NCAA Football 2008-09 Season

[Jimbo]

The other conferences can't help how weak their in-conference schedule is. What I would criticize other teams in other conferences for is choosing such weak out of conference games. Look at USC. They play a pitiful schedule, but they usually try to make up for it by playing big name out of conference teams. And not always at home. I don't like USC, but I respect them just because they at least attempt to make up for playing in a league as bad as the pac-10. And I can't stand Ohio State, but they've learned enough about their conference schedule to play USC out of conference. So if they keep scheduling games like that, I'd have to respect them, too. I have absolutely no respect for a Penn State team that plays the schedule they do this year.

Ohio State played USC this year and next, you must have forgot about the back to back years of playing Texas '05, '06. play Miami in '10 and '11 when Miami will be back in the hunt, California in '12 and probably '13 as well, my schedule doesn't go any farther...
They get bashed weekly because they play the rest of the Non Conference in the STATE so that the schools in the state can benifit from the payday.


The SEC teams normally don't go outside of thier southern area, Georgia did THIS year for the first time since they started playing football, they rest of the SEC doesn't go anywhere either.

Jimbo

 

[SideshowBob]

I have absolutely no respect for a Penn State team that plays the schedule they do this year.

Penn State played as tough (or tougher) non-conference schedule than any of the other undefeated teams. They can't help the teams they play in conference (more specifically, that they miss Minnesota and Northwestern this season and those teams have ended up being decent).

Anyhow, Alabama and PSU have very similar regular season schedules this year. Bama (assuming they win out) will have played in the SEC Championship, which will make their schedule harder, but the idea that PSU has played a joke schedule and Bama has played a massively difficult one in the SEC is laughable.

 

[Derwin0]

The SEC teams normally don't go outside of thier southern area, Georgia did THIS year for the first time since they started playing football, they rest of the SEC doesn't go anywhere either.

Probably because they don't have to. A large portion of the SEC territory overlaps another BCS conference, making scheduling a lot easier.
Why travel thousands of miles that your fans can't road trip for, when you can play a BCS school in the state or the next state over.

 

[Jimbo]

Probably because they don't have to. A large portion of the SEC territory overlaps another BCS conference, making scheduling a lot easier.
Why travel thousands of miles that your fans can't road trip for, when you can play a BCS school in the state or the next state over.

Every year OSU gets slammed for playing in state teams, but it's oK for SEC teams.

 

[HD MM]

Ohio State played USC this year and next, you must have forgot about the back to back years of playing Texas '05, '06. play Miami in '10 and '11 when Miami will be back in the hunt, California in '12 and probably '13 as well, my schedule doesn't go any farther...

Jimbo

Don't forget Ohio State plays Tennessee in 2018 and 2019.

 

[Derwin0]

Every year OSU gets slammed for playing in state teams, but it's oK for SEC teams.

Depends on who the instate team is. Is it from a BCS conference?
No one is going to slam Fla. for playing Fla St. If it was Fla. International, then yes, but not Fla St (who has had many good years in the past).

Same with UGA, can slam them for playing instate 1-AA Ga Southern, but not Ga Tech who is in a BCS conference (granted it's the ACC, but still a BCS conference).
Not to mention those non-conference games with in state or next door state rivals generate a lot of money, as opposed to distant games where travel expenses eat up any revenues.

 

[kev1782]

Let's don't get carried away with comparing Penn State's schedule to Alabama's. If you think for a moment that their schedules are even remotely close in difficulty, you don't watch very many college football games. Clemson's so bad this year, in part due to the thrashing they received on opening day, that I don't even include a neutral site opening game against a pre-season top 10 in strength of schedule arguments anymore. Georgia I will include. LSU I will include. The SEC championship game, I will include. Kentucky and Ole Miss will become bowl eligible, even Arkansas, Mississippi State and Auburn have chances to get to bowl games. Probably 2 out of those 3 make a bowl. That's 5 games against against bowl teams, with up to 3 more potential. That's 7 or 8 games out of 13 against teams that are good enough to make bowl games. Now I know there are more bowls this year than ever before, but you don't make bowl games with losing records. And just because Tennessee and Auburn are more down this year than we thought they would be, rivalry games are just a little harder even when your opponent isn't as good.

 

[kev1782]

And why should SEC teams travel a great distance to play competitive out of conference games? We don't care how far you travel to play those games. Look at Alabama's schedule in the pre-season. 4 projected top 10 teams on their schedule, without considering the SEC championship game. That would be 5 out of 13 games against top 10 opponents, pre-season projections. Why would you need to find better competition somewhere else? And remember, Tennessee played at UCLA, first game of the season. I can't name too many college stadiums that are further away than that for them. Auburn just last Thursday played at West Virginia, a team that with a win over lowly Pitt in the Big East championship game would have played for a national championship last year. Florida regularly plays Miami, and plays Florida State every year. They don't have to travel far, but how many teams would have wanted to play either of those teams a few years ago? Florida did all the tiime.

