NCAA Week 14

[Batman]

Given the 150th anniversary of college football - I would really love to see some throwback formations in some of the rivalry games this week. Single-Wing, Wing T, Double Wing, Wishbone, T formation, split T I think Texas ran some wishbone as a tribute to Darrel Royal after he died. Teams usually work on a "special" set anyway. Credit Oregon State for throwing in a drop kick earlier this season.

Rutgers has been using its 1869 offense all season long.

 

[Neutral Corner]

Been on quite the heater the past month or so. I'm 25-7-1 on games I've actually bet on over the past five weeks, and went 6-0-1 last week.
Which means I'll probably go 0-9 this time. So follow me at your own risk.
Games I love this week:


• UAB +1 1/2 @ North Texas - UAB has a lot to play for and North Texas is slumping to the finish.

This is true, but this is also Senior Day for NT QB Mason Fine. They're a good team that was expected to be in the mix for a conference championship. Fine is a very skilled QB who has carried them for years, they'll want him to go out with a win. I think UAB wins the game, but don't underestimate North Texas or their motivation. This is their bowl game, or as close as they'll get to one.

 

[Cosmo]

If LSU wins out, I still think the Tigers are No. 1. Beating No. 4 Georgia on a neutral field will be a better win than Ohio State can get in the B1G championship, and that will put the Tigers over the top.

Still think that Utah will surpass Alabama should the Utes win out. But it's clear that Alabama will make it if Utah falters. I'm not sure Baylor or Oklahoma can pass the Tide.

 

[GilGarrido]

Minnesota didn't play San Diego State this year. Without peeking at the Gophers' schedule, I'd guess you're referring to FCS South Dakota State.

My bad; good guess. The schedule I saw said SD State, and with Fresno State also on the schedule I thought maybe they were trying to raise their recruiting visibility in California.

 

[Chef2]

I'm rooting like mad for Michigan, South Carolina, Colorado and Auburn this weekend.
If we really want an 8-team playoff, then we need the most chaotic of situations to happen.
Just out and out carnage.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

The larger the number of Power Five conferences excluded from the playoff, the greater the chance of an 8-team playoff. That's the formula. The sequence of events it would take for there to be a fight between two-loss teams for selection is almost unimaginable. Putting any two-loss team in ahead of a one-loss conference champ would threaten to blow up the system altogether. BTW Chef, I wouldn't bet that parlay if I were you, though I suppose the odds would offer a high reward indeed.

 

[HappyCurmudgeon]

There are so many possibilities for all hell breaking loose this week and I want every potential upset to happen. Make this thing as ridiculous as possible.

 

[DanOregon]

I'm rooting like mad for Michigan, South Carolina, Colorado and Auburn this weekend.
If we really want an 8-team playoff, then we need the most chaotic of situations to happen.
Just out and out carnage.

If it happens to the Pac-12: Well that shows how crappy that conference is.
If it happens in the SEC or Big 10: Well that shows you how deep and competitive that conference is.

 

[BTExpress]

LSU has won 12 consecutive games against the PAC 12. Alabama was 2-0 against the PAC 12 in 2016. Auburn has won five consecutive games against the PAC 12.

Those three teams are a combined 37-8-1 all time against the PAC 12. Add Georgia, and it's 47-12-1. The Pac-12's pride and joy --- USC --- is 14-11 against the SEC. Oregon is 4-6. Washington is 1-9 (that's not a typo).
At some point, people need to realize that the tiebreaker is going to go to the SEC. And for good reason.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

For somebody so into Russia, you have a hard time grasping that selection committees are a political process, period. Also, what happened 10, 5, or even last year has no bearing on the teams of 2019. It's new people. To return to my first point, the committee can't consistently favor one conference over the other four, whether they should or not, without the other four ganging together to get rid of or drastically alter the committee.

 

[Batman]

As we prepare for the Egg Bowl tomorrow night, this is always fun to revisit. The 1983 edition, decided by the Hand of God/Immaculate Deflection/What in the hell was that!?

 

[micropolitan guy]

LSU has won 12 consecutive games against the PAC 12. Alabama was 2-0 against the PAC 12 in 2016. Auburn has won five consecutive games against the PAC 12.

Those three teams are a combined 37-8-1 all time against the PAC 12. Add Georgia, and it's 47-12-1. The Pac-12's pride and joy --- USC --- is 14-11 against the SEC. Oregon is 4-6. Washington is 1-9 (that's not a typo).
At some point, people need to realize that the tiebreaker is going to go to the SEC. And for good reason.

What happened in the past has no bearing on 2019. If it does, then by that logic the determining factor if it comes down to Utah vs. Alabama will be the 2009 Sugar Bowl, when the Utes blew Alabama off the face of the earth.

 

[Neutral Corner]

If what happened in the past has no bearing on this season, explain preseason rankings.

 

[BTExpress]

You have to break a tie somehow. And history is one of the best indicators.

Don't like it? Change the history. Quit playing .250 ball against a conference you're trying to beat in a vote of panelists who don't want to look stupid by voting for a team that will lose 30-6 in the semifinals.

 

[micropolitan guy]

If what happened in the past has no bearing on this season, explain preseason rankings.

Preseason rankings have no bearing on choosing the Final Four teams. Preseason rankings are generally meaningless, but you already knew that.

You have to break a tie somehow. And history is one of the best indicators.

So, history has shown that in a head-to-head matchup between Utah and Alabama, Utah is clearly the superior program. When they meet on the field it's not even close.

 

[Neutral Corner]

Preseason rankings are based on nothing more than a team's long-term history, what it did last season, and analysis of recruiting that no one can know for certain whether it was successful for another couple of years. The result is skewed rankings that won't change for weeks. A preseason ranking is the key to the highway, compared to the struggle for recognition of a team that plays well but started unranked. Ranked teams lose but only drop a few places. Unranked teams win and no one notices. If they're lucky they eventually achieve "others getting votes" status. They have to stay undefeated for ten weeks before anyone acknowledges it - unless they are one of the big boys.

There should not be rankings until week four or five, after the early season straw men have been played and teams have had a chance to win or lose on the field. Preseason rankings are worthless, but they linger, while being unranked is like swimming with a concrete block tied to an ankle.

Of course there is money to be made selling preseason rankings, so it won't change.

 

[HappyCurmudgeon]

You have to break a tie somehow. And history is one of the best indicators.

Please man. Alabama beating Washington four years ago has **** all to do with now.

There are some good tiebreakers.

More wins?
Did they win their conference?
Did they play in their conference title game?

If you want to deal with the eye test fine. My first question would be if their best player is currently on the field and available to play?

 

[tapintoamerica]

I'll happily settle for one SEC team in the tournament. Just not two.

 

[Neutral Corner]

If a conference is going to send a team that didn't win their conference to the playoff, that team should have a *lot* going for it, to the point that they clearly deserve to be there. A 'Bama team that didn't win their conference and lost to the best team on their schedule (at home!) while scheduling the Little Sisters of the Poor OOC is not that team. UA played Duke, New Mexico St., Southern Miss, and Western Carolina OOC, with three of those four games played at home.

They may actually be good enough to rank in the top four, but they didn't prove that on the field. "They ain't played nobody, Pawl".

 

[HappyCurmudgeon]

Beyond that, this isn't a particularly great Alabama team. Defensively they're not going to be confused with teams from earlier in the decade and there is no question that Tua is the best player on the team and he's not going to be available. If Ohio State, LSU, Clemson and Utah win out I don't see how Alabama should get in with the exception that they have everyone at ESPN carrying the water for them.

Now if they beat Auburn and upsets happen...well that's another story.