SEC is first.

Next tier is PAC and B12

Then ACC

Then B1G.

One good week does not make up for 2 bad ones. The B1G is still last among the power conferences.

(09-21-2014 10:46 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  One good week does not make up for 2 bad ones. The B1G is still last among the power conferences.

It's not just that the B1G had a good week, but that the ACC had a horrendous one and the Big 12, on balance, took a shot thanks to K-State losing to Auburn.

So when the B1G goes 4-1 while the ACC goes 0-5 and the Big 12 goes 0-1, that can indeed result in a big swing.

Still, overall, my system has those three conferences almost even-steven, at .35, .33, and .33 winning percentages. And I think this is reasonable: At this point, just about everyone agrees the SEC and PAC are #1 and #2, while the Big 12, ACC, and B1G are clustered below.

Yeah yeah, we know. The same ole haters always having to show that they are. To say that the Big Ten is obviously the worst conference in college football due to not judging how the conference looked THIS week and instead judging them upon THE PAST. Yeah it just shows an extreme bias in judging. I am not saying the Big Ten has moved up ahead of anyone but they are right there now with the rest.

Their top teams blew away teams that they were supposed to blow away. Their mid tier teams travelled to ACC sites and beat those teams without a single loss. Rutgers won despite everyone thinking Navy would beat them, Maryland wasn't favored and Iowa certainly wasn't favored. Even Illinois pulled out a victory somehow and we never expect that. How about Indiana? Oh right, all the credit goes to Missouri playing poorly or whatever. A win is a win and that is what you folks say when your teams win but when it comes to the Big Ten? You got excuses all over the place.

By all the rules that you people judge by, The Big Ten redeemed itself across the board yet....the past means more than the present? What a joke.

The ranking is the SEC first and then the rest is muddled.

(09-21-2014 11:44 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The ranking is the SEC first and then the rest is muddled.

Almost. I'd say the PAC is clearly between the SEC and the rest of the pack.

(09-21-2014 11:52 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 11:44 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The ranking is the SEC first and then the rest is muddled.

Almost. I'd say the PAC is clearly between the SEC and the rest of the pack.

Fair enough, I personally havn't seen enough out of their top squads to feel that way. Yes Oregon did great against Michigan State but what about last night against Washington State?

I am not seeing the level of play and dominance across the board at the top of the conference to put them above the rest.

I think it is fair for you to say that the PAC is arguably above the others but clearly? With Oregon's play last night and the mediocre play of Stanford, USC and UCLA? I don't think it is all that clear.

The Big 12 is underrated here. Penalizing the league when 4 of its middle to lower tier teams lose by an average of 6.25 to FSU, Bama, Auburn, and UCLA is laughable.

The Big 12's bad losses in P5 games were from Tech and KU who will probably finish at the bottom of the standings.

(09-21-2014 11:52 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 11:44 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The ranking is the SEC first and then the rest is muddled.

Almost. I'd say the PAC is clearly between the SEC and the rest of the pack.

The Big 12 has looked just as good as the PAC. Outside of Oregon who looks really strong out west?

UCLA looked incredibly beatable against the hospital and suspension roster of UT and also against UVA and Memphis.

Arizona struggled with the UTSA team that OkSt blew out.

Stanford and Baylor both haven't played anyone in noncon but should be good.

USC lost to BC who people aren't crazy on.

Wazzu-Rutgers
CU-CSU

Each league has its flaws but I in no way agree the PAC has any lead whatsoever. Outside of the perceived top two (Stanford/Oregon and OU/BU) I feel the next tier in the Big 12 (OSU, KSU, TCU, WVU) has shown more strength but that is certainly up for debate.

I do think the B12 and P12 are ahead of the B1G and ACC right now.

(09-21-2014 12:06 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 11:52 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 11:44 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The ranking is the SEC first and then the rest is muddled.

Almost. I'd say the PAC is clearly between the SEC and the rest of the pack.

Fair enough, I personally havn't seen enough out of their top squads to feel that way. Yes Oregon did great against Michigan State but what about last night against Washington State?

I am not seeing the level of play and dominance across the board at the top of the conference to put them above the rest.

