- 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 2:45 pm to xiv
Posted on 12/27/09 at 2:45 pm to xiv
quote:this year
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.
you keep arguing THIS year,, thats not the point,, the problem is the system/formula
the system/formula is set in stone for years
lets say next year the MAC,C-USA, Sun Belt
have muliple teams that win all of their OOC games and only lose 1-2 games in conference,,,but several would get left out of a bowl game with the current set up
its not about whether it has or will happen or the probibility of such
its about if it did,, deserving teams WOULD be left out,
thats a flawed system
and your formula depends upon a flawed system because the SEC has a built in advantage
1
Posted on 12/27/09 at 2:49 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:No, they wouldn't. All the tie-ins are conditional. If the MAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt win all their OOC games (excepting those played vs. each other), the SEC, Big Ten, ACC, and Big East would fail to fill their tie-ins. Most, if not all, of the bowl eligible teams from those three conferences would fill those slots.
lets say next year the MAC,C-USA, Sun Belt
have muliple teams that win all of their OOC games and only lose 1-2 games in conference,,,but several would get left out of a bowl game with the current set up
Posted on 12/27/09 at 2:54 pm to xiv
quote:nope,, depends on who played whom,,
All the tie-ins are conditional. If the MAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt win all their OOC games (excepting those played vs. each other), the SEC, Big Ten, ACC, and Big East would fail to fill their tie-ins. Most, if not all, of the bowl eligible teams from those three conferences would fill those slots.
if the the MAC,C-USA,SunBelt have more eligible teams available than they do bowl tie ins.. and the SEC had enough teams to fulfill their tie ins then those SEC teams would go ahead of a more deserving MAC,C-USA,SunBelt team
thats flawed
Posted on 12/27/09 at 2:55 pm to xiv
Instead of teams in actual bowls, why don't you use the number of bowl-eligible teams?
Probably won't make that big of a difference. I think there were only 3 or 4 bowl eligible teams who didn't go bowling this year (sun belt had a couple I think).
Probably won't make that big of a difference. I think there were only 3 or 4 bowl eligible teams who didn't go bowling this year (sun belt had a couple I think).
Posted on 12/27/09 at 2:58 pm to Guster
quote:I'll do that in a bit.
Instead of teams in actual bowls, why don't you use the number of bowl-eligible teams?
Probably won't make that big of a difference. I think there were only 3 or 4 bowl eligible teams who didn't go bowling this year (sun belt had a couple I think).
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:00 pm to xiv
you system sucks,, admit it and Ill leave you alone
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:01 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:Come up with your own that is better, and I'll allow you to live.
you system sucks,, admit it and Ill leave you alone
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:05 pm to xiv
highest percentage of bowl games WON X's the rank of the bowl games in order of importance
BSC Championship game winner 31(?) points
the bullshite bowl winner 1 point
thats about taking advantage of opportunity given and earning it
BSC Championship game winner 31(?) points
the bullshite bowl winner 1 point
thats about taking advantage of opportunity given and earning it
This post was edited on 12/27/09 at 3:08 pm
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:12 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:And you think my system is flawed?
rank of the bowl games in order of importance
Only one game actually means anything; all the others are exhibitions.
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:17 pm to xiv
quote:NO,,
And you think my system is flawed?
Only one game actually means anything; all the others are exhibitions.
winning the BSC game is Only 31 points
let say UT wins that and the rest of the Big 12 goes 50% in bowl games
the Sugar bowl would prolly be the 2nd ranked bowl game earning 30 points with a Florida win
and lets say the SEC wins 75% of their bowl games
SEC would have more overall points based upon a higher winning percentage even if every Big 12 game were ranked higher in importance than each corresponding SEC game
still flawed due to tie ins excluding some second tier conference teams from having a CHANCE to win a bowl game
but considering the current set up the fairest way to determine the mythical overall conference bowl cumulative winner
win the most bigger games = winner
This post was edited on 12/27/09 at 3:26 pm
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:27 pm to OWLFAN86
So come up with an unflawed list ranking the bowls in order of "importance." You bashed my system as flawed, and this is what you come up with? For the record, I'm not even denying my flaw, or rather, margin for error. It's just something that gives us a bit of perspective.
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:31 pm to xiv
quote:total wins by participating teams
So come up with an unflawed list ranking the bowls in order of "importance
that's one very simple way to rank the bowl games
its 24 games for every bowl
total wins = ranking
not perfect but arguable
bases the bowl upon each teams season not tradition or subjective opinion
your system awards points for simply being there whether deserved or not
mine awards points only if you win
and recognizes and rewards importance of the win
and if theres a tie on number of wins,, combine and spit the respective points
This post was edited on 12/27/09 at 3:34 pm
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:34 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:Disregarding SOS. And you criticized mine for being flawed?
total wins by participating teams
that's one very simple way to rank the bowl games
quote:You keep saying that some teams don't deserve to be there. Who else deserves those spots?
your system awards points for simply being there whether deserved or not
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:38 pm to xiv
quote:you keep arguing THIS year
You keep saying that some teams don't deserve to be there. Who else deserves those spots?
im talking about the system itself not any one year
lets say next year,, there are 8 non SEC teams with enough wins,, then what?
the SEC teams still go to a bowl game ahead of an arguably more deserving non SEC team
and Ive not disregarded SOS,, the SOS was a part of the BCS rankings which influenced what teams went to what bowls
This post was edited on 12/27/09 at 3:39 pm
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:41 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:Ok.
you keep arguing THIS year
quote:In recent years, virtually every bowl-eligible team gets a bowl bid.
im talking about the system itself not any one year
quote:Name one such instance.
the SEC teams still go to a bowl game ahead of an arguably more deserving non SEC team
quote:Touché.
and Ive not disregarded SOS,, the SOS was a part of the BCS rankings which influenced what teams went to what bowls
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:49 pm to xiv
One other way of doing it is this: If team A beats team B, team A is awarded a number of points equaling the total number of wins for both teams in the game, and team B is deducted a number of points equaling the total number of losses for both teams in the game.
Add all those up, divide by the number of teams in a conference, let simmer, and enjoy.
Add all those up, divide by the number of teams in a conference, let simmer, and enjoy.
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:52 pm to xiv
quote:
the SEC teams still go to a bowl game ahead of an arguably more deserving non SEC team
Name one such instance.
Ive already said a 9 or 10 seed SEC team,, or 8 seed ACC,, or 7 seed PAC 10 team does not have a CLEAR INNARGUABLE advantage over a 4 or 5 seed MAC,C-USA or SunBelt team
its debatable,,
you keep asking me to offer an example,,but at that point a 4 ,5 seed small confernce team is neither clearly better nor clearly worse than a 9 -10 seed SEC team in regards to which team "deserves it" more
we cant debate and debate and no one can prove one team at that point in CLEARLY better than the other unless they played head to head
however but who gets into the bowl game is NOT debatable,,because of predetermined conference tie -ins
that's flawed
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:55 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:There are more fudged tie-ins this year than there are bowl eligible teams who were not given bowl invitations. Same was true last year.
however but who gets into the bowl game is NOT debatable,,because of predetermined conference tie -ins
Posted on 12/27/09 at 3:55 pm to xiv
quote:that much closer to my formula than yours
One other way of doing it is this: If team A beats team B, team A is awarded a number of points equaling the total number of wins for both teams in the game, and team B is deducted a number of points equaling the total number of losses for both teams in the game.
Add all those up, divide by the number of teams in a conference, let simmer, and enjoy.
better,
Posted on 12/27/09 at 4:00 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:I still like my original better
that much closer to my formula than yours
but I like both.
Page 3 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News