Is Kansas State better than Georgia?

Volbound1700

Volbound1700

Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Posts
9,348
Reaction score
6,832
Bookie:
$ 2,000.00
They beat Missouri 40-12?

What does that say about Tulane as well? Would Tulane compete for SEC Championship?

I mean seriously, why can Missouri play with Georgia but can't play with Kansas State?

If Kansas State is good, how come they couldn't beat Tulane?

This is the stuff that just racks the brain of a college football fan...
Pondering Anthony Anderson GIF by BET
 
Transitive property has never been a good metric in CFB. These are young kids prone to looking ahead, having let downs, buying into their own hype, and simply greatly improving as the season progressed.
 
Deep Creek said:
That transitive shit don’t work. If it did, we could logically conclude that TCU would beat Nebraska something like 108-14
Click to expand...

It doesn't but it shows you what is wrong with teams like Missouri being in your league. I cannot stand when an SEC school goes and embarrasses itself out of conference when you know they are better than the performance they put up.

Auburn, Missouri, and Texas A&M all fit the bill this year with their dreadful OOC losses. You should get a one year suspension from the SEC if you do that kind of shit.

OOC results are especially misleading because they are played early in the season when teams are trying to find themselves and they are generally against teams you don't play often and haven't schemed for.

Keep this in mind with Oregon. Oregon is probably a lot better team than their 49-3 loss to Georgia. (Same with Utah).
 
Another example is Auburn. I watched that game against LSU last night and they looked a lot better than they did against Penn State (although they could not hold onto the ball and that cost them the game). Auburn isn't a good team but they look like a 7-5 type team now although after that loss, I doubt they go 7-5.
 
College football should have a relegation system.

3 Tiers, 40 schools per tier (thing over 40 except in the last tier)

The number of teams relegated/promoted every year can be up for debate for now.
 
Volbound1700 said:
It doesn't but it shows you what is wrong with teams like Missouri being in your league. I cannot stand when an SEC school goes and embarrasses itself out of conference when you know they are better than the performance they put up.

Auburn, Missouri, and Texas A&M all fit the bill this year with their dreadful OOC losses. You should get a one year suspension from the SEC if you do that kind of shit.

OOC results are especially misleading because they are played early in the season when teams are trying to find themselves and they are generally against teams you don't play often and haven't schemed for.

Keep this in mind with Oregon. Oregon is probably a lot better team than their 49-3 loss to Georgia. (Same with Utah).
Click to expand...
I agree it does cause some head scratching. But like fish said, sometimes this young guys go 100% “ shit for brains” or completely “ brain dead”!

And once teams get to “conference” play, things seem to react like water and level out. Familiarity and other things come into play. Which is why I’ve never bought into the “drastic” differences in conferences per se. I don’t think some are as good as perceived and others as bad as perceived.

A&M, Mizzou, Maryland and Rutgers are good examples. Both have performed in their new conferences about like they did in their old ones.
 
Deep Creek said:
I agree it does cause some head scratching. But like fish said, sometimes this young guys go 100% “ shit for brains” or completely “ brain dead”!

And once teams get to “conference” play, things seem to react like water and level out. Familiarity and other things come into play. Which is why I’ve never bought into the “drastic” differences in conferences per se. I don’t think some are as good as perceived and others as bad as perceived.

A&M, Mizzou, Maryland and Rutgers are good examples. Both have performed in their new conferences about like they did in their old ones.
Click to expand...

To be fair, Mizzou has been perennially a 6-6 or 7-5 team in the SEC since Pinkel left. They were high when they had Gary Pinkel and did well in both Big12 and SEC. Sometimes it is about coaching.

I feel like two recipes that can already improve a program are a solid QB and a good coach. Tennessee has both now which explains why we are 4-0 instead of 2-2 like we would have been right now with JG and Jeremy Pruitt.
 
