|
|
#21
11-11-2006, 06:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: You are the pollster: 0-Loss vs. 1-Loss Debate
[ QUOTE ]
Probably because Sagarin takes strength of schedule into account- something that the teams CAN'T CONTROL AT ALL! I don't think SOS should even be considered because they're all playing DI teams. Thats my entire point. If we're really going to view some wins as 'non-quality' becuase the opponents were bad, then those opponents shouldn't even be in DI. [/ QUOTE ] SOS absolutely matters, and it matters more so than MOV 
|
|
#22
11-11-2006, 06:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You are the pollster: 0-Loss vs. 1-Loss Debate
[ QUOTE ]
Probably because Sagarin takes strength of schedule into account- something that the teams CAN'T CONTROL AT ALL! I don't think SOS should even be considered because they're all playing DI teams. Thats my entire point. If we're really going to view some wins as 'non-quality' becuase the opponents were bad, then those opponents shouldn't even be in DI. [/ QUOTE ] not everyone plays D1 either.
|
|
#23
11-11-2006, 07:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You are the pollster: 0-Loss vs. 1-Loss Debate
for example, Rutgers played Howard IIRC
|
|
#24
11-11-2006, 07:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You are the pollster: 0-Loss vs. 1-Loss Debate
And Penn State played Temple today. What? Temple is D1-a??
My point? 12 game schedule = scheduling of cupcakes for every program in the nation. 12 game schedule was the worst decision for the NCAA for the players, but great for the schools cause of money.
|
|
#25
11-11-2006, 07:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You are the pollster: 0-Loss vs. 1-Loss Debate
Penn St also played at Notre Dame in the non-conf
Rutgers played North Carolina, Illinois, Ohio, Navy, and Howard...they have no one to blame but themselves if they run the table and are left out.
|
|
#26
11-11-2006, 07:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You are the pollster: 0-Loss vs. 1-Loss Debate
[ QUOTE ]
they have no one to blame but themselves if they run the table and are left out. [/ QUOTE ] I know what your saying and you are 100% correct. But, I just want ot point out that when they made that schedule, they were at best a bad/mediocre team and they just wanted some wins to possibly make a bowl game. I don't think they really thought that they would win all those games? And was UNC supposed to be that bad this year? And I really though Illinois was going to be better, I know you did too, they looked like a good program last year in that opening game.
|
|
#27
11-11-2006, 07:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You are the pollster: 0-Loss vs. 1-Loss Debate
nah...Illinois has been crappy for awhile. I've been amazed by how well they've played this year. Last year, they were almost as bad as Temple is this year.
UNC hasn't been good since Brown left IIRC
|
|
#29
11-11-2006, 08:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You are the pollster: 0-Loss vs. 1-Loss Debate
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] They aren't among the top 10 only because they started the season so far back in the preseason polls...that is what is a jopke. [/ QUOTE ] i'm not saying you're totally wrong, but why does Sagarin (an unbiased computer ranking) have both West Virginia and Louisiville ranked ahead of Rutgers? [/ QUOTE ] That ranking is irrelevant. BCS uses ELO-Chess. Rutgers is #3 there. We now know that at least two of the computers will have Rutgers at #3.
|
|
#30
11-11-2006, 08:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You are the pollster: 0-Loss vs. 1-Loss Debate
Don't forget that Rutgers SOS will also go up if Pitt wins this game against UCONN, and then beats either WVU or Louisville. Or am I wrong there?
Edit: Big East is in the heart of its conference schedule, which has been noted earlier.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
