October 13, 2004
Conventional Wisdom: Week Eight
Week 8Date: 10/13/2004
| ||
| 'WE NEED A PLAYOFF' EDITION | ||
| Perpetual Losers |  |
Army ended the nations longest losing streak and passed it to East Carolina. ECU won a few minutes later and passed the streak down to Louisiana-Monroe. ULM won and the streak fell down to Central Florida. UCF was so smitten at winning anything, they promptly lost their game...extending their streak to the nation's best nine losses in a row. |
| Cal |  |
Cal now needs help from their other friends in the Pac-10 if they expect to play for the title. |
| The SEC |  |
The top of the SEC is full of high-quality teams this year that keep beating each other -- the bottom is very, very week dropping games to Maine, Rutgers, Ohio, and Navy (among others). |
| Utah | |
CW thinks Utah is the real deal -- handled Texas A&M and on a winning streak like you wouldn't believe. These guys are BCS bound and deserve more respect. |
| Utah | |
CW thinks Utah is over-hyped and over-rated. These guys wouldn't last three weeks in a BCS conference -- play more games against the big boys and they'll deserve to go to a big boy bowl. |
| Big XII North | |
They're just 1-6 vs. Big XII South opponents (with the only win being Missouri over Baylor). A 4-4 conference record could be enough to represent the North in the Big Championship game in Kansas City. |
| Nebraska | |
CW doesn't want to rub it in, but the Cornhuskers might have been better off sending in their basketball team... they might be more accustomed to scoring 70 points in a game. |
| Oklahoma RB Peterson | |
This kid has Heisman written all over him. A few more big games, a Big XII championship ring, and a loss from Purdue would do a lot to help his cause. |
Fanblogs' Conventional Wisdom column is the opinion of the author and not necessarily those of Newsweek or MSNBC. The content of this page has not been reviewed or approved by Newsweek or MSNBC and the author is solely responsible for its content.
Comments:
posted on October 13, 2004 12:02 PM — 209.16.242.81 — link — abuse?Pete Holiday said:
Sure... and if you ignore that the SEC is one of the toughest conferences in the country to win in, I suppose that argument means something.
Let's look at the number of BCS opponents that the teams play: Utah 3 (as listed above); SEC Schools 8 (minimum).
I'll give Utah credit for scheduling A&M, and half a point for Arizona... but UNC? That's probably not even as tough as some of the conference games Utah plays.
posted on October 13, 2004 12:42 PM — 198.207.0.5 — link — abuse?
I'm sure Georgia Tech and NC State would take issue with UNC's toughness.
But I didn't discount the SEC's schedule, you read into that.
And my point was, that you discount Utah for not playing anyone, yet say that the SEC doesn't have to play anyone because they are the SEC.
The SEC is playing a total of 8 non conference games against BCS schools. Half of those are rivalry games played every year.
So it's a catch-22. The Alabama's of the world would rather pick up games against the likes of Utah State and Western Carolina, sure wins, than play a game they might lose. That way they can go .500 in conference and still get in a bowl. So Utah's and Louisville's of the world are forced to play the lowest tier of BCS schools. Then folks like you tag them for not playing the quote "big boys". They'll never win that argument
Jeff said:
posted on October 13, 2004 12:49 PM — 24.197.122.162 — link — abuse?
One factor neither of you mentions:
BCS non-conference opponents usually mean a home and home series. Lesser foes will gladly take the gate receipt of a one time (or more than that in some cases) visit to the BCS team stadium, giving a big gate split to the lesser foe and an extra home game for the BCS team.
posted on October 13, 2004 1:08 PM — 209.16.242.81 — link — abuse?
I didn't say that you discounted the SECs schedule, only that comparing Utah's to the SECs isn't doing Utah any favors. 3 BCS games versus 8.
As for the "Alabamas" of the world, I'd like to kindly point out that Alabama is coming off of a four+ year stretch of having one of the top 5 most difficult schedules in college football. Playing Home/Home with Oklahoma and UCLA in that stretch. There are a lot of teams you can chastize for scheduling pansies year in and year out, but Alabama is not one of them.
