- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Most overrated CFB programs since 2001
Posted on 10/14/11 at 7:36 pm to jcole4lsu
Posted on 10/14/11 at 7:36 pm to jcole4lsu
quote:
quote:
5. Florida
well that list is total bull shite.
How can the list be B.S. when it's not an opinion argument?
The article says explicitly...taking the highest dropoff in points from the preseason poll to the final poll.
Sorry you don't like the numbers. Be mad at the numbers. Or be mad at Zook or Meyer's off years.
Once you win a title or are labeled a god, your team will be preseason ranked high every year...even if your follow-up teams suck.
This post was edited on 10/14/11 at 7:38 pm
2
Posted on 10/14/11 at 7:38 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
How can the list be B.S. when it's not an opinion argument?
because the metric is broken, the equation produces results that few agree with.
it was the writers opinion to use that formula as the metric
Posted on 10/14/11 at 7:40 pm to jcole4lsu
i was going to start a post about Florida state earlier today, but they baffle the hell out of me.
p
I preference this by saying, Florida state, outside of arknasas is probalby my 2nd fav team, my dad loved charlie ward, i grew up watching alot of FSU games. I like FSU, I'm not flaming, i just don't get it
how can they have all these stars, and
not be able to block
not be able to pass
not be able to run
not be able to cover
lol, basically not be able to play football? they are just a bunch of fast dudes running around trying to look sweet.
then, Florida state fan comes in every season beating their meat to their recruiting rankings, like they have sucked in the past or something. talent isn't the problem, never has been. i don't konw what it is.
I remember watching the bobby bowden years, everyone talks about how he had all these "stars" and he "reloaded every year", i think people vastly, vastly underestimate how good a coach bowden was. that team played extremely sound defense year in and year out. they put out menacing defenses that shut you down. They had a balanced offense, they could run when they wanted to and pass when they wanted to. year in and year out.
Florida state fan keeps yelling "they are back". they will not be back until they start playing fundamentally sound football again
p
I preference this by saying, Florida state, outside of arknasas is probalby my 2nd fav team, my dad loved charlie ward, i grew up watching alot of FSU games. I like FSU, I'm not flaming, i just don't get it
how can they have all these stars, and
not be able to block
not be able to pass
not be able to run
not be able to cover
lol, basically not be able to play football? they are just a bunch of fast dudes running around trying to look sweet.
then, Florida state fan comes in every season beating their meat to their recruiting rankings, like they have sucked in the past or something. talent isn't the problem, never has been. i don't konw what it is.
I remember watching the bobby bowden years, everyone talks about how he had all these "stars" and he "reloaded every year", i think people vastly, vastly underestimate how good a coach bowden was. that team played extremely sound defense year in and year out. they put out menacing defenses that shut you down. They had a balanced offense, they could run when they wanted to and pass when they wanted to. year in and year out.
Florida state fan keeps yelling "they are back". they will not be back until they start playing fundamentally sound football again
This post was edited on 10/14/11 at 7:41 pm
Posted on 10/14/11 at 7:40 pm to jcole4lsu
How else would you measure overrated per year? Take the preseason poll...based on pure speculative rating or "over-rating" and measure the difference from the final poll which is how your team actually performed. Then add up the number of years this has happened.
The article isn't about...which team ESPN talks about the most...even though some on here think that is the definition of being overrated.
The article isn't about...which team ESPN talks about the most...even though some on here think that is the definition of being overrated.
Posted on 10/14/11 at 7:48 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
How else would you measure overrated per year? Take the preseason poll...based on pure speculative rating or "over-rating" and measure the difference from the final poll which is how your team actually performed. Then add up the number of years this has happened.
i would not provide equal weight to each number. for example if you started the year ranked #5 but ended the year #16, thats a 10 point drop.
that an 11 point drop. #16 isnt a bad finish, it generally means you probably lost 2 games though.
say you started at 15 though and ended unranked. that could be a drop of 11 as well, but it means you went from a team that would be poised to win a national championship if you won 1 or 2 games you were a slight underdog in, to having a total cluster frick season, ie 4 losses or more.
those are both 11 point drops, but one seems much worse to me than the other.
i think the same is true for gaining ground. start at 6 and end at 1, an increase of 5 is way, way, way, better than starting at 20 and ending at 15.
Posted on 10/14/11 at 7:59 pm to jcole4lsu
The metric isn't "broken". I'm not sure you understand the point of the article. Florida finishing #1 twice doesn't preclude them from being overrated in the other years.
Posted on 10/14/11 at 7:59 pm to bayoujd
Shocked clemson isn't top 5
Posted on 10/14/11 at 8:39 pm to TulaneTigerFan
i certainly think it precludes them from being one of the top 5 over rated teams of the decade.
