- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Kelly supports the Bama over FSU decision
Posted on 12/7/23 at 12:37 pm to OceanMan
Posted on 12/7/23 at 12:37 pm to OceanMan
And didn't tOSU wax Ba*ma*'s backside with their 3rd string QB in '14?
Not sure we beat UTenn in the '01 SECCG with Rohan at QB.
Matt Flynn hadn't shown much in '05 but we destroyed UM in a bowl game.
This clown committee is full-on clueless with their decision making.
0
Posted on 12/7/23 at 12:40 pm to OceanMan
quote:
The only control a team has is winning their games. FSU did that with and without their QB. They won a championship 10 years ago, they have made the playoff in the past, their conference has won since then, and even Notre Dame (a quasi member) has made it several times.
This is bad for college football and if you can see it you are very short sighted.
And they did it with a weaker schedule. If SoS doesn't matter, then put Liberty in.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 12:41 pm to DakIsNoLB
quote:
FSU has the weakest opponent combined win-loss record on the season and the weakest conference championship opponent of those three teams.
Maybe you should factor in away game crowd numbers. No more irrelevant than the above.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 12:43 pm to AlwysATgr
quote:
Maybe you should factor in away game crowd numbers. No more irrelevant than the above.
Can you explain this? This has what to do with win-loss records of FSU opponents?
Posted on 12/7/23 at 12:43 pm to tzimme4
quote:
It's Texas that should be out not FSU.
Per the guidelines, head-to-head MUST be considered when comparing similar teams. That is, you can’t rank bama ahead of UT. And that is exactly how you got the top 4.
“We will consider player availability” is secondary to that.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 12:43 pm to DakIsNoLB
quote:
And they did it with a weaker schedule. If SoS doesn't matter, then put Liberty in.
Just forget what happens on the field. Look at pre-season roster strength and scrimmages and base their decisions on that. If we're gonna do this then let's do it.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 12:46 pm to AlwysATgr
quote:
Just forget what happens on the field. Look at pre-season roster strength and scrimmages and base their decisions on that. If we're gonna do this then let's do it.
That makes zero sense. What exactly are you suggesting?
Posted on 12/7/23 at 12:48 pm to karmew32
quote:
This is like when Les said he would be "honored to play that team" again in 2011 and voted Bama ahead of Oklahoma State in his poll.
It's not difficult for him to support the decision because it is as easily defensible to put them in as it is to put in Texas or FSU. Had it been FSU instead of Bama, he should say the same thing.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 12:58 pm to DakIsNoLB
quote:
FSU has the weakest opponent combined win-loss record on the season
That’s a stupid metric. It really is.
quote:
weakest conference championship opponent of those three teams.
Says who?
Posted on 12/7/23 at 1:03 pm to OceanMan
quote:
That’s a stupid metric. It really is.
Really? How so? FSU played more teams with losing records than Texas and Bama. It's stupid because you don't like it unless you have viable counter argument. If you're discounting records then why should we care about 13-0 over 12-1?
quote:
Says who?
Louisville's SoS (i.e. that silly metric of opponents' combined win-loss record); they played more teams with losing records than not. Louisville isn't near on par with UGA and is at most equal to Oklahoma St.
I don't know how anyone claiming to be a reasonable and rational person can ignore strength of schedule.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 1:18 pm to DakIsNoLB
quote:
And they did it with a weaker schedule. If SoS doesn't matter, then put Liberty in.
The committee said FSU didn’t get in because their QB got hurt. Not because of any other reason. Anything else is just an effort to justify a decision that has already been made with admittedly different criteria used.
FSU played 2 SEC teams away from home in a conference that has produced a NC winner in the playoff era. The ACC had a winning record vs the SEC. If their schedule is weak, it’s completely circumstantial.
Liberty isn’t even in the discussion because FSU didn’t get in. That’s a straw man argument, and it’s not even in conflict with any advocating for FSU.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 1:31 pm to DakIsNoLB
quote:
Really? How so? FSU played more teams with losing records than Texas and Bama. It's stupid because you don't like it unless you have viable counter argument. If you're discounting records then why should we care about 13-0 over 12-1?
I’m not sure why I would owe you a counter argument, the SoS is a counter argument to winning games being the most important factor. But since I said it was stupid I’ll play along.
It’s stupid because there are endless qualifications that can be presented. Here are a few off the top of my head:
UF at home regardless of their record is a tougher game than any other mid season OOC game played by the other teams you listed.
UT and Bama both have at least one more win in their opponents W-L column because they lost a game. Bama’s SoS improved BECAUSE they hey lost a game.
If you went game by game, and looked at those opponent schedules, you would be further away from clarity, not closer. It’s ultimately a circular argument.
When comparing two undefeated teams, sure use the SoS. When comparing teams with losses to one’s without, that’s just a justification for subjective decision making.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 1:36 pm to DakIsNoLB
quote:
Louisville's SoS (i.e. that silly metric of opponents' combined win-loss record); they played more teams with losing records than not. Louisville isn't near on par with UGA and is at most equal to Oklahoma St.
The same group that made the decision you are justifying has OSU ranked several spots behind Louisville. “At most equal” is not exactly how you started your argument either.
Again, you are attempting to justify a decision that was explicitly based on subjectivity with this reasoning. It’s inherently flawed.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 1:38 pm to OceanMan
quote:
The committee said FSU didn’t get in because their QB got hurt. Not because of any other reason. Anything else is just an effort to justify a decision that has already been made with admittedly different criteria used.
They have more than that as a criteria. Easily read on their website. I'm not going to assume they didn't consider everything that their published criteria states. There's no way they didn't consider Bama and Texas SoS, record, CCG opponents, and a CCG win. That's lazy to think they only kept FSU out because of Travis being out.
quote:
FSU played 2 SEC teams away from home in a conference that has produced a NC winner in the playoff era. The ACC had a winning record vs the SEC. If their schedule is weak, it’s completely circumstantial.
