re: S.O.S. and "Resumes" Are Complete BS

calm down.
I was just saying his point was dumb. If you can't say if the pac-12 is good or big ten is good, how can you say the sec is good either?

I'm just looking at things unbiased. Just because we win the nc and have the best team doesn't mean the rest of the conference is good, see what I am saying?

Again, we need s.o.s. to determine situations like we did with putting alabama in the nc. because even though the computers are dumb (don't know how), the voters realize bama had the harder s.o.s

quote:

---

Bama's sole argument was that there loss wasn't as bad as Okie St.

---

Actually my arguement is the opposite. I argue OSU resume is a joke to say all their wins actually added value. Four of those wins were against subpar teams. Three were legit to be argued that they can place value on.

quote:

---

WVU is not a great team. But they do have a great offense. The only reason bamas defense is ranked higher than LSUs is because LSU has faced much better offenses like WVU and Oregon while bamas marquis OOC matchup was against Penn State, who has an epically bad offense.

---

I agree why I do not put alot of merit into ranking defense or offense. In conferences where the offenses are rated high the defenses are usually rated lower. Same in the reverse.

quote:

---

Indfanfromcol

---

You are making the most sense than anyone in this thread, and every moron here is ignoring your posts.

What do you Bama fans not get?

YOU'RE LOSSES ARE INCLUDED IN S.O.S.!!!!

Therefore you idiots arguing that Bama is better than Okie St. because they lost to a 6-6 team, are using S.O.S. to determine your opinion.

quote:

---

LSU only scored 3 FGs against UA in TTown. GSU scored 3 TDs agains UA in TTown. My point is just because LSU gave up alot of points to WVU does not mean UA would.

---

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Calm down. What are all these matchups you're referencing? Are you seriously comparing LSU and GSU based on their comparative performance against Alabama? I thought you didn't pay any attention to OOC games. I thought we couldn't measure teams based on common opponents. Isn't that the whole point of this thread?

Mind = Blown.

Because until this year, the Big 10 and pac 10 were enjoying the advantages of not having one, and the main people incharge still suck on big 10 dick.

but now both of them have one, I could see this rule coming in the near future.

quote:

---

I'm just looking at things unbiased

---

I'm not down with this unbiased stuff Honestly I see what you mean. If an alien looked at it without any former knowledge he would have to use something. And S.O.S would be a big part of it.

quote:

---

Let me be clear that I am not making this thread to defend Alabama's case. But come on...

"They have the better resume."
"We have the better resume."
"You didn't play anybody."

These arguments are dumb!

1.) Schedules are sometimes made 10 or more years in advance. So how can you know in 2001, whether a team you play in 2011 is going to still be a powerhouse or fall apart?

Case in point. If LSU or AL had schedule a home/away series in 2004 with USC for 2011, you'd still be thinking you were playing a powerhouse program under Pete Carroll. How did Alabama know when they scheduled Penn State that they would suck this year? You never know.

2.) Strength of conference. I can't imagine how many times I've watched the Big 12 or Pac 12 and said "man those guys are good" only to see them flop in the bowl. Computers can try to judge. Humans can try but it won't work. And you can't really say a team matches up well with another until you see how things turned out after the bowl games are finished.

We assume the Big 12 is good this year. Heard that before. OSU/Ole Miss anyone?

Until the bowl season is over and you see the better match-ups play out, you have no idea what conference/teams are actually strong.

---

One of the dumbest things I have ever read on here.

It's not to late, I can throw a classic 9-6 in the conversation if you want.

9