Still, one of those – the most recent one – was at home to an unranked team.
All right, good point. I had forgotten about that. There are arguments to be made about early losses not being as weight as later ones, because the team hasn’t gelled yet or learned it scheme yet or whatever, but that IS pretty tough to overlook. All right, VT doesn’t have a beef
Now that’s a little silly. The hindsight of being able to say, “See? They lost!” doesn’t mean they weren’t deserving of a shot.
At the end of the day, it seems like LSU suffered very, very little for a late-season home loss to an unranked team, and I don’t know why that is other than “SEC r00lz!!!1”
I am definitely not in the SEC Roolz category…quite the contrary. But it’s hard to argue when faced with the fact that, however LSU and Florida may have arrived at the NCG, they won.
But past results should count for diddly squat at the conference level. We shouldn’t punish the Big 10 because OSU choked twice, and we shouldn’t reward the SEC because 2 of their teams have won 3 straight. Every year is a new year.
Oklahoma lost to two unranked teams and neither of them needed overtime. (LSU’s other loss was the 3 OT loss to #17 Kentucky)
It just shows that Oklahoma looks really impressive when they’re beating up on Big 12 teams, but they tend to wilt when facing big non-conference opponents. Of course hindsight is better, but it validates the decision. Oklahoma went on to lose to WVU, and LSU beat the undisputed #1 team in the nation.
In reality, there was a clusterfuck of late-season losses by highly ranked teams, WVU, Mizz, Kansas, and LSU all losing a 1 or 2 rank that weekend or later. It wasn’t the season of upsets for nothing. LSU looked like the strongest team and got the edge. No one was arguing that OSU didn’t deserve a slot, so what you’re saying is that someone would have beaten LSU more convincingly, worse than the 38-24 that LSU put up.
Sounds like your proposing that we let the computer make the decisions, and the voters should be left out the equation. Because computers have no biased computations. (but I am not saying anthing about the underlying assumptions)
I’ve said absolutely nothing to lead you to make this statement. Not even hinted at anything that would lead you to say that. If you’re not interested in honest debate, then why don’t we call this thing off?
Why would a team from a strong conference add Boise St to their schedule? Strength of Schedule was a factor several years ago, when the computers decided that media-favorite Southern Cal’s weak conference schedule didn’t make them worthy of the BCSCG. After that, the BCS was rigged to give the biased human polls more weight than the unbiased computer polls, and the biased human polls decided to “make it up” to Southern Cal, and Auburn got shut out of the NCG. Since then, the people who schedule games realize that SOS is, at best, the 3rd most important factor to getting to the BCSCG, behind W-L and voter favoritism.
So why would a team from a strong conference, knowing how difficult it will be just to get through the conference schedule, schedule a decent non-conference team? It makes no sense. The SOS boost from doing that would barely be a factor. So why risk it?
If you have a problem with “Big 6” teams scheduling weak non-conference games, blame the rigging of the BCS that happened about 5 years ago that basically made SOS negligible.
Perhaps notfrommensa read my post before I posted it. Which was before I read page 2 of this thread.
I, myself, am simply in favor of going back to the computers having more weight. Also, they should be able to take margin of victory into account. (But that’s another debate altogether.)
Notre Dame fan checking in. I have yet to hear from any fellow fans who would support Charlie’s continued employment. Losing to Navy, twice, at home? Nope - you have to go. You cannot lay all that blame on the players - at some point your “decided schematic advantage” is a giant load of bullshit. Two home Navy losses exposes it for the bullshit that it is.
Send him on his way, let Corwin Brown coach through the rest of the season while you interview new coaches in time for the recruiting season so we can avoid the Willingham hangover of '07 happening again.
As an old defensive player, I personally love defensive battles. I enjoy seeing QB girly-men running for their lives from hulking uglies with bloody intentions. That’s football.
The problem is that the casual observer (ie, me) finds it hard to tell the difference between good defensive football and bad offensive football. If we’re going to see ineptitude, it should be on defense so at least there’s some excitement & scoring.
Fortunately, it’s not the team’s job to make sure you’re getting an appropriately entertaining experience. It’s their job to execute a strategy which will win the game. Defense is where it’s at. Sorry you don’t find it adequately engaging. I most certainly do.
LSU’s BCS ranking actually increased this past weekend, despite the loss to Alabama on Saturday. FTR, it was any voter bias that did the trick, as their ranking actually got worse in the Coaches and Harris polls.
The Computers are the ones that elevated LSU, coupled with the fact that Oregon and Iowa lost to unranked teams. It also didn’t hurt that Penn St also lost.
I wouldn’t mind seeing computers completely control the BCS. As I said earlier, there is no bias in computer calculations. However, there is bias in the underlying assumptions which obviously needs to be worked out. Margin of victory, with diminishing returns, should also be considered.
A loss to a highly ranked team should be more valuable than a victory against a bottom feeding team and Div I-AA team.
Taking this logic to extremes, Oregon (losses to #25 Stanford and #6 Boise St) should be ahead of Florida (wins over Charleston Southern and the Florida School for the Deaf).
Maybe i should have said “as valuable” rather than “More valuable”"
My theory is that it would encourage high profile inter-conference matchups. I don’t think anyone really likes UF playing Charleston, or Iowa playing Northern Iowa, Michigan playing Delaware St, Oregon St playing Portland St or Arizona St and Oklahoma playing Idaho St.
All conferences load up on lard and sugar by playing cupcakes. AFAIK, the only teams that really benefit are the cupcakes themselves.
The real beauty of a defensive game is that the few breakout offensive plays really light up the rest of the game. Everybody likes to see Tom Brady throw fifteen touchdowns, but really after the third, the sparkle dims a bit. When the defense keeps the game close, and a single error could change the outcome of the game, you’ve really got to pay close attention to what’s happening. Blink, and you could miss the game changing moment. That’s exciting to me.
Oh, Ogre, you’re looking particularly handsome and intelligent in this thread. Roll Tide.
That’s exactly how I feel about pitching duels in baseball. But for some reason a football punting duel doesn’t elicit the same excitement. YMMV and it does, obviously.
