Simple look at on field results shows BIG 12 shafted

[Buckaineer]

A simple look at on field results shows BIG 12 is being shafted in playoff rankings so far (again).

BAYLOR should clearly be in the top 4 right now based on actual accomplishments.

If you eliminate the biases, the fake preseason rankings, the favoritism towards certain conferences and teams, and hypotheticals about games and just look at what actually matters--the factual on field results, then the BIG 12 should currently be ranked in the top 4. Pretty clear that Baylor is being artificially held back once again. They and OU actually dropped in the rankings while many schools with lesser real results moved ahead.

Baylor is the only undefeated team 9 games in to still not have broken the top ten--yet the real results don't hold up such a low ranking for the Bears.

The rankings should be based on a simple factual method to determine rank.

Take WIN/LOSS, P5/G5/FCS opponents, Home/Neutral/Away location.

Assign points to these
(1 pt) WIN / (-1)LOSS; Play against a P5(2pts) /G5 (1pt)/FCS games (.5 pts);
Home (1 pt) /Neutral (1.5 pts) /Away (2pts).

Here's how the rankings would look right now if just actual results were used:

#1 Clemson 41.5 pts (they've won all games, played 10 while others lost or played 9)

#2 Florida 37 pts.

#3 and 4 TIE
LSU-36.5 pts
Baylor-36.5 pts

#5 Ohio State-36 pts

#6 & 7 TIE
Minnesota-35.5 pts.
Penn State-35.5 pts.

#8 Oregon-35 pts.

#9 and 10 TIE
Utah-34.5 pts.
Auburn-34.5 pts.

#11 Georgia-34 pts.

#12 Alabama-33.5 pts

#13 Oklahoma-33 pts

Bowlsby can't campaign with the committee, but he should be speaking up about a corrupt system that is intentionally trying to exclude the BIG 12. They've done it before and are trying to do it again.

 

[oceantide83]

Did you finally get Neal Brown out of your system?

 

[TheRealMikeTyson]

Did you finally get Neal Brown out of your system?

That boy didn't want to play Mike Tyson Punch out

 

[Buckaineer]

As the season goes along, the SEC schools are going to be playing more fcs or G5 schools. That will likely drop some of their scores.

In the end a tie breaker might be the win-loss record of all opponents played to get a determination of the strength of schedule. Should break most ties. Once the win-loss record of all opponents is calculated, Clemson is bound to drop as well, as the acc has been bad outside of Clemson this season.

The BIG 12 won the most OOC P5 games of any conference and this should matter too.

 

[TownesVanZandt_rivals]

Who is to say if Baylor ends up undefeated they will be left out.

Most likely Baylor has at least one if not two losses coming.

You are just wasting our time

 

[Buckaineer]

Baylor is low in the rankings and moving backwards as they win for some unkown (not really--its bias) reason.

And Oklahoma's schedule will be all P5's from here on out and a rematch with the next best team in the conference most likely. They are low right now, but should they beat Baylor are they going to get a huge bump like i.e. Minnesota did? Typically BIG 12 schools get smaller bumps up and bigger bumps down due to the biases out there.

Its already going to be very difficult for Baylor, even undefeated, to move up enough to be in no matter what. But why should Baylor and the BIG 12 have to "wait and see"? Other conferences are not having to wait, they are being artificially propped up ahead of an undefeated Baylor, but its not deserved by anything theyve done or anyone they've played.

 

[oceantide83]

 

[WVUALLEN]

Florida has 2 losses and you figure they are #2. Your formula is a joke even though you cut and pasted it from somewhere else.

 

[Buckaineer]

Obviously Minnesota has a tie breaker against Penn State already.

 

[Buckaineer]

Florida has 2 losses and you figure they are #2. Your formula is a joke even though you cut and pasted it from somewhere else.

Its about the scoring for your actual record. Its simple. Its factual.

Here is Florida's scoring

Florida:
WINS 8 LOSSES -2 = 6pts.

Games against P5--16pts (8 games x 2pts.), games against G5--0 (0 pts),games against FCS--1pt ( 2 game x .5pts ea.) = 17 pts.

