 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Other Stuff » Sports Talk » The college football thread
thatrogue
I would assert that good teams losing to mediocre teams later in the season generally do not fall as far as when they lose early in the season, simply because the voters have more to go on regarding the quality of the teams.
I sincerely believe that had Florida lost to Ole Miss in early November, then beaten Florida State and Alabama, they would still be in the National Championship picture. Yet if Penn State had lost to Iowa in September and later beaten Michigan State and tOSU, they still would not have garnered as much support for being a top two team, as did Oklahoma and Florida.
[Edited on 12-9-2008 by thatrogue]
December 09, 2008 at 08:00PM View BBCode
But why is the PSU loss not similar to the Florida loss? Simply because of timing? I am not in agreement with that.I would assert that good teams losing to mediocre teams later in the season generally do not fall as far as when they lose early in the season, simply because the voters have more to go on regarding the quality of the teams.
I sincerely believe that had Florida lost to Ole Miss in early November, then beaten Florida State and Alabama, they would still be in the National Championship picture. Yet if Penn State had lost to Iowa in September and later beaten Michigan State and tOSU, they still would not have garnered as much support for being a top two team, as did Oklahoma and Florida.
[Edited on 12-9-2008 by thatrogue]
thatrogue
December 09, 2008 at 08:03PM View BBCode
Originally posted by FacemanYou have got to be kidding me...
Oh Daren,
...
And your idol worship of Tyler...
...
tm4559
December 09, 2008 at 08:12PM View BBCode
come on darens. fess up. the truth..... you know. you know what the truth will do.
Hamilton2
Yes, because of timing.
Take, for instance, the Big 12 this year.
1) Texas beats Oklahoma and jumps in the rankings while OU drops.
2) Texas Tech beats Texas and jumps while UT drops.
3) OU beats TT and is launched into the national championship game.
If the games had simply been in different sequential order, a new result would occur.
OU beats UT. UT beats TT. TT beats OU. Would have resulted with either Texas or Texas Tech as the top team from the South, because the OU loss came last.
You cannot ignore the importance of the timing of the losses. It is, in the BCS, more important than head-to-head results.
December 09, 2008 at 08:22PM View BBCode
Originally posted by thatrogue
But why is the PSU loss not similar to the Florida loss? Simply because of timing? I am not in agreement with that.
Yes, because of timing.
Take, for instance, the Big 12 this year.
1) Texas beats Oklahoma and jumps in the rankings while OU drops.
2) Texas Tech beats Texas and jumps while UT drops.
3) OU beats TT and is launched into the national championship game.
If the games had simply been in different sequential order, a new result would occur.
OU beats UT. UT beats TT. TT beats OU. Would have resulted with either Texas or Texas Tech as the top team from the South, because the OU loss came last.
You cannot ignore the importance of the timing of the losses. It is, in the BCS, more important than head-to-head results.
thatrogue
December 09, 2008 at 08:32PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Hamilton2Again, I disagree. OU took TT to the woodshed. Had that happened in week one, and TT beaten UT on the final weekend, there was no way that shellacking could be overlooked.
Originally posted by thatrogue
But why is the PSU loss not similar to the Florida loss? Simply because of timing? I am not in agreement with that.
Yes, because of timing.
Take, for instance, the Big 12 this year.
1) Texas beats Oklahoma and jumps in the rankings while OU drops.
2) Texas Tech beats Texas and jumps while UT drops.
3) OU beats TT and is launched into the national championship game.
If the games had simply been in different sequential order, a new result would occur.
OU beats UT. UT beats TT. TT beats OU. Would have resulted with either Texas or Texas Tech as the top team from the South, because the OU loss came last.
You cannot ignore the importance of the timing of the losses. It is, in the BCS, more important than head-to-head results.
Bones2484
Yet Texas' victory over OU was overlooked because it was earlier in the season?
edit: An early season shellacking means a lot less than a late season shellacking. Look at tOSU. The huge loss to USC has almost been forgotten.
