To: Southern Cal and Texas Boosters; Subject: Kindly Shut Up

by cocknfire on Jan 2, 2009 12:48 AM EST in Football Comment 71 comments

This is brought on by nothing more than some general complaining around the Web, likely to become louder, about the fact that the invincible Southern Cal Trojans and the Texas Longhorns were somehow deprived of a chance to play in the BCS Title Game.

Get a grip.

I don't like the way the BCS does things, though I'm not sure I have a workable solution seeing as how I don't want a multi-game playoff. That said, the only team that has ever had a legitimate gripe about missing the BCS Title Game is 2004 Auburn. (If you want to be generous, I suppose you could throw in 2004 Utah and 2006 Boise State, but I digress.)

Because, you see, all but one time in the 11 editions of the BCS, there has been a relatively simple formula for getting into the title game from one of the six auto-bid conferences: Win your games. That is completely in your control. Win every game you play, and your ticket is all but punched.

Texas can't blame the pollsters for missing the title game this year; nor can Southern Cal. Because the pollsters don't play the games and don't slip up against lesser competition. (And, by the way, where is the preliminary wailing over the fate of Alabama, who won more regular season games than anyone else in the country, then lost respectably to a Florida team that was obliterating every other team that dared to face them?)

If either Texas or Southern Cal had ended this year as the only undefeated BCS team in the country, they'd be in the Championship Game. But they couldn't, and in fact they lost to teams who were, in all likelihood, inferior. Texas couldn't beat a Texas Tech team that couldn't even stay on the same field with the Oklahoma Sooners that the Longhorns were supposedly so much better than. Southern Cal couldn't beat Oregon State, a team that got waxed by the same Penn State team that the Trojans dismantled Thursday.

Are Oklahoma and Florida the best one-loss teams in the country? On that, the BCS critics are probably right: We might never know.

But, please, spare me the whining about how unfair this outcome is to Southern Cal or, should the Longhorns win Monday, to Texas.

Both had a chance to make sure no could deny them the right to play for the championship. They blew it. And they have no one to blame but themselves.

1 recs | Comment 71 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

you can't inject reality into this conversation!!!!

what are you trying to do, let facts get in the way of a good argument?

I Am The 12th Man.com

by Beergut on Jan 2, 2009 1:23 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

What a Joke

Florida lost to an inferior Ole Miss, or did we forget? Texas beat Oklahoma, didn’t they?

I hope this year exposes the BCS for the fraud it is.

by WE ARE SC on Jan 2, 2009 2:01 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

And if Florida had been shut out, I'd have said the same thing

If you lose one game, you might be shut out of the national title game. That’s the way it goes.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 2, 2009 2:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

One close game does not prove one team is better than the other.

Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/

by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 3, 2009 8:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Good post

I feel exactly like you do — it’s a horrid hack of a system, but as long as it’s in place, no one can complain after losing a game.

I’m far more concerned with the fate of Utah or Boise State, effectively eliminated from the so-called I-A championship before a game is played. If SoCal is so worried about the cosmic unfairness of it all, perhaps they can exert a little influence to get the Rose Bowl to get behind reasonable compromise proposals that incorporate the BCS bowls into a playoff instead of de facto vetoing them because of the Rose Bowl’s colossal ego.

by PhilipVU94 on Jan 2, 2009 2:17 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Sorry, not exactly like you do

I very much want a multi-game playoff. I shouldn’t have skimmed past that part.

by PhilipVU94 on Jan 2, 2009 8:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What's the point here?

The conclusions, as laid out:

1) I don’t want a multi-team playoff.

2) I’m tired of hearing all this debate about who deserves to go to the title game.

I’m pretty sure you can’t embrace (1) and call for (2).

--PB--

by PB @ BON on Jan 2, 2009 4:10 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

No, the point is that if you lose a game you can't complain

Again, it matters not to me who it is. Once you lose a game in the current system, you know you might be shut out of the system. Everyone knows this from the beginning of the year. The solution is to win your games. Otherwise, you might be shut out.

“I’m tired of hearing all this debate about who deserves to go to the title game” because there’s no one (in my mind) with a legitimate gripe — even Alabama, to chose another one-loss team, this one from the SEC. If Texas or Southern Cal had gone undefeated, they could complain. But they didn’t.

I don’t like the BCS for a variety of reasons, but the only alternative is not a playoff. That’s a false choice playoff proponents like to advance.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 2, 2009 2:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What if you end up with. . .

. . . .a handful of 1-loss teams, an undefeated team (*Z) from a non-BCS at-large conference (who happens to have 4 wins over ranked opponents, 2 of which were an “over-rated” -your opinion with this one BYU and the other a #23 early-season Michigan team NO WHERE NEAR ANYONE’S EQUATION of "quality"), and of those 1-loss teams:

1- is from an “inflated” conference (SEC) A with 4 (possibly 5) wins over ranked opponents and 1 low quality win on their record, but also suffered their loss AT HOME to an unranked (but bowl-winning) team
2 -are from a conference lacking “overall defense” who share 8 wins over ranked opponents (only of of which will gain their 5th (B), and the other (C) quite possibly also have the distinction of losing to a team that got spanked in their bowl game loss- and who’ll also share 3 “low quality wins” between them
1- is from an “under rated” conference (D) with 4 wins over ranked opponents, ZERO “low quality wins”, who’s beat 5 bowl-winning teams, in addition to suffering their only loss to (AND at the time unranked) a 6th bowl-winning team.

