CFP First Round: #11 SMU @ #6 Penn State (Noon TNT/max)

#229
#229
dieseldaddy said:
I would make a strong argument for Miami or uscjr or ole miss. Miami might have as strong an argument as we do to be honest and you take off our orange tinted glasses. I'm not saying they should be in over us . Just saying it is comparable. They should have been the 10 and usc jr the 11 . Just my opinion.
Click to expand...
They won two games (maybe more) that they had no business winning: Cal and VT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chattaboogie
#230
#230
Well, 1st rounds are going to have games like this, and the same when it's extended to 16 teams. But I do think, at 16, most/all teams that could actually win it will be in the playoffs. Seeding does have to change, strength of schedule need to be factors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nerwen Aldarion
#232
#232
C-south said:
Grueling schedule? BAMA LOST TO VANDY AND OKLAHOMA. Wins and losses matter as much, maybe even more, as strength of schedule. The world doesn’t revolve around the SEC.
Click to expand...

Oklahoma is a top 10 perennial recruiting power who send players to the NFL every season. They had a bad season because they played one of the toughest schedules in the country. Give Oklahoma the cupcake schedule that SMU and Indiana had (which Oklahoma used to get in the Big 12 regularly) and they would be 11-1.

The differences in strength of schedule are too vast in college football to simply believe that because a team goes 6-6 in the SEC that they are necessarily worse than a team that went 11-1 in another conference. Oklahoma faced 7 teams this year that recruit at a top 20 level annually. Compare that to SMU who played just 2 teams like that (FSU and Clemson).

Playing 7 teams that recruit at an elite level is gonna expose you to more potential losses than playing only 2 teams that recruit at that same level.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nerwen Aldarion
#235
#235
C-south said:
Lol. What’s gonna happen in the next two games Nostradamus?
Click to expand...

They're more likely to be competitive because all 4 teams recruit at a top 15 level annually. Now we might get blowouts cause there are blowouts even in the NFL. But there's a reason college football has more blowouts than the NFL. Because the talent disparity between teams is much closer in the NFL than it is in college. Similarly there is a closer talent disparity between Clemson/Texas and Ohio State/Tennessee than there is between teams like SMU and Indiana against perennial top 15 recruiting teams like Penn State and Indiana.

We don't obsess about recruiting in college football for no reason. Talent matters in games at this level.
 
#237
#237
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
They're more likely to be competitive because all 4 teams recruit at a top 15 level annually. Now we might get blowouts cause there are blowouts even in the NFL. But there's a reason college football has more blowouts than the NFL. Because the talent disparity between teams is much closer in the NFL than it is in college. Similarly there is a closer talent disparity between Clemson/Texas and Ohio State/Tennessee than there is between teams like SMU and Indiana against perennial top 15 recruiting teams like Penn State and Indiana.

We don't obsess about recruiting in college football for no reason. Talent matters in games at this level.
Click to expand...

There’s a reason you still play the games regardless of who you recruit.
 
#239
#239
TrueOrange said:
Because there are so many great 7 seeds in the NFL playoffs? Or the 8th seed’s first round winning percentage in the NBA, is like a high 7% (I believe it’s like 6 out of 82 series)?

I think something lost in here is everyone’s complaining about the bottom seeds. The 10th and 11th seeds are pretty much here so a bracket’s worth of games; they traditionally do (and most of them should) lose to the higher ranked teams…plenty of times badly. It’s a part of what comes with expanding a bracket.
Click to expand...
This isn't the NFL.
 
#240
#240
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
I don't care how many games Alabama loses. They're better than scrub programs like SMU and Indiana. Talent matters at this level. Teams like SMU and Indiana just don't recruit at a high enough level to compete.
Click to expand...

And even with Alabama's inconsistency this year I'd take them straight up to beat Penn State in a heartbeat. Watch, after Penn State does to same thing to a Boise St. team that had no business getting a bye the national media will be waxing poetic over them and the mediocre Allar, who would be benched in half a season in the SEC.

Does anyone seriously believe the "committee" didn't look at this bracket and say to themselves "wow, Penn St. has a free ride to the semis"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: chattaboogie and Dobbs 4 Heisman
#242
#242
nomads-11 said:
Well, 1st rounds are going to have games like this, and the same when it's extended to 16 teams. But I do think, at 16, most/all teams that could actually win it will be in the playoffs. Seeding does have to change, strength of schedule need to be factors.
Click to expand...

Because of the asinine bye system, it's the second round that's going to suffer as well in this playoff. There are two walkovers, or should be walkovers anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nomads-11 and Nerwen Aldarion
#244
#244
The talent difference is big, but the play style has me thinking about our game.

PSU is running it over SMU and the PSU d line is eating. Meanwhile SMU is trying to throw it around. Could this be our game?
 
#246
#246
C-south said:
There’s a reason you still play the games regardless of who you recruit.
Click to expand...

True. But that's why we have to put schedules in context. Because the disparity in talent is too vast. I'm not arguing for Oklahoma to be in the playoffs at 6-6 because they recruit top 10 nationally. I'm saying put 9-3 South Carolina in that played a schedule filled with top 15 recruiting powers over 11-1 Indiana that only played two such games against top 15 recruiting powers.

We have to look at wins and losses IN CONTEXT rather than simply saying that a 11-1 team deserves to be in over 9-3 teams despite the huge difference in strength of schedule because they won more games against scrub teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volwindy and sami
#247
#247
Gandalf said:
This is a joke, not even a scrimmage. I am ever so glad that Bama got left out in the cold but clearly SMU does not belong here. Its like a bunch of high schoolers. That is not to say Penn state is any good, as I think any of probably 6 teams in the SEC could easily do the same.
Click to expand...
I'm glad Bama got left out too. lol Their 24-3 loss to Oklahoma put them behind South C and Ole Miss. Miami would have been better than this too. I'm sure another Big 12 team or two would have been better as well.
 
#248
#248
I feel like the stage was too big mentally for teams like SMU and Indiana. Both teams started very poorly like a deer in headlights. They both dug themselves in a hole so deep they couldn't operate normally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Plecoptera
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top