Villanova Invites BE Football to join them in FCS

[donovan]

Y


When FSU finally won their NC in 1993...they played teams that FINISHED in the AP.....#2, #3, #5, #15, #19, and #23

Only about three or four teams can schedule like that...what do you propose for the other 110 teams....Heck, I have not problem with one super conference of 20 or 30 teams..but to keep castigating all the others because of this cockamamie system is just what was describe in other posts from afar.

[billybud]

I propose that you schedule, if your conference is really weak, four OCC games with decent teams. I give Boise credit for trying to do so with VT. But Toledo and La Tech don't do much..they are more fodder.

But there is such a disparity in the scheduling that there is no equitable way to declare a champion.

[Spence]

I propose that you schedule, if your conference is really weak, four OCC games with decent teams. I give Boise credit for trying to do so with VT. But Toledo and La Tech don't do much..they are more fodder.

But there is such a disparity in the scheduling that there is no equitable way to declare a champion.

See I think all teams should have an OOC schedule that includes playing their peers from other conferences. Why single out a few teams?

[Eric]

The next time somebody posits the positive claim about "speed", I want to see thorough statistical research to back it up. Show me everything: the mean, standard deviation, median, variance, outliers, etc. Also, put it in the form of a scatter plot for me.....What else....That's about it. You'll make a believer out of me then . Nothing like a little empiricism than anecdotal musings.

[RazorHawk]

I propose that you schedule, if your conference is really weak, four OCC games with decent teams. I give Boise credit for trying to do so with VT. But Toledo and La Tech don't do much..they are more fodder.

But there is such a disparity in the scheduling that there is no equitable way to declare a champion.

See I think all teams should have an OOC schedule that includes playing their peers from other conferences. Why single out a few teams?

Don't wish to speak for billybud, but, if you are in a difficult conference and play during the season 4 ranked teams and then add 1 ranked non-conference and 3 patsies that is fine in my eyes.

However, if you are in a weak conference, and you wish to contend for a national championship, but have no ranked teams in your conference (MAC, WAC, Sun Belt etc.) then to come close to schedule difficulty you would need to schedule 4 hopefully ranked teams.

To say that Ohio St, Alabama, Florida etc, needs to play a difficult non-conference schedule, as well as, a tough conference schedule, I don't buy that.

[Spence]

I think all teams should play their peers in other conferences to provide a basis for comparison. Coaches may have a problem with that, but I think players would love it. I know it would be good from a fan perspective and that would make TV love it. Teams that only play one tough OOC game are too hard to compare. Is Alabama good. If they play no one good outside their conference then how do you now the SEC is good? History tells us they are, but you can't say for sure. Same with Ohio State and Florida. Playing other teams in your conference well is good, but it provides zero comparison outside of the conference. You have to have out of conference games to have any chance at measuring the strength of teams. If those games are with 3 or 4 Eastern Michigans, you can't have any clue how to compare them.

[RazorHawk]

I think all teams should play their peers in other conferences to provide a basis for comparison. Coaches may have a problem with that, but I think players would love it. I know it would be good from a fan perspective and that would make TV love it. Teams that only play one tough OOC game are too hard to compare. Is Alabama good. If they play no one good outside their conference then how do you now the SEC is good? History tells us they are, but you can't say for sure. Same with Ohio State and Florida. Playing other teams in your conference well is good, but it provides zero comparison outside of the conference. You have to have out of conference games to have any chance at measuring the strength of teams. If those games are with 3 or 4 Eastern Michigans, you can't have any clue how to compare them.

I don't disagree with this, except that this does not address the SOS argument, but would further distance the difference between the top BCS conferences and the other conferences. Having SEC, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 10 teams playing 3 or 4 teams from each others conference would make their schedule difficulty over the top.

Then the Sun Belt, WAC and MAC play 3 or 4 BCS schools and their conference schedule. This would not work.

The only way this would work, would be if their were only 4 or 5 conferences of 12 teams, and these were the only ones eligible for the BCS spots. Then have a second division with the lesser conferences. This is kind of what Donovan has been talking about. Kind of, why even try to include the lesser conferences in the equation.

[Spence]

But it wouldn't matter because if a team was good you would know it regardless of whether or not the conference was good. It would just allow a team from a tough conference a loss or two and still make the championship. Teams from weaker conferences would have to be more perfect.

[RazorHawk]

I just don't see how you can compare teams that play totally different types of schedules. It becomes purely speculation. Kind of like when Nebraska had some power house teams and there were actually people that thought they could beat a couple of the bottom NFL teams.

The farther the difficulty of schedule becomes, the more difficult it is to evaluate the relative strength of teams.

I remember a time when in Iowa their were only two classes of competition in Basketball. Large Schools and then the smaller schools. Both had their separate tournament, but then matched up the winners of the small and large schools to determine the overall champ. They only did that for a year or so, and then just went to one class. I realize football and basketball are two different animals, but that was ridiculous.

Kind of like having college football teams play like competition WAC, Sun Belt, MAC and then trying to compare them to Big 10, SEC, Big 12, Pac 10 etc. I might venture a three or four loss team from a top BCS conference might be as good as an unbeaten or 1 loss team from the mid tier conference. No way to really tell this, one way or another.

