Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MavHockey14
    replied
    Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

    New Thread is up and running. Three days and we'll see real football.

    Leave a comment:


  • Spartanforlife4
    replied
    Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

    If there is one fan base that loves them it's Notre Dame. They can do just about anything and be ranked in the Top 25 the next season.

    Leave a comment:


  • dxmnkd316
    replied
    Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

    Originally posted by pgb-ohio View Post
    When I saw these comments in the same post, my first reaction was: Wait...What?

    But after a moment's reflection, I realized your distinction makes a lot of sense. As long as it's clear you're just making predictions, you're free to make any outlandish assumptions you want. It's your crystal ball, it's all in good fun. The idea that a team is overrated or underrated is beside the point.

    But published rankings? The problem is they've been used to justify giving teams favorable starting positions in the season long race -- favorable starting positions they've done nothing to earn. Again, the new format appears to address this problem. Gotta see how it works in practice for a few years before passing judgment, but let's hope.

    Not crazy. But I can think of a few of reasons why official rankings for football are a good idea:

    1. Transparency. Drawing the line between #4 and #5 is going to be both nationally relevant and controversial. Not nearly as bad as splitting hairs between #2 and #3, but it's still going under the microscope. Better to let the public see the process, however flawed. Otherwise the image of shady deals in smoke filled rooms persists. The size of the field in Hoops makes situation quite different. Separating #68 from #69 isn't going to attract a large number of conspiracy theorists.

    2. Keeping Expectations Reasonable. Inevitably we're going to get late season rivalry games and conference title match-ups where neither team is within striking distance of the top four. Better for the teams involved to know that up front, so the focus can be on the game at hand.

    3. Keeping The Beauty Contests In Their Place. Suppose the Official Committee really did withhold all rankings until the field of four was announced. Unofficial sources would be happy to fill the void. Probable result? More confusion and controversy.

    The common thread in all of this? It's very important that the process be perceived as legitimate. IMHO, releasing official rankings on October 28th (and beyond) should balance the competing concerns fairly well.
    I think this is a good explanation of how I feel about it as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • pgb-ohio
    replied
    Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

    Originally posted by MavHockey14 View Post
    I agree that preseason rankings are pointless.

    I'll also finish up my personal preseason predictions for the rest of the Big 5 and Notre Dame.
    When I saw these comments in the same post, my first reaction was: Wait...What?

    But after a moment's reflection, I realized your distinction makes a lot of sense. As long as it's clear you're just making predictions, you're free to make any outlandish assumptions you want. It's your crystal ball, it's all in good fun. The idea that a team is overrated or underrated is beside the point.

    But published rankings? The problem is they've been used to justify giving teams favorable starting positions in the season long race -- favorable starting positions they've done nothing to earn. Again, the new format appears to address this problem. Gotta see how it works in practice for a few years before passing judgment, but let's hope.

    Am I crazy for thinking that the Playoff Committee shouldn't even put a poll out? The NCAA Basketball Committee doesn't put out a poll?
    Not crazy. But I can think of a few of reasons why official rankings for football are a good idea:

    1. Transparency. Drawing the line between #4 and #5 is going to be both nationally relevant and controversial. Not nearly as bad as splitting hairs between #2 and #3, but it's still going under the microscope. Better to let the public see the process, however flawed. Otherwise the image of shady deals in smoke filled rooms persists. The size of the field in Hoops makes situation quite different. Separating #68 from #69 isn't going to attract a large number of conspiracy theorists.

    2. Keeping Expectations Reasonable. Inevitably we're going to get late season rivalry games and conference title match-ups where neither team is within striking distance of the top four. Better for the teams involved to know that up front, so the focus can be on the game at hand.

    3. Keeping The Beauty Contests In Their Place. Suppose the Official Committee really did withhold all rankings until the field of four was announced. Unofficial sources would be happy to fill the void. Probable result? More confusion and controversy.

    The common thread in all of this? It's very important that the process be perceived as legitimate. IMHO, releasing official rankings on October 28th (and beyond) should balance the competing concerns fairly well.

    Leave a comment:


  • MavHockey14
    replied
    Originally posted by pgb-ohio View Post
    Ah. You weren't saying overrated because of Braxton; you were saying overrated even with Braxton. Appreciate the clarification and we basically agree.

    Well, yeah. But there's a more fundamental problem here. Nobody's played any games yet; nobody's earned their ranking -- not just OSU. In a better world there wouldn't be any ratings at all until 3 or more games were played. But preseason rankings sell lots of publications, to say nothing of the ads in them. So, we're stuck with them. Still, it's well to remember that the source of these inflated claims is the media, not the coaches and players.


