- 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: Why is USC ranked above...
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:07 pm to loweralabamatrojan
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:07 pm to loweralabamatrojan
quote:
Fair is good for kindergarten. I want to see the two best teams play, and I'm just not convinced OU is better than Texas.
I agree with this!!!
0
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:08 pm to loweralabamatrojan
what's your point? Now you are going back to fair? You think it would be fair to put in Texas over OU because they beat them head to head.
But it was a 3 WAY TIE. OU broke that tie by having the toughest schedule of the 3 and therefore they got the nod. You can't talk about head to head and throw out the TT part altogether
But it was a 3 WAY TIE. OU broke that tie by having the toughest schedule of the 3 and therefore they got the nod. You can't talk about head to head and throw out the TT part altogether
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:09 pm to Trojan Ace
which means they are a little better than USC, is that what you are saying.
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:11 pm to lsumatt
quote:Let's stick with fair then:
But it was a 3 WAY TIE. OU broke that tie by having the toughest schedule of the 3 and therefore they got the nod. You can't talk about head to head and throw out the TT part altogether
Texas Tech vs. Texas: UT loses at TT with the Red Raiders enjoying a raucous home field advantage.
Texas Tech vs. OU: OU blows out Texas Tech at home with bloodthirsty Sooners fans screaming their lungs out the entire time.
Texas vs. OU: UT wins fair and square by double digits on a neutral field, with the fans split 50/50.
Which one of those contests was the most fair?
Would it not be "fair" to add signifigance to the "fairest game of all"?
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:13 pm to lsumatt
<<< stil trying to figure out who Matt thinks "deserves" to go to the BCS CG.
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:17 pm to loweralabamatrojan
Ehhh, the "neutral field" thing is the best Texas has got. OU has the fact they have the same record and a tougher schedule. Its basically a draw and anybody that thinks "team A" should have definitely gone is kidding themselves. Both of those teams are outstanding with outstanding resumes.
Point is those two teams were dead on equal and it was a "tie" almost anyway you look at it. Any tiebreaker at that point isn't really fair. Flip a coin for all I care...only one team could go.
Point is those two teams were dead on equal and it was a "tie" almost anyway you look at it. Any tiebreaker at that point isn't really fair. Flip a coin for all I care...only one team could go.
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:18 pm to LSUTANGERINE
I am still trying to figure out if tigahrag will:
a) win the heart of the whore on the tractor or b) figure out how stupid he is in regards to math
c) neither
The answer is c
a) win the heart of the whore on the tractor or b) figure out how stupid he is in regards to math
c) neither
The answer is c
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:18 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
stil trying to figure out who Matt thinks "deserves" to go to the BCS CG.
I already said that I think OU and Florida deserve to go.
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:19 pm to BamaScoop
Nope.
Both Bama and the Utes SOS is weaker based on removal of FCS schools.
Both Bama and the Utes SOS is weaker based on removal of FCS schools.
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:21 pm to lsumatt
quote:Home field advantage is undervalued in college football games, IMHO. It can be a huge weapon.
Point is those two teams were dead on equal and it was a "tie" almost anyway you look at it. Any tiebreaker at that point isn't really fair
That's why the "neutral field" argument is a damned good one.
Just my 2 cents, which obviously doesn't change a thing.
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:22 pm to Trojan Ace
quote:
figure out how stupid he is in regards to math
what do you mean, you stupid idiot ? add the cummulative records of USC's opponents .. it's 69-76 .. why do you wanna to continue to dig a deeper hole ? pull out a calculator and do it yourself and quit acting like an idiot ..
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:23 pm to Trojan Ace
quote:
Both Bama and the Utes SOS is weaker based on removal of FCS schools.
Okay, so Utah had a little weaker schedule and went undefeated. So losses just don't matter?
And some FCS schools are better than FBS schools. There are a probably at least a dozen FCS schools that would beat Wash, Wash St
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:24 pm to lsumatt
quote:If your life depended on it, on a neutral field, who do you like, USC or Utah?
Okay, so Utah had a little weaker schedule and went undefeated. So losses just don't matter? And some FCS schools are better than FBS schools. There are a probably at least a dozen FCS schools that would beat Wash, Wash St
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:26 pm to Trojan Ace
just add these for frick's sake:
i'll go slow for you -- > 5+10+8+9+5+2+7+0+8+5+6+4 = 69
7+2+4+3+7+11+5+12+4+7+6+8 = 76
eta: i don't give a shite about what little number crunching you are trying to do to justify yourself .. a 69-76 cummulative record by your opponents is pretty pathetic ..
quote:
Virginia: Below Average 5-7 (W: 1 AA) 4-7
Ohio St: Good 10-2 (W: 1 AA) 9-2
Oregon St: Good 8-4
Oregon: Good 9-3
Arizona St: Below Average 5-7 (W: 1 AA) 4-7
Wazzou: Below Average 2-11 (W: 1 AA) 1-11
Arizona: Average 7-5
Wash: Below Average 0-12
Cal: Good 8-4
Stanford: Below Average 5-7
Notre Dame: Average 6-6
ucla: Below Average 4-8
i'll go slow for you -- > 5+10+8+9+5+2+7+0+8+5+6+4 = 69
7+2+4+3+7+11+5+12+4+7+6+8 = 76
eta: i don't give a shite about what little number crunching you are trying to do to justify yourself .. a 69-76 cummulative record by your opponents is pretty pathetic ..