I think it is fair for you to say that the PAC is arguably above the others but clearly? With Oregon's play last night and the mediocre play of Stanford, USC and UCLA? I don't think it is all that clear.

My ratings are in the moment, just what the results are as of now, they do not attempt to predict the future.

You have a good point about the top PAC teams not looking that impressive so far, which could mean in future weeks they will lose some OOC games and thus bring the PAC rating down. But so far it hasn't happened yet.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(09-21-2014 12:36 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  The Big 12 is underrated here. Penalizing the league when 4 of its middle to lower tier teams lose by an average of 6.25 to FSU, Bama, Auburn, and UCLA is laughable.

The Big 12's bad losses in P5 games were from Tech and KU who will probably finish at the bottom of the standings.

My system only factors in wins and losses, it does not factor in margin of victory or defeat, so the Big 12 gets no credit for the 'moral victories' of having their middling teams lose close to top OOC teams.

But if you are correct that this means I am underrating the Big 12, the Big 12 will indeed rise up in the rankings if those schools chalking up moral victories start to produce real wins.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(09-21-2014 01:06 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 12:36 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  The Big 12 is underrated here. Penalizing the league when 4 of its middle to lower tier teams lose by an average of 6.25 to FSU, Bama, Auburn, and UCLA is laughable.

The Big 12's bad losses in P5 games were from Tech and KU who will probably finish at the bottom of the standings.

My system only factors in wins and losses, it does not factor in margin of victory or defeat, so the Big 12 gets no credit for the 'moral victories' of having their middling teams lose close to top OOC teams.

But if you are correct that this means I am underrating the Big 12, the Big 12 will indeed rise up in the rankings if those schools chalking up moral victories start to produce real wins.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

The league is effectively done with noncon except one or two games

(09-21-2014 01:13 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 01:06 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 12:36 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  The Big 12 is underrated here. Penalizing the league when 4 of its middle to lower tier teams lose by an average of 6.25 to FSU, Bama, Auburn, and UCLA is laughable.

The Big 12's bad losses in P5 games were from Tech and KU who will probably finish at the bottom of the standings.

My system only factors in wins and losses, it does not factor in margin of victory or defeat, so the Big 12 gets no credit for the 'moral victories' of having their middling teams lose close to top OOC teams.

But if you are correct that this means I am underrating the Big 12, the Big 12 will indeed rise up in the rankings if those schools chalking up moral victories start to produce real wins.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

The league is effectively done with noncon except one or two games

Yes, but then there is bowl season.

(09-21-2014 11:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 10:46 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  One good week does not make up for 2 bad ones. The B1G is still last among the power conferences.

It's not just that the B1G had a good week, but that the ACC had a horrendous one and the Big 12, on balance, took a shot thanks to K-State losing to Auburn.

So when the B1G goes 4-1 while the ACC goes 0-5 and the Big 12 goes 0-1, that can indeed result in a big swing.

Still, overall, my system has those three conferences almost even-steven, at .35, .33, and .33 winning percentages. And I think this is reasonable: At this point, just about everyone agrees the SEC and PAC are #1 and #2, while the Big 12, ACC, and B1G are clustered below.

The people who bet on Kansas State against the spread made money. How does that reflect badly on the B12? Kansas State did better than expected, according to every bookie in the nation.

You need to look at things besides the wins and losses. Try looking at who is playing whom. Who is favored, and by how many points. The final score, and the spread. Simply looking at wins and losses tells you almost nothing, but the record, which is often misleading.

That's why I always have a problem with rankings. They are strictly subjective, no matter how many factors you examine. Everything varies from week to week. It's all a matter of opinion.

However, it is fodder for the message board.

The conference commissioners are going to have to push hard against their schools to do something about the SOS issue. First off, the games are scheduled YEARS in advance...when no one knows what state the opponent will be in. Secondly, most schools are only scheduling 1 OOC vs. P5 schools a year. It's fine and nice that the Big Ten is going to 9 league games (like the Pac-12 and Big 12), but that doesn't help us measure the conference vs. the other conferences.

