Other People’s Football (2021 Edition)

[CrazyNotCrazie]

I think I am a bigger defender of the eye test than most people around here (I think advanced stats are one tool that needs to be used very carefully but not the be all/end all). And I think that for the football playoffs, it ultimately comes down to the eye test.

In evaluating the teams based on rankings, it seems to be a big case of circular logic. There is very little meaningful non-conference play in college football. So how a team does is largely dependent on the strength of their conference, and it is only the eye test that allows us to compare conferences, as well as the small set of playoff games from the prior year, when the rosters might have been much different.

If, for instance, the whole Big 12 stinks this year (I don't think it does), then Oklahoma State beating "highly ranked" teams is not really impressive - those teams are only achieving their high rankings by beating other teams in the same theoretically weak conference. So by being the best of the worst, you can be highly ranked, and arguing "well, they beat X-ranked Directional State so they must be good" doesn't really get you anywhere.

I'm not sure what the right answer is other than probably going to 8 teams - I think more than 8 is overkill.

[dudog84]

I think I am a bigger defender of the eye test than most people around here (I think advanced stats are one tool that needs to be used very carefully but not the be all/end all). And I think that for the football playoffs, it ultimately comes down to the eye test.

In evaluating the teams based on rankings, it seems to be a big case of circular logic. There is very little meaningful non-conference play in college football. So how a team does is largely dependent on the strength of their conference, and it is only the eye test that allows us to compare conferences, as well as the small set of playoff games from the prior year, when the rosters might have been much different.

If, for instance, the whole Big 12 stinks this year (I don't think it does), then Oklahoma State beating "highly ranked" teams is not really impressive - those teams are only achieving their high rankings by beating other teams in the same theoretically weak conference. So by being the best of the worst, you can be highly ranked, and arguing "well, they beat X-ranked Directional State so they must be good" doesn't really get you anywhere.

I'm not sure what the right answer is other than probably going to 8 teams - I think more than 8 is overkill.

Yeah, but it's not as much fun arguing about #8 vs. #9 as it is #4 vs. #5.

Baylor's best OOC win was against current #13 BYU, so they're legit. OSU's best OOC win was against Boise State (an early season squeaker), who admittedly had a poor year for them, they are typically strong (so can't really fault OSU for that). Oklahoma's best OOC win was against Nebraska, which just don't mean what it used to. What hurts the Big 12's image was this year's defection news, and that Texas sucks so bad.

If OSU beats Baylor this weekend, they absolutely deserve a playoff spot. That's the marquee game of the weekend, a slight edge over Georgia-Alabama.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

If OSU beats Baylor this weekend, they absolutely deserve a playoff spot. That's the marquee game of the weekend, a slight edge over Georgia-Alabama.

Agree to disagree.

[dudog84]

Agree to disagree.

With the former or latter?

I just think it will be a better game. Certainly the SEC matchup brings more eyeballs, but I think Georgia handles Alabama rather easily. We'll see.

[dukelifer]

I could see the Bama thing going either way, they haven't been Bama-esque this year.

By the way, anyone notice that Nebraska (3-9) became the first FBS team to ever lose nine games by single digits.? As a Duke fan, I can only dream of that.

Oh I am sure folks will complain that those nine losses are the result of bad coaching and the coaching staff did not prepare the players to keep from making critical mistakes- and that another coach would make all the difference. Duke fans would have had the same reaction to this season if all the losses were in single digits.

[camion]

Oh I am sure folks will complain that those nine losses are the result of bad coaching and the coaching staff did not prepare the players to keep from making critical mistakes- and that another coach would make all the difference. Duke fans would have had the same reaction to this season if all the losses were in single digits.

Nope.


IMHO.

[dukelifer]

Nope.


IMHO.

When Duke lost to Charlotte and Ga Tech there were many folks here saying this was the result of bad coaching

[Bob Green]

Duke fans would have had the same reaction to this season if all the losses were in single digits.

I can only speak for myself but I believe I am aligned with the general tenor of this board which desires for Duke football to be competitive and not get blown out by 30+ points every week.

The bar is set pretty low win six or seven games and beat directional U in a minor bowl game. With those 7-5 and 6-6 regular seasons perhaps an occasional 8 win season along with the occasional 5-7 or 4-8 season.

No one expects Duke to be a Top 10 team.

[camion]

When Duke lost to Charlotte and Ga Tech there were many folks here saying this was the result of bad coaching

Many folks here saw the downward trend in earlier seasons and not just those to losses.

You failed to mention the 7 losses by more than 20 points each. Those are relevant and what really drove home the hopelessness of the current coaching situation.

IMHO.

[sagegrouse]

I think I am a bigger defender of the eye test than most people around here (I think advanced stats are one tool that needs to be used very carefully but not the be all/end all). And I think that for the football playoffs, it ultimately comes down to the eye test.

In evaluating the teams based on rankings, it seems to be a big case of circular logic. There is very little meaningful non-conference play in college football. So how a team does is largely dependent on the strength of their conference, and it is only the eye test that allows us to compare conferences, as well as the small set of playoff games from the prior year, when the rosters might have been much different.

