The reason I am so depressed about BYU

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by DJRoss

I have to agree that it isn't so fun going to games where the outcome is so clear. We all like to believe our team will always win, but when you are scheduling Chattanooga and its directional cousins each year where is the excitement? Unfortunately for the MWC to become a power conference they actually have to start dumping the challenging exciting games and salt their schedules with these types of teams in order to sweep or nearly sweep their OOC's. The opponents opponents schedule is only a third of the SOS calculation component, but if you scheduled Western Carolina, they may go 0-4 OOC, but 3 of those games are against SEC and ACC opponents. That means that MWC teams can get the benefit of that 1/3 which actually serves to boost their SOS enough so when conference schedule starts the two or three weaker programs provide a huge boost for the 5 or 6 strongers ones. It is sad that the game is not what really matters as much anymore, but the strategy of scheduling.

I know at least three Legacy Cougar members and season ticket holders that if they adopt that strategy could possibly tell BYU not to call on them for money anymore. I know two others that probably feel that way, but I haven't talked to them.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by DJRoss

Sure the initial squawking would be heard in the media about how weak the MWC scheduling is, but after a couple of seasons, the computer polls would begin calculating the MWC teams with 4-0 and 3-1 records as contributing to each others SOS so by seasons end the magic of improve SOS would create the same illusion the Big East has succeeded in doing.

You could not be further from the truth with that statement.

1. Computers only use game data of present season, so there is never an "after a couple seasons" effect. If there is any effect, it would start season one.

2. The only way MWC teams are going to go 4-0 or 3-1 is by ridiculously loading up on non D1AA opponents. The computers wouldn't get tricked into anything, and if it had any effect it would be negative.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by DJRoss

I have to agree that it isn't so fun going to games where the outcome is so clear. We all like to believe our team will always win, but when you are scheduling Chattanooga and its directional cousins each year where is the excitement? Unfortunately for the MWC to become a power conference they actually have to start dumping the challenging exciting games and salt their schedules with these types of teams in order to sweep or nearly sweep their OOC's.

False. What MWC needs is good teams.

The opponents opponents schedule is only a third of the SOS calculation component, but if you scheduled Western Carolina, they may go 0-4 OOC, but 3 of those games are against SEC and ACC opponents. That means that MWC teams can get the benefit of that 1/3 which actually serves to boost their SOS enough so when conference schedule starts the two or three weaker programs provide a huge boost for the 5 or 6 strongers ones.

What SOS calculation are you talking about? Only place SOS is measured right now is within each computer's calculation. And I can guarantee you none of the computers use formula like this. Especially treating D1A and D1AA records apples to apples.

It is sad that the game is not what really matters as much anymore, but the strategy of scheduling.

Can you back this up with any actual data? Can you show me where teams over the past few years have manipulated weak SOS to their advantage?

[DJRoss]

Originally Posted by jay santos

1. Really doubtful BYU gets invited to power conference right now. But we can hope. Only real chance is if someone raids Big XII and they need someone.

2. I agree independence is not a bad idea for football. I'm a BB fan, too, though and I worry what would happen there.

3. Totally disagree. BCS schools have actualy upgraded schedules and you see more early season cross-conference games like Cal-Tenn that you didn't use to see as often.




The gate is open for BYU but not due to scheduling. BYU will make a BCS if they are top 12 and higher than any other non-BCS and most likely if they are top 16 and higher than any other non-BCS. Our competition for BCS game now is Boise, TCU, Hawaii, etc. I predict at least one non-BCS will make BCS game at least every other year as long as rules are in place. We can get to #12/#16 by scheduling really tough and go 10-2, like we are now and go 11-1, or by scheduling really weak and go 12-0. It's more a matter of personal preference not a matter of BCS through scheduling strategy. You have to be good enough to get yourself ranked that high and you're generally not going to fool anyone. P.S. Hawaii is not a top 16 team and therefore no matter how easy their schedule is, they'll lose a game and fall out of BCS contention. If a non-BCS makes it this year, it will be Boise with one loss.

Actually the schedules of the BCS conferences have been weakened by their own nepotism. Here are the first few ACC teams. I did this in alphabetical order:

Alabama
1998
Brigham Young (UT) Tuscaloosa, AL East Carolina (NC) Birmingham, AL Southern Mississippi Tuscaloosa, AL
1999
Houston Nashville, TN Southern Mississippi Tuscaloosa, AL Louisiana Tech Birmingham, AL
2000
UCLA Pasadena, CA Southern Mississippi Birmingham, AL Central Florida Tuscaloosa, AL
2001
UCLA Tuscaloosa, AL UTEP Birmingham, AL Southern Mississippi Birmingham, AL
2002
Middle Tennessee Birmingham, AL Oklahoma Norman, OK North Texas Tuscaloosa, AL Southern Mississippi Tuscaloosa, AL
2003
South Florida Birmingham, AL Oklahoma Tuscaloosa, AL Northern Illinois Tuscaloosa, AL Southern Mississippi Tuscaloosa, AL
2004
Utah State Tuscaloosa, AL Western Carolina Tuscaloosa, AL Southern Mississippi Tuscaloosa, AL
2005
Middle Tennessee Tuscaloosa, AL Southern Mississippi Tuscaloosa, AL Utah State Tuscaloosa, AL
2006
Hawaii Tuscaloosa, AL La Monroe Tuscaloosa, AL Duke Tuscaloosa, AL Florida International Tuscaloosa, AL
2007
Western Carolina Tuscaloosa, AL Houston Tuscaloosa, AL Florida State Tallahassee, Fl La Monroe Tuscaloosa, AL