Home games 5pts (5 games x 1 pt ea.), Away games 6 pts. (3 games x 2 pts. ea.) , Neutral games -3pts. (2 games x 1.5 games ea.) = 14 pts.

TOTAL SCORE = 37 (6 +17+14)

Based on nothing but real results and a basic scoring system--no fake information or hype or pre season b.s. or anything else, just who you've played and the results.

 

[WVUFanForever]

Did you know since 1950.....WVU has had just nine coaches prior to Brown.

Dana Holgy had just the seventh best winning percentage of those nine coaches since 1950.

What a complete failure.

 

[WVUFanForever]

Did you know holg's four-year stretch from 2012-15... WVU was just 26-25...that stretch was the worst stretch of WVU football since Nehlan's last three years and Rod first year at the start of the century...22-24

 

[WVUFanForever]

The last two posts by me.....just FACTS

 

[Buckaineer]

If you wanted to, you could go through the remainder of the season and guess fairly accurately final win loss records and also who teams played and where they played.

This will let you know how things would shake out and where teams are going to finish up in real rankings based on actual results. This isn't likely going to resemble the phony committees final rankings.

 

[TownesVanZandt_rivals]

You have to check your system.

LSU beat Florida has zero losses and much better wins but they are behind them.

Any ranking that doesn't have LSU #1 is bogus

 

[Buckaineer]

You have to check your system.

LSU beat Florida has zero losses and much better wins but they are behind them.

Any ranking that doesn't have LSU #1 is bogus

Yes I would say head to head would be a tie breaker if it came down to it,

However at this time, Florida has the better schedule and that beats LSU's record, which is partly what it is because the ease of schedule they've played as compared to Florida. In the end if the season stopped right now, both may make the playoff--if actual results were in play--they aren't of course.

There could be a tie breaker with Baylor/LSU though--because both will have played Texas. Baylor has a very tough route though with OU followed by Texas to go, plus an improved Kansas that has played several teams tough (and crushed the acc's Boston College earlier).

Clemson has won more games and is front loaded with P5 teams--I suspect though that if you added in opponents records at the end, Clemson would drop.

Right now LSU and Baylor are equally deserving--anything else is just phony wishful thinking and bias--no reason LSU should be #1 or even #2 based on actual results.

 

[TownesVanZandt_rivals]

LSU has 4 Top 20 wins according to the CFP

Baylor has zero


Plus Florida only has 1.
They are 1-2 against Top 20 CFP teams

 

[Buckaineer]

The rankings of teams LSU has played are phony--they are all based on bias for the SEC, and bias for tv schedules, and pre season rankings before a down was played etc. etc.

In a simple system rankings don't matter.

Where the actual strength of schedule would come in as I mentioned is when the final record of all your opponents is calculated. Then you would see how strong a teams schedule was, not based on opinion as it is now, but based on actual on field results which is all that should matter.

It should be who you played--P5, G5, FCS numbers, plus how your opponents did over their season. No opinions needed. Opinions are used to skew the rankings and keep teams like Baylor and the BIG 12 Conference out artificially, pretending their actual results don't matter.

 

[TownesVanZandt_rivals]

SEC has multiple programs who are capable of winning a NC.
As of right now no other conference has more than 2 while the SEC has 5

SEC has 5
B1G has 1
Big 12 has 2
ACC has 2

PAC 12 has 0 because Oregon hasn't reached that level and USC hasn't been able to recruit since the 2018 recruiting year
ACC might have 1 Florida State needs a Top 15 recruiting class to stay at that level

If Florida State falls the next up is Michigan, Oregon or Texas A&M.
Most likely Texas A&M so the SEC could have 6 teams.

 

[spartansstink]

Actually, your system is biased. Its biased in a way that gets the results you want as you selectively used criteria that generated the result of showing Baylor in the best light possible.

Still, what you have created has as much merit as anything else out there today. In the end, every system has flaws and biases. As long as everyone knows what they are, you can live with the results and compensate to a certain degree for them.

Its when the biases are constantly changing that the system can no longer be trusted as the results are no longer valid or reliable.

