YOU are the Orange bowl.

[Kratz]

You are the Orange Bowl God. You get to pick it. Who do you pick and why or why not between UofL and FSU. Operate under the assumption that you already have Michigan.

I'll go first.

I'm picking FSU over UofL for the following reasons:

FSU finished strong after a shaky start. UofL was the opposite. Finished with a whimper. I want a good game with 2 powerhouses duking it out. I'm seriously afraid that the UofL team that showed up for Houston and UK will show up at my game.

Ticket sales: Much shorter trip for FSU fans. UofL fans usually travel very well, but many are disheartened after the last 2 games and a number of them aren't going to spend the money this year considering the finish to the season.

If I'm the Orange Bowl God, that's who I choose and why.

Your turn.

 

[KerryRhodes]

FSU vs LSU would be a better matchup and higher ratings than FSU vs Michigan.

Before the rankings came out, 90% of Cards fans were reserved to the fact that the Orange bowl was going to choose FSU. Instead, they put the Cards one spot behind, thus setting up a possible switch.

I dont want to play either Michigan or LSU. Even with 30 days off, im not convinced the Cards can play up to their NC state/BC potential.

FSU can have the Orange bowl.

 

[Cue Card]

I too would pick FSU to represent the ACC in the Orange Bowl over the Cards for the same reasons. We are limping into a bowl game with gaping wounds fresh and deep. FSU has recovered from a shaky start and is playing well. It only makes sense the OB committee would and should choose FSU over UofL.

The huge win the Cards had earlier in the year over the Noles now feels decades old.

 

[BPGhost]

Easy to do - simply a cut and paste from the other thread on this very topic. If I'm the OB committee, I take UofL over FSU using the following factual criteria.

UofL's 7-1 vs FSU's 5-3 record - in the (same side of the) conference.

H2H matchup where UofL put a prison beat down on FSU. 63-20 and it wasn't that close.

UofL's best win was better than FSU's, their 'best' loss was to the same team as FSU and, their 'worst' loss was only (arguably) slightly worse than FSU's.

Better intangibles including the probable Heisman trophy winner.

FSU has the name and a campus that's closer – that’s it. There is also no guarantee that they would sell substantially more tickets than UofL would.

UofL crapped the bed the past two weeks - of that there is no doubt. If you want to make the case that they are not deserving of the OB bid, you certainly could but, they are WAY more worthy than FSU.

 

[Kratz]

Easy to do - simply a cut and paste from the other thread on this very topic. If I'm the OB committee, I take UofL over FSU using the following factual criteria.

UofL's 7-1 vs FSU's 5-3 record - in the (same side of the) conference.

H2H matchup where UofL put a prison beat down on FSU. 63-20 and it wasn't that close.

UofL's best win was better than FSU's, their 'best' loss was to the same team as FSU and, their 'worst' loss was only (arguably) slightly worse than FSU's.

Better intangibles including the probable Heisman trophy winner.

FSU has the name and a campus that's closer – that’s it. There is also no guarantee that they would sell substantially more tickets than UofL would.

UofL crapped the bed the past two weeks - of that there is no doubt. If you want to make the case that they are not deserving of the OB bid, you certainly could but, they are WAY more worthy than FSU.

All good points, but I think the record portion of it is skewed. Both teams are 9-3. The committee is supposed to look at the overall body of work. In the end they have the same record. 2 of FSU's losses were to ranked opponents (the other loss was to UNC which has been in and out of the rankings this year, so not too shabby). We lost to 2 unranked teams (the loss to Houston compares to UNC for FSU, in and out of the rankings). We have 1 win over a ranked team (FSU). They have 3 wins over ranked teams (Miami,Ole Miss and Florida).

With that being said, I'd give slight advantage to FSU on the schedule.

 

[BPGhost]

All good points, but I think the record portion of it is skewed. Both teams are 9-3. The committee is supposed to look at the overall body of work. In the end they have the same record. 2 of FSU's losses were to ranked opponents (the other loss was to UNC which has been in and out of the rankings this year, so not too shabby). We lost to 2 unranked teams (the loss to Houston compares to UNC for FSU, in and out of the rankings). We have 1 win over a ranked team (FSU). They have 3 wins over ranked teams (Miami,Ole Miss and Florida).

With that being said, I'd give slight advantage to FSU on the schedule.

Again, the identical 9-3 records as well as the other mitigating factors that you mention might have more weight if you were comparing two teams that were not in the same conference or, even more importantly - in the same conference division. Particularly when the spot in question is reserved for an ACC team.

