PAC12 CFP Hopes

[HLB]

Nine-game conference schedules and a lack of no exposure on the East coast have been two of the biggest arguments I've heard from PAC12 fans, as a reason for the PAC12 not getting recognition in the CFP.

My argument has been the PAC12's poor performance in OOC contest.

This year, the PAC is 17-15, in OOC play, with 2 losses to FCS opponents, and 5 losses to G5 opponents, and 3 losses to BYU.  With four more OOC games to be played (2 vs. BYU and 2 vs. ND), the conference is probably going to finish OOC play with an 18-18 overall record. 

The lone win over a currently ranked opponent is Oregon's win over Ohio State (who I believe will lose at least two more games on the season).

Every year, the PAC12 struggles to impress, in OOC play.  And if your conference can't win games out of conference, no one cares what you do in conference, no matter how many conference games you play, or don't play. 

The conference's overall record, in OOC games, is what places the PAC12 behind all other conferences, in playoff discussions, not the other excuses given.

Only if Oregon wins out, would the PAC12 have a hope of making the playoffs.  And it only took three weeks of OOC play for this reality to become official.

[glduck]

Can you name a single example of “bad non-conference performance” stigma keeping a Pac-12 team out of the playoff? No, you cannot. 

The Pac-12 has never had an undefeated or one-loss team left out of the CFP. When we’ve had a team deserve to be there, they’ve been there. We’ve never had a deserving team not make it in.

[azgreg]

An undefeated PAC-12 champ is a lock for the CFP.

 

[dtd]

Also, the Pac has two ranked non conference wins. Basically your post is wrong in every facet. 

Why do we even bother with this troll?

[HLB]

On 9/19/2021 at 6:08 PM, azgreg said:

An undefeated PAC-12 champ is a lock for the CFP.

 

I would agree.  We've seen that in the past. 

Even a PAC12 Champion who has one conference loss, has made the playoffs. 

But no PAC12 Champion has made the playoffs with an OOC loss.  But losing an OOC game hurts PAC12 Champions chances of making the playoffs, even it it's their only loss of the season.

Other conferences have had 1-loss champions, who's lone loss came in an OOC game, but they still made the playoffs.  The same cannot be said for the PAC12.

[HLB]

On 9/19/2021 at 6:50 PM, dtd said:

Also, the Pac has two ranked non conference wins. Basically your post is wrong in every facet. 

Why do we even bother with this troll?

I said "wins over CURRENTLY ranked" OOC opponents.  LSU is not currently ranked.

[HLB]

On 9/19/2021 at 4:26 PM, glduck said:

Can you name a single example of “bad non-conference performance” stigma keeping a Pac-12 team out of the playoff? No, you cannot. 

The Pac-12 has never had an undefeated or one-loss team left out of the CFP. When we’ve had a team deserve to be there, they’ve been there. We’ve never had a deserving team not make it in.

You missed the point.

It has been argued that the SEC has an advantage of making the playoffs, because they only play 8-conference games. 

Yet the PAC12 champion has made the playoffs, (twice), when they've had one-loss one conference champions, who won all of their OOC games (2014 and 2016).

But in seasons where the PAC12 champion has lost one conference game and an OOC game, (2015, 2017 and 2019) they didn't make the playoffs.  

The point is, a 9-game conference schedule doesn't hurt the PAC12's chances, as it has been argued.  What has hurt the PAC12's playoff chances, is when they lose OOC games.

[clpp01]

On 9/19/2021 at 8:42 PM, HLB said:

You missed the point.

It has been argued that the SEC has an advantage of making the playoffs, because they only play 8-conference games. 

Yet the PAC12 champion has made the playoffs, (twice), when they've had one-loss one conference champions, who won all of their OOC games (2014 and 2016).

But in seasons where the PAC12 champion has lost one conference game and an OOC game, (2015, 2017 and 2019) they didn't make the playoffs.  

The point is, a 9-game conference schedule doesn't hurt the PAC12's chances, as it has been argued.  What has hurt the PAC12's playoff chances, is when they lose OOC games.