This post was edited on 12/8/08 at 2:30 pm
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:27 pm to loweralabamatrojan
quote:
If your life depended on it, on a neutral field, who do you like, USC or Utah?
I sound like a fricking broken record. Its not about who would probably win. I (And almost everyone) had Florida favored over bama last week and at the same time had Bama ranked over Florida.
I would take USC if my life depended on it. But losses matter. They lost to Oregon State and there is a penalty for that. If USC loses to Penn State and Utah beats Bama I would probably still take USC over Utah....would you still rank USC above Utah?
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:28 pm to lsumatt
quote:
Oklahoma and Texas had the two toughest schedules of 1-loss teams. I do think something is said for winning your conference (and avoiding rematches) and Florida had the next toughest schedule. I am a fan of the "checks and balances" of the voters/computers and the voters trumped the computers in favor of UF.
quote:
I already said that I think OU and Florida deserve to go.
ACtually, you said fair, but okay.
I am calling back-tracking big-time!
Wow, the contradicts your previous stance on objectivity. Why the back-tracking or change of heart? OU and UT have the best resume, which acc'd to your previous posts are the criteria for "deserving" It is not possible for the two most desereving teams with the best resumes to be from the same conference? Onloy one can win a conference championship. You are all of the sudden a fan of "checks and balances" of the voters and computers? You have got to be kidding. You have stated on numerous occassions that you are a huge fan of objectivity and having the teams with the best reumes go to the BCS CG.
This post was edited on 12/8/08 at 2:30 pm
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:29 pm to loweralabamatrojan
quote:
If your life depended on it, on a neutral field, who do you like, USC or Utah?
USC!! But thats not the point!!! Ohio State vs. Boise on a netrual field!! who ya take!!!
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:31 pm to lsumatt
quote:I guess I think rankings ought to be less about resume and more about team strength, like a "power poll". I understand why others think differently. In response to your question, if SC loses to Penn State and Utah beats Bama, I'd take Utah over SC.
I sound like a fricking broken record. Its not about who would probably win. I (And almost everyone) had Florida favored over bama last week and at the same time had Bama ranked over Florida. I would take USC if my life depended on it. But losses matter. They lost to Oregon State and there is a penalty for that. If USC loses to Penn State and Utah beats Bama I would probably still take USC over Utah....would you still rank USC above Utah
I consider USC to be better than Bama, and USC better than Utah from what I've seen of all three of them. A Utah victory over the Tide combined with a USC loss to PSU, and I'd have to adjust my paradigm.
This post was edited on 12/8/08 at 2:40 pm
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:33 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
You have stated on numerous occassions that you are a huge fan of objectivity and having the teams with the best reumes go to the BCS CG.
(1) Winning your conference adds to your resume. Its not everything, but with Florida, OU, and Texas being razor thin imo that gives Florida the nod.
(2) I have never suggested a "computer-only" BCS. But I use it as a good measuring stick when team A >> B in the computers. I recognize that computers have limitations. MOV counts for something (and Florida has been beating the crap out of teams). I do think the human polls are important.
Posted on 12/8/08 at 2:33 pm to TigahRag
You will never get it.
Go back and re-read the "Interdivisonal" aspect. If you don't play nine in-conference games, those games missed don't count towards your cumulative total. Ohio State is showing their competition played a total of 113 games. Every Big Ten team is docked two games for each Big Ten opponent not played. Notre Dame is not in a conference (-12). Ohio State plays only eight conference games (-2). That's why USC only shows 129 games of cumulative opposition. That could affect our overall SOS, since in all likelihood OSU would have beaten Indiana and Purdue.
There's "your", yes "your", faulty math.
Maybe Dukke V can explain with his superior intellect if you still don't understand.
Go back and re-read the "Interdivisonal" aspect. If you don't play nine in-conference games, those games missed don't count towards your cumulative total. Ohio State is showing their competition played a total of 113 games. Every Big Ten team is docked two games for each Big Ten opponent not played. Notre Dame is not in a conference (-12). Ohio State plays only eight conference games (-2). That's why USC only shows 129 games of cumulative opposition. That could affect our overall SOS, since in all likelihood OSU would have beaten Indiana and Purdue.
There's "your", yes "your", faulty math.
Maybe Dukke V can explain with his superior intellect if you still don't understand.
Page 8 of 9
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News