re: Need to cancel the home and home with Clemson

You sound retarded

quote:

---

it's easier to get there playing Southeastern in September rather than Clemson.

---

quote:

---

The name of the cupcake matters not.

---

Right. So they played Northwestern State and are #2. If they had played and beat Cincinnati or virtually any FBS school they'd be #1.

Your point is the exact opposite of what is true.

The greatest thing about this is that if LSU had played literally anyone other than Virginia Tech (or Ohio State) in 2007, there would be no national title for LSU that year. Replace Virginia Tech with Oklahoma (the next best opponent), and there's one less title for the Tigers.

The idea that LSU steps on a rake by scheduling big OOC's is so stupid, I can't believe it.

quote:

---

The idea that LSU steps on a rake by scheduling big OOC's is so stupid, I can't believe it.

---

the whole thinking is bassackwards, what's hurting us about Texas is they are 6-5, replace them with UAB (or dare i say Troy ) and chances are we never reach #1 in the first place, not to mention the Texas game vaulted Burrow into the Heisman conversation especially the 3rd and 17. ETA : He would have gotten in eventually but still, there's nothing bad about playing Texas this year

quote:

---

So they played Northwestern State and are #2. If they had played and beat Cincinnati or virtually any FBS school they'd be #1.

---

Sound logic there. Compare the worst OOC for LSU to the best OOC for OSU.

WHy don't we compare Alabama and Rutgers next?


Teams that schedule games against opponents you expect to be good, like LSU/Texas, Oregon/Auburn, UGA/ND, Clemson/A&M, that should be rewarded regardless if one of the teams ends up not being that great that year. I'm not saying you treat Texas or A&M as some great win if they end up not being really good, but reward the team that went out and scheduled a game like that.

Scheduling Cincinnati is no different than scheduling Utah State. It makes ZERO difference if one finishes 10-2 or 6-6, an elite team will beat the crap out of them regardless, and there was ZERO risk in scheduling them.

I wish the committee used more common sense and took into effect when a team played someone. Playing 1-0 Texas who's ranked in the top 10 is a lot different than playing 6-4 Texas. Playing 2-2 VA Tech is a lot different than playing 8-3 Va Tech. The Maryland team PSU played in Week 4 had a lot more confidence in themselves than the Maryland team OSU played in week 10. The week 5 MSU team OSU beat was playing with a lot more confidence than the weak 10 MSU team that Michigan beat.
This is why i like playing Auburn early in the year, and A&M late in the year. Auburn usually gets better as the season progresses, and A&M gets worst, even though they may have around the same records, when you play them makes a big difference.

That's the kind of things i thought the committee was supposed to factor in, the things a computer cannot.
A computer looks at 6-6 Miami Ohio and rewards OSU for playing them over an FCS team LSU played, something they do every year to help support in state schools. In reality, there is no difference in these two opponents, again, something i understand a computer can't recognize, but the committee should.

quote:

---

If they had played and beat Cincinnati or virtually any FBS school they'd be #1

---

So that would hold weight if our SOS wasn't better than that of Ohio St.....so wrong again

ETA

Also to claim that Cincinnati is some great win is dumb....they are just another group of 5 team.

Big games like these are great for program exposure. College football is all about the quality of your brand to sell to recruits.

quote:

---

what's hurting us about Texas is they are 6-5, replace them with UAB (or dare i say Troy ) and chances are we never reach #1 in the first place

---

jfc yes.

Consider the schedule in the following subgroups. In the left column is the number of total combined wins you'd expect those teams to have in the regular season; in the right column, current combined wins.

a) OOC - 24 - 18
b) SECE - 16 - 12
c) SECW Haves - 26 - 25
d) SECW Have-nots - 15 - 11

Basically, the components that contribute to a team's SOS are not delivering the way we expect them to deliver in a normal year. Based on everything I've observed in 16 years of being way more into this can be considered healthy, I'd say that the best way to schedule OOC games if you're a school like LSU (with goals as lofty as they are) is:
- Biggest name program who will agree to a home/away or neutral 1-off. Doesn't matter how good they are--they're good enough to have that big arse name, so beating them will be a great-to-really-really-great start.
- Biggest name program who will agree to one game at your site. Doesn't matter how good they are--you're good enough to beat them, so go for it. Sometimes this is Oregon State, but other times it's Appalachian State. Either way, the kicker is going to miss three extra points because you're destined to win this game.
- Mid-major who you expect to be playing for bowl eligibility two days after Thanksgiving. Bowling Green. Miami U. Georgia Southern. You know the type.
- Worst FBS program you can find. Akron. UConn. Rice. You know this one, too.

Obviously these things are complicated, so I don't mean this as to suggest that a school not named Notre Dame has the ability to nail a schedule so perfectly on a regular basis, but if LSU wanted to present themselves with the best opportunity possible, all things considered, that's who I believe they'd be best attempting to schedule.

Thanks a lot Texas for sucking all season.

quote:

---

tOSU scheduled tougher OOC than LSU,

---

At Texas with their injured 7 starters is a good team...and good victory...

Pretty sure OSU didn't play a blueblood program on the road