And if the Pac-12 dropped down from a 9 game conference schedule to a 8 game schedule in 2019 Oregon replaces their 9th game against ASU with someone like Western Kentucky they end the season as a 12-1 conference champion and would have been selected to the playoff ahead of Oklahoma or in 2017 if USC drops their 9th conference game against Washington State for an SEC style OOC game against Florida Atlantic then they would end the season as a 12-1 conference champion and would have been selected to the playoff ahead of an Alabama team that did not win the SEC

 

[Orange]

On 9/19/2021 at 1:33 PM, HLB said:

Nine-game conference schedules and a lack of no exposure on the East coast have been two of the biggest arguments I've heard from PAC12 fans, as a reason for the PAC12 not getting recognition in the CFP.

My argument has been the PAC12's poor performance in OOC contest.

This year, the PAC is 17-15, in OOC play, with 2 losses to FCS opponents, and 5 losses to G5 opponents, and 3 losses to BYU.  With four more OOC games to be played (2 vs. BYU and 2 vs. ND), the conference is probably going to finish OOC play with an 18-18 overall record. 

The lone win over a currently ranked opponent is Oregon's win over Ohio State (who I believe will lose at least two more games on the season).

Every year, the PAC12 struggles to impress, in OOC play.  And if your conference can't win games out of conference, no one cares what you do in conference, no matter how many conference games you play, or don't play. 

The conference's overall record, in OOC games, is what places the PAC12 behind all other conferences, in playoff discussions, not the other excuses given.

Only if Oregon wins out, would the PAC12 have a hope of making the playoffs.  And it only took three weeks of OOC play for this reality to become official.

die in a fire.

[glduck]

On 9/19/2021 at 8:42 PM, HLB said:

You missed the point.

It has been argued that the SEC has an advantage of making the playoffs, because they only play 8-conference games. 

Yet the PAC12 champion has made the playoffs, (twice), when they've had one-loss one conference champions, who won all of their OOC games (2014 and 2016).

But in seasons where the PAC12 champion has lost one conference game and an OOC game, (2015, 2017 and 2019) they didn't make the playoffs.  

The point is, a 9-game conference schedule doesn't hurt the PAC12's chances, as it has been argued.  What has hurt the PAC12's playoff chances, is when they lose OOC games.

I didn’t miss your point at all. You are an extremely poor communicator.

[PAC MAN]

I was one to defend the nine game conference schedule but my tune is changing in this case.  Having one less OOC game means one less chance per team to make an impression on the country.  This eight conference game plus one against the B1G & ACC is something that I can get behind.  That eight game conference record certainly has helped the SEC & ACC of late.

If Oregon goes undefeated this year with a P12 championship, they should be in the CFP no questions asked.

[EastCoastFan]

On 9/20/2021 at 1:46 PM, Jalapeno said:

This eight conference game plus one against the B1G & ACC is something that I can get behind.  That eight game conference record certainly has helped the SEC & ACC of late.

If Oregon goes undefeated this year with a P12 championship, they should be in the CFP no questions asked.

I believe that with the eight-game conference schedule, Kliavkoff intends to have two Alliance games, one against the ACC and one against the B1G every year, with one away, the other home.  He said the other day that it'll leave two out-of-conference games for Pac-12 schools to schedule as they wish.

[Mano]

On 9/20/2021 at 1:09 PM, EastCoastFan said:

I believe that with the eight-game conference schedule, Kliavkoff intends to have two Alliance games, one against the ACC and one against the B1G every year, with one away, the other home.  He said the other day that it'll leave two out-of-conference games for Pac-12 schools to schedule as they wish.

I wonder if ND would count as an ACC game for USC and Stanford, or if they just schedule the Irish on top of the alliance games.

[win2bfree]

On 9/19/2021 at 8:06 PM, HLB said:

I would agree.  We've seen that in the past. 

Even a PAC12 Champion who has one conference loss, has made the playoffs. 

But no PAC12 Champion has made the playoffs with an OOC loss.  But losing an OOC game hurts PAC12 Champions chances of making the playoffs, even it it's their only loss of the season.

Other conferences have had 1-loss champions, who's lone loss came in an OOC game, but they still made the playoffs.  The same cannot be said for the PAC12.

Outside of OSU in 2014, no team has made the playoffs with a non-conference loss.  And OSU was aided by their blue blood status relative to Baylor/TCU as much as anything.

[EastCoastFan]

On 9/20/2021 at 3:33 PM, Mano said:

I wonder if ND would count as an ACC game for USC and Stanford, or if they just schedule the Irish on top of the alliance games.

