we hadn't ###-puked all over ourselves against NC St. and
Jun 4, 2012, 2:24 PM
|
|
the Coots, and finished out with a win over VT in the ACCCG, we would absolutely, undeniably have been one of the top 4 teams at the end of the season last year. Look at the polls before, during and after and it's crystal clear.
Not defending the ACC here, but the evidence shows that your argument is not supported by reality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2989]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 7583
Joined: 7/19/01
|
How did Bama only fall a few spots. Pre-season rankings?***
Jun 4, 2012, 3:11 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 52
| visibility 1,813
|
|
|
50
