[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

[quote author=dabigv link=topic=13471.msg139038#msg139038 date=1446499703]
Oh by the way, FSU isn't out of it yet either. If they beat top 3 Clemson and top 10ish Florida, their only loss is a fluke FG block to GT, much better looking than the garbage we put up against Northwestern and with better quality wins. That Northwestern game is just an absolute albatross for us.

Doesn't matter unless we win out of course, but we don't control our destiny, not by a mile.

Why do you focus on the loss than on the wins?


And you are correct, no one loss team in the country controls its own destiny at this point - though Bama might be on the edge of that.
[/quote]

A one-loss FSU would have a much more impressive resume than a one-loss Stanford.

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

[quote author=dabigv link=topic=13471.msg139038#msg139038 date=1446499703]
Oh by the way, FSU isn't out of it yet either. If they beat top 3 Clemson and top 10ish Florida, their only loss is a fluke FG block to GT, much better looking than the garbage we put up against Northwestern and with better quality wins. That Northwestern game is just an absolute albatross for us.

Doesn't matter unless we win out of course, but we don't control our destiny, not by a mile.

Why do you focus on the loss than on the wins?


And you are correct, no one loss team in the country controls its own destiny at this point - though Bama might be on the edge of that.
[/quote]

A one-loss FSU would have a much more impressive resume than a one-loss Stanford.

[dabigv13]

Right, wins over Clemson and Florida both are better than anything we would potentially have. Better than an ND win (which lost to Clemson).

[dabigv13]

Right, wins over Clemson and Florida both are better than anything we would potentially have. Better than an ND win (which lost to Clemson).

[OutsiderFan]

A one-loss FSU would have a much more impressive resume than a one-loss Stanford.

How is that?  Have you seen Florida State's schedule?  Stanford's is much more challenging.

Why do so many people discount the Pac-12's depth of quality teams?  Arizona and Oregon State are the only easy games on the schedule.  Colorado is a super competitive team for being the 11th team in the conference.

[OutsiderFan]

A one-loss FSU would have a much more impressive resume than a one-loss Stanford.

How is that?  Have you seen Florida State's schedule?  Stanford's is much more challenging.

Why do so many people discount the Pac-12's depth of quality teams?  Arizona and Oregon State are the only easy games on the schedule.  Colorado is a super competitive team for being the 11th team in the conference.

[BostonCard]

[quote author=ThePassionOfTheChryst link=topic=13471.msg139117#msg139117 date=1446520270]
A one-loss FSU would have a much more impressive resume than a one-loss Stanford.

How is that?  Have you seen Florida State's schedule?  Stanford's is much more challenging.

Why do so many people discount the Pac-12's depth of quality teams?  Arizona and Oregon State are the only easy games on the schedule.  Colorado is a super competitive team for being the 11th team in the conference.
[/quote]

Predicated on them winning out, they would have wins over Clemson, Florida, and in the ACC championship they would have a much better resume they they have now.  Still, what do you say about wins against Texas State, South Florida, Wake Forest, Syracuse, and Boston College.  Plus, I doubt they'll win out.

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=ThePassionOfTheChryst link=topic=13471.msg139117#msg139117 date=1446520270]
A one-loss FSU would have a much more impressive resume than a one-loss Stanford.

How is that?  Have you seen Florida State's schedule?  Stanford's is much more challenging.

Why do so many people discount the Pac-12's depth of quality teams?  Arizona and Oregon State are the only easy games on the schedule.  Colorado is a super competitive team for being the 11th team in the conference.
[/quote]

Predicated on them winning out, they would have wins over Clemson, Florida, and in the ACC championship they would have a much better resume they they have now.  Still, what do you say about wins against Texas State, South Florida, Wake Forest, Syracuse, and Boston College.  Plus, I doubt they'll win out.

BC

[OutsiderFan]

Stanford will have beaten USC, UCLA, Washington, Oregon, Cal, Notre Dame, and hopefully Utah, seven Top 32 Sagarin teams right now.  And Washington State is Sagarin #55, but are way underrated, IMO. Florida State will have played four Sagarin Top 34 teams through the ACC championship game if they beat Clemson.

A 12-1 Stanford will have a more impressive record than a 12-1 Florida State.

[OutsiderFan]

Stanford will have beaten USC, UCLA, Washington, Oregon, Cal, Notre Dame, and hopefully Utah, seven Top 32 Sagarin teams right now.  And Washington State is Sagarin #55, but are way underrated, IMO. Florida State will have played four Sagarin Top 34 teams through the ACC championship game if they beat Clemson.

A 12-1 Stanford will have a more impressive record than a 12-1 Florida State.

[CTcard]

Right, wins over Clemson and Florida both are better than anything we would potentially have. Better than an ND win (which lost to Clemson).

Depends on what you think counts.

