It's not so much if they hang on tonight, it's if a few other upsets can happen to really cause chaos in the BCS.I wonder what would happen if Baylor and USC held on?One can only hope.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
- Status
Slap Shot
I got nothing
Re: 2011 College Football: Occupy GameDay!
Why would having as many as two more "significant wins" be considered a less important factor than one bad loss? That's a bullsh*t, myopic and intellectually lazy evaluation of the season as a whole when comparing single-loss teams.
Why would having as many as two more "significant wins" be considered a less important factor than one bad loss? That's a bullsh*t, myopic and intellectually lazy evaluation of the season as a whole when comparing single-loss teams.
Last edited:
Well, it wouldn't matter as much if they had a true 8 team playoffs instead of the one shot cash money grab that is the BCS.
Re: 2011 College Football: Occupy GameDay!
The pollsters will agree with me, mark my words.
In other words, we disagree.
The pollsters will agree with me, mark my words.
Patman
Rodent of Unusual Size
Re: 2011 College Football: Occupy GameDay!
well, figure it this way... you are pushed up by all your wins and pushed down by your losses... now you do you compare when a team's only loss is against the number 1 team? You'd probably have to have a few top 10 wins to off-set a loss to a middle-road opponent. This is, at least from the prospective of the computers.
edit: I'll surely say that the pollsters will SURELY punish for a bad loss... its how they think.
well, figure it this way... you are pushed up by all your wins and pushed down by your losses... now you do you compare when a team's only loss is against the number 1 team? You'd probably have to have a few top 10 wins to off-set a loss to a middle-road opponent. This is, at least from the prospective of the computers.
edit: I'll surely say that the pollsters will SURELY punish for a bad loss... its how they think.
Slap Shot
I got nothing
Re: 2011 College Football: Occupy GameDay!
Which is obviously not the point.
I agree with you both regarding how the pollsters will respond, but isn't that the very same reason why so many fans wish for a playoff system? How the pollsters will vote doesn't validate the vote, it only validates a ****-poor reason to justify picking one team over another.
In other words, we disagree.
The pollsters will agree with me, mark my words.
Which is obviously not the point.
I agree with you both regarding how the pollsters will respond, but isn't that the very same reason why so many fans wish for a playoff system? How the pollsters will vote doesn't validate the vote, it only validates a ****-poor reason to justify picking one team over another.
Last edited:
Patman
Rodent of Unusual Size
Re: 2011 College Football: Occupy GameDay!
you assume I read the whole conversation... I will never defend the modern conception of the bowl system
you assume I read the whole conversation... I will never defend the modern conception of the bowl system
Re: 2011 College Football: Occupy GameDay!
You can't do it, and neither can I. It's simply a matter of opinion, period.
Okay, then - prove to me that your reason is not ***-poor.Which is obviously not the point.
I agree with you both regarding how the pollsters will respond, but isn't that the very same reason why so many fans wish for a playoff system? How the pollsters will vote doesn't validate the vote, it only validates a ****-poor reason to justify picking one team over another.
You can't do it, and neither can I. It's simply a matter of opinion, period.
Slap Shot
I got nothing
Re: 2011 College Football: Occupy GameDay!
So having a more impressive résumé of stronger wins - with the same number of losses even if one is considered weak - isn't the logically stronger argument? No I can't "prove" anything, but if that consideration coupled with fan disillusionment with the BCS and polling doesn't sway my argument then I guess we'll just agree to disagree.
So having a more impressive résumé of stronger wins - with the same number of losses even if one is considered weak - isn't the logically stronger argument? No I can't "prove" anything, but if that consideration coupled with fan disillusionment with the BCS and polling doesn't sway my argument then I guess we'll just agree to disagree.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: 2011 College Football: Occupy GameDay!
And the pollsters are never wrong...In other words, we disagree.
The pollsters will agree with me, mark my words.
bronconick
Yep, still here
Re: 2011 College Football: Occupy GameDay!
Pretty much. Jimbo thought his exposure to Saban/Miles would be enough to overwhelm the power of wide_____. That was the derpiest play calling and clock management outside of Kiffin or Miles.
