I know. And I completely agree. I have no problem with it. I think I've pretty clearly stated that the double standard exists in the conversation about it and I think anyone would find that a pretty impossible thing to argue against.

Adding to that, I'm hoping the playoff system will open it up to bigger OOC games because teams will be more focused on showing they are worthy of a spot rather than trying to optimize a SOS number or computer ranking.

The way the system has been, can you really blame schools for trying to play the polls and system to their advantage.

No, not at all. The system has been trash since it was installed. The only thing I can say is that it usually got it right and provided some great games. But it certainly isn't the best way to do it. Honestly, I already want the playoff expanded to 8. When it's at 4, you still won't get those big OOC games happening more frequently than they do now. Teams are still going to assume they have to go undefeated to get into that. But at 8, you could get in with a loss or two depending how who beat you.

Me?;1531176 wrote:Uh. First of all A&M is a conference game.

Still doesnt change the fact that outside of Georgia(at Clemson, S.Carolina) it was probably the most difficult first two games of the season for any team.

Second, VT lost to Duke--did you miss that?

Duke is 6-2 now. Definitely not world beaters but that is where they stand now. They will likely end up 7-5/8-4. VT lost the game with Alabama and gradually made it in the top 15. The win for Duke against the #14 ranked Virginia Tech means they do have more wins against the top 15 in the past two years(this season and last) than OSU does. .I know, you can comeback with the 21 wins in a row but Northern Illinois would be right up there if we went by regular season wins(lost opener last season).

And lastly, if Ohio State was playing YSU (a better FCS team) in November, that's all we'd hear about. And it has nothing to do with VT and schedule dates--the big SEC teams do this EVERY year. Give themselves a cupcake game at the end of the season. I honestly don't care, the double standard is what bothers me. You can't tell me I'm wrong about how it would be perceived. It's perceived that way when Ohio State plays a MAC team in early September. THIS ISN'T EVEN A FBS TEAM!

If? Until it happens, don't worry about it. So you would rather see the SEC teams take a bye week than play the Sun Belt/FCS teams? A cupcake is a cupcake no matter when it happens. If anything wouldn't they be better off by not playing because a major player can get hurt at anytime no matter who its against.

I do think however OSU would get crap because of the perception(right or wrong) about their schedule and and people would see it as a weak attempt to better it.

It's just funny to me that that was left out of the OOC game list because if would NEVER be left out of the B1G side of that discussion.

I basically stopped at the top 16 OOC teams(not games since teams like Clemson, ND and Syracuse were played 2 or 3 teams). When I did the edit that didn't save, I added Indiana and SMU to the OOC teams for the SEC to make 16. If you would like to break it down to top 10, top 15, a different way to compare, then be my guest.

Now if you dont mind, I am off to study up on some games so I can decide on what games I will blowing money(very small amount) on this weekend.

Azubuike24;1531200 wrote:Adding to that, I'm hoping the playoff system will open it up to bigger OOC games because teams will be more focused on showing they are worthy of a spot rather than trying to optimize a SOS number or computer ranking.

The way the system has been, can you really blame schools for trying to play the polls and system to their advantage.

The guys on College Sports Nation(mostly Arute and Tim Brown) seem to think the new system will make for less of the big OOC games, especially if it costs a team a title shot in the first few years since OOC games are already scheduled for the next few years. I thought the way you did at first until they went on about it.

I don't think that a 4 team playoff is enough to change much (though it is better than 2). Use all the BCS Bowls as first round playoff games and expand to 8. (Rose, Sugar, Orange, and Fiesta) You don't hurt the Bowls and you have a much better chance of representing everyone. The B1G is going to 9 conference games in (I think 2016) so with 3 OOC games, I still think that they will play only 1 tough game. I think to get the number of home games the big boys need for the money (no home and home contracts) that the practice of playing cupcakes can't and won't stop. (by all conferences not just the B1G)

http://www.landgrantholyland.com/2013/11/6/5069126/ohio-state-football-schedule-predicting-the-future-is-hard

Me?;1531294 wrote:http://www.landgrantholyland.com/2013/11/6/5069126/ohio-state-football-schedule-predicting-the-future-is-hard

I disagree with this article. South Carolina still sucks and wouldn't win a game in the B1G. They have 1 good player who's a soft ass and that somehow makes them a ranked team. LOL

0311sdp;1529983 wrote:There is an SEC bias in the media, look at Michigan State #1 defense in the country 8-1 record and ranked 19th, Wisconsin ranked 23rd. Then look where LSU, Texas A&M, South Carolina, Missouri, and even a 3 loss joke of a team Georgia are ranked. ESPN leads the charge for the SEC because financially they are in bed together, so they talk them up and put everyone else down. They have been doing this for so long and have such a huge umbrella of coverage that a lot of people across the country have bought into this BS. They tell you that last season's 12-0 record for Ohio State means nothing towards this season's ranking but on the other hand they'll tell you that Alabama should be ranked #1 no matter what they look like as long as they're unbeaten because they've won the last 2 NC. You can't have it both ways. Now everyone in the media is jumping on Florida State's (who have played no one all year) quarterback Jameis Winston for the Heisman. He is not even close to Marcus Mariota (oregon) yet he has a good chance of winning because these are the stupid bastards that have most of the votes. They have Johnny Manziel 3rd an even bigger joke, a guy who should have been banned for life from college football.

