Keating: CFP committee blind to strength of schedule

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Peter Keating recently posted an article on ESPN that only ESPN Insiders can read. I have never paid for an Insider account, probably never will, but judging from the picture posted with the article, I have to assume Keating thinks Iowa's SOS is too weak for us to be included in the CFP...

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/i...yoff-committee-value-strength-schedule-should

 

[hawkcub]

During Iowa's great seasons they always get ripped on for something because Iowa isn't a blue blood. Yet their are teams that always seem to get a mulligan in the National pundits eyes.

 

[BeepBeepInMyJeep]

So to ESPN, We look dominant to them when compared to programs like Wisconsin and Nebraska. I'd say this is a pretty good image to project.

 

[MeetTheFerentz]

That act has grown old. The only ridiculously bad team we played this year was N. Texas. Every other team was a quality to high-quality opponent (most computer rankings have Illinois State ranked in the 60s-70s, so better than most Group of 5 teams). Anyone ripping on Iowa's schedule is only looking at the names on the jerseys (ours and our opponents) and recruiting rankings. We're the only undefeated team with two road wins over CFP Top 25 teams, so when an "expert" rips on our schedule, he looks silly, not to mention bad at his job.

 

[ichawk24]

Iowa is mentioned twice, and barely at that, so it is odd that we're in the image.

Oklahoma State is in the CFP's top 10 (through Week 11) despite opposition nearly as weak as Baylor's. Ditto for Iowa. Ohio State, which spent most of its nonconference schedule stifling yawns against Hawaii and Western Michigan, is in the CFP top four even though committee members haven't been particularly impressed with the Buckeyes. "We think they're a team that probably hasn't played its best yet," chairman Jeff Long said after the second week of rankings. "We think their best games are in front of them." Translation: The committee is grading Ohio State not on results but on its hope that another Urban Meyer team will have a great finish.

The final paragraph is:

Any reasonable, comprehensive measure of schedule strength would be better than cherry-picking quality wins and dubious losses. Such a measure would suggest the committee is overrating Iowa and severely underrating Stanford. Statistics don't have to trump observation, but we all need data to check the eye test and hedge against favoritism.

---

The Massey Computer compilation has Iowa 7th, and Stanford 12th. The CFP has Iowa 5th and Stanford 11th.

 

[BeepBeepInMyJeep]

Stanford HAS been getting the benefit of the doubt with their schedule, but the games on the field actually count. Iowa's relative lack of talent, real or imagined, shouldn't factor into the discussion at all. If it was, then I'd make the case that USC and Texas should be in the discussion.

 

[ichawk24]

Btw, the CFP rankings have tracked computer rankings such as the Massey compilation very closely. I think the CFP uses some computer index as the basis of their rankings, so SOS is heavily used whether they publicize it or not.

http://www.masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm

 

[Hawk-A-Doodle-Doo]

Stanford HAS been getting the benefit of the doubt with their schedule, but the games on the field actually count. Iowa's relative lack of talent, real or imagined, shouldn't factor into the discussion at all. If it was, then I'd make the case that USC and Texas should be in the discussion.

Stanford plays six of its final eight games at home. SIX out of EIGHT! They have two 3-game homestands in that 8 game slate. And the two road games were against a good-but-not-great Washington State team (which they should have lost), and a horrifically bad Colorado program against which, frankly, it doesn't matter where the game is played.

But yeah, their schedule is just murderous compared to ours.

 

[David1979]

I think it is funny the talking heads are still talking up the Big 12's remaining schedule with regard to the top teams. TCU is borderline top 25 so stop talking about them like they are great and Baylor is not the same team without their QB and now their true freshman QB is banged up.

 

[bagdropper]

Here's what I don't get about the B12 as it relates to all these polls and opinions by the so-called experts at ESPN and elsewhere.

If an ENTIRE CONFERENCE hasn't played and beaten anybody reasonably good except their own teams in-conference (that's the claim), how are they any different than say a non-P5 conference that does the exact same thing?

How do we know what Okie State's record translates to if they played...literally, NOBODY with a heartbeat in their non-con? I understand pundits quantifying Iowa against Pitt and believing Pitt really isn't any good. But at least Iowa did play them, and Okie State didn't play anybody at all remotely close to their level.

I just don't get that.

Then in the B10, we have evidence that NW beat Stanford (the 11am kickoff hallpass theory is utter bullcrap...you had an entire off-season to prepare for that) and beat Duke at their place - Wisconsin played a neutral against all-world Alabama. Alabama gets a hall pass for losing at home to Mississippi, a 3 loss team if my memory is good.

But Iowa does not get one beating the same Wisconsin at their house. NW does not get credit for beating a team they themselves view as better than Iowa. Therefore, Iowa doesn't get any credit.