 

[TownesVanZandt_rivals]

They have already narrowed down the teams before the season

Minnesota and Baylor weren't included.
Probably never will be

They don't another Michigan State.

 

[Cuyahoga Falls Eers_rivals]

Baylor is low in the rankings and moving backwards as they win for some unkown (not really--its bias) reason.

And Oklahoma's schedule will be all P5's from here on out and a rematch with the next best team in the conference most likely. They are low right now, but should they beat Baylor are they going to get a huge bump like i.e. Minnesota did? Typically BIG 12 schools get smaller bumps up and bigger bumps down due to the biases out there.

Its already going to be very difficult for Baylor, even undefeated, to move up enough to be in no matter what. But why should Baylor and the BIG 12 have to "wait and see"? Other conferences are not having to wait, they are being artificially propped up ahead of an undefeated Baylor, but its not deserved by anything theyve done or anyone they've played.

An undefeated Baylor after the conference title games is a lock to be in the playoffs. Getting there is the Bears' problem.

 

[Buckaineer]

An undefeated Baylor after the conference title games is a lock to be in the playoffs. Getting there is the Bears' problem.

Agree it won't be easy. But its a sham that a one loss Baylor or even OU is being knocked down so that they won't have a shot, but other one loss teams are jumping with any and every win up the scale.

Things would be different if only a simple ranking system were used rather than bias.

 

[Buckaineer]

They have already narrowed down the teams before the season

Minnesota and Baylor weren't included.
Probably never will be

They don't another Michigan State.

Hence there's really not a playoff, just an artificial selection posing as one.

No reason either the acc or SEC should be gifted a spot each year, it should just be based on actual results.

 

[TownesVanZandt_rivals]

Hence there's really not a playoff, just an artificial selection posing as one.

No reason either the acc or SEC should be gifted a spot each year, it should just be based on actual results.

Clemson did start at #5.

The ACC isn't gifted anything. Clemson has earned that.

Difference is Clemson is recruiting at a much higher level and has proven themselves.

But Clemson losses they are out right now

Starts with Recruiting.
SEC has more schools recruiting at a higher level.

If you include OU in the South because of where they recruit.
Only USC and Ohio State have proven to be able to win a NC outside of the South since 1998
Much better players.

Screw the B1G.
Their football sucks. They can cry all they want

 

[TownesVanZandt_rivals]

Baylor has to earn their way in.

Clemson pretty much credited the blueprint
They weren't much of anyone before Tajh Boyd stepped on the field with Chad Morris in 2011

 

[doneagain]

SEC has multiple programs who are capable of winning a NC.
As of right now no other conference has more than 2 while the SEC has 5

SEC has 5
B1G has 1
Big 12 has 2
ACC has 2

PAC 12 has 0 because Oregon hasn't reached that level and USC hasn't been able to recruit since the 2018 recruiting year
ACC might have 1 Florida State needs a Top 15 recruiting class to stay at that level

If Florida State falls the next up is Michigan, Oregon or Texas A&M.
Most likely Texas A&M so the SEC could have 6 teams.

Texas A&M hasn’t won/claimed a national title since 1939, so I would hold off on polishing their knob just yet. They didn’t just start trying when they hired Jimbo. Not claiming a title since 39 is not any better than Oregon never claiming one. I am sure you know all about that 39 team though.

 

[doneagain]

Clemson did start at #5.

The ACC isn't gifted anything. Clemson has earned that.

Difference is Clemson is recruiting at a much higher level and has proven themselves.

But Clemson losses they are out right now

Starts with Recruiting.
SEC has more schools recruiting at a higher level.

If you include OU in the South because of where they recruit.
Only USC and Ohio State have proven to be able to win a NC outside of the South since 1998
Much better players.

Screw the B1G.
Their football sucks. They can cry all they want

You are not that blind.

Clemson was #5 for 2 reasons.

#1 They knew Bama, LSU, PSU and Ohio State were all going to play each other and they would reorder themselves that way.