Arkansas
1998
La Lafayette Fayetteville, AR SMU Little Rock, AR Memphis Memphis, TN
1999
SMU Dallas, TX La Monroe Little Rock, AR Middle Tennessee Fayetteville, AR
2000
Missouri State Little Rock, AR Boise State Little Rock, AR La Monroe Fayetteville, AR
2001
UNLV Little Rock, AR Weber State Fayetteville, AR Central Florida Fayetteville, AR
2002
Boise State Fayetteville, AR South Florida Little Rock, AR Troy Little Rock, AR La Lafayette Fayetteville, AR
2003
Tulsa Fayetteville, AR Texas Austin, TX North Texas Little Rock, AR New Mexico State Fayetteville, AR
2004
New Mexico State Fayetteville, AR Texas Fayetteville, AR La Monroe Little Rock, AR
2005
Missouri State Fayetteville, AR USC Los Angeles, CA La Monroe Little Rock, AR
2006
USC Fayetteville, AR Utah State Fayetteville, AR Southeast Missouri St Fayetteville, AR La Monroe Little Rock, AR
2007
Troy Fayetteville, AR North Texas Little Rock, AR Chattanooga Fayetteville, AR Florida International Fayetteville, AR

Auburn
1998
Virginia Auburn, AL Louisiana Tech Auburn, AL Central Florida Auburn, AL
1999
Appalachian St Auburn, AL Idaho Auburn, AL Central Florida Auburn, AL
2000
Wyoming Auburn, AL Northern Illinois Auburn, AL Louisiana Tech Auburn, AL
2001
Ball State Auburn, AL Syracuse Syracuse, NY Louisiana Tech Auburn, AL
2002
USC Los Angeles, CA Western Carolina Auburn, AL Syracuse Auburn, AL La Monroe Auburn, AL
2003
USC Auburn, AL Georgia Tech Atlanta, GA Western Kentucky Auburn, AL La Monroe Auburn, AL
2004
La Monroe Auburn, AL Citadel Auburn, AL Louisiana Tech Auburn, AL
2005
Georgia Tech Auburn, AL Ball State Auburn, AL Western Kentucky Auburn, AL
2006
Washington State Auburn, AL Buffalo Auburn, AL Tulane Auburn, AL Arkansas State Auburn, AL
2007
Kansas State Auburn, AL South Florida Auburn, AL New Mexico State Auburn, AL Tennessee Tech Auburn, AL

Florida
1998
Citadel Gainesville, FL La Monroe Gainesville, FL Florida State Tallahassee, FL
1999
Western Michigan Gainesville, FL Central Florida Gainesville, FL Florida State Gainesville, FL
2000
Ball State Gainesville, FL Middle Tennessee Gainesville, FL Florida State Tallahassee, FL
2001
Marshall Gainesville, FL La Monroe Gainesville, FL Florida State Gainesville, FL
2002
UAB Gainesville, FL Miami Gainesville, FL Ohio Gainesville, FL Florida State Tallahassee, FL
2003
San Jose State Gainesville, FL Miami Miami, FL Florida A&M Gainesville, FL Florida State Gainesville, FL
2004
Eastern Michigan Gainesville, FL Middle Tennessee Gainesville, FL Miami Atlanta, GA
2005
Wyoming Gainesville, FL Lousiana Tech Gainesville, FL Florida State Gainesville, FL
2006
Southern Miss Gainesville, FL Central Florida Gainesville, FL Western Carolina Gainesville, FL Florida State Tallahassee, FL
2007
Western Kentucky Gainesville, FL Troy Gainesville, FL Florida Atlantic Gainesville, FL Florida State Gainesville, FL

As you can see the scheduling actually has weakened as these teams since the BCS was created in 1998 have enjoyed an over 80% home field advantage over that time period. If I go on and finish the entire SEC and other charter member conferences the verdict would be the same. The only contrast I could initially find was that the PAC10 seemed to be more willing to schedule tougher opponents OOC early in the season. However the Stephen F. Austins and Portland States of the world are still welcome to come and get wacked out west. Interestingly enough the PAC10 seems to be using the MWC as their pool of "decent" opponent markers for scheduling.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by jay santos

Can you back this up with any actual data? Can you show me where teams over the past few years have manipulated weak SOS to their advantage?