    EDIT: On the bright side, the new playoff system appears to address this problem pretty well. The real rankings, as crafted by the selection committee, don't even start until October 28th. That should greatly reduce the impact of the preseason stuff. In other words, the inevitable banter may still irritate, but it's been rendered relatively harmless.
    I agree that preseason rankings are pointless.

    Am I crazy for thinking that the Playoff Committee shouldn't even put a poll out? The NCAA Basketball Committee doesn't put out a poll?

    I'll probably start the new thread this week. I'll also finish up my personal preseason predictions for the rest of the Big 5 and Notre Dame.

    Leave a comment:


  • pgb-ohio
    replied
    Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

    Originally posted by MavHockey14 View Post
    I thought they were overrated due to the fact they're replacing virtually their entire O-Line and Secondary.
    Ah. You weren't saying overrated because of Braxton; you were saying overrated even with Braxton. Appreciate the clarification and we basically agree.

    If you took the roster without the OSU name, there's no way they're #5.
    Well, yeah. But there's a more fundamental problem here. Nobody's played any games yet; nobody's earned their ranking -- not just OSU. In a better world there wouldn't be any ratings at all until 3 or more games were played. But preseason rankings sell lots of publications, to say nothing of the ads in them. So, we're stuck with them. Still, it's well to remember that the source of these inflated claims is the media, not the coaches and players.


    EDIT: On the bright side, the new playoff system appears to address this problem pretty well. The real rankings, as crafted by the selection committee, don't even start until October 28th. That should greatly reduce the impact of the preseason stuff. In other words, the inevitable banter may still irritate, but it's been rendered relatively harmless.
    Last edited by pgb-ohio; 08-24-2014, 08:26 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • LynahFan
    replied
    Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

    Originally posted by ExileOnDaytonStreet View Post
    I've often thought it was amusing that the word "facetious" can almost be synonymous with "full of ****", when you consider how many people pronounce the first two syllables in "facetious".
    I believe facetious is also the shortest word that has a-e-i-o-u in order... can sometimes even tack on -ly if you want the full monty.

    Leave a comment:


  • ExileOnDaytonStreet
    replied
    Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

    Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post
    I think he was being facetious
    I've often thought it was amusing that the word "facetious" can almost be synonymous with "full of ****", when you consider how many people pronounce the first two syllables in "facetious".

    Leave a comment:


  • bigblue_dl
    replied
    Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

    Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post
    I think he was being facetious
    That makes it less funny....so I think he was dead serious.

    Leave a comment:


  • dxmnkd316
    replied
    Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

    I think he was being facetious

    Leave a comment:


  • bigblue_dl
    replied
    Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

    For your monitor's, and keyboard's sake, make sure you're not taking a drink when you read what I've written below:









    I just heard on KFAN, a prediction that the Gophers would be in the National Championship game.




    Now that you've stopped laughing, point and laugh at Justin Conzemius, who is a reoccurring guest on the KFAN morning show.

    Leave a comment:


  • Critical Thinker
    replied
    Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

    Originally posted by MavHockey14 View Post
    I'm not sure if any of you saw me ask previously, but does anyone wanna do a weekly pick 'em game?
    I'd play.

    Leave a comment:


  • MavHockey14
    replied
    Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

    I'm not sure if any of you saw me ask previously, but does anyone wanna do a weekly pick 'em game?

    Leave a comment:


  • MavHockey14
    replied
    Originally posted by pgb-ohio View Post
    When Miller is healthy, he's the real deal.

    But even before today's developments, I'd agree we were a bit overrated, though for a different reason: A totally unproven offensive line, with only one returning starter. The new guys may grow into something great. But as of right now, the situation is something to prove.

    Also note that it was a potentially toxic combination: A QB prone to injury, coupled with an O-Line that would be expected to make its share of rookie mistakes. That concern now appears to be moot...

    No kidding. And yet, I can't say this is a total surprise. Miller was being withheld from all contact -- just being nursed along -- less than two weeks before the opening game. Something wasn't right. Now I certainly never imagined a season-ending injury on an unrushed, uncontested throw. But I was getting concerned that Miller would be less than 100% at the beginning of the season, and might even miss some starts. Again, though, the way it actually played out was much worse...

    Fear not, Ohio Stadium will be full for Virginia Tech. But the dynamics and expectations are admittedly altered.
    I thought they were overrated due to te fact they're replacing virtually their entire O-Line and Secondary. If you took the roster without the OSU name, there's no way they're #5.

    Leave a comment:


  • Slap Shot
    replied
    Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

    Originally posted by MinnesotaNorthStar View Post
    Oklahoma's Joe Mixon suspended for the season for knocking a woman unconscious.
    If he were in the NFL by now he'd only get 2.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X