Pretty much. Jimbo thought his exposure to Saban/Miles would be enough to overwhelm the power of wide_____. That was the derpiest play calling and clock management outside of Kiffin or Miles.
Re: 2011 College Football: Occupy GameDay!
Yes. You're probably doing something wrong when the coach on the other sideline is arguing profusely in favor of your team catching a pass.
Yes. You're probably doing something wrong when the coach on the other sideline is arguing profusely in favor of your team catching a pass.
Re: 2011 College Football: Occupy GameDay!
But no, I don't think that is logically the stronger argument. Your point about fan disillusionment with polling is a red herring. There will always be a poll - even if there were a 32-team playoff, there would still be a poll, so there would still be a need for people to try to compare 1-loss teams.
Setting that aside, I still don't buy the argument that two extra wins against top-25 competition should automatically cancel out a bad loss. What if the extra good wins were against #24 and #25? What if the bad loss was to #110? What if the good loss was to another 1-loss team or to an undefeated team? What if the team with fewer top-25 wins also beat #s 26-30? Don't forget, the whole point of this exercise is to decide who the best 1-loss team is when there is only one undefeated team, i.e. who is #2. If you want to claim to be the #2 team, you ought to be able to beat an unranked opponent even on a bad day. Conversely, losing to another highly ranked team is much more understandable - when teams are closely matched, one or two bounces could determine that game. A loss to a bad team tells me a lot more about a candidate than a loss to a good team. On the flip side, beating a team ranked #25 vs one ranked #50 doesn't really do much to distinguish between the teams for me - even the #3 team should be able to beat both of those, so how do those wins tell you which team should be #2 and which should be #3?
I was agreeing to disagree 3 posts ago - glad you could catch up.
But no, I don't think that is logically the stronger argument. Your point about fan disillusionment with polling is a red herring. There will always be a poll - even if there were a 32-team playoff, there would still be a poll, so there would still be a need for people to try to compare 1-loss teams.
Setting that aside, I still don't buy the argument that two extra wins against top-25 competition should automatically cancel out a bad loss. What if the extra good wins were against #24 and #25? What if the bad loss was to #110? What if the good loss was to another 1-loss team or to an undefeated team? What if the team with fewer top-25 wins also beat #s 26-30? Don't forget, the whole point of this exercise is to decide who the best 1-loss team is when there is only one undefeated team, i.e. who is #2. If you want to claim to be the #2 team, you ought to be able to beat an unranked opponent even on a bad day. Conversely, losing to another highly ranked team is much more understandable - when teams are closely matched, one or two bounces could determine that game. A loss to a bad team tells me a lot more about a candidate than a loss to a good team. On the flip side, beating a team ranked #25 vs one ranked #50 doesn't really do much to distinguish between the teams for me - even the #3 team should be able to beat both of those, so how do those wins tell you which team should be #2 and which should be #3?
JF_Gophers
2147483647
Re: 2011 College Football: Occupy GameDay!
This is bad news for everyone who doesn't want to see LSU/Alabama rematch.
This is bad news for everyone who doesn't want to see LSU/Alabama rematch.
Re: 2011 College Football: Occupy GameDay!
I think Chip Kelly is a great coach and I admire what he's done to get Oregon to where they are in the football universe right now...but he blew it today and cost his team any shot at a return to the BCS title game. That was just awful clock management in the last 90 seconds. I understand the desire to take advantage of momentum and everything but he cost his team the ability to run several more plays by not using his timeouts more intelligently. Granted the team played like crap for most of the first 3 quarters, but when the players finally dug themselves out of the hole he stuck his foot on their heads and pushed them back down.
I think Chip Kelly is a great coach and I admire what he's done to get Oregon to where they are in the football universe right now...but he blew it today and cost his team any shot at a return to the BCS title game. That was just awful clock management in the last 90 seconds. I understand the desire to take advantage of momentum and everything but he cost his team the ability to run several more plays by not using his timeouts more intelligently. Granted the team played like crap for most of the first 3 quarters, but when the players finally dug themselves out of the hole he stuck his foot on their heads and pushed them back down.
- Status