No if; their schedule is weak; or at least weaker than Bama and Texas. And SoS is a stated criteria for playoff selection. It doesn't matter how the ACC did against the SEC; it matters how each respective team did against their opponents and the strength of those opponents. There's no way to separate that from the decision.
quote:
Liberty isn’t even in the discussion because FSU didn’t get in. That’s a straw man argument, and it’s not even in conflict with any advocating for FSU.
I'm bringing them in the discussion. Why shouldn't they get in?
Posted on 12/7/23 at 1:48 pm to karmew32
Kelly is the only coach who faced both of them. I’d take his word for it as to who is the better team. He should know.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 2:04 pm to DakIsNoLB
quote:
They have more than that as a criteria. Easily read on their website. I'm not going to assume they didn't consider everything that their published criteria states.
It’s subjective, and they stated their reasoning. That’s not an assumption.
quote:
There's no way they didn't consider Bama and Texas SoS, record, CCG opponents, and a CCG win. That's lazy to think they only kept FSU out because of Travis being out.
Oh they did. They also used their criteria that head-to-head MUST be considered when comparing two teams, which is why FSU ultimately got left out. They couldn’t, per their own guidelines, bring in bama without UT.
quote:
And SoS is a stated criteria for playoff selection.
So how is it calculated and where can you find it? How does FSU compare to the other undefeated teams?
quote:
I'm bringing them in the discussion. Why shouldn't they get in?
Because there are already 4 teams in that you have already made an argument for, that would exclude them.
If the committee were to put in Michigan Washington and FSU, I would expect an explanation of how they decided on that final team. I wouldn’t expect them to be ranked ahead of those teams because of lack of comparability with common opponents.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 2:19 pm to OceanMan
quote:
I’m not sure why I would owe you a counter argument, the SoS is a counter argument to winning games being the most important factor. But since I said it was stupid I’ll play along.
You don't owe me anything. I simply asked, or otherwise I would dismiss your assertion as baseless.
quote:
UF at home regardless of their record is a tougher game than any other mid season OOC game played by the other teams you listed.
What? Texas and Bama played each other OOC. They are both better than UF on any field. Not OOC, but Bama played Tennessee and LSU midseason and beat them handily. Texas played Oklahoma and Kansas state. Also beat a 5-7 TCU at TCU who can't be much worse than UF. I don't know how citing UF strengthens the argument for FSU and one OOC game doesn't validate a SoS.
quote:
UT and Bama both have at least one more win in their opponents W-L column because they lost a game. Bama’s SoS improved BECAUSE they hey lost a game.
And? That's who they played. It's not different if FSU had played somebody and lost to them. If you don't want to count that opponent's win for Bama, they are still 97-61. Or pull the Texas and Bama records out of each others' schedules entirely and you're still at 78-66 and 86-60 respectively. That they played each other isn't a knock on their selection, so there's no reasonable argument for discounting it in the decision process.
quote:
If you went game by game, and looked at those opponent schedules, you would be further away from clarity, not closer. It’s ultimately a circular argument.
No, that would not be the case. It's not a circular argument. It would be an effort, but it would not be terribly difficult to assess the quality of each opponent's record.
When comparing two undefeated teams, sure use the SoS. When comparing teams with losses to one’s without, that’s just a justification for subjective decision making.
No. The selection committee protocols do not state that. They consider strength of schedule regardless of record, though record comparing could very well keep a team out if there's too much disparity in those records. Undefeated is not an automatic bid and shouldn't be.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 2:21 pm to DakIsNoLB
quote:
I'm not going to assume they didn't consider everything that their published criteria states.
quote:
SoS, record, CCG opponents, and a CCG win
I’d like to add that all of the criteria is preceded by “when comparing similar records and pedigree”
History shows that record is the single most important factor in ranking teams, which supports the statement above.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 2:30 pm to DakIsNoLB
quote:
That makes zero sense. What exactly are you suggesting
It's mocking the committee and their decision making process. They don't even know where the target lies.
The goal is not to select four "best" teams at the end of the regular season. The goal is to finish the season with the one team that demonstrated its superiority on the field over the most number of other teams.
Because of the sheer # of teams, there will be an inevitable subjective element to the process. But there is no need to exacerbate the uncertainty in this case. No team has demonstrated on the field that they're better than FSU. That cannot be said for Ba*ma*.
Posted on 12/7/23 at 2:32 pm to OceanMan
quote:
It’s subjective, and they stated their reasoning. That’s not an assumption.
I take you mean they didn't base it solely on FSU QB injury.
quote:
Oh they did. They also used their criteria that head-to-head MUST be considered when comparing two teams, which is why FSU ultimately got left out. They couldn’t, per their own guidelines, bring in bama without UT.
Being considered isn't the same as automatically puts you in, but, yes, putting Bama in and then not Texas wouldn't look right. Still doesn't mean SoS, and quality of CCG opponent, and CCG win didn't come into play.
quote:
So how is it calculated and where can you find it? How does FSU compare to the other undefeated teams?
Opponents' combined win-loss record, opponents' final season ranking, opponents' conference, opponents' talent. I get where you are going; what's the detailed protocol? Without it, there's your subjectivity. If you can find where it is stated, I'd like to see it, but those items I mentioned are what make sense to me.
quote:
Because there are already 4 teams in that you have already made an argument for, that would exclude them.
Yes, I'm basing this on Michigan and UW getting in regardless. I'm asking why doesn't Liberty get in with 2 spots among Texas, Bama, and FSU? For me, they don't beat out those three on any of the criteria I mentioned.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News