The fact that UofL finished TWO full games ahead of FSU (in addition to crushing them H2H) are the two most important parts of the criteria that should be looked at. I'm with Kerry in the thought that the committee only dropped UofL one spot below FSU giving them the option to switch should the Gumps decimate the gay-tors.

 

[ULGrad09]

At the end of the day it comes down to the money involved when teams are comparable or can be argued. In the case of FSU vs UL, so many arguments can be made for each side.

The bottom line is that the NCAA, bowls, etc. are focused on the finances involved. FSU will be the choice due to this. Whether they are more deserving or not, is truly irrelevant.

 

[beantowncard]

All good points, but I think the record portion of it is skewed. Both teams are 9-3. The committee is supposed to look at the overall body of work. In the end they have the same record. 2 of FSU's losses were to ranked opponents (the other loss was to UNC which has been in and out of the rankings this year, so not too shabby). We lost to 2 unranked teams (the loss to Houston compares to UNC for FSU, in and out of the rankings). We have 1 win over a ranked team (FSU). They have 3 wins over ranked teams (Miami,Ole Miss and Florida).

With that being said, I'd give slight advantage to FSU on the schedule.

Including Miami and Ole Miss as "ranked teams" is being very generous (to them).

 

[CardsFirst]

Again, the identical 9-3 records as well as the other mitigating factors that you mention might have more weight if you were comparing two teams that were not in the same conference or, even more importantly - in the same conference division. Particularly when the spot in question is reserved for an ACC team.

The fact that UofL finished TWO full games ahead of FSU (in addition to crushing them H2H) are the two most important parts of the criteria that should be looked at. I'm with Kerry in the thought that the committee only dropped UofL one spot below FSU giving them the option to switch should the Gumps decimate the gay-tors.

I think it's close which is why their 12 and 13. However FSU beat a ranked Florida team and we had a loss the UK to end the season. They simply finished stronger then we did. We were fading fast over the last 4 weeks. FSU earned it we gave it away.

 

[BPGhost]

I think it's close which is why their 12 and 13. However FSU beat a ranked Florida team and we had a loss the UK to end the season. They simply finished stronger then we did. We were fading fast over the last 4 weeks. FSU earned it we gave it away.

Which again might mean more if UofL didn't finish 2 games ahead of FSU in the ACC and destroy them H2H.

 

[Kratz]

Including Miami and Ole Miss as "ranked teams" is being very generous (to them).

I based on what teams were ranked at the time they were played. Did it fairly for both sides, and even threw in that UNC and Houston were in and out of rankings all year.

 

[nccardfan]

Including Miami and Ole Miss as "ranked teams" is being very generous (to them).

Not only that they were ranked but FSU beat three teams with winning records, U of L only one..

 

[BPGhost]

Not only that they were ranked but FSU beat three teams with winning records, U of L only one..

Absolutely true, and so stipulated in perpetuity. Can we agree that fact means significantly less than others do - namely the H2H result?

Here is what I consider to be the (mostly) objective order of importance - from a criteria standpoint - used to compare teams. You feel free to tell me where I'm wrong.

1. H2H – if applicable
2. Overall record
3. Conference record – particularly important if comparing teams from the same conference.
4. Conference division record – see above
5. Strength of Schedule
6. OOC Schedule & results
7. W-L record – last 5 games of season (or 4)
8. Best win
9. Worst loss
10. Best loss

 

[nccardfan]

I will add these for the Cards:

After beating FSU and losing to Clemson, what was the most important game on your schedule and gave you a chance to finish 11-1. That was Houston, how did we do? Not only lost but got embarrassed. How did you do in a rivalry game in which you were favored by 28 points and the Orange Bowl still in play, how
did you do? It's not so much as what FSU has done it's what U of L hasn't been able to do. Can you with any confidence right now say we are going to play at the same level we were early in the season or how we played the last two games of the season? Make your case, please?

 

[Cue Card]

I will add these for the Cards:

After beating FSU and losing to Clemson, what was the most important game on your schedule and gave you a chance to finish 11-1. That was Houston, how did we do? Not only lost but got embarrassed. How did you do in a rivalry game in which you were favored by 28 points and the Orange Bowl still in play, how
did you do? It's not so much as what FSU has done it's what U of L hasn't been able to do. Can you with any confidence right now say we are going to play at the same level we were early in the season or how we played the last two games of the season? Make your case, please?

I can't.

