Started By
Message
re: Anyone following this Danny Kanell saga?
Posted on 12/6/17 at 12:46 pm to GenesChin
Posted on 12/6/17 at 12:46 pm to GenesChin
quote:
While I believe Bama is better than Wisconsin
This is what you're missing.
The numbers didn't matter, because the committee believed Bama to be the better team, period. Hocutt even specifically mentioned the eye test, and that the committee had been impressed with Bama all season.
They are picked the 4 BEST teams, not the 4 most deserving teams.
0
Posted on 12/6/17 at 6:21 pm to GenesChin
No problem with 1 loss consideration, have said this for four years now. Two losses eliminates you, all of you, resume or not. 
Posted on 12/7/17 at 9:42 am to BDJ
quote:
OSU got shite on by Iowa and Wisconsin is worse than OSU.
This literally makes no sense. Wisconsin did to Iowa what Iowa did to OSU. If what you said was true then Wisky should have boatraced OSU like they did Iowa. But they didn’t. The Big Ten is not the strongest conference but it’s a hell of a lot better than it was 6 or 7 years ago.
This post was edited on 12/7/17 at 9:43 am
Posted on 12/9/17 at 3:56 pm to crimson jake
quote:
Don't be dense.
frick you for your miniature insult. It was uncalled for.
quote:
OU was NOBODIES #2 in the polls
What we are discussing is using math, and leaving the polls out. The polls can have human error and be swayed by a school being good 20 years ago.
The math would be based on strength of schedule only. EVERY individual game would change the math. Also, if we named the Team #1234567 instead of Ohio state, there would be no need for the eye test.
quote:
Do some Research.
My research and observations show that the Eye test has been an abortion. Putting Pat fricking Hayden and Connie Rice on a committee is the original coat hanger.
Posted on 12/9/17 at 4:04 pm to Hangit
The 4 best teams ARE the 4 most deserving teams.
Have NEVER understood what this best teams vs deserving teams shite means.
That means 4 best teams period. Conference titles are nice but they don't mean anything unless they help determine the 4 best teams. Don't see what's so hard about that.
My own team some years ago won the Pac 10 (back then I think) with 5 losses overall. Seriously you can't believe conference titles on their own settle the question of 4 best teams.
Have NEVER understood what this best teams vs deserving teams shite means.
That means 4 best teams period. Conference titles are nice but they don't mean anything unless they help determine the 4 best teams. Don't see what's so hard about that.
My own team some years ago won the Pac 10 (back then I think) with 5 losses overall. Seriously you can't believe conference titles on their own settle the question of 4 best teams.
Posted on 12/9/17 at 4:09 pm to Hangit
That train left nearly a week ago, pal. You need to be figuring out how you're gonna get your picture taken with both Mickey and Goofy in a couple of weeks. 
Posted on 12/9/17 at 4:20 pm to Taurus 357
quote:
This literally makes no sense. Wisconsin did to Iowa what Iowa did to OSU. If what you said was true then Wisky should have boatraced OSU like they did Iowa. But they didn’t. The Big Ten is not the strongest conference but it’s a hell of a lot better than it was 6 or 7 years ago.
The more predictable the outcomes of games in a conference (as a whole), the better that conference is. B1G currently is not a good conference. Not terrible but not as good as SEC or ACC.
On the other hand, if the games are all predictable for a conference but the best team in that conference is a 2 loss team that probably wouldn't beat a 4th place team in another conference, that conference is predictably weak (Pac 12). USC was left out for good reason.
Posted on 12/9/17 at 4:30 pm to secuniversity
anytime someone is fricking with the bitch that is ESPN, I really don't get real rustled. I do not agree with kannel about OSU but I aint mad. oh and frick ESPN.
Posted on 12/9/17 at 6:38 pm to RichRyder
quote:
Have NEVER understood what this best teams vs deserving teams shite means.
This is part of the problem. A team that is playing great now but has two early losses does not deserve it over a one loss team, given that they have similar strengths of schedule.
The whole eye test thing is bullshite. You have to base it all off of wins and losses and SOS. If it is a close call, you cannot have the people deciding be employees or cheerleaders of any of the schools in question.
Posted on 12/9/17 at 6:50 pm to coachcrisp
quote:
That train left nearly a week ago, pal
tOSU,. with two losses, should not even have been in the conversation, buddy. Their overall product had two losses, friend.
Them playing good ball in the conference championship against Wiscy does not negate those pesky losses, mon frere.
Posted on 12/9/17 at 7:13 pm to GenesChin
quote:
Obviously, it isn't Bama's fault that FSU/SEC was a dumpster fire compared to avg quality. Bama didn't do anything wrong. I just don't want name brand schools to start playing cupcake schedules knowing that dominating cream puffs, 1-2 decent wins + a quality loss is "enough"
It is going to be in school's best interest to schedule middle tier P5 opponents and survive their conference slate as long as their brand name/reputation is big enough
Why should Alabama schedule teams like FSU/expected top 5-10 programs again when they can get in by beating the North Carolina, Purdue and Kansas Sts of the world?
But that's how the FSUs and Clemsons of the ACCs, and the OSUs and Michigans of the Big10s have done it for decades. What always got the SEC being talked about as the top CFB conference in the US was the tendency for the SEC to have a 3rd and a 4th option at least every 3rd season......
Page 6 of 6
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News