Utah (67th) - 2004

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt04.htm


Boise State (90th) - 2006

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt06.htm

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Utah (67th) - 2004

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt04.htm


Boise State (90th) - 2006

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt06.htm

Ok, in order to have this discussion, we have to agree on an assumption. I'm assuming computer models are SOS neutral, meaning if a computer has you pegged at #8, you're really #8, and you would have earned #8 with an SOS of 100 or and SOS of 1, the only difference being the number of losses and MOV. That may not be an assumption you're comfortable with, but that's my assumption when I say it's impossible to manipulate your BCS standings through SOS.

Both these teams were ranked higher in computer models than in human polls. So I would tell you that if anything, their weak schedules hurt them. They could have upgraded their schedules and still been undefeated or more impressive as one loss teams.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by jay santos

Ok, in order to have this discussion, we have to agree on an assumption. I'm assuming computer models are SOS neutral, meaning if a computer has you pegged at #8, you're really #8, and you would have earned #8 with an SOS of 100 or and SOS of 1, the only difference being the number of losses and MOV. That may not be an assumption you're comfortable with, but that's my assumption when I say it's impossible to manipulate your BCS standings through SOS.

Both these teams were ranked higher in computer models than in human polls. So I would tell you that if anything, their weak schedules hurt them. They could have upgraded their schedules and still been undefeated or more impressive as one loss teams.

Because the current BCS computer models fail to capture MOV, upgrading your schedule would not appropriately be rewarded by the computer models because of the loss of MOV information. More of the weighting would then fall upon the shoulders of your win-loss record which in all likelihood would not be offset by any gains in your SOS component.

[DJRoss]

Originally Posted by BYU71

Again my question are you in favor of dummying down the schedule to get to a BCS game?? How do you feel about the fans who buy season tickets getting ripped off. Would you be in favor of lowering ticket prices.

Why should people who pay $500 to $3000 a year in ticket prices plus Cougar dues pay for everyones chance to see a BCS bowl game, maybe??

I don't think over the long haul screwing your customers for a big pay day works.

My personal opinion is that there should be only 8 power conferences with 12 teams each. Get rid of the OOC and allow the programs a preseason test match against whoever they want to play in order to get the kinks out and prepare for the season. Than let an 11 game season begin where you play everyone in your conference and the two best teams play the first game of the playoff as a conference championship game. That would leave 8 teams left for quarterfinals, semis and than a final. Each game would suddenly be very important, each game would hold more excitement for the fans, and forking over a few grand a year for season passes would be well worth it.

This current trend of dumming down the schedule is strategically sound for the conference in getting into the BCS. Is it desirable? Not if it means continuing once on the inside. That would seriously take the steam out of the season IMO. However when Alabama can get 90K to show up at a spring game, who knows. Maybe the fans will forgive the dumb OOC scheduling if that means each conference game is a sudden death to a BCS bowl game each season.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by DJRoss

My personal opinion is that there should be only 8 power conferences with 12 teams each. Get rid of the OOC and allow the programs a preseason test match against whoever they want to play in order to get the kinks out and prepare for the season. Than let an 11 game season begin where you play everyone in your conference and the two best teams play the first game of the playoff as a conference championship game. That would leave 8 teams left for quarterfinals, semis and than a final. Each game would suddenly be very important, each game would hold more excitement for the fans, and forking over a few grand a year for season passes would be well worth it.

This current trend of dumming down the schedule is strategically sound for the conference in getting into the BCS. Is it desirable? Not if it means continuing once on the inside. That would seriously take the steam out of the season IMO. However when Alabama can get 90K to show up at a spring game, who knows. Maybe the fans will forgive the dumb OOC scheduling if that means each conference game is a sudden death to a BCS bowl game each season.

Yea, I would be a lot more excited going to see BYU play EWU.

Hey, maybe you're right and I represent a pee wee amount of Cougar fans. I could see myself going the same way I do for BB. We don't buy BB tickets anymore. We were season ticket holders for 10 years. We bought about 20 each year. My one brother now buys 3 in the boonies and moves down.

I buy single seats for a few games I want to and get first dibs when single seats come available. Also get high priority if we make it to a NCAA game.

I can see myself not buying season tickets for football. Buy just single tickets and the bowl game. I missed the EWU game. First home game missed in 32 years. I found out it wasn't all that bad. I really didn't miss the traffic.

This will never really happen though, because BYU will not dummy down the schedule.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Because the current BCS computer models fail to capture MOV, upgrading your schedule would not appropriately be rewarded by the computer models because of the loss of MOV information. More of the weighting would then fall upon the shoulders of your win-loss record which in all likelihood would not be offset by any gains in your SOS component.

I think if you dug into it, you'd find this idea is overstated. For example, 2006 Boise State was slightly penalized in the MOV polls compared to BCS computer models, but still was penalized more by human voters.

Boise State was undefeated, so according to computers you can't do any better than that as far as outcomes to games. But when you bring in MOV, they moved behind Ohio State, who was also undefeated but with greater MOV, and teams like Louisville, Texas, Hawaii, BYU, Clemson and LSU narrowed the gap from their winning percentages because their MOV to winning percentage ratio comparison was greater.