At least the bowl games match up similarly talented teams usually. These early season OOC games are quite often impossible to make equitable. PSU vs. Alabama in 2010? PSU was atrocious...some OOC game for 'Bama! PSU vs. Syracuse in 2008? Syracuse was atrocious...but when the game was scheduled, Syracuse was a top 25 squad. Should 'Bama be punished in 2010 for scheduling PSU? Should PSU be punished in 2008 for Syracuse?

If this is truly going to matter to the CFP committee, then something needs to be done.

(09-21-2014 01:54 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  The conference commissioners are going to have to push hard against their schools to do something about the SOS issue. First off, the games are scheduled YEARS in advance...when no one knows what state the opponent will be in. Secondly, most schools are only scheduling 1 OOC vs. P5 schools a year. It's fine and nice that the Big Ten is going to 9 league games (like the Pac-12 and Big 12), but that doesn't help us measure the conference vs. the other conferences.

At least the bowl games match up similarly talented teams usually. These early season OOC games are quite often impossible to make equitable. PSU vs. Alabama in 2010? PSU was atrocious...some OOC game for 'Bama! PSU vs. Syracuse in 2008? Syracuse was atrocious...but when the game was scheduled, Syracuse was a top 25 squad. Should 'Bama be punished in 2010 for scheduling PSU? Should PSU be punished in 2008 for Syracuse?

If this is truly going to matter to the CFP committee, then something needs to be done.

I tend to agree with you here. The OOC schedules for the various teams should be setup so that we have some idea of the strength of the various teams and conferences. And the best time to do that is just prior to the season.

They manage to do that each year in basketball. Why couldn't they do the same for football? Basketball schedules are not made up years in advance. I don't see why football schedules need to be.

Just look at Baylor. They play 3 cupcakes OOC every year, and according to Art Briles they have no intention of changing that. IMO they should be penalized for it, and they will be. One of these days they will be on the outside looking in, simply because they played nobody OOC.

(09-21-2014 12:36 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  The Big 12 is underrated here. Penalizing the league when 4 of its middle to lower tier teams lose by an average of 6.25 to FSU, Bama, Auburn, and UCLA is laughable.

The Big 12's bad losses in P5 games were from Tech and KU who will probably finish at the bottom of the standings.

Strong losses only aid you if followed by wins. You guys still have work to do. You aren't being penalized, you just aren't getting equal credit for losses as others get for wins. You get recognition that those losses were against strong teams. We are waiting to see how your wins look.

(09-21-2014 04:15 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 12:36 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  The Big 12 is underrated here. Penalizing the league when 4 of its middle to lower tier teams lose by an average of 6.25 to FSU, Bama, Auburn, and UCLA is laughable.

The Big 12's bad losses in P5 games were from Tech and KU who will probably finish at the bottom of the standings.

Strong losses only aid you if followed by wins. You guys still have work to do. You aren't being penalized, you just aren't getting equal credit for losses as others get for wins. You get recognition that those losses were against strong teams. We are waiting to see how your wins look.

OU dominated the Vols, TCU dominated the Gophers, ISU beat Iowa, and WV beat Maryland. Those are the P5 wins.

Paired with no poor performances from the top part of the league it's hard to argue that any of the non-SEC P5 leagues deserve to be ahead of the Big 12.

(09-21-2014 04:31 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 04:15 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 12:36 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  The Big 12 is underrated here. Penalizing the league when 4 of its middle to lower tier teams lose by an average of 6.25 to FSU, Bama, Auburn, and UCLA is laughable.

The Big 12's bad losses in P5 games were from Tech and KU who will probably finish at the bottom of the standings.

Strong losses only aid you if followed by wins. You guys still have work to do. You aren't being penalized, you just aren't getting equal credit for losses as others get for wins. You get recognition that those losses were against strong teams. We are waiting to see how your wins look.

OU dominated the Vols, TCU dominated the Gophers, ISU beat Iowa, and WV beat Maryland. Those are the P5 wins.

Paired with no poor performances from the top part of the league it's hard to argue that any of the non-SEC P5 leagues deserve to be ahead of the Big 12.

