Everyone talks about how playing an extra game makes such a big difference, but it upsets me because of this main point: a bunch of the schools that play in conf championships don’t play a full schedule against FBS teams. Big deal if you play one extra game against a decent team if you have 1 or 2 FBS teams throughout the year.

 

To me it is more impressive if you play 12 games against FBS schools along with several top 25 ranked teams. I have always thought the extra game theory is hypocritical given the patzees most of these schools schedule along the way.

 

Thoughts?

It helps out immensely with the "eye test." You have a team beating a good opponent on a neutral site, while winning the conference. At the same time, non conference teams (like ND), aren't even playing. The closer we get to the final playoff poll, the more the eye test matters. Not having a conference title game doesn't help at all. Blowing out a team and winning your conference (ala Ohio St 2014) helps a lot.

It helps out immensely with the "eye test." You have a team beating a good opponent on a neutral site, while winning the conference. At the same time, non conference teams (like ND), aren't even playing. The closer we get to the final playoff poll, the more the eye test matters. Not having a conference title game doesn't help at all. Blowing out a team and winning your conference (ala Ohio St 2014) helps a lot.

 

But a lot of the conf championships aren’t against “good teams”. Some conferences divisions have most of the good teams in the same division in some years. They sometimes play a team that would actually be 4th or 5th if they had all the teams in one division. There have been a bunch of bad SEC championship games where the opponent wasn’t good. Same thing in the PAC 12. Look at the Big 10 this year—Wisconsin is soooo overrated and haven’t played anyone! So OSU gets more credit if they beat them?

 

But my point is i would give them a lot more credit if most of these teams played a full schedule of FBS schools prior to the championship game. They really only play 10 or 11 legit games with the FBS II schools they play. I just think that is hypocritical.

Leave them alone. Mercer and Georgia St are tough games.

What would work best for ND is for our own victims to win those conference championship games. THAT would build the resume without us having to lift a finger after Stanford!

Everyone talks about how playing an extra game makes such a big difference, but it upsets me because of this main point: a bunch of the schools that play in conf championships don’t play a full schedule against FBS teams. Big deal if you play one extra game against a decent team if you have 1 or 2 FBS teams throughout the year.

 

To me it is more impressive if you play 12 games against FBS schools along with several top 25 ranked teams. I have always thought the extra game theory is hypocritical given the patzees most of these schools schedule along the way.

 

Thoughts?

 

The whole conference championship factor is eventually going to end up putting ND in the ACC IMO. I agree with your point, but the fact is the committee has winning your conference as one of their check marks so it means something. The problem is like you said most of the teams play nobody OOC and then play each other so it’s tough to get a feel on how good these teams are. They have the advantage of getting another big win at the end of the year while we’re sitting at home.

The whole conference championship factor is eventually going to end up putting ND in the ACC IMO. I agree with your point, but the fact is the committee has winning your conference as one of their check marks so it means something. The problem is like you said most of the teams play nobody OOC and then play each other so it’s tough to get a feel on how good these teams are. They have the advantage of getting another big win at the end of the year while we’re sitting at home.

 

I like your point on the OOC schedule. ND plays teams from a lot of the different conferences. This gives a true read of our abilities and talent. I’ve thought the teams in the Big12 have been weak forever and they get credit for getting wins over each other. We play top teams in several conferences every year. That should count for something IMO.

ND has beaten 2 ( USC, NC State)and will play 5 (Miami, Georgia, Stanford) current divisional leaders in their respecfive conference. If that doesn’t trump a “conference title” what does?

Edited November 2, 20177 yr by corysold

But a lot of the conf championships aren’t against “good teams”.

But, that's not applicable in ND's competition with going to the playoff.

 

The Big X will field a very strong opponent (undefeated Wisconsin, PSU, etc.).

The Big XII will also field a strong opponent. (TCU, Ok St, ISU- still 15 currently with victories over OU, TCU.)

The ACC will, in all probability, field Clemson going v. Miami or VT This one won't be as strong as the aforementioned conferences but still reasonably impressive.

 

The comparison with smaller conferences (Georgia St, etc.) doesn't apply in this situation. The playoff only concerns big boy teams/conferences.