The reason that Utah can't win the argument is because their conference schedule is weak. Their conference schedule is weak because their conference is weak. You can't play games against 8 mediocre teams and then play 3 BCS schools (two of which are also mediocre teams) and then gripe about respect.
You also can't expect BCS teams to schedule tough out-of-conference games more now (with SOS being even LESS of a factor) than before.
Minimizing SOS gives "BCS Busters" more of a chance in the short run, but it doesn't help them to grow their program to be a long-term player in the national rankings.
posted on October 13, 2004 1:32 PM — 168.166.80.205 — link — abuse?
An honest look at strength-of-schedule:
Ranking Utah vs. the SEC West:
#16 Alabama
#29 Arkansas
#33 Ole Miss
#47 Auburn
#57 Mississippi St.
#62 LSU
#95 UtahI think it's obvious that the Utes have some major work to do if they want their strength of schedule to compare well to others. I don't see a way in the world you could call theirs a "tough schedule". Give me a break.
Compare Utah to fellow Mountain West teams:
#40 BYU
#53 Colorado State
#73 UNLV
#74 San Diego State
#79 Air Force
#87 Wyoming
#89 New Mexico
#95 UtahGranted, the Utes give a little lift to the others, but #95 is just sad. Give me a break.
posted on October 13, 2004 1:49 PM — link — abuse?
The Mountain West is improving. The addition of TCU gives the mid-level conference another mid-level team. The problem is that it's slow growth - it's not going to boost anyone this season.
In fairness to the Utes, Utah's strength is a key factor in the higher SOS for their conference mates.
Utah scheduled what they believed (at the time) would be a pretty tough schedule this year. I give them some props. It's not entirely their fault that the "good" teams they scheduled haven't entirely held up to Utah's expectations.
The Utes will be measured on how they finish the year. It looks like they'll be in a BCS bowl. That alone is a huge victory. Now, if they can manage to actually WIN that game...........
posted on October 13, 2004 2:00 PM — 68.62.114.241 — link — abuse?
So *if* Utah wins out, they get a BCS bowl (almost a given) -- but do they DESERVE one? I mean, sure, it's easy to say "Oh, they went undefeated, they deserve a BCS bowl" but do they REALLY?
I had no idea that Utah's SOS was that absurdly bad (nor that Alabama's was that good, to be honest)
So they beat A&M. And Arizona. And UNC. So what? Those three wins does NOT a BCS-caliber team make.
Is it fair? Maybe not, but that's how it is. Utah scheduled teams that they thought would be "pretty good" -- I'd love to see who they TRIED to get. Also, if they were playing to win and not playing those games for cash, I'd bet they could've gotten some teams more likely to be good in any given year had they just asked a bit less to travel and play, or been willing to pay themselves for the opportunity to play a MAJOR team from a MAJOR conference.
Which really raises an interesting point... the NCAA doesn't like teams paying players because it gives an unfair advantage to teams with big boosters... but they'll let a TEAM pay a boatload of cash to another school to play a game. With so much riding on who plays who, why doesn't the NCAA do more to regulate teams buying easier schedules?
posted on October 13, 2004 2:18 PM — 168.166.80.205 — link — abuse?
Remember that Tulane ran the table in C-USA a few years ago (Tommy Bowden's last season there), and they got snubbed by the BCS. There is absolutely no guarantee of Utah getting into the BCS unless they rank #1 or #2 in it. My bet is still that the Utes will be playing in Memphis at Liberty Bowl come New Year's Eve.
Also, if Louisville beats Miami and wins out, there's NO way both teams make the BCS. Won't happen.
colby said:
posted on October 13, 2004 3:58 PM — 68.165.14.189 — link — abuse?
Just pretend for a second that Utah is playing in the SEC East and has Auburn and LSU and Miss St. as their SEC West opponents. Does anyone really think that Utah would finish in the top half of the division? Plug Louisville into the same scenario. Now try Purdue. Even USC doesn't look so dominant playing the SEC schedule. So much hype was made of USC playing Cal that you'd think it was the Pac-10 championship game. Actually, I guess it was. Very impressive.
brian said:
posted on October 16, 2004 2:14 AM — 67.125.172.124 — link — abuse?