If, for instance, the whole Big 12 stinks this year (I don't think it does), then Oklahoma State beating "highly ranked" teams is not really impressive - those teams are only achieving their high rankings by beating other teams in the same theoretically weak conference. So by being the best of the worst, you can be highly ranked, and arguing "well, they beat X-ranked Directional State so they must be good" doesn't really get you anywhere.

I'm not sure what the right answer is other than probably going to 8 teams - I think more than 8 is overkill.

So you think that the College Football Playoff Committee is "On a fool's errand" because there is not enough inter-conference competition? I encourage you to put some data together -- I assure you tracking a 12-game football schedule with 8-9 conference games is a lot easier than tracking a college basketball schedule of over 30 games. It'll be good for your soul.

[OldPhiKap]

Many folks here saw the downward trend in earlier seasons and not just those to losses.

You failed to mention the 7 losses by more than 20 points each. Those are relevant and what really drove home the hopelessness of the current coaching situation.

IMHO.

Yeah, but.

We went to bowl games in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2017 and 2018.

2019 we finished 5-7 and just missed bowl eligibility. We knew the schedule was brutal that year; losses included games against Alabama and Notre Dame. There were some stinkers in there, but no one could seriously argue that it was time to fire Cut.

2020 was a bad year, but COVID forced Duke to have a very shortened practice schedule and the whole year was kind of a FUBAR. It seems to me that Cut had earned the right to try and right the ship in a full, normal season, and that he should not be replaced. But I realize some have much more hair triggers than I do.

2021 gave him that chance. And now it’s time for a change.

I have no problem with Cut getting to coach this year, and would have been disappointed if we forced him out last year. Similarly, I will be disappointed if we don’t make a change now.

YMMV. (and by “Y” I am not directing that at camion or anyone else in particular).

[CrazyNotCrazie]

So you think that the College Football Playoff Committee is "On a fool's errand" because there is not enough inter-conference competition? I encourage you to put some data together -- I assure you tracking a 12-game football schedule with 8-9 conference games is a lot easier than tracking a college basketball schedule of over 30 games. It'll be good for your soul.

The patronizing tone is not necessary. I could be snarky back but will refrain.

That being said, I think they generally do the best they can. As does the basketball committee. There is no right answer. I just think that everyone getting their panties in a bunch over the relative rankings of different opponents is circular logic. So it ultimately comes down more to the eye test. Which is what I think the committee actually does, rather than worrying about rankings. So I think they are doing a better job than the average shmo posting here or elsewhere. There is no science to it. Which is why Lunardi and others who have made a cottage industry out of acting like experts on this frustrate me so much.

[sagegrouse]

The patronizing tone is not necessary. I could be snarky back but will refrain.

That being said, I think they generally do the best they can. As does the basketball committee. There is no right answer. I just think that everyone getting their panties in a bunch over the relative rankings of different opponents is circular logic. So it ultimately comes down more to the eye test. Which is what I think the committee actually does, rather than worrying about rankings. So I think they are doing a better job than the average shmo posting here or elsewhere. There is no science to it. Which is why Lunardi and others who have made a cottage industry out of acting like experts on this frustrate me so much.

Hey, wait! That wasn't snarky -- that was a joke referencing my decade-long obsession with the inability of the NCAA hoops Tournament Selection Committee to meaningfully determine who's in and who's out because of the lack on interconference games.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

Hey, wait! That wasn't snarky -- that was a joke referencing my decade-long obsession with the inability of the NCAA hoops Tournament Selection Committee to meaningfully determine who's in and who's out because of the lack on interconference games.

Sorry - having a rough day for a variety of reasons so read "It'll be good for your soul" to be like "Bless your heart" which I mastered during my time living down south.

There is a part of me that likes seeing the whole thing blow up. But a larger part of me wishes it would just resolve cleanly - I often like getting in the weeds about these things, but when it comes to football and basketball "bracketology" I have zero tolerance. So I guess we are kind of on the same page.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Sorry - having a rough day for a variety of reasons so read "It'll be good for your soul" to be like "Bless your heart" which I mastered during my time living down south.

There is a part of me that likes seeing the whole thing blow up. But a larger part of me wishes it would just resolve cleanly - I often like getting in the weeds about these things, but when it comes to football and basketball "bracketology" I have zero tolerance. So I guess we are kind of on the same page.

Too early in the season for my first bracketology rant.

[OldPhiKap]

Too early in the season for my first bracketology rant.

{deletes first four in/first four out analysis}

[CrazyNotCrazie]

Too early in the season for my first bracketology rant.

For the first night of Hanukah tonight I requested a one way plane ticket to send Joe Lunardi to a location in Djibouti with no internet or TV access. But I digress.

I think these weekly Tuesday night bracket reveals for football are almost as bad.

[OldPhiKap]

AA498FE3-5599-4894-A3E6-7968D55CC1DE.jpg

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

For the first night of Hanukah tonight I requested a one way plane ticket to send Joe Lunardi to a location in Djibouti with no internet or TV access. But I digress.

I think these weekly Tuesday night bracket reveals for football are almost as bad.

Yes. Same level of idiocy.

It's media for the sake of media.

[dudog84]

AA498FE3-5599-4894-A3E6-7968D55CC1DE.jpg

Looking at Texas, I'm not sure they know what good coaching is either.