- 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: SEC and Big East tied for #1 in current bowl standings
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:11 pm to xiv
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:11 pm to xiv
quote:Meh..
My point here is that it is generally better to go 4-4 in bowls than 3-0.
again tie -ins
those arent based upon season performance,,esp the lower tier bowls are based upon ticket sales, proximitiy of school to bowl site, etc
and since so many bowl are played the south because of weather that tips the scales in favor of the SEC in paticular
This post was edited on 12/27/09 at 1:17 pm
0
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:11 pm to dukke v
quote:Why don't you just make your own system and show us instead of arguing in ALL CAPS against mine with rhetoric?
dukke v
quote:It's on a message board. That makes it not a big deal.
If its NOT a BIG DEAL, why bring it up????
Can you just bow out of this thread? You're doing a lot of
but not really adding anything to the thread. Thanks.
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:15 pm to xiv
quote:
You're doing a lot of but not really adding anything to the thread. Thanks.
I am adding the TRUTH!!! Your #'s DON'T mean shite. Sorry to flame ya but I said ALL I have to say. There is a REASON the SEC hasn't played a Bowl game yet. They are the BEST!!! LOOK you are a #'s GEEK kinda guy. More power to ya. BUT I am A FOOTBALL GUY!!! There is a BIG difference. STATS ARE PAST HISTORY!!! DEAL WITH IT.
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:15 pm to dukke v
I'm not reading your ALL CAPS shite.
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:21 pm to xiv
quote:
I'm not reading your ALL CAPS shite.
That means I am right!!! But who cares.
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:26 pm to xiv
quote:then answer might points and ignore him
I'm not reading your ALL CAPS shite.
when the tie in are established even before the season is played you cant argue thse bowl games are earned on merit,,
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:30 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:I disagree since there are only three bowl eligible teams (two from the Sun Belt and one independent) who aren't in bowls. It isn't as if any worthy teams are being denied a chance to play in a bowl.
when the tie in are established even before the season is played you cant argue thse bowl games are earned on merit,,
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:33 pm to xiv
quote:but the tie in year ofter year skew the numbers,, a 9-10 seed SEC team prolly only belongs once every 3 years
I disagree since there are only three bowl eligible teams (two from the Sun Belt and one independent) who aren't in bowls. It isn't as if any worthy teams are being denied a chance to play in a bowl.
esp as has been metioned with out of conference scheduling,, some of these BIG conference teams play a OOCS of the weaker sisters ( even if still D1) of the the poor get 3-4 cheap wins then go 2 for 8 in conference,, thats not a deserving bowl team IMO
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:35 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:Less than that. And the #10 SEC team has never been in a bowl game before this year.
a 9-10 seed SEC team prolly only belongs once every 3 years
quote:Then which teams who aren't bowl eligible deserve to be in bowls instead of all these 7-5 SEC teams?
esp as has been metioned with out of conference scheduling,, some of these BIG conference teams play a OOCS of the weaker sisters ( even if still D1) of the the poor get 3-4 cheap wins then go 2 for 8 in conference,, thats not a deserving bowl team IMO
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:37 pm to xiv
I WILL interject here. THERE ARe TOOOOOOOO MANY BOWLS!!!!!
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:39 pm to xiv
its not about which individual teams
this year or last,,
my point is even before the seson begins a SEC team with a losing conference record is going to a bowl game,,
those tie ins arent based upon merit,, theyre based upon ticket sales,, and with the SEC,,big schools that travel well and proximity to bowl sites they get slots before the season is played
they are not EARNING those games
this year or last,,
my point is even before the seson begins a SEC team with a losing conference record is going to a bowl game,,
those tie ins arent based upon merit,, theyre based upon ticket sales,, and with the SEC,,big schools that travel well and proximity to bowl sites they get slots before the season is played
they are not EARNING those games
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:42 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:
they are not EARNING those games
DING DING!!!!!
