- 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: SEC babies whining about SOS and not playing OOC games is pathetic
Posted on 12/9/24 at 1:20 pm to TackySweater
Posted on 12/9/24 at 1:20 pm to TackySweater
quote:
Sorry you don’t understand it
No it’syou don’t understand
Playing 4 cupcakes gives you 4 easy wins. Ole Miss played 4 cupcakes and got 4 easy wins. So what benefit was it for them?
Bama had 4 easy OOC wins, how does cancelling future games help them? If they played Furman instead of Wisconsin instead of would they be in the playoff?
All you’ve got are hypotheticals. can find even 1 single case that this actually happened? An SEC team lost a tough OOC game and it kept them out?
1
Posted on 12/9/24 at 1:24 pm to TackySweater
quote:
So what are you saying? The SEC teams aren’t good and shouldn’t count as good wins?
What’s being said is that the SEC argument is moot at this point.
Argument against Indiana: “They lost to the only good team they played”
Argument for Ole Miss/Bama: “Yes, they lost to bad sec teams, but the SEC is tough!”
Do you understand the doublethink going on here? You excuse poor sec losses, but hold better losses against other teams? It’s absolutely maddening.
You don’t get to lose to 4-8, 6-6 and 7-5 teams and argue that a loss against a 10-2 team is disqualifying.
This post was edited on 12/9/24 at 1:25 pm
Posted on 12/9/24 at 1:29 pm to ConcreteThreshold
quote:
Do you understand the doublethink going on here? You excuse poor sec losses, but hold better losses against other teams? It’s absolutely maddening.
Where did I do this lol
Posted on 12/9/24 at 1:32 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Playing 4 cupcakes gives you 4 easy wins. Ole Miss played 4 cupcakes and got 4 easy wins. So what benefit was it for them?
Cupcake wins aren’t meant to benefit a teams rankings or sos. It’s about mitigating risk. Plain and simple. It’s weird that you don’t understand this lol
If you’re going to stand by the “playing an easy ooc schedule doesn’t do anything for a teams chances to make the playoffs” argument then you’re just lost and aren’t comprehending things.
quote:
Bama had 4 easy OOC wins, how does cancelling future games help them?
Cancelling future tough ooc games mitigates risk. Again, not sure how you don’t understand this lol
This post was edited on 12/9/24 at 1:34 pm
Posted on 12/9/24 at 1:36 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
what he’s doing is whining like a little bitch threatening to take his ball and go home. OOC games is not what decided Bama’s fate.
Where did I say that's why Alabama wasnt in the playoffs? Mouth breathers like you keep saying that about his comments when they were clearly about future OOC games.
quote:
Money, prestige, fans and players get more fired up for those games, the program gets more attention that week, it helps you team get prepared for tough conference games ahead? How many reasons do you want.
Did USC beating LSU get them ready for that vaunted Big 10 Schedule? Nope. How about Notre Dame beating A&M at Kyle Field.. did that stop them from losing to NIU at home?
Again Ole Miss did exactly this “risk mitigation” and how did it help them? I could make an argument their OOC hurt them when they had to play conference games?
Then make that argument, it would be baseless but you can make that argument. All Ole Miss had to do was not lose 3 SEC games, if they only lost 2 then they would be in.
quote:
A team with only 2 SEC loses would be in without 4 cupcakes. UGA scheduled 2 ACC teams and they were in with 2 loses. If Bama/OM/USCe had only 2 conference loses they would be in.
Does your dumbass understand what risk mitigation means? lets dumb it down for you.. Is it riskier to play 4 power 4 teams or 4 group of 5 teams?
Posted on 12/9/24 at 1:42 pm to TackySweater
quote:
Cancelling future tough ooc games mitigates risk. Again, not sure how you don’t understand this lol
Thankfully someone else here understands that. This board should make people pass a semblance of an IQ test to be able to post here, and the rest of yall can take it back to X and Reddit.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 1:49 pm to JoylessMurderball
quote:
Mouth breathers like you keep saying that about his comments when they were clearly about future OOC games.
Why do you think he’s making these comments about future OOC if it’s not a reaction to being left out this year? If you listen to all of what is being said they are saying the committee didn’t count SOS so we won’t play tough games in future. Do you think he would be saying this if Bama was in this year?
quote:
All Ole Miss had to do was not lose 3 SEC games, if they only lost 2 then they would be in.