FSU hasn't played anyone? Really? I guess Clemson is chopped liver in your myopic view.

Me?;1531176 wrote:Uh. First of all A&M is a conference game. Second, VT lost to Duke--did you miss that? And lastly, if Ohio State was playing YSU (a better FCS team) in November, that's all we'd hear about. And it has nothing to do with VT and schedule dates--the big SEC teams do this EVERY year. Give themselves a cupcake game at the end of the season. I honestly don't care, the double standard is what bothers me. You can't tell me I'm wrong about how it would be perceived. It's perceived that way when Ohio State plays a MAC team in early September. THIS ISN'T EVEN A FBS TEAM! It's just funny to me that that was left out of the OOC game list because if would NEVER be left out of the B1G side of that discussion.

VT at home was GIVEN a win against Marshall. Marshall was better all game but coach settled for GW FG attempts twice......and VT lucked out in OT

The AP sports writers seem to think a 6-3 Georgia is worthy of a reappearance in the Top 25 because they nailed FCS Appy State over a 7-2 Minnesota and/or Nebraska.

Hell, they even have 6-3 Ole Miss over Minnesota and Nebraska in the "also receiving votes" category. http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings

OK now THAT's SEC bias.

Georgia and Ole Miss benefit greatly having beaten LSU. I can't point to any Neb/Minnesota quality wins

Mohican00;1533066 wrote:Georgia and Ole Miss benefit greatly having beaten LSU. I can't point to any Neb/Minnesota quality wins

beating a 3 loss team counts as a quality win?

Pick6;1533081 wrote:beating a 3 loss team counts as a quality win?

In the $EC apparently so.

Pick6;1533081 wrote:beating a 3 loss team counts as a quality win?

still ranked. Can't find any Minn/Neb victories against ranked teams (edit: lol, coaches poll)

Mohican00;1533100 wrote:still ranked. Can't find any Minn/Neb victories against ranked teams

who the hell has LSU beat? 4-6 TCU or 4-5 Florida? LMAO.

Pick6;1533106 wrote:who the hell has LSU beat? 4-6 TCU or 4-5 Florida? LMAO.

not talking about LSU, bro. Conversation was regarding why Georgia/Ole Miss were garnering more love from the AP. Not trying to argue for the AP, just changing perspective

Mohican00;1533111 wrote:not talking about LSU, bro. Conversation was regarding why Georgia/Ole Miss were garnering more love from the AP. Not trying to argue for the AP, just changing perspective

What I am saying is that you called LSU a quality win for Georgia and Ole Miss. I'm changing the perspective by questioning what exactly makes a 3 loss LSU a quality win, or honestly even be ranked? LSU has exactly 1 win over a team with a winning record.

Also, not arguing for Nebraska or Minnesota, either.

why not? LSU's still ranked which gives teams like Ole Miss and Jawjuh a leg up on the B1G outsiders

Looks like the coaches have a little more sense about it: http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings/_/poll/2

The truth is..the SEC blows. Sleeper is right. Think about it. You have 2 middle of the road Big 12 teams over the years transfer to the shitty SEC and pretty much dominate the conference sans Alabama.

The Big 10 have some really, really bad teams...but so does the SEC. The best conference in college football is the PAC 12. The SEC knob slobbers need a reality check.

believer;1533161 wrote:Looks like the coaches have a little more sense about it: http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings/_/poll/2

How in the hell is LSU ranked 17th with 3 losses? Are they kidding me? They lost to a pathetic Florida team as well. Unreal.

Buckeyes play a cup cake schedule...so does Alabams.

Footwedge;1533178 wrote:The truth is..the SEC blows. Sleeper is right. Think about it. You have 2 middle of the road Big 12 teams over the years transfer to the shitty SEC and pretty much dominate the conference sans Alabama.

The Big 10 have some really, really bad teams...but so does the SEC. The best conference in college football is the PAC 12. The SEC knob slobbers need a reality check.

The PAC 12 may indeed be the best conference right now but AGAIN the SEC has won 80% of the national championships the past 10 years.

No matter how much we want to wish it away the SEC has clearly demonstrated itself to be the premier Division 1 college football conference.

Until another conference shows the same dominance (perhaps the PAC 12??), the perception will remain that the SEC is the conference to beat.

Oddly and ironically enough it doesn't appear that this will be the year the PAC 12 will get a chance to reverse that trend.

believer;1533268 wrote:The PAC 12 may indeed be the best conference right now but AGAIN the SEC has won 80% of the national championships the past 10 years.

No matter how much we want to wish it away the SEC has clearly demonstrated itself to be the premier Division 1 college football conference.

Until another conference shows the same dominance (perhaps the PAC 12??), the perception will remain that the SEC is the conference to beat.

Oddly and ironically enough it doesn't appear that this will be the year the PAC 12 will get a chance to reverse that trend.

How many times over that span has a one loss SEC team been given the gift opportunity of playing in the title game? A perfect example of the nonsense was the year Florida cleaned our clock. Had Florida played in another conference they would not have been given a title game opportunity.

The SEC was considered a nothing conference in 2006. It went
1. Pac10
2. Big10
3. BIG12
4. ACC
5.SEC