 

[BPGhost]

I will add these for the Cards:

After beating FSU and losing to Clemson, what was the most important game on your schedule and gave you a chance to finish 11-1. That was Houston, how did we do? Not only lost but got embarrassed. How did you do in a rivalry game in which you were favored by 28 points and the Orange Bowl still in play, how
did you do? It's not so much as what FSU has done it's what U of L hasn't been able to do. Can you with any confidence right now say we are going to play at the same level we were early in the season or how we played the last two games of the season? Make your case, please?

I was trying to apply the objective measures, I see you still prefer the subjective ones.

Answering your question honestly - I don't have the first damn clue as to how UofL will play in whatever bowl game they go to and anyone who tells you otherwise is BS'ing.

It happens every bowl season - teams who you expect to show up don't, and teams you expect to get steamrolled end up winning games. UofL has been both of those teams over the years.

I would like to think that Petrino's track record of preparing teams and a month to heal players and address the issues that led to the losses would mean that they would be ready. But you just don't know until gametime.

Are you able to say that FSU wouldn't revert back to the poor play they exhibited multiple times this season?

 

[nccardfan]

Petrino had 10 days to prepare for his arch rival. Yes he did correct the false starts but failed to consider their passing game. Now what did FSU do? They got up for their archrival probably knowing that we were going to drum UK and they would be left with a bowl other than the Orange. Did they lay an egg?

 

[BPGhost]

Petrino had 10 days to prepare for his arch rival. Yes he did correct the false starts but failed to consider their passing game. Now what did FSU do? They got up for their archrival probably knowing that we were going to drum UK and they would be left with a bowl other than the Orange. Did they lay an egg?

I can see you are significantly fonder of posing questions, than of answering them – lol. I’m not sure why we keep covering the same ground. For the final time, UofL finished the season poorly and FSU finished strong. Give FSU credit for beating an overrated UF team. To your point, you could certainly argue that they were energized for their 8PM game by seeing UofL lose at noon. If UofL had won, would the FSU / UF game have had the same result? We will never know.

But, you asked me to make a case for UofL over FSU for the OB and over the course of several threads I believe that I’ve done so. I’m not sure why you are continually raising issues that really should have either no bearing on a decision or, minimal impact.

 

[nccardfan]

You deal in speculations and what ifs. You responded to a question with don't have a clue and then posed a question. I tried to answer that question and you respond with a statement that Florida was overrated and yet was ranked 14th or so. We are now ranked 14th so are we overrated? Try to take your Cardinal subjectivity out of the equation sometimes and things may be a little clearer to you.

 

[BPGhost]

You deal in speculations and what ifs. You responded to a question with don't have a clue and then posed a question. I tried to answer that question and you respond with a statement that Florida was overrated and yet was ranked 14th or so. We are now ranked 14th so are we overrated? Try to take your Cardinal subjectivity out of the equation sometimes and things may be a little clearer to you.

Your question wasn’t designed to be answered with anything other than speculation. I am of course biased to UofL’s position however my responses on this topic have 99% been objective – listing the criteria that supposedly the committee uses to determine how they rank teams. In fact the only time that I think I delved into the subjective was when listing the things that I called ‘intangibles’ such as LJ being the probable Heisman winner.

We may indeed be overrated at 14 but again, that’s not the topic. Where ever we are rated – based upon the objective facts of the comparison – we should be ahead of FSU in any, and every metric.

I’m not sure how that is not clear to you.

 

[nccardfan]

Your question wasn’t designed to be answered with anything other than speculation. I am of course biased to UofL’s position however my responses on this topic have 99% been objective – listing the criteria that supposedly the committee uses to determine how they rank teams. In fact the only time that I think I delved into the subjective was when listing the things that I called ‘intangibles’ such as LJ being the probable Heisman winner.

We may indeed be overrated at 14 but again, that’s not the topic. Where ever we are rated – based upon the objective facts of the comparison – we should be ahead of FSU in any, and every metric.

I’m not sure how that is not clear to you.

Based on the CFP, FSU is ranked at 13th and our Cards at 14th, how's that for being objective. Right now that's all that matters. Let's move on.

 

[nccardfan]

Youre arguing with a SuCkS fan

Haha! You must be one too, you have been saying the same things..

 

[BPGhost]

Based on the CFP, FSU is ranked at 13th and our Cards at 14th, how's that for being objective. Right now that's all that matters. Let's move on.

If that were the only bullet that I had in my gun - I'd want to move on as well - lol.

 

[nccardfan]

Ok let's use your metrics. What's FSU's worse loss? To us? Nope. Wasn't a bad lost, considering we were ranked as high as #5 and playing at home. North Carolina? They were ranked in the top 20. What was our worst loss, easily unranked UK at home on Senior Day.