Right now FSU is 0-0 against the Sagarin top 30, their best win is over Louisville. If they do something quite unthinkable and win out, they would add top 30 wins over Clemson, Florida, and possibly one more in the CCG (right now the only ACC Coastal team in the Sagarin top 30 is UNC at #23). So they could get to 3 top 30 wins.

Stanford is 3-0 against the Sagarin top 30 right now. If Stanford wins out they would add wins against the current top 30 in und, c.a.l., and probably the CCG. I somehow suspect c.a.l. is on their way out of the top 30, but UO is at #32 and could be on their way in. Most likely Stanford would be 6-0 vs Sagarin top 30.

That's just one of many ways to look at things. More likely in a case like this the deciding factor would actually be style points in the late season games.

[CTcard]

Right, wins over Clemson and Florida both are better than anything we would potentially have. Better than an ND win (which lost to Clemson).

Depends on what you think counts.

Right now FSU is 0-0 against the Sagarin top 30, their best win is over Louisville. If they do something quite unthinkable and win out, they would add top 30 wins over Clemson, Florida, and possibly one more in the CCG (right now the only ACC Coastal team in the Sagarin top 30 is UNC at #23). So they could get to 3 top 30 wins.

Stanford is 3-0 against the Sagarin top 30 right now. If Stanford wins out they would add wins against the current top 30 in und, c.a.l., and probably the CCG. I somehow suspect c.a.l. is on their way out of the top 30, but UO is at #32 and could be on their way in. Most likely Stanford would be 6-0 vs Sagarin top 30.

That's just one of many ways to look at things. More likely in a case like this the deciding factor would actually be style points in the late season games.

[CTcard]

I think the fact that you had to type that much invalidates your argument. The scenarios are getting pretty implausible pretty quickly and you need a few of them for Stanford to benefit. It's just not going to happen that the B1G, ACC, and SEC all have two-loss champions, and I think we'd need that, PLUS for our loss to not be against ND, for it to matter. What do you peg the odds of that at? It's gotta be less than 1%, and probably significantly less. Is it possible? Sure, but it's unlikely enough to write off.

I type that much because I cannot stop myself from going into far too detailed explanations. It has nothing to do with likelihood.

For a two-loss conference champ to make the field, all it takes is fewer than four 1-loss conference champs  - or at least two 2-loss champs. Though you are right that in Stanford's case the head to head vs und makes it trickier.

The odds are low of any particular set of wins and losses - thus the point behind my original post was really more that at this point much less is defined than most of the what-ifs presented presume.

[CTcard]

I think the fact that you had to type that much invalidates your argument. The scenarios are getting pretty implausible pretty quickly and you need a few of them for Stanford to benefit. It's just not going to happen that the B1G, ACC, and SEC all have two-loss champions, and I think we'd need that, PLUS for our loss to not be against ND, for it to matter. What do you peg the odds of that at? It's gotta be less than 1%, and probably significantly less. Is it possible? Sure, but it's unlikely enough to write off.

I type that much because I cannot stop myself from going into far too detailed explanations. It has nothing to do with likelihood.

For a two-loss conference champ to make the field, all it takes is fewer than four 1-loss conference champs  - or at least two 2-loss champs. Though you are right that in Stanford's case the head to head vs und makes it trickier.

The odds are low of any particular set of wins and losses - thus the point behind my original post was really more that at this point much less is defined than most of the what-ifs presented presume.

[stupac2]

I type that much because I cannot stop myself from going into far too detailed explanations. It has nothing to do with likelihood.

For a two-loss conference champ to make the field, all it takes is fewer than four 1-loss conference champs  - or at least two 2-loss champs. Though you are right that in Stanford's case the head to head vs und makes it trickier.

The odds are low of any particular set of wins and losses - thus the point behind my original post was really more that at this point much less is defined than most of the what-ifs presented presume.

It does, though, especially because we'd likely miss out to at least a couple different 2-loss teams, and the way the schedules are set up it's just hard to get two losses in enough conferences we'd be likely to pass PLUS ND. It's obviously not impossible, but the odds of it happening are just really, really low.

[stupac2]

I type that much because I cannot stop myself from going into far too detailed explanations. It has nothing to do with likelihood.

For a two-loss conference champ to make the field, all it takes is fewer than four 1-loss conference champs  - or at least two 2-loss champs. Though you are right that in Stanford's case the head to head vs und makes it trickier.

The odds are low of any particular set of wins and losses - thus the point behind my original post was really more that at this point much less is defined than most of the what-ifs presented presume.

It does, though, especially because we'd likely miss out to at least a couple different 2-loss teams, and the way the schedules are set up it's just hard to get two losses in enough conferences we'd be likely to pass PLUS ND. It's obviously not impossible, but the odds of it happening are just really, really low.

[M T]

After all most of the Bay Area doesn't have the Cardboard bookmarked for daily reading.

It's not your home page?

[M T]

After all most of the Bay Area doesn't have the Cardboard bookmarked for daily reading.

It's not your home page?