(12-07-2014 12:22 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 11:33 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  I'm starting a "One Play Away" metric and seeing if it goes anywhere.

TCU, losing @ Baylor by 3, is 1PA from 12-0. On the other hand, beating Kansas by a nose, they're 1PA from 10-2. I don't think TCU has any other 1PA's. So the range is 10-2 to 12-0.

Baylor, beating TCU by 3, is 1PA from 10-2, and barely held on vs Texas Tech, so 2PA from 9-3. So their range is 9-3 to 11-1.

#geniusorstupid ? I can never tell with my ideas like this, so I ask you guys.

TCU kicked a last second FG vs. WVU to win by 1.

Thanks. That puts TCU at a range of 9-3 to 12-0.

Maybe what I'm driving at is separating solid wins, solid losses, and flukey, could-go-either-way games. So maybe I should be saying Baylor 9-2-1, TCU 9-0-3? And FSU 7-0-6 or so?

(12-07-2014 01:06 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 12:22 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 11:33 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  I'm starting a "One Play Away" metric and seeing if it goes anywhere.

TCU, losing @ Baylor by 3, is 1PA from 12-0. On the other hand, beating Kansas by a nose, they're 1PA from 10-2. I don't think TCU has any other 1PA's. So the range is 10-2 to 12-0.

Baylor, beating TCU by 3, is 1PA from 10-2, and barely held on vs Texas Tech, so 2PA from 9-3. So their range is 9-3 to 11-1.

#geniusorstupid ? I can never tell with my ideas like this, so I ask you guys.

TCU kicked a last second FG vs. WVU to win by 1.

Thanks. That puts TCU at a range of 9-3 to 12-0.

Maybe what I'm driving at is separating solid wins, solid losses, and flukey, could-go-either-way games. So maybe I should be saying Baylor 9-2-1, TCU 9-0-3? And FSU 7-0-6 or so?

If it's really "one play away", then you have to look at how the game played out and not just the score.

Example: Alabama was not one play away from losing to Mississippi State. MSU scored a meaningless TD on the last play of the game to cut the margin from 12 to 5.

(12-07-2014 01:12 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 01:06 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 12:22 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 11:33 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  I'm starting a "One Play Away" metric and seeing if it goes anywhere.

TCU, losing @ Baylor by 3, is 1PA from 12-0. On the other hand, beating Kansas by a nose, they're 1PA from 10-2. I don't think TCU has any other 1PA's. So the range is 10-2 to 12-0.

Baylor, beating TCU by 3, is 1PA from 10-2, and barely held on vs Texas Tech, so 2PA from 9-3. So their range is 9-3 to 11-1.

#geniusorstupid ? I can never tell with my ideas like this, so I ask you guys.

TCU kicked a last second FG vs. WVU to win by 1.

Thanks. That puts TCU at a range of 9-3 to 12-0.

Maybe what I'm driving at is separating solid wins, solid losses, and flukey, could-go-either-way games. So maybe I should be saying Baylor 9-2-1, TCU 9-0-3? And FSU 7-0-6 or so?

If it's really "one play away", then you have to look at how the game played out and not just the score.

Example: Alabama was not one play away from losing to Mississippi State. MSU scored a meaningless TD on the last play of the game to cut the margin from 12 to 5.

Absolutely. That doesn't count as 1PA. I think Alabama's loss to Ole Miss does count as 1PA, because the interception was late enough that Miss could just run out the clock. Alabama's win over Arkansas counts as 1PA, any overtime game counts as 1PA so the win at LSU counts,

So that would make Alabama 10-0-3 by 1PA. Does that tell us anything, comparing it to Baylor's 9-1-2 or TCU's 9-0-3?

I mean, it tells us that Baylor had a solid loss. Which we already knew, but sort of got lost in teh conversation.

Maybe I'm overcomplicating it. Maybe I should just say that a one-loss team where the game was decided in overtime or in the last minute is better than a one-loss team that wasn't in the game in the last minute.

(12-07-2014 12:43 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 10:21 AM)bullet Wrote:  In any event, the Big 12 did once have a ccg until the Pac 12, Big 10 and SEC took their schools. The Big 12 would be glad to start doing a ccg again if the Big 10 sent Nebraska back. Think Delany is game for that?

Well, Big Ten schools did get Nebraska kicked out of the AAU, so you never know...

Seriously, though, it was one of those things where people start getting nervous and don't want to be the one left behind if half the league bails out.

Colorado's then-AD said that he started reaching out to his contacts in the Pac-10 after the Big Ten said they were expanding and Missouri's idiot governor started drooling about the Big Ten.

Missouri governor spurred Buffs' move

It is kind of funny. All the Big 12 schools voted to keep Nebraska in. If either Wisconsin or Michigan had voted to keep Nebraska, they wouldn't have been kicked out.

And Nebraska is making about $10 million less a year than if they had stayed in the Big 12 in addition to paying the $9 million exit fee. They've got a long 7 year buy-in.

But no, I don't think they are willing to leave. But we would gladly take them back. I don't think Missouri would get any votes if they wanted to come back. A&M and Colorado wouldn't be unanimous.