 

[topdecktiger]

Absolutely true, and so stipulated in perpetuity. Can we agree that fact means significantly less than others do - namely the H2H result?

Here is what I consider to be the (mostly) objective order of importance - from a criteria standpoint - used to compare teams. You feel free to tell me where I'm wrong.

1. H2H – if applicable
2. Overall record
3. Conference record – particularly important if comparing teams from the same conference.
4. Conference division record – see above
5. Strength of Schedule
6. OOC Schedule & results
7. W-L record – last 5 games of season (or 4)
8. Best win
9. Worst loss
10. Best loss

The problem with your criteria is that that the committee doesn't view it nearly the same way. They don't put head to head #1. If you had to rank the committee's criteria, it would probably look like this:

1. Overall record
1a. SOS
2. OOC (Probably folded into SOS)
3. Best Win
4. Head to head
5. Worst loss
6. Best loss
7-9. Probably don't care.

The way they look at it, they start with your entire body of work, and then use stuff like head to head as a tiebreaker if they think it's close between two teams.

 

[zipp]

The problem with your criteria is that that the committee doesn't view it nearly the same way. They don't put head to head #1. If you had to rank the committee's criteria, it would probably look like this:

1. Overall record
1a. SOS
2. OOC (Probably folded into SOS)
3. Best Win
4. Head to head
5. Worst loss
6. Best loss
7-9. Probably don't care.

The way they look at it, they start with your entire body of work, and then use stuff like head to head as a tiebreaker if they think it's close between two teams.

Looks like the CFP fly-on-the-wall is back with his insider knowledge. So, how do you come up with these tie-breaker rankings, a$$hat? Do you glean that from the protocol webpage, or do you just make this ish up? I mean "1 and 1a" is cutting it pretty fine for any a$$hat!!

This is the same guy arguing until he was blue that conference championships mattered most and based on two stinking data points. That was WAY back a month ago. And look who's ranked #2 today with no shot at a championship. Wanna bet tOSU doesn't get jumped by three teams this week?

Remember a$$hat that we may not be as smart as you, but we're smart enough to remember...

 

[KerryRhodes]

Guess i have to repeat myself;

If...........this was a 9-3 (5-3 in conference ) NC state team who is "hot" at the end of the season, vs Louisville would this be an argument?

Clemson/FSU are the big boyz. Anything close and it goes their way.
We louisville fans got to know our place.
FSU can have the Orange bowl.

If Michigan goes to the playoffs, then FSU would play Wisconsin or Penn st.

 

[topdecktiger]

Looks like the CFP fly-on-the-wall is back with his insider knowledge. So, how do you come up with these tie-breaker rankings, a$$hat? Do you glean that from the protocol webpage, or do you just make this ish up? I mean "1 and 1a" is cutting it pretty fine for any a$$hat!!

This is the same guy arguing until he was blue that conference championships mattered most and based on two stinking data points. That was WAY back a month ago. And look who's ranked #2 today with no shot at a championship. Wanna bet tOSU doesn't get jumped by three teams this week?

Remember a$$hat that we may not be as smart as you, but we're smart enough to remember...

Well, I can tell you from that fact that Ohio ST is ranked ahead of Penn St, despite head to head, and Southern Cal is ranked ahead of Stanford, despite head to head, and Florida St is ranked ahead of Louisville, despite head to head, so that's a pretty good indication that my list is closer to the committee's than the other posters.

 

[BPGhost]

The problem with your criteria is that that the committee doesn't view it nearly the same way. They don't put head to head #1. If you had to rank the committee's criteria, it would probably look like this:

1. Overall record
1a. SOS
2. OOC (Probably folded into SOS)
3. Best Win
4. Head to head
5. Worst loss
6. Best loss
7-9. Probably don't care.

The way they look at it, they start with your entire body of work, and then use stuff like head to head as a tiebreaker if they think it's close between two teams.

First of all, you (like everyone else) has no real idea of what order the committee uses those metrics - which is part of the problem. With no clear or stated criteria, they can allow their biases to dictate selections and, essentially switch it up to do whatever they want.

Let's look at your list, as I may actually agree with some of it.

1. Overall record - I agree, based upon some qualifying factors, overall record should be first. UofL and FSU are both at 9-3. Tie.

