Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Topics > Sporting Events
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #181  
Old 11-14-2007, 07:21 PM
BigSoonerFan BigSoonerFan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Augusta National
Posts: 1,937
Default Re: NCAA College Football Week 11 -- Rank\'em

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If they beat Missouri and Oklahoma then we will have to adjust how good we think they are.

[/ QUOTE ]
Some of us already have adjusted.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're kidding, right? You've adjusted based on their wins over A&M and Kansas State? That's just funny.
Reply With Quote
  #182  
Old 11-15-2007, 12:12 PM
pirateboy pirateboy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,514
Default Re: NCAA College Football Week 11 -- Rank\'em

[ QUOTE ]

Basically, this is the same results-oriented, ignore that-which-is-unseen thinking that dominates the AP voters.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Ranking Kansas #1 is highly results-oriented, and I'm actually proud of the AP for where they have Kansas.



[ QUOTE ]

Some of us already have adjusted.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you shouldn't have. What made you adjust? The 0 wins against good football teams?




[ QUOTE ]
The flipside fo this is that the fact that the teams they've played so far aren't incredibly touggh doesn't mean that they DON'T deserve it. Playing a weaker schedule doesn't inherently make a worse team. A team that's played mediocre teams all year doesn't suddenly get better just because they get to a decent team on their schedule.


[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, wow. Certainly a poor schedule doesn't make a team worse. However, it doesn't make them better. It inflates their record, their stats, their rating. And football is all about what you've DONE. We as fans react to what has happened. So, if Kansas beats Missouri, they become a better team historically than before. It's simple logic, really. And lastly on this quote, if a team plays a HORRIBLE schedule (like Kansas has), they no, they don't deserve it (a #1 ranking).
Reply With Quote
  #183  
Old 11-15-2007, 12:34 PM
pirateboy pirateboy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,514
Default Re: NCAA College Football Week 11 -- Rank\'em

I just checked something over at Football Outsiders. For NCAAF, they have their FEI ratings, which is the college equivalent to the NFL DVOA.

Kansas is 25th in FEI.
Reply With Quote
  #184  
Old 11-15-2007, 10:11 PM
pvn pvn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: back despite popular demand
Posts: 10,955
Default Re: NCAA College Football Week 11 -- Rank\'em

[ QUOTE ]
pvn,

After Week 1, Tennessee was 0-1 and Northwestern was 1-0. Do you think Northwestern should have been ranked above Tennessee simply because Northwestern would be more deserving of a championship berth if both teams won the rest of their games?

[/ QUOTE ]

Insomuch that such ranking has a direct impact on those teams post-season fate, YES. Currently, only #1 and #2 rankings have such impact (outside of such considerations as at-large BCS bids for non-bcs-conference schools), so I don't really care if one is #45 and the other #46 or vice versa. The teams in the BCS championship game should not be selected based upon sklansky ratings.
Reply With Quote
  #185  
Old 11-15-2007, 10:20 PM
pvn pvn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: back despite popular demand
Posts: 10,955
Default Re: NCAA College Football Week 11 -- Rank\'em

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Basically, this is the same results-oriented, ignore that-which-is-unseen thinking that dominates the AP voters.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Ranking Kansas #1 is highly results-oriented, and I'm actually proud of the AP for where they have Kansas.

[/ QUOTE ]

Should an undefeated BCS champion get to the championship game if there are no other undefeated BCS-conference teams?

If you say "yes" to that, then any attempt to rationalize putting Kansas outside of the top two based on results this year is results-oriented.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Some of us already have adjusted.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you shouldn't have. What made you adjust? The 0 wins against good football teams?

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. You're the one doing that. If you saw AA beat 72, and KK beat QQ, you'd rank KK > AA?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The flipside fo this is that the fact that the teams they've played so far aren't incredibly touggh doesn't mean that they DON'T deserve it. Playing a weaker schedule doesn't inherently make a worse team. A team that's played mediocre teams all year doesn't suddenly get better just because they get to a decent team on their schedule.


[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, wow. Certainly a poor schedule doesn't make a team worse. However, it doesn't make them better. It inflates their record, their stats, their rating. And football is all about what you've DONE. We as fans react to what has happened. So, if Kansas beats Missouri, they become a better team historically than before. It's simple logic, really. And lastly on this quote, if a team plays a HORRIBLE schedule (like Kansas has), they no, they don't deserve it (a #1 ranking).

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. Exactly.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.