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:50 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:So who else is earning those games?
they are not EARNING those games
quote:There are a LOT of teams with losing records to SEC teams this year who are in bowl games.
my point is even before the seson begins a SEC team with a losing conference record is going to a bowl game,,
This post was edited on 12/27/09 at 1:52 pm
Posted on 12/27/09 at 1:59 pm to xiv
quote:
So who else is earning those games?
they are filling slots,, the SEC has a certain number of tie -in,, these low seeds are filling slots to fulfill a contractual obligation
THATS THE POINT
your argument was the SEC will win some mathematical equation you have created.
I'm saying the foundation of the formula is flawed since the SEC has an advantage based upon blow tie ins, which are established prior to the season even being played
your post is arguing about individual teams,, your thread is about which conference wins some imaginary rankings
Ive already said its not about individual teams ,, this year or last,, or next
and we could argue,, about this MAC team from 2006 vs some SEC team from 2006 or some C-USA team from 2009 vs a SEC team from 2009
( truth is once you get that far down the pecking order its usually a toss up anyway)
but that would be inconsequential.
since the tie in obligates the bowl to the SEC
Posted on 12/27/09 at 2:01 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:So tell me, which teams deserve to play in those games if not those SEC teams?
I'm saying the foundation of the formula is flawed since the SEC has an advantage based upon blow tie ins, which are established prior to the season even being played
There are only three bowl-eligible teams who aren't in bowls, and two are from the Sun Belt. Should they be in bowl games instead of say, Arkansas and South Carolina?
Posted on 12/27/09 at 2:02 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:
they are filling slots,, the SEC has a certain number of tie -in,, these low seeds are filling slots to fulfill a contractual obligation
THATS THE POINT
your argument was the SEC will win some mathematical equation you have created.
I'm saying the foundation of the formula is flawed since the SEC has an advantage based upon blow tie ins, which are established prior to the season even being played
your post is arguing about individual teams,, your thread is about which conference wins some imaginary rankings
Ive already said its not about individual teams ,, this year or last,, or next
and we could argue,, about this MAC team from 2006 vs some SEC team from 2006 or some C-USA team from 2009 vs a SEC team from 2009
( truth is once you get that far down the pecking order its usually a toss up anyway)
but that would be inconsequential.
since the tie in obligates the bowl to the SEC
THREAD OVER 14.
Posted on 12/27/09 at 2:11 pm to xiv
quote:you and I are having two different arguments,,
So tell me, which teams deserve to play in those games if not those SEC teams?
There are only three bowl-eligible teams who aren't in bowls, and two are from the Sun Belt. Should they be in bowl games instead of say, Arkansas and South Carolina?
Im saying the system and your formula are flawed. Thats something that is established well in advance of the season
youre arguing THIS year..
for the sake of argument Ill concede that THIS year Arky and SC are more deserving than these Sun-belt teams,, that does not mean that some other year the opposite might not be true,, but even if it were it wouldnt matter because of the tie ins
thats my point
Posted on 12/27/09 at 2:24 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:Apparently.
you and I are having two different arguments,,
quote:Of course it's flawed because it is using selective statistics. Any "bowl standings" thing is selective since it doesn't count every game played by every team in every conference; it only counts bowl games played by bowl teams.
your formula are flawed
I do, however, think that my way is the most comprehensive way of dealing with bowl standings.
Posted on 12/27/09 at 2:26 pm to xiv
quote:but your thread is about bowl standings,,NOT which teams deserve to be there
you and I are having two different arguments,,
Apparently
quote:but when certain teams based upon conference affiliations are included and others excluded prior to the start of the first day of practice,,its a flawed system
I do, however, think that my way is the most comprehensive way of dealing with bowl standings.
cant you at least acknowledge that?
Posted on 12/27/09 at 2:32 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:No, since the only bowl-eligible teams are two teams from the shittiest conference and one team who refused to play in a bowl game. Other than that, everybody who is bowl eligible is playing in a bowl.
but when certain teams based upon conference affiliations are included and others excluded prior to the start of the first day of practice,,its a flawed system
cant you at least acknowledge that?
Also, the bowl tie-ins, especially the lower-ended ones, are all conditional upon a conference having enough qualifiers. The SEC has nine tie-ins; if they only produce eight bowl-eligible teams, another team from another conference (most likely the SBC) gets selected.
There are four or five instances this year alone where tie-ins had to be fudged.
Page 2 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News