ASU football home & home w/ MSU

[Zobaczcie suki]

1. The original poster specifically called out UofA's scheduling in his diatribve so not surprising UofA fans responded.

2. UofA's schedules statistically have been above average in strength for the the last decade including last year and project that way going forward which is a inconvenient fact on this thread that nobody has addressed.

3. Nobody has again addressed the completely false "to beat the best you have to play the best" narrative that hasn't applied to any of college football's recent championship teams.

I suppose it's fun making stuff up and then changing the subject when somebody calls you on it but perhaps the reason our board is slow on football-related matters is that there's nothing that really matters to talk about. Football recruiting is a boring subject, half of the committed players in a given class one never hears from again. And scheduling as has been pointed out means nothing in attaining a program's lofty goals. So what is there to talk about until we get into fall camp?

That's cool, if you all want to play USTA in 2014, and again in 2015, while we play Notre Dame in 2014 and Texas A&M in 2015, more power to you. http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/pac-10/arizona-wildcats.php
Oh crap, it looks like ASU also plays USTA in 2016 http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/pac-10/arizona-state-sun-devils.php. But at least we pick up Texas Tech that year.

 

[HooverDam]

Using past scenarios in the BCS system to analyze the future in the Playoff system is silly. Its an apples to oranges comparison, we have no idea how the new system will shake out.

Lets hope that the NCAA comes down on the SEC and makes them start playing a real schedule. All 5 power conferences should be required by the NCAA to play a 9 game conference schedule and at least 1 team from another power conference in OOC play.

That still leaves plenty of room for the SEC to fill up their OOC with schools like Duke, Indiana and Kansas if they want to keep the cupcake train going.

I think there's a fair chance we may see the NCAA make moves like this in the near future. The move to the playoffs shows the NCAA has an interest in a more equitable system, making sure schedules are relatively equalized seems like a natural next step.

 

[TJ]

You really, truly, honestly do not feel that playing national powerhouse teams like LSU, Texas A & M, and Michigan State does not gain you respect from players, recruits, coaches, and reporters/analysts?

No. Getting to big boy bowl games gets you respect, not going 2-1 or 1-2 to enter a grueling PAC 12 schedule, and certainly not playing in the Holiday bowl, Independence bowl, or the Waxie toilet bowl.

Even your own alumnus, Pete Prisco, repeats himself every time a team loses a game. One loss = season over, even if it is hyperbole.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. But I believe that outsiders (fans of teams other than ASU and UA) see a team willing to schedule quality opponents in higher regard than another who schedules only cupcakes. I also believe that a nationally televised game against say Notre Dame will gain more exposure than a locally televised game against Nevada. I don't have any proof, just going off of gut instincts here.

Again, go look at the SEC blueprint. This has been pointed out to you as evidence, not opinion, over and over in this thread; yet, you continue to ignore it. I'm not going to repeat myself; only to say go back to what Mao and I have indicated.

And the instincts you're going off of are homerism and unbridled optimism.

Do you have any logic to why UA basketball plays in preseason tournaments against quality teams like Kansas, Kentucky, etc.? Especially if it is so important for the football team to schedule the easiest possible out of conference opponents.

LMAO! You're talking about two VERY different systems. Hoops is very reliant upon SOS, RPI, etc., while football is mostly record based. If you are in a power conference and go 11-1, you're almost guaranteed to go to a BCS bowl regardless of OOC (even Boise St. and TCU got into the Fiesta Bowl playing with an overall substandard SOS with a similar record). If you're in a power conference and go 27-6 in hoops with a SOS >70, you're destined for the NIT or, at best, a 10 seed 2500 miles away from campus. Hoops rewards teams for scheduling tough OOC; football doesn't.

 

[HooverDam]

Again, go look at the SEC blueprint.


LMAO! You're talking about two VERY different systems..

You just contradicted yourself. The SEC blueprint may, or may not, work in the new playoff system. It's a totally new system that will likely continually undergo tweaks over the next few years.

The fact that the SECs cupcake scheduling worked over the past 5 years or so has NOTHING to do with the NCAA football landscape going forward.

 

[TJ]

You just contradicted yourself. The SEC blueprint may, or may not, work in the new playoff system. It's a totally new system that will likely continually undergo tweaks over the next few years.



The fact that the SECs cupcake scheduling worked over the past 5 years or so has NOTHING to do with the NCAA football landscape going forward.

I didn't contradict myself, but you sure did. By saying the SEC blueprint "May or may not work" then subsequently saying "it has NOTHING to do with the NCAA football landscape" shows you know very little about the implications of scheduling, and are just guessing.