I don't think it's hard at all. The SEC has won 90% of its games against the FBS. The PAC 12 has won 84%. Then come the ACC (64%) and the Big 12 and B1G (63% each). There is no single best measurement, but the gap in this one between the PAC and the Big 12 makes it hard to argue the Big 12 is better. Especially when the PAC 12 also has the best record against the P5, even ahead of the SEC (5-2). The Big 12 is 4-6.

(09-21-2014 04:55 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 04:31 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 04:15 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 12:36 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  The Big 12 is underrated here. Penalizing the league when 4 of its middle to lower tier teams lose by an average of 6.25 to FSU, Bama, Auburn, and UCLA is laughable.

The Big 12's bad losses in P5 games were from Tech and KU who will probably finish at the bottom of the standings.

Strong losses only aid you if followed by wins. You guys still have work to do. You aren't being penalized, you just aren't getting equal credit for losses as others get for wins. You get recognition that those losses were against strong teams. We are waiting to see how your wins look.

OU dominated the Vols, TCU dominated the Gophers, ISU beat Iowa, and WV beat Maryland. Those are the P5 wins.

Paired with no poor performances from the top part of the league it's hard to argue that any of the non-SEC P5 leagues deserve to be ahead of the Big 12.

I don't think it's hard at all. The SEC has won 90% of its games against the FBS. The PAC 12 has won 84%. Then come the ACC (64%) and the Big 12 and B1G (63% each). There is no single best measurement, but the gap in this one between the PAC and the Big 12 makes it hard to argue the Big 12 is better. Especially when the PAC 12 also has the best record against the P5, even ahead of the SEC (5-2). The Big 12 is 4-6.

That's a pretty simplistic analysis. Oregon has a good win against Michigan St. The rest were Michigan (UU), Texas (UCLA), Virginia (UCLA) and Illinois (UW). The losses were Rutgers (WSU) and Boston College (USC). So their top 4 teams are 4-1 vs. the P5 while the rest are 1-1.

For the Big 12, the top 4 are 1-2 and have 2 close losses to top 5 teams. The other 6 are 3-4 and have 2 close losses to top 11 teams along with the likely bottom two teams getting blown out by Arkansas and Duke (ranked this week). Wins aren't as impressive-Tennessee, Minnesota, Iowa and Maryland-but the record is mostly compiled by the bottom half of the league and includes 5 ranked teams. The Pac 12 has only 1 of their 7 games vs. ranked teams and has really struggled vs. their non-P5 competition. UW who is supposed to be one of the top teams beat Hawaii 17-16, E. Washington 59-52 and Georgia State 45-14 after trailing the worst team in FBS (and worse than much of FCS) 14-0 at the half.

(09-21-2014 04:31 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 04:15 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-21-2014 12:36 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  The Big 12 is underrated here. Penalizing the league when 4 of its middle to lower tier teams lose by an average of 6.25 to FSU, Bama, Auburn, and UCLA is laughable.

The Big 12's bad losses in P5 games were from Tech and KU who will probably finish at the bottom of the standings.

Strong losses only aid you if followed by wins. You guys still have work to do. You aren't being penalized, you just aren't getting equal credit for losses as others get for wins. You get recognition that those losses were against strong teams. We are waiting to see how your wins look.

OU dominated the Vols, TCU dominated the Gophers, ISU beat Iowa, and WV beat Maryland. Those are the P5 wins.

Paired with no poor performances from the top part of the league it's hard to argue that any of the non-SEC P5 leagues deserve to be ahead of the Big 12.

You really NEED people to think The Big 12 is better don't you?

It's f'n early. Get over it. The Big 12 hasn't shown it is above the rest. The Volunteers aren't all that great, neither are the Gophers. ISU and Iowa always trade wins back and forth, it is the nature of that rivalry.

WV beating Maryland I give credit on but I think we can find a single impressive P5 win across the board.

I am saying that the Big 12 is in the mix. You are trying to say they stand above the others. The burden of proof is on you and most folks don't agree it seems.

Try a little patience. Yes, I can say that, I am pulling for the Big Ten to yet make something of this season and that takes extreme patience.