 

[SideshowBob]

Let's don't get carried away with comparing Penn State's schedule to Alabama's. If you think for a moment that their schedules are even remotely close in difficulty, you don't watch very many college football games.

I watch tons of college football and it's certainly not a stretch. Why don't we actually look at their schedules. For starters, look at teams they have already played (I'm putting their Sagarin ranking after their names for some prospective):

Alabama PSU
Georgia(8) Ohio State(12)
Mississippi(45) Oregon State(17)
Kentucky(48) Illinois(49)
Tennessee(61) Wisconsin(53)
Clemson(74) Purdue(72)
Arkansas(83) Temple (87)
West. Kentucky(123) Michigan(92)
Tulane(129) Syracuse(121)
Coastal Carolina(178)

Georgia -- the one impressive win by Alabama -- isn't all that different from PSU's win against Ohio State. Other than that, Bama has played a bunch of mediocre teams -- and PSU's win over Oregon State is just as impressive as any of them (if not more impressive). And I don't see why mediocre teams in the Big Ten are less impressive than mediocre teams in the SEC -- at least PSU solidly defeated the likes of Wisconsin and Illinois unlike Alabama's close wins over Ole Miss and Kentucky.

Alabama's big claim to fame besides Georgia is their smacking of Clemson, which only seemed impressive at the time because people thought Clemson would be good. Now, we no better and Bama shouldn't get any special credit for defeating a medicore at best team.


And onto games to be played:

Alabama PSU
LSU(21) Michigan St(19)
Auburn(71) Iowa(26)
Mississippi St(98) Indiana(82)
Arkansas St(106)

Both Bama and PSU have one big game to go versus a 2 loss team (LSU and MSU respectively) -- to be fair, Alabama's game is on the road. PSU also has a game against a decent Iowa team and that game is on the road. Other than that, Bama has a bunch of poor teams (yeah, I know Auburn started the season ranked highly, but now we know that they suck).

The schedules just aren't that different. The big differentiating factor is that Bama will potentially face Florida (or Georgia again) in the SEC championship. But at this point in time, there is little to suggest that Bama has done so much more than PSU or should be regarded as that much better.

 

[mccoyrj]

Every year OSU gets slammed for playing in state teams, but it's oK for SEC teams.

That's because all of the other in state teams in Ohio suck! Same reason LSU gets slammed for playing inside Louisiana.

 

[kev1782]

The combined records for the teams on Alabama's schedule right now are 52-43. The combined records for Penn State's schedule are 45-51. The fact that Alabama will have played more bowl eligible teams, more top ten teams, and one game more than Penn State doesn't give them a decided edge on strength of schedule in your opinion? Their schedules are "similar"...? And all of this without the pre-season hype of 3 teams on Bama's schedule, which I'd already thrown out of the argument. Clemson, Auburn, and Tennessee all proved to be pretenders this year. Playing a weak schedule is what allowed Ohio State to make it into 2 consecutive national championship games. And who believes that either time Ohio State was one of the two best teams in the nation following those games?

 

[hancox]

...loading up on the Sun Belt helps the SEC records

 

[kev1782]

As opposed to playing 1-AA powerhouses like Coastal Carolina, Youngstown State, Eastern Illinois, Montana State....shall I keep going? Not to mention the fact that the Big Ten played almost as many Sun Belt games as the SEC. 8 games for the SEC, 5 for the Big Ten against the Sun Belt.

 

[Jimbo]

Don't forget Ohio State plays Tennessee in 2018 and 2019.

My schedule I had didn't go that far.

 

[Jimbo]

Depends on who the instate team is. Is it from a BCS conference?
No one is going to slam Fla. for playing Fla St. If it was Fla. International, then yes, but not Fla St (who has had many good years in the past).

Same with UGA, can slam them for playing instate 1-AA Ga Southern, but not Ga Tech who is in a BCS conference (granted it's the ACC, but still a BCS conference).
Not to mention those non-conference games with in state or next door state rivals generate a lot of money, as opposed to distant games where travel expenses eat up any revenues.

No one is going to slam Fla. for playing Fla St.

Thats correct, but neither of these teams are playing the other for the revenue.
It's the smaller D 1 or D 2 teams that play them for the paycheck and I can't say I blame them.