Volbound1700 said:
To be fair, Mizzou has been perennially a 6-6 or 7-5 team in the SEC since Pinkel left. They were high when they had Gary Pinkel and did well in both Big12 and SEC. Sometimes it is about coaching.

I feel like two recipes that can already improve a program are a solid QB and a good coach. Tennessee has both now which explains why we are 4-0 instead of 2-2 like we would have been right now with JG and Jeremy Pruitt.
Click to expand...
No doubt. Nebraska is an example. Their teams of late would have been just as bad in the Big 12 as they have in the B1G. And those old teams of theirs would have done well in the B1G.
 
Team strengths and weaknesses as well as injuries play a role.

Georgia may also have been looking past Missouri as well.

In the end they did what they needed to do and how well Missouri played will be forgotten by most next week.
 
Even great teams have off games.

If I'm a betting man, if they were to play next week I'd be all in on Georgia to cover.
 
Deep Creek said:
No doubt. Nebraska is an example. Their teams of late would have been just as bad in the Big 12 as they have in the B1G. And those old teams of theirs would have done well in the B1G.
Click to expand...

I only partially agree. I think it depends on schedule. You mentioned Maryland and Rutgers but they are bad examples. Maryland had 9-10 wins a few times since 2000 in the ACC and was a more competitive program. Rutgers was regularly winning 9-10 games in the Big East. Both are not sniffing anywhere near that.

However, it really depends on schedule. Kentucky and Ole Miss a great examples. They often have softer SEC schedules versus Arkansas, Auburn or Tennessee and tend to have better seasons record-wise because of it.

I have been down on Baylor. I don't think Baylor is a very physical team after watching them yesterday. I think they would be a winner in every league but they wouldn't have competed for a conference title had they played in B1G or SEC last year. Give Baylor Tennessee's 2022 schedule and they have at least 2 losses to go 10-2 (Alabama and Georgia) and likely another loss because Alabama would beat them so bad that they would suffer injuries and have a letdown game. I think Baylor goes 9-3 or 8-4 at worse with Tennessee's 2021 schedule in that year.

Now give Baylor Kentucky's 2021 schedule and they are likely 11-1.

Maryland and Rutgers (going back to your previous example) play in one of the toughest divisions in CFB with Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State on their schedule annually. Also add in Michigan State which is often a tough out and that is almost 4 guaranteed losses every year for these programs that did not exist in their previous league.

Power programs tend to have good players and more resources even in their down years. Most years, Florida just has better players than Tennessee. We have to recruit and be a top 15 team to stay competitive against our rivals which explains why we have been so bad with the crappy coaches we have. I do think Tennessee gains 1 extra win a year playing in Big12 or hell even playing Kentucky's SEC slate. However, put Tennessee in B1G East and we are just as bad, maybe even worse.

Who is on your schedule matters A LOT. However, their are imbalance schedules in every league.
 
Didn't lowly Oklahoma play Kent St. tougher than Georgia?
 
duckboy33 said:
Obviously Tulane is better than Georgia
Click to expand...

If that is the case, what would Tulane do to Oregon? Yikes!

:pound:

Yeah, I guess main point of this thread is don't look at these OOC losses too heavily. I mean Ohio State in 2014 won the National Title but lost at home to a pretty mediocre Virginia Tech team. That didn't mean Virginia Tech would win the B1G and was a National Title contender.
 
Volbound1700 said:
Another example is Auburn. I watched that game against LSU last night and they looked a lot better than they did against Penn State (although they could not hold onto the ball and that cost them the game). Auburn isn't a good team but they look like a 7-5 type team now although after that loss, I doubt they go 7-5.
Click to expand...
Breaking news.. Teams look like they have improved in week 5 compared to how they looked in week 0
 
LOL.

No.
 
Remember when Alabama lost to Ole Miss, and then beat Arkansas 14-13 in back to back weeks, and they still easily made the playoffs?

Overreacting to what essentially comes down to style points isn't a good look.

A win is a win and if you win ugly 15 times in a season, you're still gonna have a natty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top