#2 They knew they would get flack for the weak ACC if they put Clemson up higher because the odds were no one left in the conference could beat them. Putting them at 5 initially makes the committee look like they are trying to take into account the weaker schedule Clemson plays and could always point to the initial #5 ranking and say they were trying to be fair with s he duke strength all the while knowing they would get bumped back up when other teams facing real schedules would eliminate each other.

That said, Clemson is a very good team and is good enough to challenge for the title in the playoffs.

 

[westsiderSJHS77]

So if the weak schedule is not hurting Clemson, then why did they not put UCF in the past couple of seasons?
They certainly passed the “Eye Test” that certain ESPN reports spew.

 

[Buckaineer]

I don't know how anyone could possibly claim the SEC has 5 teams capable of winning the MNC but no one else has more than 2.

Who exactly are these five SEC teams?

Alabama hasn't played anyone and LOST already. Many teams from other conferences could beat them this year

Florida and Auburn have two losses each.

Georgia lost to South Carolina for crying out loud. Ohio State, Oklahoma, Oregon, Baylor would ALL likely take down South Carolina if they played among maybe a couple dozen other programs.

LSU is good, but Oklahoma beat their only calling card Texas just the same as they did.

Oklahoma has been permanently relegated down the food chain behind other teams with losses despite playing a more difficult schedule. LSU is ranked #1, but if they played?

And to claim no one else in the BIG 12 besides Texas or OU, BOTH of whom have LOST in the BIG 12 already, could compete in a championship is just wishful thinking.

Baylor is currently undefeated. If they lose to OU, how are they any different than the host of other one loss teams? Yet they are ranked by biased people behind TWO loss teams.

 

[Buckaineer]

Clemson did start at #5.

The ACC isn't gifted anything. Clemson has earned that.

Difference is Clemson is recruiting at a much higher level and has proven themselves.

But Clemson losses they are out right now

Starts with Recruiting.
SEC has more schools recruiting at a higher level.

If you include OU in the South because of where they recruit.
Only USC and Ohio State have proven to be able to win a NC outside of the South since 1998
Much better players.

Screw the B1G.
Their football sucks. They can cry all they want

The playoff is supposed to be about what you are doing THIS year, not what someone thinks you are or anything like that. And if your opponents are all BAD, that should count against you. But because their conference was given an expensive network this year, and a certain network has been trying to prop them up for several years now, they have to have an acc team in the playoff.

Clemson is good, but at the end everything should be added up in comparison to other contenders. If their opponents don't stack up, they should be penalized for playing a weaker schedule than everyone else.

 

[Buckaineer]

Clemson's opponents so far:

Georgia Tech 2-7
A&M 6-3
Syracuse 3-6
Charlotte 5-5
UNC 4-6 (Clemson won by 21-20 when UNC went for 2 instead of tying with an extra pt.)
FSU 5-5
Louisville 5-4
BC 5-5
Wofford 2-2
NC State 4-5

That is a schedule very unworthy of a playoff participant--especially after the committee has excluded BIG 12 schools with top ten wins and close losses to top five opponents.

 

[WVUALLEN]

Ohio State is the best team in college football this year. The final will be setup for an Ohio State vs LSU. Would be one heck of a final.

Oklahoma lost to KSU. If Florida passes this rating then how can others get a fair rating.

Florida Sched. 8-2 [2 FCS teams. Really. and their #2]
Miami 6-3
UT Martin 6-4 (FCS)
Kentucky 4-5
Tennessee 5-5
Towson 6-4 (FCS)
Auburn 7-2
LSU 9-0
South Carolina 4-6
Georgia 8-1
Vanderbilt 2-7

Upcoming
Missouri 5-4
FSU 5-5

Your numbers game is a joke.

 

[TownesVanZandt_rivals]

Texas A&M hasn’t won/claimed a national title since 1939, so I would hold off on polishing their knob just yet. They didn’t just start trying when they hired Jimbo. Not claiming a title since 39 is not any better than Oregon never claiming one. I am sure you know all about that 39 team though.

It is their recruiting.

Schools who can recruit to a certain level will be considered contenders.

Recruiting more than on the field results is why Florida State and USC fell off.
It will be really apparent this year.
USC never made a CFP so not all teams who recruit to that level reach the CFP
Most of the time they are in contention.



