To win the division...?

[GTfan1985]

I was actually thinking about this yesterday. If we were to realign divisions, I'd say just move us to the Atlantic, and send Maryland over to the Coastal. That would balance out the strength in football with the Atlantic having f$u, Tech, and climpsun as the three forerunners. Then the Coastal would have VT, miami, and unc, with maryland capable of popping up from time to time.

On top of that, set our yearly inter-division matchup to vt. This establishes a rivalry between f$u, and makes our rivalry with climpsun even more important. Plus, I just like playing vt every year. They're the king of the hill right now, so I want us to beat them every year.

To be completely honest, though, I really favor the round-robin schedule. I'd love to see that.

I completely agree. The way the division are now come out to be too lopsided. If Tech were to swap with Maryland It would be a good start, but still, heres my $.02

My personal preference has been to divide into a East / West deal. Still balanced in power and makes sense georgraphically as well (mostly, except the split of the Virginia teams)

East: VT, Miami, BC, Maryland, UNC, Wake
West: GT, FSU, Clemson, UVA, Duke, NCSU

 

[hiveredtech]

Because of the lack of parity in the ACC this year compared to last year...I really think 1 loss in the Coastal is all you can afford...Atlantic will be different possibly.

As someone pointed out...VT does not play FSU or Clemson...so they have a cakewalk through the Atlantic portion of their schedule.

I really believe we have to win out our ACC schedule and Miami has to lose to either Clemson or UNC. It may be that simple.

 

[gthog61]

Because of the lack of parity in the ACC this year compared to last year...I really think 1 loss in the Coastal is all you can afford...Atlantic will be different possibly.

As someone pointed out...VT does not play FSU or Clemson...so they have a cakewalk through the Atlantic portion of their schedule.

I really believe we have to win out our ACC schedule and Miami has to lose to either Clemson or UNC. It may be that simple.

and it will probably save us all a bunch of nedless speculation if we'd jus wait to see what we do with FSU and VT before we go through all of the arcane calculations of what has to happen - those two things have to happen (Ie us beating them) before anything else matters anyway.

 

[gt_white_gold]

and it will probably save us all a bunch of nedless speculation if we'd jus wait to see what we do with FSU and VT before we go through all of the arcane calculations of what has to happen - those two things have to happen (Ie us beating them) before anything else matters anyway.

I agree entirely. I also think that we are still in a position to where we win out and we will be playing in a BCS Bowl.

 

[GiveEmHellJackets]

I agree that all we can do is do our best and let the chips fall where they may and all that, but I would still like to have an understanding of our tie-breaker rules. Is that too much to ask? Maybe they are left intentionally vague so that Swofford can "interpret" them as needed.

 

[YouEnjoyJackets]

I interpret "non-divisional" as still IN conference. So, OOC is never a factor except for the BCS rankings which are involved in rule 7 of the 3-way tie. Also, I don't see how it could ever get past rule 7 to the "chosen by draw".

 

[hiveredtech]

I agree that all we can do is do our best and let the chips fall where they may and all that, but I would still like to have an understanding of our tie-breaker rules. Is that too much to ask? Maybe they are left intentionally vague so that Swofford can "interpret" them as needed.

It is pretty simple...in the event of a tie you then look at the head-to-head.

 

[unforgiven108]

I interpret "non-divisional" as still IN conference. So, OOC is never a factor except for the BCS rankings which are involved in rule 7 of the 3-way tie. Also, I don't see how it could ever get past rule 7 to the "chosen by draw".

If none of them are ranked in the BCS rankings would be my guess.

 

[GiveEmHellJackets]

I interpret "non-divisional" as still IN conference. So, OOC is never a factor except for the BCS rankings which are involved in rule 7 of the 3-way tie. Also, I don't see how it could ever get past rule 7 to the "chosen by draw".

But there are other rules, besides Rule #4, which factor in the conference records. Rule #4 seems to add nothing to the tie-breaker if it just means conference record. Obviously the tied teams are tied in their conference record if we are using a tie-breaker and rule #2 is the one that distinguishes Coastal record from Atlantic record....

Rule 7 could theoretically come into play, like if none of the tied teams were ranked at all in the BCS (more likely in the Atlantic).

And to the person who says it's pretty simple, head-to-head resolves it: head-to-head does not resolve a 3 way tie when A beat B, B beat C and C beat A.