 

[HooverDam]

I didn't contradict myself, but you sure did. By saying the SEC blueprint "May or may not work" then subsequently saying "it has NOTHING to do with the NCAA football landscape" shows you know very little about the implications of scheduling, and are just guessing.

I was quite clear in what I said, and actually it made perfect sense. Yes, SEC's cupcake scheduling worked well in the BCS era. Going forward as the new playoff system is implemented and undoubtedly tweaked after each season, we don't know that it will continue to work. We also don't know if the NCAA will, sooner rather than later, mandate 9 conference games--there's been a lot of talk about that, it will likely happen at some point.

 

[Jay Cardinal]

No. Getting to big boy bowl games gets you respect, not going 2-1 or 1-2 to enter a grueling PAC 12 schedule, and certainly not playing in the Holiday bowl, Independence bowl, or the Waxie toilet bowl.

Even your own alumnus, Pete Prisco, repeats himself every time a team loses a game. One loss = season over, even if it is hyperbole.



Again, go look at the SEC blueprint. This has been pointed out to you as evidence, not opinion, over and over in this thread; yet, you continue to ignore it. I'm not going to repeat myself; only to say go back to what Mao and I have indicated.

And the instincts you're going off of are homerism and unbridled optimism.



LMAO! You're talking about two VERY different systems. Hoops is very reliant upon SOS, RPI, etc., while football is mostly record based. If you are in a power conference and go 11-1, you're almost guaranteed to go to a BCS bowl regardless of OOC (even Boise St. and TCU got into the Fiesta Bowl playing with an overall substandard SOS with a similar record). If you're in a power conference and go 27-6 in hoops with a SOS >70, you're destined for the NIT or, at best, a 10 seed 2500 miles away from campus. Hoops rewards teams for scheduling tough OOC; football doesn't.

Cupcake scheduling is great if ultimate goal is to get to a "big boy bowl game". But if you are trying to make your way into a 4-team playoff to compete for the national championship I find it hard to believe a challenging OOC schedule would not make a difference.

Say ASU and Michigan were both 10-2, won their conference, and were vying for the fourth playoff spot. If Michigan played and beat all easy schools out of conference, while ASU beat Notre Dame or LSU in out of conference play I think this could be a deciding factor.

So basketball has a tournament, and relies on strength of schedule as a determining factor to who gets in. Football is switching to a tournament, but you don't think they will consider strength of schedule? As HooverDam said this is a new format and we don't know how it will play out. I believe scheduling will be a factor, particularly when teams have very similar seasons. To some extent, football does this already. Do you remember the Hawaii-Georgia game a few years back? 12-0 Hawaii was pissed they did not get to play for the national championship. The reason they did not get to the national championship? Strength of schedule! The toughest team they played prior to Georgia was #19 Boise State.

 

[Zobaczcie suki]

Cupcake scheduling is great if ultimate goal is to get to a "big boy bowl game". But if you are trying to make your way into a 4-team playoff to compete for the national championship I find it hard to believe a challenging OOC schedule would not make a difference.

Say ASU and Michigan were both 10-2, won their conference, and were vying for the fourth playoff spot. If Michigan played and beat all easy schools out of conference, while ASU beat Notre Dame or LSU in out of conference play I think this could be a deciding factor.

So basketball has a tournament, and relies on strength of schedule as a determining factor to who gets in. Football is switching to a tournament, but you don't think they will consider strength of schedule? As HooverDam said this is a new format and we don't know how it will play out. I believe scheduling will be a factor, particularly when teams have very similar seasons. To some extent, football does this already. Do you remember the Hawaii-Georgia game a few years back? 12-0 Hawaii was pissed they did not get to play for the national championship. The reason they did not get to the national championship? Strength of schedule! The toughest team they played prior to Georgia was #19 Boise State.

 

[TJ]

Do you remember the Hawaii-Georgia game a few years back? 12-0 Hawaii was pissed they did not get to play for the national championship. The reason they did not get to the national championship? Strength of schedule! The toughest team they played prior to Georgia was #19 Boise State.

As I suggested to you, go back and read my earlier posts. But since you didn't, thanks anyway for making my point for me, Jay; and you brought up a great example to support my argument.

Georgia = SEC (powerhouse conference)
Hawaii = WAC (midmajor)

See the difference? Prior to that bowl game, In 2007-2008, Georgia played four ranked opponents, all in conference, with a number of very good unranked teams. Hawaii? Only one ranked team in conference along with a bunch of scrubs. And Hawaii got stomped in that game, BTW.