 

[Jimbo]

Let's don't get carried away with comparing Penn State's schedule to Alabama's. If you think for a moment that their schedules are even remotely close in difficulty, you don't watch very many college football games. Clemson's so bad this year, in part due to the thrashing they received on opening day, that I don't even include a neutral site opening game against a pre-season top 10 in strength of schedule arguments anymore. Georgia I will include. LSU I will include. The SEC championship game, I will include. Kentucky and Ole Miss will become bowl eligible, even Arkansas, Mississippi State and Auburn have chances to get to bowl games. Probably 2 out of those 3 make a bowl. That's 5 games against against bowl teams, with up to 3 more potential. That's 7 or 8 games out of 13 against teams that are good enough to make bowl games. Now I know there are more bowls this year than ever before, but you don't make bowl games with losing records. And just because Tennessee and Auburn are more down this year than we thought they would be, rivalry games are just a little harder even when your opponent isn't as good.

Your pointing out "Making a Bowl" game, making a Bowl game anymore is not a standard at all. They have increased the amount of bowl game that eventually EVERYONE will play in one. You can't use that as a yardstick anymore.
If it 's not a BCS or at least a NY day bowl (even thats pushing it anymore) it's not worth comparing.

 

[Jimbo]

I watch tons of college football and it's certainly not a stretch. Why don't we actually look at their schedules. For starters, look at teams they have already played (I'm putting their Sagarin ranking after their names for some prospective):

Alabama PSU
Georgia(8) Ohio State(12)
Mississippi(45) Oregon State(17)
Kentucky(48) Illinois(49)
Tennessee(61) Wisconsin(53)
Clemson(74) Purdue(72)
Arkansas(83) Temple (87)
West. Kentucky(123) Michigan(92)
Tulane(129) Syracuse(121)
Coastal Carolina(178)

Georgia -- the one impressive win by Alabama -- isn't all that different from PSU's win against Ohio State. Other than that, Bama has played a bunch of mediocre teams -- and PSU's win over Oregon State is just as impressive as any of them (if not more impressive). And I don't see why mediocre teams in the Big Ten are less impressive than mediocre teams in the SEC -- at least PSU solidly defeated the likes of Wisconsin and Illinois unlike Alabama's close wins over Ole Miss and Kentucky.

Alabama's big claim to fame besides Georgia is their smacking of Clemson, which only seemed impressive at the time because people thought Clemson would be good. Now, we no better and Bama shouldn't get any special credit for defeating a medicore at best team.


And onto games to be played:

Alabama PSU
LSU(21) Michigan St(19)
Auburn(71) Iowa(26)
Mississippi St(98) Indiana(82)
Arkansas St(106)

Both Bama and PSU have one big game to go versus a 2 loss team (LSU and MSU respectively) -- to be fair, Alabama's game is on the road. PSU also has a game against a decent Iowa team and that game is on the road. Other than that, Bama has a bunch of poor teams (yeah, I know Auburn started the season ranked highly, but now we know that they suck).

The schedules just aren't that different. The big differentiating factor is that Bama will potentially face Florida (or Georgia again) in the SEC championship. But at this point in time, there is little to suggest that Bama has done so much more than PSU or should be regarded as that much better.

Nice post :up

Remember, it's NOT the Big Tens fault that Bama has to play a Conference Championship game, that game is meaningless in the long haul, they play it strictly for the MONEY, not really needed at all, had they not wanted to make a "Super" conference they wouldn't have that many teams and would not have to worry about it. There are alot of NOT so GREAT teams in that conference anyways , they have thier top 3-4 teams and the rest are just like any other conference.

Iowa is currently 5-3 and unranked, so I doubt that will be considered a Big game.

Jimbo

 

[Jimbo]

That's because all of the other in state teams in Ohio suck! Same reason LSU gets slammed for playing inside Louisiana.

No they don't SUCK, they are SMALLER schools ...

 

[BillD1984]

Your pointing out "Making a Bowl" game, making a Bowl game anymore is not a standard at all. They have increased the amount of bowl game that eventually EVERYONE will play in one. You can't use that as a yardstick anymore.
If it 's not a BCS or at least a NY day bowl (even thats pushing it anymore) it's not worth comparing.

Excellent point, Jimbo! :up

Simply making a bowl does NOT carry the same cache that it once did.

 

[Jimbo]

As opposed to playing 1-AA powerhouses like Coastal Carolina, Youngstown State, Eastern Illinois, Montana State....shall I keep going? Not to mention the fact that the Big Ten played almost as many Sun Belt games as the SEC. 8 games for the SEC, 5 for the Big Ten against the Sun Belt.

OSU has played 1 game against a Sunbelt team in 10 years.