Started By
Message
Posted on 11/13/12 at 10:11 pm to bhart99
So explain how Mizzou bolsters your argument.
Posted on 11/13/12 at 10:12 pm to bmy
quote:
Strength of conference ratings last I checked had big12 above the SEC. The SEC has beaten literally no one worth a single shite out of conference this season.
The conference ranks are stupid.
quote:
10-team group ___ the weights are 1-2-3-4-5-5-4-3-2-1
quote:
14-team group ___ the weights are 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-7-6-5-4-3-2-1
Meaning. Alabama and K-State would be viewed as the tw best teams right? Well K-State counts for 1/30th of the formula, and Alabama counts for 1/56th. Explain to me how a computer ranking eliminates bias by it's best team having such little weight, and relative to another conference's best team, almost half that? It makes no sense.
Posted on 11/13/12 at 10:15 pm to TeLeFaWx
While SEC has four dogs compared to just one in the Big XII, the Big XII only has ten teams. The SEC"s top 10, top to bottom, is way better.
In that equation, our tenth best team would probably be Missouri or Vandy. Both of those teams could probably manage .500 in the Big XII.
In that equation, our tenth best team would probably be Missouri or Vandy. Both of those teams could probably manage .500 in the Big XII.
Posted on 11/14/12 at 6:42 am to Roger Klarvin
quote:
While SEC has four dogs compared to just one in the Big XII, the Big XII only has ten teams. The SEC"s top 10, top to bottom, is way better.
In that equation, our tenth best team would probably be Missouri or Vandy. Both of those teams could probably manage .500 in the Big XII.
That's a nice spin lol. When comparing 14 team conference to 10 you take out the best 2 and the worst 2.
Posted on 11/14/12 at 6:48 am to bhart99
quote:
That's a nice spin lol. When comparing 14 team conference to 10 you take out the best 2 and the worst 2.
No. A conference talent level isn't symmetrical. The best team isn't as good as the worst team is bad. That's moronic.
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News