Week 11 Playoff Projections

[Big Al Rogorson]

Then you're a card carrying SEC homer Al. Right @Sgt Brutus?

And the following would win the Big 10 & run through it like crap through a goose:

Alabama
aTm
LSU
Ole Miss
Georgia
Tennessee
South Carolina
Texas

 

[Across The Field]

Bottom tier teams beating the top teams does nothing but make the top tier teams look not as good, especially when the bottom tier teams continue to be bottom tier caliber in most of the other games they play.

Of course we are constantly sold the notion that the SEC is just so great overall and beating up on eachother, could NEVER be that just none of the teams are really that great.

Exactly, I have no idea how this somehow means the SEC is strong because the big dogs can't take out the shit teams, especially when those shit teams accomplished nothing out of conference. For fuck's sake Auburn couldn't even beat Cal, and they lost to Florida State!

 

[Deep Creek]

Not mine but note worthy......

I was looking at the schedules and results for various ranked teams and Texas’ is simply shocking when you consider the following facts:

- Texas is ranked in the top 3.

- Texas plays in the SEC.

- Heading into late November, Texas has ONE win against a Power 4 opponent with a current winning record and that was a 3 point win against now 6-4 Vandy.

- Looking at Vandy’s remaining schedule, Texas might head into the A&M game with ZERO wins against a Power 4 opponent with a winning record.

And in before @Thiefery is here with some lame excuse like we beat Michigan lol.

Agree 100% on Texas. IMO, they are the worst of the committee's blunders because they are sitting at #3 with that resume.

Right behind them is #4 Penn State with a resume of zero wins against ranked opponents. While they don't have a win over a ranked team, a good argument could be made their loss to tOSU is much better than Texas' loss to Georgia.

Next is #5 Indiana with zero wins against ranked opponents. Same argument could be made for them as the one for Penn State.

A little further behind is #9 Miami with one (Louisville) win against ranked teams. Because of their overall resume, this one may be the worst of top 10 ranked teams IMO.

Outside Oregon and Ohio State, are those four really any better than

Kentucky and Vanderbilt continue to be middling-bad teams no matter how you want to spin it. Vandy beat Bama yea but they also lost to the 2nd worst team in the Sun Belt.

You realize its completely possible that it's because those "SEC leaders" like Ole Miss this year just aren't as good as the biased sports media leader makes them out to be.

You didn't answer "When's the last time a B1G middle/bottom team beat a leader?" When Purdue beat Urban?

 

[osubuckeye89]

Exactly, I have no idea how this somehow means the SEC is strong because the big dogs can't take out the shit teams, especially when those shit teams accomplished nothing out of conference. For fuck's sake Auburn couldn't even beat Cal, and they lost to Florida State!

Auburn is complete shit but guess who thinks they are near top 25 caliber? Nearly ever one of these fucking metric rating systems people like to base their arguments on.

 

[osubuckeye89]

Agree 100% on Texas. IMO, they are the worst of the committee's blunders because they are sitting at #3 with that resume.

Right behind them is #4 Penn State with a resume of zero wins against ranked opponents. While they don't have a win over a ranked team, a good argument could be made their loss to tOSU is much better than Texas' loss to Georgia.

Next is #5 Indiana with zero wins against ranked opponents. Same argument could be made for them as the one for Penn State.

A little further behind is #9 Miami with one (Louisville) win against ranked teams. Because of their overall resume, this one may be the worst of top 10 ranked teams IMO.

Outside Oregon and Ohio State, are those four really any better than

You didn't answer "When's the last time a B1G middle/bottom team beat a leader?" When Purdue beat Urban?

My answer would be who cares? It says more about the top team who loses to the shit team not being as good as advertised than the shit team who wins that 1 game but is otherwise shit the rest of the season being any less than the shit they are.

 

[Across The Field]

We'll see. Anyone can get beat. No one is saying Vandy is good, but they are clearly better than the Vandy of old.

Can we say that Oregon's struggle to beat Idaho and BSU makes them "not as good as you might have thought?" Or do you have to lose for that? Seems to me IU's win against UM might say they aren't as good as we thought. Or again, are we just looking at Ls and Ws? Seems like we get criticized a lot for a close win to Ky.

Boise State is a likely playoff team so not sure that's exactly making the point you want. Idaho struggle was bad but they've also redeemed themselves obviously. IU has had exactly one game that wasn't a 14+ point blowout, so again, not really proving much. Also while michigan is shit, they're still better than Kentucky and Miss State, for fucks sake.

 

[Hu War Yu]

And the following would win the Big 10 & run through it like crap through a goose:

Alabama
aTm
LSU
Ole Miss
Georgia
Tennessee
South Carolina
Texas

LOL @ Missouri!!

 

[Deep Creek]

Nobody is claiming the middle or bottom of the B1G is good, that's the difference. Plenty will claim the Middle-Bottom of the SEC is way better than they are.

Not my argument. They aren't "way better than they are". They aren't as good as their hype either.

They ARE good enough to beat the SEC leaders on a regular basis. Results prove it. The middle-bottom of the B1G isn't good enough...or at least hasn't done so in recent memory if they are good enough.

 

[osubuckeye89]

Not my argument. They aren't "way better than they are". They aren't as good as their hype either.