Any big name school in the South plus USC and Ohio State.
Truthfully are the teams
Schools that can recruit mainly top Southern talent or West Coast talent

Plus in 1994 if A&M wasn't on probation would have been in the mix for a national title with Florida State and Nebraska.

 

[Buckaineer]

Real results matter.

There is nothing wrong with the real numbers posted. They are accurate and are handled the same for all participants in the playoff poll listed.

They are what they are and are a simple way to compare these teams based on what they've done and who they've played. Once everyone's numbers for the season are in, it would be an unbiased way to select teams.

Not--I think this or that team is good, or this or that team would be the best matchup, etc.

A real playoff should be based only on real results. No hypotheticals, not wishlists, no tv ratings, etc.

 

[WVUALLEN]

Numbers can be skewed just like stats.

 

[TownesVanZandt_rivals]

His ranking system has flaws that he won't fix.
Florida shouldn't be in front of LSU and if they are the data is flawed.


But Bucky doesn't care and that is why I say don't waste your time with him.
Your time is way too valuable for Bucky

 

[TownesVanZandt_rivals]

How many schools would go undefeated with LSUs schedule?

Maybe only LSU. Possibly Clemson


How about Minnesota's schedule or Baylor's?

This is what they look at.
LSU has played the toughest schedule and haven't lost a single game.

This is why Clemson at first was placed behind everyone. It wasn't because the other teams were going to play each other
It was because 5-10 teams would be undefeated with it.
But Clemson has dominated that schedule for the most part unlike Baylor and Minnesota

The ESPN mouthpieces are saying if Clemson loses they are out without a chance

 

[muthed]

A simple look at on field results shows BIG 12 is being shafted in playoff rankings so far (again).

BAYLOR should clearly be in the top 4 right now based on actual accomplishments.

If you eliminate the biases, the fake preseason rankings, the favoritism towards certain conferences and teams, and hypotheticals about games and just look at what actually matters--the factual on field results, then the BIG 12 should currently be ranked in the top 4. Pretty clear that Baylor is being artificially held back once again. They and OU actually dropped in the rankings while many schools with lesser real results moved ahead.

Baylor is the only undefeated team 9 games in to still not have broken the top ten--yet the real results don't hold up such a low ranking for the Bears.

The rankings should be based on a simple factual method to determine rank.

Take WIN/LOSS, P5/G5/FCS opponents, Home/Neutral/Away location.

Assign points to these
(1 pt) WIN / (-1)LOSS; Play against a P5(2pts) /G5 (1pt)/FCS games (.5 pts);
Home (1 pt) /Neutral (1.5 pts) /Away (2pts).

Here's how the rankings would look right now if just actual results were used:

#1 Clemson 41.5 pts (they've won all games, played 10 while others lost or played 9)

#2 Florida 37 pts.

#3 and 4 TIE
LSU-36.5 pts
Baylor-36.5 pts

#5 Ohio State-36 pts

#6 & 7 TIE
Minnesota-35.5 pts.
Penn State-35.5 pts.

#8 Oregon-35 pts.

#9 and 10 TIE
Utah-34.5 pts.
Auburn-34.5 pts.

#11 Georgia-34 pts.

#12 Alabama-33.5 pts

#13 Oklahoma-33 pts

Bowlsby can't campaign with the committee, but he should be speaking up about a corrupt system that is intentionally trying to exclude the BIG 12. They've done it before and are trying to do it again.

I like your rating system. It's similar to how high school teams are ranked in West Virginia, i.e., so many points for beating a AAA, fewer for beating a AA, and so on. Then bonus points based on your opponent's records. This system, and yours are objective. Although the objective system would certainly exclude any G5 from being ranked high.The CFP system is no more than the pretty boys getting the glory.

 

[muthed]

If you wanted to, you could go through the remainder of the season and guess fairly accurately final win loss records and also who teams played and where they played.

This will let you know how things would shake out and where teams are going to finish up in real rankings based on actual results. This isn't likely going to resemble the phony committees final rankings.

I'm with you all the way Bick.