Ball State, a couple of years ago came within a whisker of going 11-0 and were in the discussion for a BCS bid. Had they not lost a late season game, they probably would have kept a more deserving team from a BCS bowl.

I wonder what would happen, if TCU and Boise State wind up as the only unbeaten teams and then play for the National championship. This may not be as bad as when BYU only had to beat a fifth place Michigan team in the Holiday bowl for their National Championship.

[Spence]

If Boise State played Alabama, Ohio State, Troy State, and East Carolina. If Texas plays Oregon, Ohio State, TCU, and Central Michigan. If Georgia Tech plays Alabama, Cincinnati, Central Michigan, and TCU and If Ohio State plays Texas, Cincinnati, Boise State, and Troy State. and the #2 teams in conferences did the same, 3's and so on, SOS wouldn't be a big deal. Remember, we are looking for the best team, not the team that plays the best schedule. Sometimes that gets lost in the discussion. If the best team plays seven or eight really good teams in a year, they may drop a game and still be in the championship.

[billybud]

The next time somebody posits the positive claim about "speed", I want to see thorough statistical research to back it up. Show me everything: the mean, standard deviation, median, variance, outliers, etc. Also, put it in the form of a scatter plot for me.....What else....That's about it. You'll make a believer out of me then . Nothing like a little empiricism than anecdotal musings.

OK...Empirically, Ohio State is latitude affected. OSU has difficulty when playing teams from below a certain southern latitude,

Since 1980..is 1-9 (.139) vs teams in the current SEC
..............is 0-7 against California teams (all southern California)
..............is 1-4 vs teams currently in the ACC South of North Carolina (beat Miami this year for the lone win).

OSU is 168-61-4 (.74) in the Big Ten for the same period. Maybe it's not speed. It could be latitude weakness. OSU guys may play poorly against teams from latitudes south of a certain point.

The data is there...surmising why it is so I have to leave for others.

[Spence]

The next time somebody posits the positive claim about "speed", I want to see thorough statistical research to back it up. Show me everything: the mean, standard deviation, median, variance, outliers, etc. Also, put it in the form of a scatter plot for me.....What else....That's about it. You'll make a believer out of me then . Nothing like a little empiricism than anecdotal musings.

OK...Empirically, Ohio State is latitude affected. OSU has difficulty when playing teams from below a certain southern latitude,

Since 1980..is 1-9 (.139) vs teams in the current SEC
..............is 0-7 against California teams (all southern California)
..............is 1-4 vs teams currently in the ACC South of North Carolina (beat Miami this year for the lone win).

OSU is 168-61-4 (.74) in the Big Ten for the same period. Maybe it's not speed. It could be latitude weakness. OSU guys may play poorly against teams from latitudes south of a certain point.

The data is there...surmising why it is so I have to leave for others.

Also most big ten teams are heavy with Ohio players and the B-10 against the SEC in the last 10 years are about even in bowl games.


Ohio State beat Miami in 2002 in the national championship game. It has nothing to do with Ohio guys speed. Ohio State played teams that were better overall teams. Nothing else, otherwise Ohio State wouldn't be one of the top schools in producing NFL talent.

I bet that no matter when in you ran against me in a race I would have won and I have never seen you run. I was born in Ohio and have lived almost my whole life here. I did live in Florida for several years when I was younger, maybe that is why I became a good runner. Latitude has nothing to do with speed. Genetics on the other hand...........

If you would like to ever compare track medals, though, let me know.

[Spence]

Also since 1980 Ohio State has beaten these teams in a southern latitude(counting teams from the west and south west because BB included Southen California and that latitude)

Rice twice
Baylor
OKlahoma
LSU
OKlahoma State twice
Texas Tech twice
Arizona three times
Arizona State
Texas A&M
UCLA
Miami FL twice
San Diego State
Texas

Not to let the facts get in the way of your point. Also save fifteen or twenty years all of Florida State's "golden years" Ohio State would have beaten them more often then not. Ohio State just has a history that spans more then 1980 forward.

[billybud]

Shoot...Ohio State played FSU in a wide spread of years (not including just FSU's dynasty years)...and lost.

Nothing makes me think that Ohio State would have beaten FSU more times than not. They didn't before FSU had their dynasty run ...and didn't during that run...and, in fact, lost by 9, by 17, and by 17 again.

But then again, I admittedly have a jaundiced view of the Big Ten...

[WoVeU]

Have you guys met people from Florida? Georgia, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi? I have met some great ones, but even they will tell you much like West Virginians...often not well rounded people. You don't get a lot of education and the arts getting in the way of football time. You also have a heaping helping of poor folk, and single moms, that could use the free baby sitting, and the coaches for some kind of father figures. Many of the kids got Boys Clubs etc after school, and they encourage athletics for many reasons. Then you have the climate and you have to look at urbanization. It only makes sense that these states should have a higher density of football players. WVa, Kentucky, Tenn, Arkansas, Iowa, Mizz, Idaho, Nebraska, Oklahoma...even Pennsylvania, Ohio, etc...some of your toughest kids are on the few remaining farms. Many of the rest are small towners - recruiters aren't own culling through A, AA, and smaller AAA schools (it is a business, and they are going with the numbers).