(12-07-2014 10:21 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 10:19 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You can tell who simply hates the Big Ten and whom is looking at everything equally. That doesn't even take into account that it is highly unlikely that in a single day the Committee is going to come to an agreement between TCU and Baylor. It is much easier for them to simply pick Ohio State as punishment for The Big 12's obvious attempt to game the system.

I don't think the committee is that capricious.

In any event, the Big 12 did once have a ccg until the Pac 12, Big 10 and SEC took their schools. The Big 12 would be glad to start doing a ccg again if the Big 10 sent Nebraska back. Think Delany is game for that?

You talk as if those schools had no choice in the matter. Those schools left because the Big 12 was dysfunctional. It was and still is.

It's not the other conference's responsibility to make the Big 12 have enough teams to be on an even playing field. It's up to the Big 12 conference to keep their members happy.

The Big 12 is on borrowed time. It's just a matter of time until the conference is broken apart. It likely won't be for another decade, but it's just a matter of time. Extremely poor leadership and the power gap that exists in the conference will be the death knell. In the end the losers will be the Baylors, the TCUs, the ISUs, the KSUs, and possibly the TT's.

(12-07-2014 05:08 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 10:21 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 10:19 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You can tell who simply hates the Big Ten and whom is looking at everything equally. That doesn't even take into account that it is highly unlikely that in a single day the Committee is going to come to an agreement between TCU and Baylor. It is much easier for them to simply pick Ohio State as punishment for The Big 12's obvious attempt to game the system.

I don't think the committee is that capricious.

In any event, the Big 12 did once have a ccg until the Pac 12, Big 10 and SEC took their schools. The Big 12 would be glad to start doing a ccg again if the Big 10 sent Nebraska back. Think Delany is game for that?

You talk as if those schools had no choice in the matter. Those schools left because the Big 12 was dysfunctional. It was and still is.

It's not the other conference's responsibility to make the Big 12 have enough teams to be on an even playing field. It's up to the Big 12 conference to keep their members happy.

The Big 12 is on borrowed time. It's just a matter of time until the conference is broken apart. It likely won't be for another decade, but it's just a matter of time. Extremely poor leadership and the power gap that exists in the conference will be the death knell. In the end the losers will be the Baylors, the TCUs, the ISUs, the KSUs, and possibly the TT's.

No, those schools left because they got a better offer. Colorado fits better with the Pac. A&M wanted to differentiate themselves (A&M is dysfunctional all on their own) and go to the top football conference. Nebraska wanted more money and to go to the most academically prestigious conference. Missouri just didn't want to have to go to the Big East at some point.

When people leave a job, it isn't necessarily because their company is dysfunctional.

The issues in the Big 12 were really the diversity of institutions. The Big 10 schools are pretty much alike-enormous state research universities. The ACC schools are mostly privates or small elite publics (the only B1G like school-Maryland-left). The SEC schools all pretty much looked alike 30 years ago before the recent growth in Georgia and Florida. The Pac 12 has the Oregon schools and WSU, but mostly they were very highly regarded research universities. The Big 12 was a mix of different types.

(12-07-2014 05:41 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 05:08 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 10:21 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 10:19 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You can tell who simply hates the Big Ten and whom is looking at everything equally. That doesn't even take into account that it is highly unlikely that in a single day the Committee is going to come to an agreement between TCU and Baylor. It is much easier for them to simply pick Ohio State as punishment for The Big 12's obvious attempt to game the system.

I don't think the committee is that capricious.

In any event, the Big 12 did once have a ccg until the Pac 12, Big 10 and SEC took their schools. The Big 12 would be glad to start doing a ccg again if the Big 10 sent Nebraska back. Think Delany is game for that?

You talk as if those schools had no choice in the matter. Those schools left because the Big 12 was dysfunctional. It was and still is.

It's not the other conference's responsibility to make the Big 12 have enough teams to be on an even playing field. It's up to the Big 12 conference to keep their members happy.

The Big 12 is on borrowed time. It's just a matter of time until the conference is broken apart. It likely won't be for another decade, but it's just a matter of time. Extremely poor leadership and the power gap that exists in the conference will be the death knell. In the end the losers will be the Baylors, the TCUs, the ISUs, the KSUs, and possibly the TT's.

No, those schools left because they got a better offer. Colorado fits better with the Pac. A&M wanted to differentiate themselves (A&M is dysfunctional all on their own) and go to the top football conference. Nebraska wanted more money and to go to the most academically prestigious conference. Missouri just didn't want to have to go to the Big East at some point.

When people leave a job, it isn't necessarily because their company is dysfunctional.

The issues in the Big 12 were really the diversity of institutions. The Big 10 schools are pretty much alike-enormous state research universities. The ACC schools are mostly privates or small elite publics (the only B1G like school-Maryland-left). The SEC schools all pretty much looked alike 30 years ago before the recent growth in Georgia and Florida. The Pac 12 has the Oregon schools and WSU, but mostly they were very highly regarded research universities. The Big 12 was a mix of different types.

You forgot OU and OSU tried to escape to the PAC 12, UT was on the phone with the ACC, and the Big East was willing to take remaining B12 schools....