[Edited on 12-9-2008 by Bones2484]
December 09, 2008 at 08:36PM View BBCode
Originally posted by thatrogue
Again, I disagree. OU took TT to the woodshed. Had that happened in week one, and TT beaten UT on the final weekend, there was no way that shellacking could be overlooked.
Yet Texas' victory over OU was overlooked because it was earlier in the season?
edit: An early season shellacking means a lot less than a late season shellacking. Look at tOSU. The huge loss to USC has almost been forgotten.
[Edited on 12-9-2008 by Bones2484]
thatrogue
December 09, 2008 at 08:46PM View BBCode
tOSUs annilation by USC (as well as their last two BCS Title appearances) were why they were never going to be considered a legit contender. If their fans didn't travel so well, Boise State would be playing in a BCS Bowl.
thatrogue
December 09, 2008 at 08:48PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Bones2484And I still think that the way Oklahoma ran up HUGE scores against TT, OK State, and Missouri provided the edge, as opposed to the timing of their loss to Texas. They were not beating their competition, they were humiliating them.
Originally posted by thatrogue
Again, I disagree. OU took TT to the woodshed. Had that happened in week one, and TT beaten UT on the final weekend, there was no way that shellacking could be overlooked.
Yet Texas' victory over OU was overlooked because it was earlier in the season?
edit: An early season shellacking means a lot less than a late season shellacking. Look at tOSU. The huge loss to USC has almost been forgotten.
[Edited on 12-9-2008 by Bones2484]
chi925a
Penn State beat 3 ranked opponents #10, #17, & #22
Florida: 5 ranked opponents #1, #4, #8, #23, #24
Oklahome: 5 ranked opponents #2, #11, #16, #19, #24
PSU wouldn't have received the support as you stated because they didn't play the same quality of competition as the other 2 did. Florida beat ranked teams by an avg margin of 32 pts, OU by 29 & PSU by only 17. The loss hurt them more due to timing and the lack of schedule strength to make up for it. So it weighs more than Florida or OU's.
December 09, 2008 at 08:49PM View BBCode
Originally posted by thatrogue
But why is the PSU loss not similar to the Florida loss? Simply because of timing? I am not in agreement with that.
I would assert that good teams losing to mediocre teams later in the season generally do not fall as far as when they lose early in the season, simply because the voters have more to go on regarding the quality of the teams.
I sincerely believe that had Florida lost to Ole Miss in early November, then beaten Florida State and Alabama, they would still be in the National Championship picture. Yet if Penn State had lost to Iowa in September and later beaten Michigan State and tOSU, they still would not have garnered as much support for being a top two team, as did Oklahoma and Florida.
[Edited on 12-9-2008 by thatrogue]
Penn State beat 3 ranked opponents #10, #17, & #22
Florida: 5 ranked opponents #1, #4, #8, #23, #24
Oklahome: 5 ranked opponents #2, #11, #16, #19, #24
PSU wouldn't have received the support as you stated because they didn't play the same quality of competition as the other 2 did. Florida beat ranked teams by an avg margin of 32 pts, OU by 29 & PSU by only 17. The loss hurt them more due to timing and the lack of schedule strength to make up for it. So it weighs more than Florida or OU's.
thatrogue
Aren't you proving my point?
December 09, 2008 at 08:54PM View BBCode
Where does the lack of schedule strength come from? From PSU being in a weaker conference, which has been my assertion all along. So even if PSU's loss had happened in week one, they would not have been seriously considered for the BCS Title.
chi925a
The rule of thumb for big ten schools, don't play anyone, go unbeaten, get shellacked in a bowl game.