The point? You don't have to schedule tough if you're in a power conference like the SEC, PAC 12, etc. The challenges are already in front of you. If you want to schedule a bunch of power houses OOC, more power to you. But if you go into conference play 2-1 or 1-2, your chances for reaching a playoff are slim-to-none regardless of the quality of opponent you faced in OOC.

A team like Hawaii has to schedule a tough OOC in order to have a puncher's chance to play in a bowl game of significance. Even then, they still carry the stigma of being in an inferior conference and playing ~7 crap teams. Our PAC 12 conference is fortunate to have about 8-9 good-to-great teams where you don't have to schedule a tough OOC to bolster your post season resume.

You can continue to say OOC matters, but what matters most is the conference in which you play. PAC 12 and SEC already provides challenges for you. With the exception of maybe the top two teams in a conference, the rest of the teams are going to cannibalize one another.

That being said, regardless of what the landscape is moving forward, the balance of power will remain with the power conferences. And even with new regulations for the SEC, it is still going to look to play bottom-feeder teams like Colorado, Kansas, and Northwestern that barely belong in their respective conferences. In essence, it'll be more of the same.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

ASU and Michigan were both 10-2, won their conference, and were vying for the fourth playoff spot. If Michigan played and beat all easy schools out of conference, while ASU beat Notre Dame or LSU in out of conference play I think this could be a deciding factor.

Well, I highly doubt that a two loss team will get into a fourth playoff spot very often (and would likely be behind in the pecking order to a one loss team with an slightly easier schedule for sure) so this point is moot.

So basketball has a tournament, and relies on strength of schedule as a determining factor to who gets in. Football is switching to a tournament, but you don't think they will consider strength of schedule? As HooverDam said this is a new format and we don't know how it will play out. I believe scheduling will be a factor, particularly when teams have very similar seasons. To some extent, football does this already. Do you remember the Hawaii-Georgia game a few years back? 12-0 Hawaii was pissed they did not get to play for the national championship. The reason they did not get to the national championship? Strength of schedule! The toughest team they played prior to Georgia was #19 Boise State.

You're really comparing the 68 teams in the NCAA Tournamanet to the four teams in this playoff? Apples and oranges as is the Hawaii example. Hoover's right though that everything is speculative until we see a few years of results from the selection committee but my guess is that just about every undefeated team gets in (the public will demand it even if they are non-BCS) and most one loss power conference teams make it. I suppose in the unlikely chance it comes down to a couple 2 loss teams then SOS will carry one team in. But the odds of that being the case are so remote that it's not worth basing your schedule around. There have been zero two loss teams in the top 4 BCS rankings this decade, only five teams as a whole in the last ten years.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

To update this per Sagarin ASU's final strength of schedule is 33rd overall in the country. Arizona's is 35th with Oregon left which will ultimately vault them over. Bottom line UA's scheduling is just fine.

 

[devilalum]

if they do expand at that point the conference champion would likely get an automatic bid which again makes winning the South both program's best shot.

This is my master plan. Expand the "playoffs" to 8 teams and give the spots to 7 conference champions and one at large.

 

[Iceman]

This is my master plan. Expand the "playoffs" to 8 teams and give the spots to 7 conference champions and one at large.

You said what I've been saying ever since this "Playoff" scenario came out. More $ for NCAA, hard to determine what 5th or 6th should be left off and 1 extra week of college football!

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

This is my master plan. Expand the "playoffs" to 8 teams and give the spots to 7 conference champions and one at large.

It would be an auto bid for winners of Power 5 conferences and three at-large teams selected by the committee is my guess.

 

[Dback Jon]

It would be an auto bid for winners of Power 5 conferences and three at-large teams selected by the committee is my guess.

Correct - or the P5 champs, 1 G5, and 2 at-larges.

 

[Dback Jon]

To update this per Sagarin ASU's final strength of schedule is 33rd overall in the country. Arizona's is 35th with Oregon left which will ultimately vault them over. Bottom line UA's scheduling is just fine.

I wouldn't be so sure of that.


The CFP committee has shown they favor teams that play a tougher OOC schedule - evidenced by TCU being ahead of Baylor, even though Baylor beat TCU by 3. Baylor had a worse OOC schedule than ARizona, and TCU played a road game against a decent P5 team.

Marshall was also ranked behind Boise for the G5 spot - Marshall played no one OOC, while Boise had a good OOC schedule (Ole Miss, BYU)