thavoice;1682704 wrote:True. The thing is when comparing teams across the country with very little common opponents they will look at anything they can to try and that brings in the types of the loss. If there are nine common opponants though....it makes that head to head very important and telling and a tipping point
True, but remember what I said about OSU-VTech? Baylor has the same thing going on with that WVU loss, as they've faded to 7-5 after being ranked for some time. I'm getting the vibe that "bad losses" are among the top things going on with the committee at times.
wildcats20;1682711 wrote:@JBradEdwards: Using the old BCS formula, the current rankings would be: 1 Bama, 2 FSU, 3 Oregon, 4 TCU, 5 OSU, 6 Baylor
Is that better for you, thavoice?
Even the old way has TCU ahead of Baylor.
Of course, that would change after Saturday if both teams win, as Baylor's computer numbers will rise a good bit with a win over KSU. AT THAT POINT, we can make a more direct comparison to actually determine if non-conference scheduling is being graded more than head-to-head. I mean, right now there are 3 Big 12 teams in the Top 10 and two of them haven't played each other. Of course, that's going to have a big impact on any polls only counting what's gone on so far, as TCU just has more big wins than Baylor. Pretty much anyone who's analyzed the TCU/OSU/Baylor log-jam has brought up that TCU's advantage in scheduling gets diminished a lot after Saturday because the other two are playing tough opponents while they have a cupcake.