December 09, 2008 at 09:09PM View BBCode
In my opinion no, not with better one loss teams out there. Coming out of the big ten they need to go unbeaten.The rule of thumb for big ten schools, don't play anyone, go unbeaten, get shellacked in a bowl game.
tm4559
December 09, 2008 at 09:10PM View BBCode
the oklahoma-missouri-texas thing was just an unabridged disaster, start to finish. now they're deciding who plays in the conference title game (and thus in the National Championship Game) on style points. it is crazy.
barterer2002
On September 27 Florida lost and dropped from 4 in the polls to 12
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=5&seasonType=2]Here is the poll from week 4 before the Florida loss[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=6&seasonType=2]Here is the poll from Week 5 after the Florida loss[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=7&seasonType=2]In Week 6 South Florida lost to drop below Florida[/url]
Week 7 saw losses for LSU (to Florida), and Missouri dropping them from the ranks of the unbeaten [url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=8&seasonType=2]week 7 poll[/url], Florida also jumped over Texas Tech, BYU and USC because they beat previously unbeaten LSU. Missouri dropped from 3 to 11, while LSU dropped from 4 to 13.
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=9&seasonType=2]Week 8 saw no change at the top of the polls[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=9&seasonType=2]Week 9 had the BCS standings come out with Florida ranked 8 but holding 5th in the major polls which were unchanged at the top[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=11&seasonType=2]Week 10 saw Texas Tech win on a last second touchdown and move up to second with Texas dropping to 5[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=12&seasonType=2]Week 11 was the Penn State loss dropping them down to 7[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=13&seasonType=2]In week 12 there was no change[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=14&seasonType=2]Week 13 saw Texas Tech lose to Oklahoma and drop down below Penn State in everything but the BCS poll[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=15&seasonType=2]Week 14 had no change[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=16&seasonType=2]Week 15 had Florida beat Alabama to leapfrog into the title game with Bama droppnig to 4[/url]
Thus my assertion that Florida, by losing early, had the opportunity to move back up when the teams above them lost while Penn State, which lost late, did not have that opportunity because the teams above them didn't lose (every one that did dropped behind them except for Alabama)
To assert that this isn't factual is just silly.
December 09, 2008 at 10:16PM View BBCode
Florida lost on September 15 and dropped to 8 or 9. they were able to work their way up the standings because the teams in front of them lost later in the season.On September 27 Florida lost and dropped from 4 in the polls to 12
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=5&seasonType=2]Here is the poll from week 4 before the Florida loss[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=6&seasonType=2]Here is the poll from Week 5 after the Florida loss[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=7&seasonType=2]In Week 6 South Florida lost to drop below Florida[/url]
Week 7 saw losses for LSU (to Florida), and Missouri dropping them from the ranks of the unbeaten [url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=8&seasonType=2]week 7 poll[/url], Florida also jumped over Texas Tech, BYU and USC because they beat previously unbeaten LSU. Missouri dropped from 3 to 11, while LSU dropped from 4 to 13.
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=9&seasonType=2]Week 8 saw no change at the top of the polls[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=9&seasonType=2]Week 9 had the BCS standings come out with Florida ranked 8 but holding 5th in the major polls which were unchanged at the top[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=11&seasonType=2]Week 10 saw Texas Tech win on a last second touchdown and move up to second with Texas dropping to 5[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=12&seasonType=2]Week 11 was the Penn State loss dropping them down to 7[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=13&seasonType=2]In week 12 there was no change[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=14&seasonType=2]Week 13 saw Texas Tech lose to Oklahoma and drop down below Penn State in everything but the BCS poll[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=15&seasonType=2]Week 14 had no change[/url]
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex?seasonYear=2008&weekNumber=16&seasonType=2]Week 15 had Florida beat Alabama to leapfrog into the title game with Bama droppnig to 4[/url]
Thus my assertion that Florida, by losing early, had the opportunity to move back up when the teams above them lost while Penn State, which lost late, did not have that opportunity because the teams above them didn't lose (every one that did dropped behind them except for Alabama)
To assert that this isn't factual is just silly.
Faceman
December 09, 2008 at 10:34PM View BBCode
the only thing not factual about that post Bart is the first word.
whiskybear
Yeah.
Edit: Daren deleted his post.