Kliavkoff said in an interview that Notre Dame counts as an ACC-Alliance foe for both the Pac and B1G.

[Scscsc89]

It would be a drag if the only ACC team that Stanford and USC ever faced was Notre Dame.

[HLB]

On 9/20/2021 at 4:02 AM, clpp01 said:

And if the Pac-12 dropped down from a 9 game conference schedule to a 8 game schedule in 2019 Oregon replaces their 9th game against ASU with someone like Western Kentucky they end the season as a 12-1 conference champion and would have been selected to the playoff ahead of Oklahoma or in 2017 if USC drops their 9th conference game against Washington State for an SEC style OOC game against Florida Atlantic then they would end the season as a 12-1 conference champion and would have been selected to the playoff ahead of an Alabama team that did not win the SEC

 

If Oregon had defeated Auburn, in 2019, they would have made the playoffs, and if USC had defeated Notre Dame, they would have made the playoffs.

Again, the OOC losses have kept PAC12 teams out of the playoffs, not the conference losses.  The PAC12's reputation in OOC games, is that the PAC12 is the weakest of the P5 conferences, given their overall conference performances against OOC opponents.    If Oregon beats ASU, but loses to Auburn, they don't think they make the playoffs over Oklahoma, because OU defeated their OOC P5 opponent (UCLA); and in 2017, if USC beats Washington State, but still loses to ND, they still don't make the playoffs over BAMA, who defeated their P5 OOC opponent, FSU.

That being said, why doesn't the PAC12 drop to 8 conference games (if they feel other conferences have an advantage for only playing 8)?  Why do they continue to play 9 conference games?  And why should all of the other conferences play 9 conference games, just because the PAC12 has decided to play 9 conference games?

[HLB]

On 9/20/2021 at 3:08 PM, win2bfree said:

Outside of OSU in 2014, no team has made the playoffs with a non-conference loss.  And OSU was aided by their blue blood status relative to Baylor/TCU as much as anything.

tOSU was aided by two bad calls in their game versus Penn State, in 2014, when the replay booth was malfunctioning and incorrect calls (interception and 5th down FG) were not overturned.  If those calls are corrected, tOSU loses to Penn State, doesn't win their division, doesn't play for the conference championship, and doesn't make the playoffs.

[HLB]

Speaking as someone who is not in the PAC12 footprint, the perspective by fans in the Big12, B1G, ACC and SEC footprint view the PAC12 as the weakest conference, because of their overall performance in OOC competition.  When the conference annually loses to FCS teams (sometimes more than one), and G5 opponents, it hurts their reputation as a strong conference.  And that reputation hurts their conference, when being evaluated for the playoffs, because winning the PAC12 is not viewed as big of an accomplishment.

Clemson is in the same boat this year.  Because of their season opening loss to Georgia, it's going to be hard for Clemson to make the playoffs, even if they win out.  The don't play another ranked opponent for the remainder of the year.  They have to hope that Georgia wins out, beats BAMA and wins the SEC Championship.  This would make their 10-to-3 loss to Georgia more acceptable, particularly when the difference in the game was a 74-yard pick-6.  But if Georgia doesn't win out, and doesn't win the SEC, Clemson is probably on the outside looking in.

But if Clemson had beat Georgia (their strongest OOC opponent), they could still sustain a conference loss (as they did in 2016, when they beat Auburn, but lost a conference game to unranked Pitt, and in 2016 when they beat Auburn, but lost to unranked Syracuse).  Clemson also plays an 8-game conference schedule, yet losing a conference game didn't hurt their chances of being in the playoffs, because of their OOC play, and because of the overall OOC play of the conference.

[win2bfree]

On 9/20/2021 at 8:25 PM, HLB said:

tOSU was aided by two bad calls in their game versus Penn State, in 2014, when the replay booth was malfunctioning and incorrect calls (interception and 5th down FG) were not overturned.  If those calls are corrected, tOSU loses to Penn State, doesn't win their division, doesn't play for the conference championship, and doesn't make the playoffs.

Which makes my point:  OSU status gives them an advantage over other teams who don't share that status.  A loss and a near loss couldn't derail OSU.  Meanwhile TCU lost on a last second field goal on the road to a Baylor team ranked #5 at the time and Baylor never dropped below #12 all year, TCU wins their final game 55-3 and still drops in the poll by 3 spots.