They ARE good enough to beat the SEC leaders on a regular basis. Results prove it. The middle-bottom of the B1G isn't good enough...or at least hasn't done so in recent memory if they are good enough.

Vandy is also "good enough" to lose to a 2-7 sun belt cellar dweller.

Kentucky is "good enough" to lose by 14 to a very bad Auburn team and by 28 to a bad Florida team.

 

[Deep Creek]

Yes but how does that mean the SEC is tougher? That's the whole point - USC is good enough to beat one of the top teams in the SEC but not in the B1G, so how does that equate to the SEC somehow being tougher?

You seem to be using the "top teams" are the sole measuring stick. I'm using the entire conference in regards to better. B1G definitely looks better at the top than the SEC does. And I don't consider LSU as a conference leader. They've been playing on house money all year. Proves your point with the USC catastrophe they had.

Can you remember the last time a B1G middle-lower team beat a conference leader? I can't but I don't follow as closely as you do.

 

[Deep Creek]

My answer would be who cares? It says more about the top team who loses to the shit team not being as good as advertised than the shit team who wins that 1 game but is otherwise shit the rest of the season being any less than the shit they are.

That's what I thought, You can't.

 

[osubuckeye89]

That's what I thought, You can't.

Because it's a stupid argument to begin with. The only thing some shit team in a conference beating a upper level team means is that the upper level team really isnt that good, the shit team is still shit. No matter how you want to try to spin it

 

[Deep Creek]

Because it's a stupid argument to begin with. The only thing some shit team in a conference beating a upper level team means is that the upper level team really isnt that good, the shit team is still shit. No matter how you want to try to spin it

You can't.

 

[osubuckeye89]

You can't.

You've still yet to explain how the shit teams in the conference getting up for one game and beating a "good" team in the conference, then going right back to shit for the rest of the year is a good thing for the conference. Because its not........

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

You've still yet to explain how the shit teams in the conference getting up for one game and beating a "good" team in the conference, then going right back to shit for the rest of the year is a good thing for the conference. Because its not........

Exactly.

Their argument may hold water if those teams didn't stink it up when they played ooc games.

 

[Across The Field]

You seem to be using the "top teams" are the sole measuring stick. I'm using the entire conference in regards to better. B1G definitely looks better at the top than the SEC does. And I don't consider LSU as a conference leader. They've been playing on house money all year. Proves your point with the USC catastrophe they had.

Can you remember the last time a B1G middle-lower team beat a conference leader? I can't but I don't follow as closely as you do.

Honestly it depends on who you consider a "conference leader". Over the last decade, OSU and PSU have been the only really consistent mainstays. Some years you see Iowa, Wisconsin, or Michigan State jump up and have a 10+ win season but just not with any consistency. If you're talking about OSU, yeah it would have been Purdue back in 2018.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Ole Miss lost to LSU and Kentucky so i'm going to assume they arent as great as some are going to make them out to be and by result UGA is not either

Missouri has pretty much beaten nobody and has gotten destroyed by the 2 good teams they did play. So yea.......

A&M still managed to lose to Notre Dame and got destroyed by South Carolina. They'll get hyped as a great team but they are more on the above average scale

South Carolina lost to said meh LSU team, it was a close game though, they both have 3 losses, so they are basically in the same category of meh.

You guys kill me ... basically, you have just said in this thread there isn't a single SEC team that is good. Not even any sense in discussing it anymore. We'll just wait and see how the CFP goes and then we will know.

Instead of seeing that every team in the country has flaws this year and there is no one elite team, you guys just say over and over that every team in the SEC sucks because of this or that. Good thing at least 4 teams will be able to prove that this year.

 

[Deep Creek]

You've still yet to explain how the shit teams in the conference getting up for one game and beating a "good" team in the conference, then going right back to shit for the rest of the year is a good thing for the conference. Because its not........

It is probably not a good thing regarding what the CFP committee prefers. It is obvious they prefer conferences that are lopsided. It also isn't good for fans of conferences that prefer deeper conference races. At least in regards to the CFP.

I answered your question. Now, would you please answer mine.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Bottom tier teams beating the top teams does nothing but make the top tier teams look not as good, especially when the bottom tier teams continue to be bottom tier caliber in most of the other games they play.

Of course we are constantly sold the notion that the SEC is just so great overall and beating up on eachother, could NEVER be that just none of the teams are really that great.

Until your mid teams, or even your top teams start beating the SEC teams regularly, I'm going with the SEC is better. I listed all the reasons the other day why the SEC gets the benefit of the doubt. Wins some NCs and beat some SEC teams. You will get your chance starting in a little over a month.

You guys act like there is no reason that people assume that the SEC teams are better when there is ample reason for people to think so, not just "it's ESPN bias."

 

[Across The Field]

You guys kill me ... basically, you have just said in this thread there isn't a single SEC team that is good. Not even any sense in discussing it anymore. We'll just wait and see how the CFP goes and then we will know.

Instead of seeing that every team in the country has flaws this year and there is no one elite team, you guys just say over and over that every team in the SEC sucks because of this or that. Good thing at least 4 teams will be able to prove that this year.

I'm not sure people are saying there aren't any good SEC teams, but this seems more of a response to constantly hearing how the SEC is going to get 6, even 7 CFP teams when they sure as hell don't deserve to.