|
|
|
|
#1
11-11-2007, 11:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NCAA College Football Week 11 -- Rank\'em
[ QUOTE ]
iggy, How many more losses before you realize Auburn is not a top 25 team? If the Jayhawks wore maroon and had "Oklahoma" on their jerseys they'd be #1 right? Putting Oklahoma above Kansas is downright laughable. You know that the W/L column is the most important stat, not SOS. You punish Kansas for beating nobodies each week, but not Oklahoma for losing to them. [/ QUOTE ] Based on that expert analysis, Kansas should be #1 and Hawaii #2. 
|
|
#2
11-11-2007, 11:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAA College Football Week 11 -- Rank\'em
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] iggy, How many more losses before you realize Auburn is not a top 25 team? If the Jayhawks wore maroon and had "Oklahoma" on their jerseys they'd be #1 right? Putting Oklahoma above Kansas is downright laughable. You know that the W/L column is the most important stat, not SOS. You punish Kansas for beating nobodies each week, but not Oklahoma for losing to them. [/ QUOTE ] Based on that expert analysis, Kansas should be #1 and Hawaii #2. [/ QUOTE ] I wouldn't have a problem with Kansas at #1. You give credit to Oklahoma for beating Texas and Missouri, but what about losing to a sub .500 Colorado team. But that was just a "fluke" right? W/L>SOS (BCS conferences only).
|
|
#3
11-11-2007, 11:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAA College Football Week 11 -- Rank\'em
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] iggy, How many more losses before you realize Auburn is not a top 25 team? If the Jayhawks wore maroon and had "Oklahoma" on their jerseys they'd be #1 right? Putting Oklahoma above Kansas is downright laughable. You know that the W/L column is the most important stat, not SOS. You punish Kansas for beating nobodies each week, but not Oklahoma for losing to them. [/ QUOTE ] Based on that expert analysis, Kansas should be #1 and Hawaii #2. [/ QUOTE ] Just to add a few things... This doesn't matter now, because Kansas/Missouri/Oklahoma will shake out over the next month. Kansas gets credit for being undefeated, but they still havne't even played anyone in the top five of their OWN conference. They got lucky and didn't get scheduled the three best teams in the south (OU, Texas and Texas Tech) and they haven't played the only good team in the north (Missouri). Oklahoma did have a lapse and lose to Colorado on a last second FG while Kansas won by 5 against Colorado, but Oklahoma has beaten the two best teams in the conference, Missouri and Texas. There isn't a team in the BCS conferences with a SOS worse than that of Kansas. If you don't think Kansas is getting enough respect, wait until the 24th and they'll get a chance to earn it.
|
|
#4
11-11-2007, 02:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAA College Football Week 11 -- Rank\'em
[ QUOTE ]
iggy, How many more losses before you realize Auburn is not a top 25 team? If the Jayhawks wore maroon and had "Oklahoma" on their jerseys they'd be #1 right? Putting Oklahoma above Kansas is downright laughable. You know that the W/L column is the most important stat, not SOS. You punish Kansas for beating nobodies each week, but not Oklahoma for losing to them. [/ QUOTE ] FWIW, if Oklahoma wore blue and had "Kansas" on their jerseys, they'd probably be #1 right now because they'd be 10-0. They were getting everybody's best shot all season due to their reputation and still just barely got beat by Colorado on the road when they were looking ahead to Texas. The thing is that we know that Oklahoma was giving nowhere near maximum effort against Colorado and that if they played the Buffaloes again, they'd win about 98% of the time. I don't think you have to make too big of a deal out of that loss. It's enough to keep them behind LSU and Oregon, but behind a Kansas team who's only beaten one BCS conference team with a winning record (6-5 Texas A&M)? Not so much. If it was Oklahoma that had played Kansas's schedule, I might give them a little more credit because when you don't get an adequate evaluation of a team through the games they play (because they don't play anyone in the Top 30), you have to use talent evaluations to fill in the blanks a little. Still though, once they play Missouri and Oklahoma, that's what they'll be judged on.
|
|
#5
11-11-2007, 07:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAA College Football Week 11 -- Rank\'em
Kansas at #1 seems like a joke to me. 7th or 8th seems more appropriate. They have only 1 good win (The Nebraska blowout). Today's win over Ok St was decent(2 scores at least), but then they have 3 1-score wins over marginal teams and a few token blowout wins over cupcakes. Luckily they still have to face Missouri and Oklahoma(if they beat Missouri), so they can't skate into the championship.
|
|
#6
11-11-2007, 08:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAA College Football Week 11 -- Rank\'em
Do you think that Kansas would beat Oregon and LSU? I'm thinking no, could be wrong, but you rank them ahead based on their record. Yet, you put Georgia behind a 3-loss Florida that Georgia beat? Which way is it? Reward good records or the "best team"?
|
|
#7
11-11-2007, 05:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAA College Football Week 11 -- Rank\'em
1. Kansas
\interesting note: this year has had the most top 5 losses to unranked teams with 9 amazing enough, one unranked team beat two top 5 opponents--Illinois v Wisky, Illinois @ Ohio State probably because Wisky had no business in the top 5 and Illinois was a bunch of jackasses at Iowa and blew their ranking
|
|
#8
11-11-2007, 05:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NCAA College Football Week 11 -- Rank\'em
[ QUOTE ]
1. Kansas \interesting note: this year has had the most top 5 losses to unranked teams with 9 amazing enough, one unranked team beat two top 5 opponents--Illinois v Wisky, Illinois @ Ohio State probably because Wisky had no business in the top 5 and Illinois was a bunch of jackasses at Iowa and blew their ranking [/ QUOTE ] If you say that, you've got to say: (1) Kansas (2) Hawaii you've got to be consistent....
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