Remember that if Utah finishes in the top 6 of the BCS they will automatically get a berth in a BCS bowl. If they win out and move up in the polls even a few spots, chances are they'll finsish the season in the top 6 of the BCS. The question was asked whether they deserve it? Any team that can go undefeated by punishing everyone of their opponents and ends the season in the top 6 in the BCS deserves to be in a BCS bowl. Yes their strengh of schedule sucks, but that doesn't mean that there not a good team, it means there opponents suck. In fact, thats even more reason to see them in a BCS game put them up against the "big boys" and lets see what happens.
I remember this same argument back in mid 90's when a very good BYU team went 13-1 against a weak schedule. They were snubbed by the Fiesta Bowl, but rebounded with a win against a good Kansas State team in the Cotton Bowl. It just goes to show that even teams with a weak schedule can be pretty damn good. The Utes I think are one of those teams, it's just too bad they don't have last years schedule this year a win over A&M, Cal, and Oregon would have been nice this to have this year.
posted on October 16, 2004 12:34 PM — 69.73.43.133 — link — abuse?
OK, fine, Utah may be overrated. They are even more overrated in the computers, due to the computer biases (toung planted firmly in cheek).
**IF** they go undefeated they WILL be in the top 6 in the BCS standings, and WILL be in a BCS bowl game.
The Fiesta Bowl is the best fit because Utah would travel well there. Who would they be likely to play? A Big East Champion?? After Utah runs over West Virginia like they are another Texas A&M and end the season undefeated with a BCS Bowl win what will the nay sayers say?
posted on October 16, 2004 12:41 PM — 68.62.114.241 — link — abuse?
If the computers were so accurate, why use anything else? The answer, of course, is that the computers aren't really that great either.
Being one of the nay-sayers you speak of, I'll tell you what I'll say if Utah beats West Virginia in a BCS Bowl: a) WVU is ALSO overrated, and b) Utah wouldn't even be there if they had a real schedule.
There are plenty of 1-loss teams right now that would thump West Virginia, but will need someone else to lose in order to move up into the top 6. Thinking that winning their bowl game justifies them being there is tempting, but doesn't really hold water because you have to assume that Utah is an anomaly in a good system and not the product of a broken one.
posted on October 16, 2004 12:42 PM — 69.73.43.133 — link — abuse?
[ Utah would be about #5 in the SEC this year, #2 or 3 in the PAC 10 and about #3 or 4 in the Big 12. They would be a contender for the Big 12 North. They would be #3 or 4 in the ACC. They would be #3 or 4 in the Big 10 and would win the Big East.
Utah would be a Bowl eligable team in any conference. With the exception of the Big East, their chances of a BCS Berth are HIGHER as an outsider. The trade off is their EXTREAMLY unlikely chance of the title game(almost to the point of exclusion). ]
posted on October 16, 2004 12:52 PM — 68.62.114.241 — link — abuse?
Bowl Elligible isn't really the issue, I don't think. After all, there are a ton of mediocre teams that will be bowl elligible. I also think your projected rankings in the major conferences is a bit slanted.
Utah could be a fair number of teams in those conferences taken one at a time but, as the SEC is demonstrating very aptly this year, playing the schedule week in and week out amplifies the difficulty.
Case in point: South Carolina loses to Ole Miss after giving Georgia a run for their money. Some people want to use this as an indictment of SC or Georgia, or to pump up Ole Miss... but it really just comes down to a major BCS conference beating up on itself.
Utah is a good team, a top 20 -- maybe 15 -- team. But they're certainly not one of the best 5 or 6 teams in the nation.
Josh McClain said:
posted on October 13, 2004 11:28 AM — 198.207.0.5 — link — abuse?Just for grins - Utah scheduled more non-conference games this season against BCS teams (3 - A&M, UNC, Arizona) , than the entire SEC West did (2 - Ark v. Texas, LSU v. Oregon State).