You have a reasonable method of quantifying Iowa based upon those actual games played out and in of conference to derive that maybe Iowa actually has played 3 games where an educated opinion with actual results states that they should get credit for that.

Again, I just don't get that. I'm not saying beating Baylor and TCU is not something to quantify. I'm saying you cannot apply a different set of standards to one set of quantification versus the other.

 

[MeetTheFerentz]

Any reasonable, comprehensive measure of schedule strength would be better than cherry-picking quality wins and dubious losses.

That sentence says it all. Read between the lines and it says "If you're a team like Alabama or Stanford, we ignore losses and justify this by saying your schedule is great because you're Alabama or Stanford; but if you're a team like Iowa with no losses and multiple quality wins or Northwestern with a high quality win vs. a blue-blood, those don't count because we perceive your entire schedule as weak because you're Iowa or Northwestern."

 

[LincolnHawkeye]

Here's what I don't get about the B12 as it relates to all these polls and opinions by the so-called experts at ESPN and elsewhere.

If an ENTIRE CONFERENCE hasn't played and beaten anybody reasonably good except their own teams in-conference (that's the claim), how are they any different than say a non-P5 conference that does the exact same thing?

How do we know what Okie State's record translates to if they played...literally, NOBODY with a heartbeat in their non-con? I understand pundits quantifying Iowa against Pitt and believing Pitt really isn't any good. But at least Iowa did play them, and Okie State didn't play anybody at all remotely close to their level.

I just don't get that.

Then in the B10, we have evidence that NW beat Stanford (the 11am kickoff hallpass theory is utter bullcrap...you had an entire off-season to prepare for that) and beat Duke at their place - Wisconsin played a neutral against all-world Alabama. Alabama gets a hall pass for losing at home to Mississippi, a 3 loss team if my memory is good.

But Iowa does not get one beating the same Wisconsin at their house. NW does not get credit for beating a team they themselves view as better than Iowa. Therefore, Iowa doesn't get any credit.

You have a reasonable method of quantifying Iowa based upon those actual games played out and in of conference to derive that maybe Iowa actually has played 3 games where an educated opinion with actual results states that they should get credit for that.

Again, I just don't get that. I'm not saying beating Baylor and TCU is not something to quantify. I'm saying you cannot apply a different set of standards to one set of quantification versus the other.

Seriously, like who has the Big 12 beaten OOC? Oklahoma won in double OT against a mediocre Tennessee team, and TCU won by 6 at a mediocre Minnesota. That's about it.

 

[cg8284]

Seriously, like who has the Big 12 beaten OOC? Oklahoma won in double OT against a mediocre Tennessee team, and TCU won by 6 at a mediocre Minnesota. That's about it.

Yeah but that Tennessee team beat Iowa in a bowl game last year so you have to take that into account

 

[bagdropper]

that's Finebaum's theory...

 

[BeepBeepInMyJeep]

Yea but offense! Explosive plays! Shiny objects!

Even If Oklahoma St wins the next two games by 50 they will not pass unbeaten Iowa. Oklahoma St does have nothing but Panera Bread in their OOC. Ok State will have beaten 9 Power 5 teams, Iowa would have beaten 11. If it is Ohio St in the Big Ten championship, nobody in America would have such a premium win. The only argument about Iowa would be about getting the #1 seed.

 

[ichawk24]

Oklahoma beat Iowa in the 2011 Insight Bowl, so, you know.

 

[Recruiting Violation]

Stanford plays six of its final eight games at home. SIX out of EIGHT! They have two 3-game homestands in that 8 game slate. And the two road games were against a good-but-not-great Washington State team (which they should have lost), and a horrifically bad Colorado program against which, frankly, it doesn't matter where the game is played.

But yeah, their schedule is just murderous compared to ours.

Also, you have to remember that they are all conveniently writing off the fact that Stanford LOST at Northwestern, while we WON there (in blowout fashion, no less).

 

[Vroom_C14]

That act has grown old. The only ridiculously bad team we played this year was N. Texas. Every other team was a quality to high-quality opponent (most computer rankings have Illinois State ranked in the 60s-70s, so better than most Group of 5 teams). Anyone ripping on Iowa's schedule is only looking at the names on the jerseys (ours and our opponents) and recruiting rankings. We're the only undefeated team with two road wins over CFP Top 25 teams, so when an "expert" rips on our schedule, he looks silly, not to mention bad at his job.

North Texas also played Tennesse (Lost 24-0), compared to Iowa's (62-14 drubbing) yet you hear nothing about the almighty SEC playing them.

 

[Hawk and Awe]

You guys really just can't get enough of this can you?