Posted on 10/14/11 at 8:48 pm to jcole4lsu
Well you're wrong. If you look at "rated" as a mathematical number which you can bc of the polls, then Florida is 5th. Maybe don't suck so much under Zook
Posted on 10/14/11 at 8:51 pm to tigerfan88
BOISE ST.
There should be no more discussion.
/thread
There should be no more discussion.
/thread
Posted on 10/14/11 at 8:53 pm to tigerfan88
quote:
If you look at "rated" as a mathematical number which you can bc of the polls,
except that being "over rated" is a subjective term based on pre season polls that are 100% subjective.
Posted on 10/14/11 at 9:10 pm to jcole4lsu
quote:
If you look at "rated" as a mathematical number which you can bc of the polls,
except that being "over rated" is a subjective term based on pre season polls that are 100% subjective.
No. You are getting all pissy because you are inferring what you think overrated means.
For frick sake...before the season starts...the polls "rate" the teams...at the end of the year the voters "rate them again" - if the beginning poll is quite disparate from the end poll the team can be rightfully declared "overrated" or "underrated" depending on whether they slid or climbed in the poll. And as you said, preseason polls are based on reputation and opinion on how good a team is...if that team...say Florida is consistently not living up to the hype of their preseason rating...then they are OVERRATED!
ETA: In case you still don't understand the article...he isn't saying Florida's two title teams were dogshite. Okay...we're talking about a decade analysis here.
This post was edited on 10/14/11 at 9:16 pm
Posted on 10/14/11 at 9:41 pm to Zamoro10
quote:
You are getting all pissy because you are inferring what you think overrated means.
the only person pissy here appears to be you.
quote:
For frick sake...before the season starts...the polls "rate" the teams...at the end of the year the voters "rate them again"
and like i said, more weight should be placed on winning a national title than anything.
auburn, for example, should be considered one of the most under rated teams in the time period since they went from 15 to 1 last year. to you, and the author of the article, its only 15 spots.
to me however, its going from being rated as "pretty good" to the best team in the land. that should count for more than X amount of spots in the poll.
quote:
In case you still don't understand the article.
i fully understand the article, its my opinion the metric is crap, and therefor the results dont make sense.
Posted on 10/14/11 at 9:51 pm to oompaw
quote:
BOISE ST.
There should be no more discussion.
They are overrated because they have won almost 90% of their games over a ten year period?
Posted on 10/14/11 at 10:02 pm to jcole4lsu
quote:
jcole4lsu
You are utterly confused in this thread.
Look, this metric is not broken. You simply do not like it.
What hurts Florida is when they would come into a season, say ranked sixth, and finish the season 7-5 or whatever, with a ranking of like 43. That would kill their ranking because they were overrated by 37 spots.
Conversely, let's say Florida entered the season at eight and went on to win the national championship, so even though they won it all, they only jumped seven spots.
If you were to average these hypothetical seasons, then Florida was overrated by 17 spots on average, even though they won a national title in this two-year span.
It is really simple. If you do not like, then make your own "improved" metric.
Posted on 10/14/11 at 10:09 pm to jcole4lsu
Posted on 10/14/11 at 10:11 pm to bayoujd
quote:
notre dame should be number 1
Posted on 10/14/11 at 10:12 pm to jcole4lsu
quote:
and like i said, more weight should be placed on winning a national title than anything.
What the hell are you talking about?
How do you know the year they won the title...they weren't properly rated or under-rated based on their preseason ranking?
In 2006 they started out preseason #7 and finished #1. In 2008 they started #5 and finished #1. So that's a plus in the metric for being underrated.
In 2010 they started #3 and finished unranked.
In 2007 they started #3 and finished #16.
In 2004 they started #10 and finished unranked.
In 2002 they started #7 and finished #24.
They had two championship years...where they finished #1. But they weren't a consistent program over the decade...they weren't the team of the decade...for every great year they had 2-3 flop years compared to expectations - their preseason "rating."
quote:
i fully understand the article,
I don't think you do.
Posted on 10/14/11 at 10:13 pm to Vicks Kennel Club
quote:
What hurts Florida is when they would come into a season, say ranked sixth, and finish the season 7-5 or whatever, with a ranking of like 43. That would kill their ranking because they were overrated by 37 spots.
i understand how the author came up with the data. i am not saying he made a mathematical error. i am saying that based on the outcomes, i would not use it as the singular measure of a team being over rated.
quote:
You are utterly confused in this thread.
if you think that a drop from 15 to 30 should count against you the same as a jump from 15 to 1, then you are the one confused.
the former is a result of losing one or two games you were a slight favorite in, the latter is the result of being the best team in the land and proving it on the field.
i think the metric is broken because the results say it is. extra weight should be given to certain factors, not a simple formula of where you began to where you ended.
Posted on 10/14/11 at 10:14 pm to jcole4lsu
Quick question, do you think the Yankees were overrated in this past decade?
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News