 

[YouEnjoyJackets]

If none of them are ranked in the BCS rankings would be my guess.

Right, and that seems pretty far fetched. I guess if the 3-way tie is between 4-4 teams with (possible) OOC losses, it could happen to one of the divisions.

Edit: I do not even understand how there can be a 2-team tie. Bueller?

Also, agreed that rule 2 & 4 in the 3-team breaker seem redundant.

Another thing, the more losses between the tied teams, leading to a scenario that none are in BCS, the odds would be much greater that it would never make it to rule 7.

 

[lonestarjacket]

And to the person who says it's pretty simple, head-to-head resolves it: head-to-head does not resolve a 3 way tie when A beat B, B beat C and C beat A.

My question is do our rules for three-way ties work like the SEC or Big 12?

We all know the Big 12 rules for a three way tie that took them to BCS ranking. (...which leads to simple voting because of the heavy influence of polls on BCS.)

What I heard was that in the SEC rules that they first go through the tie-breakers in a three-way tie to eliminate one team. THEN, they start back at the first tie-breaker for the two remaining teams.

So, IIRC, Texas would have won the Big 12 under SEC tie-breaker rules. Texas Tech would have been eliminated by BCS ranking. The Texas would have beaten OU in head-to-head competition.

I think it makes sense to eliminate one team at a time in a multi-team tie situation and start over with remaining teams at first tie-breaker.

 

[Yukonwreck]

Here's some food for thought. If we win the rest of the games, we probably go to the ACC-CG. If we can't go to the ACC-CG after winning the rest of our games, it would still be a good thing because more than likely Miami would be going to the National Championship or Orange Bowl and we would be going to a major BCS bowl.

So, as CPJ has been saying all along, our future rests in our hands. Win the rest of them, we will be in a BCS bowl unless if there are tons of undefeated teams at the end of this year.

Winning lots of games is always a good thing.

 

[GiveEmHellJackets]

My question is do our rules for three-way ties work like the SEC or Big 12?

We all know the Big 12 rules for a three way tie that took them to BCS ranking. (...which leads to simple voting because of the heavy influence of polls on BCS.)

What I heard was that in the SEC rules that they first go through the tie-breakers in a three-way tie to eliminate one team. THEN, they start back at the first tie-breaker for the two remaining teams.

So, IIRC, Texas would have won the Big 12 under SEC tie-breaker rules. Texas Tech would have been eliminated by BCS ranking. The Texas would have beaten OU in head-to-head competition.

I think it makes sense to eliminate one team at a time in a multi-team tie situation and start over with remaining teams at first tie-breaker.

The problem (at least for me) is that the meaning of 3-way tiebreaker rule #4 is unclear. I linked to the tiebreaker rules in an earlier post on this thread.

It is true that our 3-way tiebreaker does seek to eliminate one of the teams, and then resolve the two remaining teams by a simple head-to-head analysis. My problem is that I can't tell whether overall record is considered or not in attempting to elimiate one of the teams. Rule #4 is not clear but it seems to me that it can't just be another rule about conference record alone, because prior provisions in the tie-breaker consider conference records from every angle.

So after all this, I still have no idea: What does rule #4 mean?

I know that at one point, one of the last resort tiebreakers in the SEC was to have all the head coaches in the division vote on who should go to the SECCG. Imagine the controversy there..... Not sure if they have changed that yet.

 

[xcnewbee]

I have been an Oklahoma fan for a long time because I used to live there so I watch and keep track like crazy. From what I've seen it looks like OU will just lay Miami out, even without Bradford. I think if Miami just gets dominated then they will fall back enough for us to take and keep a lead in the BCS if we win out. I think a huge reason that VT won is they got pressure on Jacory Harris. OU has allowed 4.3 points/game this year. Defensively are just unstoppable, we need to hope that Gerald McCoy, Adrian Taylor, Austen English, and Jeremy Beal have one beast of a game along with their fast defense.

So for all GT fans, it's BOOMER SOONER time!!!!

 

[chilidogking]

Miami's gotta drop another one b/c they beat us head to head, and we have to win out.

That isn't going to be a problem, Miami is not that good. Mark it down, they lose to Clemson in 3 weeks.

GT is going to have a very tough time winning against VT and at FSU though. If Tech wins out, the division will take care of itself.