CockyTalk

CockyTalk (http://www.cockytalk.com/index.php)
-   The Cock Pit (http://www.cockytalk.com/forumdisplay.php?f=27)
-   -   Schedule strength (http://www.cockytalk.com/showthread.php?t=205608)

The Yancey 04-03-2014 01:39 PM

Schedule strength
 
Going into the season we have the #13 most difficult: http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/201...h-of-schedule/

Cocktober Surprise 04-03-2014 01:49 PM

Re: Schedule strength
 
And Bama at 95th...

Saban's good at three things: recruiting, coaching...and playing a sissy schedule EVERY season.

ZenUSC 04-03-2014 01:57 PM

Re: Schedule strength
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cocktober Surprise (Post 4127647)
And Bama at 95th...

Saban's good at three things: recruiting, coaching...and playing a sissy schedule EVERY season.

That schedule ranking looks very ACC heavy.

sunbeam 04-03-2014 02:02 PM

Re: Schedule strength
 
How is that possible? They have LSU, Auburn, and A&M guaranteed on the schedule. That is at least 3 top 20 teams, and two have a very good chance of being top ten when Alabama plays them.

So how exactly can their schedule be 95th? The past decade or so the West has been tougher year in and out than the east.

Cocktober Surprise 04-03-2014 02:09 PM

Re: Schedule strength
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sunbeam (Post 4127661)
How is that possible? They have LSU, Auburn, and A&M guaranteed on the schedule. That is at least 3 top 20 teams, and two have a very good chance of being top ten when Alabama plays them.

So how exactly can their schedule be 95th? The past decade or so the West has been tougher year in and out than the east.

You just named the three quality teams on their schedule. That's about it.

That's why it's at 95th.

We play more than twice that many.

rosstheboss 04-03-2014 02:18 PM

Re: Schedule strength
 
a&m is not guaranteed to even be a ranked team next year. they lose a lot plus their D is absolute garbage. Plus, the article clearly shows how the rankings are figured out. Only by winning % of the previous year.

GamecockUltimate 04-03-2014 02:25 PM

Re: Schedule strength
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cocktober Surprise (Post 4127669)
You just named the three quality teams on their schedule. That's about it.

That's why it's at 95th.

We play more than twice that many.

I can knock Saban's scheduling stuff, they constantly play a good out of conference team like Michigan, VT, top 10 Clemson, sometimes at neutral sites or away.

Cock Kool-Aid 04-03-2014 02:53 PM

Re: Schedule strength
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cocktober Surprise (Post 4127647)
And Bama at 95th...

Saban's good at three things: recruiting, coaching...and playing a sissy schedule EVERY season.

This statement is false.

rioninusc 04-03-2014 03:33 PM

Re: Schedule strength
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sunbeam (Post 4127661)
How is that possible? They have LSU, Auburn, and A&M guaranteed on the schedule. That is at least 3 top 20 teams, and two have a very good chance of being top ten when Alabama plays them.

So how exactly can their schedule be 95th? The past decade or so the West has been tougher year in and out than the east.

SOS goes by how many games teams won last year, BAMA is also hurt because their Cross division rival has been in a bind the past 5 years. They also have another team from the east that didn't do to well, named UF. That with 3 not so steller OOC games, and you have their SOS. I also think WVU ended the season at 4-8 last year. Yeah they are ranked appropriately in my book.

Does that mean they aren't that good? no
Does it mean they aren't the best team in the land? no
Does this hinder their chance at the final 4 playoff? probably so. They have to be perfect and dominate the 4 OOC teams.

That is what this playoff system if for. So at the end of the year if the Tide is 1 of the 4 teams in the playoff they will get to prove just how good they are.

GarnetSwarm1990 04-03-2014 03:47 PM

Re: Schedule strength
 
Pre-season SOS means about as much as pre-season rankings. They are always based off last years teams. They don't take into account that they are completely different teams.

Cocktober Surprise 04-03-2014 05:20 PM

Re: Schedule strength
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cock Kool-Aid (Post 4127738)
This statement is false.

Bama has been GREAT. Not knocking that or the results that have come from it.

But their showing in the end of year SOS is bolstered dramatically over the last five years based on the SEC Championship Game and their opponents in bowl games. Their regular season schedule is not in the Top 20 in the regular seasons during these years.

Now, I understand they do not control their SEC schedule s and it's not their fault they're drawing East teams during their down years...nor is it their fault some of their OOC games were signed when those teams were good, yet somehow those teams may be down once game day rolls around.

They, however, do not schedule difficult, IMO.

uscsandstorm85 04-04-2014 12:38 AM

Re: Schedule strength
 
This shows how tough our conference schedule is.

Cocknfire55 04-04-2014 12:57 AM

Re: Schedule strength
 
This article is somewhat flawed because it weighs W/L of FCS opponents the same as conference opponent. Let's be honest, a 6-6 SEC team is superior in talent than a 11-1 or 10-2 FCS team.

Ericvol2096 04-08-2014 11:01 AM

Re: Schedule strength
 
yay for #3!

Dietz 04-08-2014 11:12 AM

Re: Schedule strength
 
Bring on the playoff system. That will equalize any weak schedules of perceived "great"teams.

lake-cityCOCK89 04-08-2014 11:21 AM

Re: Schedule strength
 
take away FSU and USC from Clemson's sos and you'll see theirs drop dramatically.

Goofyboy 04-08-2014 12:29 PM

Re: Schedule strength
 
The method used to develop this ranking is so flawed it begs to be ignored. We should get tough schedule credit for having Coastal Carolina (a 12-3) team on our schedule even though we overwhelmed them few first teamers playing? Or Furman at 8-6 over Tennessee at 5-7? Or SC State at 9-4 over a 4-8 Florida?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:06 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.