ND has beaten 2 ( USC, NC State)and will play 5 (Miami, Georgia, Stanford) current divisional leaders in their respecfive conference. If that doesn’t trump a “conference title” what does?

It doesn't look bad now, but that's about to change soon I'm afraid. NCST will likely have 3 losses after Saturday. USC can easily sustain another loss or so before it's all done. Miami can, potentially, finish with 3 losses with VT, ND, and the conference title game, as they have been barely hanging on in games. Stanford already has 2 losses and will likely finish with 5 total losses with additional defeats to WSU, UW, and ND. No arguments on Georgia. Impressive team.

It doesn't look bad now, but that's about to change soon I'm afraid. NCST will likely have 3 losses after Saturday. USC can easily sustain another loss or so before it's all done. Miami can, potentially, finish with 3 losses with VT, ND, and the conference title game, as they have been barely hanging on in games. Stanford already has 2 losses and will likely finish with 5 total losses with additional defeats to WSU, UW, and ND. No arguments on Georgia. Impressive team.

 

Certainly could be true. But I think ND plays enough top tier teams that they can escape the non-title issues. BYU, not so much.

 

Also, NC State took Clemson to overtime last year. Their DLine is good enough that I think they can contain Clemson, whether they can score enough is the question. Clemson gives up a bunch of sacks and they aren't a power team, both play into NC State's hand.

We'll truly see this year if we can survive as an independent if we win out. If nd goes 11-1 and is jumped by 12-1 conference champs who are behind them in the rankings now then we are in trouble in this system not having an opportunity to get that extra win. Essentially nd will have to go undefeated to have a shot on years that there aren't a bunch of 2 loss conference champs

Pac 12 and Big 12 champs will have 2 L's...

Win out and we are in, but first and foremost...WIN OUT OR4 ITS MOOT!!!

Pac 12 and Big 12 champs will have 2 L's...

Win out and we are in, but first and foremost...WIN OUT OR4 ITS MOOT!!!

Maybe so. What if Ohio St runs out and Clemson though? You can't see Georgia, Alabama, Clemson, and Ohio St going? Sure hope you're correct sir.

We'll truly see this year if we can survive as an independent if we win out. If nd goes 11-1 and is jumped by 12-1 conference champs who are behind them in the rankings now then we are in trouble in this system not having an opportunity to get that extra win.

 

And that possibility is why there's no way I'm allowing myself to believe that winning out locks us in.

 

Having said that, this committee's job is to look at EVERYTHING, not just wins and losses. It actually makes a diff how you win games, and they like how we go about our business. I hope that continues to be enough to keep us in that group of 4.

And that possibility is why there's no way I'm allowing myself to believe that winning out locks us in.

 

Having said that, this committee's job is to look at EVERYTHING, not just wins and losses. It actually makes a diff how you win games, and they like how we go about our business. I hope that continues to be enough to keep us in that group of 4.

 

Exactly and agree hopefully we keep rolling teams and that is enough.

Has anyone thought that this committee will eventually go by he way side. No way we are talking about a committee in 10 years. If that’s the case, ND may not need to join a conference. If it stays, ND will have to join.

Has anyone thought that this committee will eventually go by he way side. No way we are talking about a committee in 10 years. If that’s the case, ND may not need to join a conference. If it stays, ND will have to join.

 

But without a committee where will they go next? Back to computers? Polls?

But without a committee where will they go next? Back to computers? Polls?

 

I’m not sure. How do they do it D2 and 3? There has to be a way to do it without people’s opinions being involved.

I’m not sure. How do they do it D2 and 3? There has to be a way to do it without people’s opinions being involved.

 

I'd be more okay with the committee if current ADs (OSU's), coaches who failed at multiple schools (good old Tyrone) and former politicians (Condoleeza Rice) weren't on the committee.

Has anyone thought that this committee will eventually go by he way side. No way we are talking about a committee in 10 years. If that’s the case, ND may not need to join a conference. If it stays, ND will have to join.

 

Basketball has had a committee for how many years? Basketball is probably easier to automate given the greater number of games to use as input