[Edited on 12-9-2008 by whiskybear]
December 09, 2008 at 10:50PM View BBCode
You know those times when Happy stakes himself to a hopeless position and argues it to the bitter end, against a rising tide of opposition?Yeah.
Edit: Daren deleted his post.
[Edited on 12-9-2008 by whiskybear]
barterer2002
No but I think they'd have fallen to 6th or 7th with a slim shot at getting back into the national title picture. They had the advantage over Penn State this year in that they had the opportunity to play a top team in the final season to prove their case.
Lets be honest, the LSU victory wasn't nearly as impressive as it seemed-in fact LSU was a lesser team than Oregon State this season but Florida jumped up by beating them while Penn State's shellacking of Oregon State was ignored.
I'm certainly not making the argument that the Big 10 is as good as either the SEC or the Big 12 this year but your contention that the losses are the same is just plain wrong. Furthermore, you know its wrong and you're just being a happyistic homer on this one. I expected a more reasonable reaction from you on this Daren-you've been reading the OGL boards too much I think.
December 09, 2008 at 10:51PM View BBCode
Originally posted by thatrogue
Bart, do you really think that, had an undefeated Florida, having already beaten LSU and Georgia, lost to Ole Miss during the first week of November, they would have fallen all they way to 12th with little shot of getting back into the National Title picture? Do you? Really?
No but I think they'd have fallen to 6th or 7th with a slim shot at getting back into the national title picture. They had the advantage over Penn State this year in that they had the opportunity to play a top team in the final season to prove their case.
Lets be honest, the LSU victory wasn't nearly as impressive as it seemed-in fact LSU was a lesser team than Oregon State this season but Florida jumped up by beating them while Penn State's shellacking of Oregon State was ignored.
I'm certainly not making the argument that the Big 10 is as good as either the SEC or the Big 12 this year but your contention that the losses are the same is just plain wrong. Furthermore, you know its wrong and you're just being a happyistic homer on this one. I expected a more reasonable reaction from you on this Daren-you've been reading the OGL boards too much I think.
Hamilton2
PSU - lost late and played in a weak conference.
UF - lost early and played in a strong conference.
USC - lost early and played in a weak conference.
AL - lost late and played in a strong conference.
UT - lost late and played in a strong conference.
OU - lost early and played in a strong conference.
TT - lost late and played in a strong conference.
PSU is the only team to have both lost EARLY and played in a WEAK conference. Where are they getting screwed? There are 6 teams on that list who have more compelling BCS arguments than PSU does, just based on those 2 factors.
Where exactly is your point?
December 09, 2008 at 10:52PM View BBCode
Daren, you are really including too many things in this comparison to make it work. Here are the 2 comparison points you are arguing, broken down among 7 1-loss teams.PSU - lost late and played in a weak conference.
UF - lost early and played in a strong conference.
USC - lost early and played in a weak conference.
AL - lost late and played in a strong conference.
UT - lost late and played in a strong conference.
OU - lost early and played in a strong conference.
TT - lost late and played in a strong conference.
PSU is the only team to have both lost EARLY and played in a WEAK conference. Where are they getting screwed? There are 6 teams on that list who have more compelling BCS arguments than PSU does, just based on those 2 factors.
Where exactly is your point?
thatrogue
December 09, 2008 at 11:03PM View BBCode
Originally posted by whiskybearI just got tired of debating it. The team I like is in the BCS Title game so why should I really care. I think the system is biased against some of the other, deserving teams and am convinced it is because of the perceptions around conference strength moreso than the timing of losses. Florida got their 1996 National Title shot (pre-BCS) after a very late season loss. Oklahoma got their 2003 shot after a very late season loss. LSU got their 2007 shot after a very late season loss. I've seen it happen time and time again, but if everyone wants to say it is the timing of those losses, well, so be it...
You know those times when Happy stakes himself to a hopeless position and argues it to the bitter end, against a rising tide of opposition?