A = Florida
B = Oklahoma
C = Texas
D = USC
Z = Utah

So if you’ve got 4 cream-of-the-crop 1-loss teams and 1 undefeated truly untested team (for the sake of argument, let’s not include any other team and stick with JUST this equation) how would you analyze it?

Trust me, we could include TCU and Boise- if you’re so inclined. . . . ., but honestly- I’m not down self-flagellation. At least not lately. . . .

’Bama (much to my chagrin, with 2 losses 3 low quality wins IS NOT IN THIS PICTURE)

Sound complicated? Sorry, just thought I’d ask anyway.

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 4, 2009 5:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Okay, first of all your analysis is somewhat flawed

To say USC has “ZERO ‘low quality wins’” is just absurd. Stanford, Washington and Washington State are low-quality wins. Arizona State is not a great win. Virginia got better as the year went on, but was playing awful football when Southern Cal annihilated them. (Two weeks later, the Cavaliers would lose to Duke by 28. DUKE.) And Notre Dame — which is one of your “bowl-winning teams,” thanks to the Hawaii Bowl — is hardly the stuff of legends. Unless you’re count MOV — and then, please tell me which Florida win is “low quality.”

Ole Miss was not ranked at the time they defeated Florida, but that is also a ridiculous argument. But that logic, you’d have to give LSU credit for defeating a “ranked” team because they won their game against Auburn and, hey, the Tigers from the Plains wer ranked then, right? Ole Miss is ranked now in some polls, and should be ranked after waxing Texas Tech, something 94 percent of America thought wouldn’t happen according to ESPN. Other than the Rebels, only Alabama (ranked No. 1 a the time, so Florida BEAT THE NO. 1 TEAM IN THE NATION by your logic) came within three touchdowns of Florida. I’m not sure how much better Florida could have done against its schedule, except go undefeated.

Again with Texas and Oklahoma — what exactly are you calling low-quality wins? Besides Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech, no one came within three TDs of Texas. Besides Texas and Kansas, no one came within three TDs of Texas. If you’re throwing out MOV, again — Washington, Washington State, Notre Dame, Stanford, etc.

This “inflated conference” stuff really irritates me, too. Yes, the SEC was overrated to begin the year. But looking at it after the year, it’s still a pretty good league — it’s just some of the teams we thought wouldn’t be good (Mississippi) were and some of the teams we thought would be good (Auburn) aren’t. I would point out that some of the teams that were supposed to be good Pac-10 team also weren’t — hello, Arizona State. If you want me to shred the Pac-10 overall, I’d be glad to do so, though I think they’re probably the 3rd-best conference in the country.

Utah, I think, has a legitimate gripe. That’s why I’m considering ranking them (and maybe the other one-loss teams) at No. 1.

My larger point is that I’m sick of teams like Southern Cal protesting that they are somehow “powerless” to stop the big, bad BCS from keeping them out of the title game. They aren’t powerless. In all but one of the 11 years we’ve had the BCS, undefeated teams from BCS conferences have gone to the national title game. WIN YOUR GAMES, and no one can “rob” you. (And, yes, if Florida or Oklahoma had been locked out of the national title game — sorry, they didn’t win all of their games, either.)

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 4, 2009 6:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

“if Florida or Oklahoma had been locked out of the national title game — sorry, they didn’t win all of their games, either.)” – that was gooood! But if I may, who the hell are you to tell people to ‘Shut up!’, I mean. . . .really. Last I checked, most Americans are given that right to gripe and have an opinion. And what makes it even more infuriating, is that you state yourself the system is “flawed”, so. . .to that end- when you’re out posting invectives like “Shut up” for people having an opinion you might not agree with BUT THAT you do agree is a controversial topic to begin with – with all do respect, you sound like an asshole! I’m not saying you are, just saying.

Low quality wins to me means wins over non-conference teams that are FCS schools, or very low tier FBS. Which would have looked like this:

Florida – Citadel
Texas – Florida Atlantic and UTEP (originally included because it’s OOC and 4-4 in C-USA, 5-7 overall isn’t high quality- to me)
Oklahoma – Chattanooga
Utah – Weber State (OOC 10-4), Utah St. (OOC 3-9)
Alabama – Tulane (OOC – 2-9), Western Kentucky (OOC – 2-9 ), Arkansas State (OOC – 6-6)

But you raise good points about the Washington Schools- however Stanford? They’re pretty good- how about we include ASU instead? ASU was a major disappointment, Stanford is getting better with Harbaugh and he’ll only work that program to get better.

