Preseason rankings are ridiculous. Remember when 2012 USC was ranked #1, but could only go 7-6 on the season? Even though we had a spectacular implosion of 2012’s top dog, history won’t repeat itself now. Clemson isn’t USC. But also they’ll be skating through much of their schedule. Yes, they play two preseason ranked teams in the first three weeks. But if they get out of week 3 undefeated, they aren’t going to lose. While Stanford is playing Notre Dame in November, Clemson will be dinking around with Wofford.
Outside of Clemson, there are some ranked teams with tough schedules: Ohio State, LSU, and Michigan play a ton of ranked teams. But the difference between them and Stanford is a matter of respect: if any of these three teams were to lose one or fewer games, they’d be a shoo-in for the playoffs. On the other hand, if a Pac-12 team goes 11-1, it might still be left out.
Stanford plays five preseason ranked teams. And even among the unranked teams on Stanford’s schedule, there are still a ton of landmines: a Northwestern team that previously upset Stanford, a road game at USC, an Arizona team led by Heisman dark horse Khalil Tate, a road game against a Colorado team with a first round NFL talent, and a rivalry game against Cal. Even if Stanford went 10-2 against that insanely stiff schedule, every rational argument figures Stanford should be a lock for the playoffs—in the world of College Football, though, Stanford might not make the playoffs at 11-1!
Since we cannot trust the playoff committee to properly account for tough schedules, something must be done to normalize schedules. Imagine if schools like Clemson, Alabama, and Oregon didn’t play junior college teams. How awesome would it be in week 2 if, while Stanford plays USC, Penn State played literally anybody except Buffalo. Imagine if instead of Alabama vs. New Mexico State, we got Alabama vs. Georgia! Some in the media are praising #6 LSU and #10 Texas for being brave enough to play each other. Seriously? You only get credit for bravery if the rest of your out-of-conference slate isn’t complete garbage. In fact, you shouldn’t be a top 10 team in August when you play nobody in September. Even when a top 10 team beats a platter of cupcakes in September, what have they really proved?
Of course, Stanford’s tough schedule comes with a lot of built in excuses—but I don’t want to hear them. I expect at least 10 wins this season. Stanford’s toughest games are at home, where Stanford has enjoyed a 50-8 record this past decade—and scored some of its biggest wins in its history. Coach David Shaw has plenty of motivation this season: he owes Northwestern from 2015, needs to prove he can win a tough road game at UCF, and Mike Leach’s WSU team has beaten him the last three years in a row. K.J. Costello should also be motivated: he is overlooked by fellow QBs like JT Daniels, Justin Herbert, Jacob Eason, and Ian Book.
Against a stiff schedule like this, some may consider 7-5 a good year—but they are wrong. Stanford is a top ten team—and it’s time to view the tough schedule as a blessing, not a curse.
Comments
I like the optimism
And no one will be happier than I if Stanford gets 10 wins this season. But… wow.
Completely agree about the cupcake schedule other major college programs are playing. But the pundits and the voters don’t seem to care. Until they find some way to reward schools for playing actual competition, don’t expect to see that change.
By g8tgod on 08.30.19 11:02am
Unfortunately, College Football Rankings Are (Mostly) All About Records
Consider the SEC (not a pleasant thought). They play 8 games in conference, and 4 out of conference. By handpicking their "cupcakes", they can be just .500 teams in conference but have an overall record of 8 – 4. And get ranked. Why? Their losses are all "good losses" to quality, "ranked" SEC teams! Obviously if they can go, just wait, 6 – 2 in conference, they are looking at CFP consideration. Certainly well into the top 10. Further, by pushing those cupcakes into the middle of the schedule, they can effectively create extra bye weeks for critical injury recovery opportunities.
Most importantly, they dramatically reduce the liklihood of picking up a loss. Anything can happen in college football between major teams, but less so in a decidely unequal matchup. How many times has a top team ALMOST lost to one of their cupcakes? It happens regularly. But it is not a loss.
Arguably, Stanford could be a very good football team and lose all three of its non-conference games. Which means that they would need to go 6 – 3 in conference just to make it to a Bowl game.
While the pundits have managed to keep the UCFs out of the playoffs despite very strong or unblemished records, they are prepared to look the other way when top teams play cupcakes – focusing more on perhaps the one out of conference game that is competitive. They do talk alot about strength of schedule. But I think that is only a tie breaker issue rather than one that might vault a major team with more losses over another major team with fewer losses.
Stanford’s annual out of conference game with Notre Dame has always put it at a rankings disadvantage, playing a team that might possibly beat them. Sure, they get some credit for winning these games as well. But the losses hurt rankings more than the value of wins. Adding UCF and Northwestern this year is really, really tough – particularly with two of these early in the year before Stanford has a chance to get warmed up. Honestly, I don’t see ANY GAMES on Stanford’s schedule that are automatic wins, with the possible exception of Oregon State. The losses are going to come, just don’t know how many. Also, the injuries are going to come. Every week is going to be a battle.
10 – 2 would be a miracle. 8 – 4 / 7 – 5 very possible. 6 – 6 not out of the realm of possibility.
Hoping for the best! We’ll know more after tomorrow.
By hoyaparanoia on 08.30.19 3:21pm
To be the best team you got to beat the best teams
While I completely concur the cupcakes that pad the SEC team records, they are also really good at picking up marquee out of conference wins against other p5 teams (that they schedule them conveniently close to their territory is just genius). Clemson traveled to Texas A&M and won, lsu is playing Texas, etc. If pac-12 has to be respected then win the ooc games first and then lets talk.
Now specifically with stanford, here’s why they are definitely not top-10 worthy these past few years (taken from bill_c preview):
"Over the last five years, they’re 9-17 against teams that finished with nine or more wins and 39-2 against everyone else."
The 5 years before that they had a 2:1 w-l ratio against top-25 teams. So, if David shaw or the team wants to be ranked in the top-10 then lets go 10-2 against our schedule this year.
We only have to look back to 2013 when a 11-2 stanford was ranked #5 and got the respect it deserved in what was statistically the best pac-12 had been in 2 decades.
By layman on 08.31.19 12:08pm