That’s literally what I said
OOC had nothing to do with it so it’s crybaby nonsense to make the threat to not play the future games.
quote:
Does your dumbass understand what risk mitigation means? lets dumb it down for you.. Is it riskier to play 4 power 4 teams or 4 group of 5 teams?
I understand risk mitigation just fine. You don’t understand how the real world works or marginal differences lol: but yes it’s less risky to play 4 teams than 5, it be less risky still to play 3 or 2 or 1 or 0. Maybe they should drop out of the SEC and play 12 non P4 and go undefeated.
Of courses that ridiculous but so is you instance that playing a good OOC match puts a team a risk in the future when it’s not what cost teams in the past.
Btw these complaints are not new. 20 years ago people would freak out about Boise or West Virginia or whatever team had a easy schedule that would go undefeated and the SEC would beat each other up and every year the SEC teams even with a loss were in contention and the undefeated Boise/Utah/Hawaii would not be
Posted on 12/9/24 at 2:00 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Why do you think he’s making these comments about future OOC if it’s not a reaction to being left out this year? If you listen to all of what is being said they are saying the committee didn’t count SOS so we won’t play tough games in future. Do you think he would be saying this if Bama was in this year?
I don't think he would publicly say it so soon, but I do believe it would be stated by him and other SEC AD's in the future. Of course it's a reaction to this year, but it's about future OOC games. He knows what games are coming down the pipe line (Ohio State & Notre Dame), and the risk is too high to play those games.
quote:
That’s literally what I said
OOC had nothing to do with it so it’s crybaby nonsense to make the threat to not play the future games.
Thats my point with Byrnes comments being about risk mitigation. If Alabama loses to Ohio State and then drops 2 conferences games, they are out of the playoff... if the Ohio State game is canceled and they lose 2 conference games then they're in.
quote:
I understand risk mitigation just fine. You don’t understand how the real world works or marginal differences lol: but yes it’s less risky to play 4 teams than 5, it be less risky still to play 3 or 2 or 1 or 0. Maybe they should drop out of the SEC and play 12 non P4 and go undefeated.
Yep. You're just a dumbass. It's okay. The world needs dumbasses too.
Is Alabama more likely to lose to Ohio State or Mercer?
Posted on 12/9/24 at 2:03 pm to JoylessMurderball
quote:
Thankfully someone else here understands that. This board should make people pass a semblance of an IQ test to be able to post here, and the rest of yall can take it back to X and Reddit.
Bama and Ole Miss had about as easy of OOC schedules as you could have. I’ll give credit for @Wisconsin, but they’re still a 5-7 team.
You just have to win. That’s it. If Ole Miss and Bama beat some of the shittiest conference teams on their schedule, they’re in.
Indiana, Boise, and SMU did that.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 2:06 pm to TackySweater
quote:
It’s about mitigating risk. Plain and simple. It’s weird that you don’t understand this lol
Why do you keep saying I don’t understand this?
What’s the purpose of “mitigating” risk here? To not lose games and get in the playoffs is it not?
Ole Miss mitigated risk what did it get them? What happened don’t understand is why people keep making this argument about future schedules when it’s not what hurt these teams this year? I mean no need to play 4 big OOC games but 1 or 2 doesn’t hurt.
Do you understand the other side is risk aka reward? There are definitely benefits to playing big OOC games, I laid out some earlier. You can’t play football or live life for that matter with out some risk, you have to balance it.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 2:06 pm to TackySweater
quote:
Where did I do this lol
In your post that I quoted. “Are you saying SEC teams are bad?”
Maybe it wasn’t doublethink and you just have a hard time with reading comprehension. I understood OP just fine.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 2:08 pm to ConcreteThreshold
quote:
Bama and Ole Miss had about as easy of OOC schedules as you could have. I’ll give credit for @Wisconsin, but they’re still a 5-7 team.
You just have to win. That’s it. If Ole Miss and Bama beat some of the shittiest conference teams on their schedule, they’re in.
Once again. I'm not saying that OOC had anything to do with this year, and Byrne didn't either. He actually prefaced his comments by saying Alabama cant lose at Vandy and Oklahoma. It's about risk mitigation for future schedules when Alabama has teams like Ohio State and Notre Dame as future OOC opponents. Even if they cancel those games they have to win the games in conference they are supposed to get in.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 2:09 pm to ConcreteThreshold
quote:
Bama and Ole Miss had about as easy of OOC schedules as you could have. I’ll give credit for @Wisconsin, but they’re still a 5-7 team. You just have to win. That’s it. If Ole Miss and Bama beat some of the shittiest conference teams on their schedule, they’re in. Indiana, Boise, and SMU did that.