Yeah.
Edit: Daren deleted his post.
[Edited on 12-9-2008 by whiskybear]
Faceman
Man, I didn't realize that the U made the title game! Go Canes!
December 09, 2008 at 11:06PM View BBCode
Originally posted by thatrogue
I just got tired of debating it. The team I like is in the BCS Title game
Man, I didn't realize that the U made the title game! Go Canes!
Faceman
Every year is different Daren. Last year, I think OSU was the only 1 loss team. Some team with 2 losses had to go. That was LSU.
2003 was pretty much a shaft I believe.
December 09, 2008 at 11:07PM View BBCode
Originally posted by thatrogue
Originally posted by whiskybearI just got tired of debating it. The team I like is in the BCS Title game so why should I really care. I think the system is biased against some of the other, deserving teams and am convinced it is because of the perceptions around conference strength moreso than the timing of losses. Florida got their 1996 National Title shot (pre-BCS) after a very late season loss. Oklahoma got their 2003 shot after a very late season loss. LSU got their 2007 shot after a very late season loss. I've seen it happen time and time again, but if everyone wants to say it is the timing of those losses, well, so be it...
You know those times when Happy stakes himself to a hopeless position and argues it to the bitter end, against a rising tide of opposition?
Yeah.
Edit: Daren deleted his post.
[Edited on 12-9-2008 by whiskybear]
Every year is different Daren. Last year, I think OSU was the only 1 loss team. Some team with 2 losses had to go. That was LSU.
2003 was pretty much a shaft I believe.
thatrogue
Bryan and Matt decided to disagree and the rest is history.
December 09, 2008 at 11:08PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Hamilton2Matt noted that USC got excluded because of their weak conference, and I noted you could make the same argument about the Big Ten. I also asserted that PSU's upset loss was not dissimilar to UF's upset loss.
Daren, you are really including too many things in this comparison to make it work. Here are the 2 comparison points you are arguing, broken down among 7 1-loss teams.
PSU - lost late and played in a weak conference.
UF - lost early and played in a strong conference.
USC - lost early and played in a weak conference.
AL - lost late and played in a strong conference.
UT - lost late and played in a strong conference.
OU - lost early and played in a strong conference.
TT - lost late and played in a strong conference.
PSU is the only team to have both lost EARLY and played in a WEAK conference. Where are they getting screwed? There are 6 teams on that list who have more compelling BCS arguments than PSU does, just based on those 2 factors.
Where exactly is your point?
Bryan and Matt decided to disagree and the rest is history.
thatrogue
December 09, 2008 at 11:10PM View BBCode
Originally posted by FacemanYes, I like two college football teams. No I am not ashamed of it. Yes, the U stinks this season and I still root for them. No, I do not care what you think about all that. :lol:
Originally posted by thatrogue
I just got tired of debating it. The team I like is in the BCS Title game
Man, I didn't realize that the U made the title game! Go Canes!
Faceman
December 09, 2008 at 11:15PM View BBCode
Hey, I like two college football teams. They just don't happen to be big time rivals with each other. (Illinois and Ole Miss)
FuriousGiorge
December 09, 2008 at 11:17PM View BBCode
Then it should read "A team I like...." The definite article is reserved for those of us who don't treat sports fandom like an all-you-can-eat buffet.
Faceman
By the way Daren, my beef wasn't with you saying the Big 10 was bad. It was that you were refuting my claim that the Big 10 wasn't as bad as the Pac 10 by comparing PSU to Florida.
You were standing in the way of me refuting 'Slow and his aggression against the Big 10.
December 09, 2008 at 11:18PM View BBCode
Originally posted by thatrogue
Bryan and Matt decided to disagree and the rest is history.
By the way Daren, my beef wasn't with you saying the Big 10 was bad. It was that you were refuting my claim that the Big 10 wasn't as bad as the Pac 10 by comparing PSU to Florida.
You were standing in the way of me refuting 'Slow and his aggression against the Big 10.