1a. SOS - I might agree that this would be more important if the stated committee line didn't include something about 'conference championship' which would indicate that they valued how a team did within their conference. Regardless FSU's SOS is ranked somewhere between 10-15 places higher than UofL's, which is not a huge difference. Given that UofL finished 2games ahead of FSU in the same division of the same conference, that should carry if not more weight than the SOS, at least enough to negate that as a plus to FSU. Either a tie or, slight edge to UofL.

2. OOC (Probably folded into SOS) - probably so - see above.

3. Best Win - this is where we start to completely disagree. H2H should be more important than best win. Regardless, UofL's best win is better than FSU's. Edge to UofL.

4. Head to head - Enormous edge to UofL.

5. Worst loss - slight edge to FSU.

6. Best loss - Tie

 

[BPGhost]

Ok let's use your metrics. What's FSU's worse loss? To us? Nope. Wasn't a bad lost, considering we were ranked as high as #5 and playing at home. North Carolina? They were ranked in the top 20. What was our worst loss, easily unranked UK at home on Senior Day.

By all means - let's use the 8th, 9th, or 10th most important metric to based the conversation on. When someone asks you about a movie, do you tell them about all the cool shots of the extras?

 

[topdecktiger]

3. Best Win - this is where we start to completely disagree. H2H should be more important than best win. Regardless, UofL's best win is better than FSU's. Edge to UofL.

Agreeing or disagreeing isn't an issue. If the committee puts one metric ahead of the other, that's going to be the deciding factor. That goes to a deeper point, which is how the entire system itself is structured. Having only 4 spots with 5 teams, there is a built-in problem before you ever start.

 

[KerryRhodes]

Well, I can tell you from that fact that Ohio ST is ranked ahead of Penn St, despite head to head, and Southern Cal is ranked ahead of Stanford, despite head to head, and Florida St is ranked ahead of Louisville, despite head to head, so that's a pretty good indication that my list is closer to the committee's than the other posters.

Penn state has two losses. They should be ranked below one loss OSU.

 

[BPGhost]

Agreeing or disagreeing isn't an issue. If the committee puts one metric ahead of the other, that's going to be the deciding factor. That goes to a deeper point, which is how the entire system itself is structured. Having only 4 spots with 5 teams, there is a built-in problem before you ever start.

Your right - it doesn't matter if we agree or disagree- what matters is that in both of those metrics, the edge goes to UofL.

 

[topdecktiger]

Penn state has two losses. They should be ranked below one loss OSU.

Which illustrates the point that the committee is placing other factors ahead of head to head.

If you want to take that one out, then you have Louisville being ranked over Houston, despite head to head.

 

[topdecktiger]

Your right - it doesn't matter if we agree or disagree- what matters is that in both of those metrics, the edge goes to UofL.

And again, it matters how much weight is put on those metrics.

 

[KerryRhodes]

Which illustrates the point that the committee is placing other factors ahead of head to head.

If you want to take that one out, then you have Louisville being ranked over Houston, despite head to head.

You dont know how rankings work do you.

Houston was unranked, and UofL was #3 when UH beat them. UofL dropped 8 spots after the loss. Had UH been ranked #11 or above when they played, then UH would be ranked ahead of them now.

 

[BPGhost]

And again, it matters how much weight is put on those metrics.

Not if the same team wins both of them. Even in your version, UofL wins or ties the 'most important' categories. I guess your list is wrong as well.

 

[topdecktiger]

Not if the same team wins both of them. Even in your version, UofL wins or ties the 'most important' categories. I guess your list is wrong as well.

Nope. If the committee doesn't put much value into any two given metrics, it doesn't matter if the same team wins both. In our debate, you added in conference record to the SOS metric, to make that a tie. SOS, you even admitted, would tilt to Florida St. Plus, Kirby Hocutt has said they don't look at conference record specifically.

You dont know how rankings work do you.

Houston was unranked, and UofL was #3 when UH beat them. UofL dropped 8 spots after the loss. Had UH been ranked #11 or above when they played, then UH would be ranked ahead of them now.

No, I do know they work. The problem is you don't. What you described is how the AP and Coaches' polls rank teams. Different animal with the CFP.

That said, your argument is just as bad. That's kind of like the debate under the old system. "Because Team X was ranked high at the beginning of the season, that means they should be ranked higher now."

Also, you would be looking at the same problem, even without the CFP. Conferences allow bowl games to pick the team the prefer, not the team higher in the standings. In particular, the ACC has been notorious for that.

 

[ImmaTiger]

I'd like to see UofL in the Orange; not for prestige, but because I believe the Cards would be stronger than the Noles against Michigan.

I'd rather see the Noles go H2H against LSU and run Cook all over Fournette.