Agree, however, I also give credit to Bama for scheduling Wisky. Wisky was more often than not in the BIG Championship game, plus Camp Randall is a tough place to play. It’s not Bama’s fault Wisky has fallen off some since they scheduled the game.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 2:23 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Do you understand the other side is risk aka reward? There are definitely benefits to playing big OOC games, I laid out some earlier. You can’t play football or live life for that matter with out some risk, you have to balance it.
It's not only risk mitigation, it's the cumulative effect of playing a tougher schedule that may cause a hiccup in any game of the season. If there's no real benefit to scheduling tough OOC games, especially when you're already playing in the SEC, then why do it?
Posted on 12/9/24 at 2:36 pm to TackySweater
quote:
quote:
Bama had 4 easy OOC wins, how does cancelling future games help them?
Cancelling future tough ooc games mitigates risk. Again, not sure how you don’t understand this lol
But it doesn't.
1) Had Alabama had a quality OOC win against, say, Oregon or Penn State or Notre Dame or someone along those lines, then they would've had a stronger argument than that they did. A stronger OOC performance counterbalances the risk of losing in-conference. To wit UGA would have almost certainly stayed ahead of Alabama this year with a third conference loss to, say, Florida, with wins against Clemson and GT.
This will apply each and every single year. Whatever perceived risk you think there is by playing creampuffs OOC is counterbalanced by a heightened risk of performing poorly in conference.
2) In years of softer in-conference scheduling (like Texas this year), it buffers the risk of potential in conference losses as well. Had UT lost against A&M, they would have been sweating their balls off heading into this past weekend and if they had gotten in, would have been right there with Indiana and SMU. To their credit they at least tried to put a notable game out of conference on the schedule, but it didn't pan out; a real top 20 win OOC would have had them in no question even with an A&M loss. This is going to be cyclical and will continue to affect teams as long as these mega conferences exist with wildly uneven schedules.
3) There is a lot of risk to any conference writ large if they don't play a strong OOC schedule; SoS are reference algorithms. The more robust the data, then the more meaningful the data is. If the top third of SEC teams all of the sudden decide to opt out, then those cross-conference points of reference go away, and all of the sudden either the SEC's SoS starts to look meaningless and / or shitty.
If you want a real complaint, look at the composition of the committee. You have a B1G lackey in charge with only 2 of the 13 with any connection to the SEC, one of those being Pinkel who spent the vast majority of his time at Mizzou in the Big XII. Penn State and Indiana should have been punished a bit more for their resumes, and that's because of conference bias, not the overall process.
This post was edited on 12/9/24 at 2:39 pm
Posted on 12/9/24 at 2:43 pm to H-Town Tiger
Don't lay eggs in Norman. Problem solved
Posted on 12/9/24 at 2:48 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:Saban didn’t play tough OOC games?
Well Alabama's AD insinuated that they're gonna cancel their OOC games against name teams and go back to playing The Citadel and Louisiana-Monroe and Grambling like under Saban.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 2:52 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:This is silly.
But it doesn't. 1) Had Alabama had a quality OOC win against, say, Oregon or Penn State or Notre Dame or someone along those lines, then they would've had a stronger argument than that they did
3 loss teams don’t typically slap the #1 team in the country.
Moving forward, to start the season, it is much more beneficial to have the worst schedule you can possibly cultivate.
For many, like SMU, that’s easy af bc of the conference they’re in. SEC teams would need to get rid of any decent OOC game.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 3:00 pm to Epic Cajun
quote:
Then why do it
Money, ratings, exposure, fan interest. Do you want a third of the schedule to be Nicholls/Kent State/Air Force/etc?
This post was edited on 12/9/24 at 3:03 pm
Posted on 12/9/24 at 3:34 pm to NIH
quote:
Money, ratings, exposure, fan interest. Do you want a third of the schedule to be Nicholls/Kent State/Air Force/etc?
As an LSU fan I would rather them schedule a cupcake game 1 of the season than lose the first game of the season for 5 consecutive seasons
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News