2010 Schedule and SOS theories

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by jay santos

Sorry but your perspective as a Big XII girl doesn't do any good here. You have OK, Neb, TT, and Mizzou on your conf schedule. We have to get those teams on our OOC schedule or we don't have them at all.

Don't look at the names. And don't seperate OOC from conference. If we stacked up this schedule of four big names and our MWC schedule against your typical schedule it would look the same. It's not crazy-talk to think that if we think we're a top 30 program that our SOS should look roughly the same as another top 30 program.

Also, you're completely wrong about the trend in college football. The trend is the opposite. Auburn went undefeated and got kept out of championship game due to schedule. Schedules have gotten tougher and tougher as teams realize it's important in the BCS standings. SEC and to lesser extent Big XII are the last ones to catch on, and it hurts them every year in the BCS.

By the way, Texas' schedule may do them in as much as their loss to Ohio State. They dumbed down their schedule and it's biting them in the ass.

Wow. In my defense, I did say "it's different for a non-BCS school." But I still think any school would be crazy to stack up those four teams, which apparently is an imaginary line-up.

And I'm not "completely wrong." I'm just ahead of you... See...The trend over the past 5 years has been to toughen schedules. But coaches like Stoops and Brown have both said it's not worth the risk. I would not be surprised if "big-name" schools back off of the trend.

The truth of the matter is, and please tell me you can't deny this, BCS standings depend a little on SOS but a LOT on pre-season rankings.

And that's something that tougher non-conference schedules may not be able to help...



BTW, I'm a Sooner, not a Longhorn. Ick.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Lisa.Kinzer

Wow. In my defense, I did say "it's different for a non-BCS school." But I still think any school would be crazy to stack up those four teams, which apparently is an imaginary line-up.

And I'm not "completely wrong." I'm just ahead of you... See...The trend over the past 5 years has been to toughen schedules. But coaches like Stoops and Brown have both said it's not worth the risk. I would not be surprised if "big-name" schools back off of the trend.

The truth of the matter is, and please tell me you can't deny this, BCS standings depend a little on SOS but a LOT on pre-season rankings.

And that's something that tougher non-conference schedules may not be able to help...



BTW, I'm a Sooner, not a Longhorn. Ick.

LOL sorry I called you a Longhorn. I can only imagine the trauma that might have caused you.

Well you may be right in predicting the future trend, but I don't believe it. Just this week, I heard a couple commentators talk about Cal and the love the computers have for them. Stoopes and Brown may not like it, but they're stuck with it.

Computers are here to stay and each year the college football world will understand them better and better. And the way to be rewarded by the computers is by beating a strong SOS.

Of course final BCS standings rely to some degree on preseason rankings, but unfortunately that's nothing BYU can control, so it's a non-factor either way.

The paradigm for both you as an outsider and to my Cougar brothers here is that everyone's looking at it as an OOC schedule.

It seems murder to line up an OOC schedule of #1, #10, #40, #50 like the 2010 schedule does.

But is it murder to line up a total schedule that goes #1, #10, #30, #40, #50, #50, #60, #70, #80, #80, #100, #110? That's the 2010 schedule, and it's not much different than anybody else. We just have to load up on the OOC to make it work.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

What are you smoking, Jay? One or two top teams per year is plenty for a lightweight school like BYU. Put it this way, what is most likely way to get a top-ten ranking? Have zero or one loss with this year's schedule, or have two losses or less with the 2010 schedule?

This is the crux of the issue. Are we lightweight or not? If we're lightweight, then why do we deserve BCS or heaven forbid national championship game, which Indy is suggesting is possible without my schedule?

I believe we're a top 30 program. If we feel like we belong with ASU, Colorado, Wisconsin, Georgia Tech--other top 30ish programs, why is it so impossible for us to have a schedule that matches theirs?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Lisa.Kinzer

BTW, I'm a Sooner, not a Longhorn. Ick.

Scoreboard, baby. Scoreboard.

(I'm a UT alum).

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by jay santos

I heard a couple commentators talk about Cal and the love the computers have for them.

Well, Cal and the computers can enjoy their trip to the Holiday Bowl!

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Scoreboard, baby. Scoreboard.

(I'm a UT alum).

WHAT????? They let LONGHORNS on this board??? I'm so outta here.

Anyway, win six in a row, then we'll talk!

(Wait, I take that back, please don't win six...or even three...)