Now, I was a bit chippy in my post, but I honestly (in my heart of hearts) believe that the world has a very good and sound match-up for the BCS/FSB championship next week. Admittedly, in all truthfulness- and after both USC’s and Utah’s win (oh lemme tell you THAT FREAKING SUCKED!!! I couldn’t watch ‘Bama get worked like that!)- coupled with T-Tech’s loss, I kinda lost my head a bit these past couple of days. In-and-out stupors of reality, if you will.

The Pac 10 “got lucky” this bowl season, and I say that with all seriousness and without hesitation. Oregon State with their 3-0 win over Pitt “should count as a loss” for both teams (bammer from Roll ’Bama Roll once wrote- and I thought that to be hilarious and totally appropriate).

With Utah beating Alabama, even though it was a pretty good lick- with all due respect, I’m not so sure they’d put that hurt on the teams like the Gators, Sooners, Longhorns, Nittany Lions, or us. (that Mountain West! Sheesh. . . .) I “voted” Utah over at CC for #1, too though. How weird is that? It just goes to show, I really don’t think we can claim, or have a right to claim #1. (a few writer’s votes wouldn’t be so bad though)

I’m all whacked out, and – as usual, verbose.

What a trippy weekend?
\

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 5, 2009 2:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I was a little ticked when I wrote this

I probably shouldn’t have chosen those exact words, but it was how I felt at the time (I had just read a post from a pro-playoff blogger, whom I won’t name because I otherwise respect him), and it kind of set me off.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 5, 2009 3:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And to elaborate...

Because I was in a hurry the first time around

I’ve got no problem with debate about who should be in the title game. I do have a problem with teams that lost chirping about “deserving” to be considered for No. 1, or get another chance, or whatever. They haven’t been “cheated” by the system. The system — flawed as it might be — gives you a way to guarantee you get in the championship game: Win. Short of that, your fate is in the hands of others. But you have a way to make sure no one else can deny you the opportunity (and it’s not a right) to play for the title.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 2, 2009 3:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Fair enough

That’s a distinction I agree with.

--PB--

by PB @ BON on Jan 2, 2009 7:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yah, sure, except the presence of Utah blows a giant whole in your argument. Have you forgotten Auburn’s snub so easily?

by honkskillet on Jan 4, 2009 12:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Obviously he meant

1. Start out in a BCS conference or as the University of Notre Dame.
2. Win all your games.
3. Hope no more than one of the teams ahead of you in the preseason popularity contest wins all of its games.

Then you will have a guaranteed spot in the NCG.

by PhilipVU94 on Jan 4, 2009 5:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I said all but one of the 11

Auburn clearly has a case. Utah might have a case, having gone undefeated.

(See my comment below for more on that.)

None of that changes the fact that, had Texas or Southern Cal won all of their games, they would have been in the national title game. That’s really not debatable. Utah has a complaint that the pollsters and others kept them out of the title game. No one else, in my mind, does.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 4, 2009 6:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hey cock!

You digressed from the words, “This is brought. . . .”

Get over yourself. Your a blog writer. Not a Wilbon or Plaschke.

I thought your football team was the only thing weak in Athens. . . . .?

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 2, 2009 11:36 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Or. . . .

. . . .whatever context this blog is attempting to cover- I’m actually unsure where you’re writing from. Athens is a small enough town to try to gauge your locality or disposition.

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 2, 2009 11:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure what most of that means

However, if you’re trying to suggest that I’m a Georgia fan or blogger, I have to take exception. I’m a South Carolina fan, and as painful as that might be, I’m insulted by the notion that I’m a Georgia fan.

If you look all over the page, it suggests that this is a blog about the SEC. I assure you, I’m not lying there. This was just a personal rant. brought on by Pete Carroll, Brent Musberger, ESPN and some other bloggers (some of whom I respect very much) trying to suggest that Southern Cal “deserved” to be in the title game.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 2, 2009 3:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I humbly apologize. Truly, I do.

It was a complete oversight by me, and I’m sincerely in the wrong. I realize that now. . . .after the fact.

If its all the same. . . ? I’ve been HEINOUSLY partying since Wednesday afternoon. And as such, I regretfully wrote my reply at “the very” time I should have been either:. . . sleeping or. . . . .at the very least, should have SERIOUSLY been considering putting the brakes on all the “fun times” I’d been having. . . . ?

It’s been weird.

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 2, 2009 10:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No problem.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 3, 2009 1:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

check post below

Paul D. Kelley

by so.cal.native1952 on Jan 3, 2009 3:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The thing is that Utah is 13-0 and will be voted #1 in ap as well deserved!

I’m an USC fan and I feel we had a great team, I don’t need a national champ to be happy. Quality football and the best record in the past 7rs is what i’m about, national championships are basically voted for not proven in college football. This way overall records and the amount of players moving on to NFL matter more.

Now that you guys have a coach maybe you can rebound but your not really getting top talent witch is tough. At least you got the Blowfish!

Paul D. Kelley

by so.cal.native1952 on Jan 3, 2009 3:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

tell that to Utah

[crickets]

by honkskillet on Jan 4, 2009 12:40 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

As Philip pointed out above ...

I’m talking about BCS teams. I said Texas and Southern Cal — who have been the loudest complainers so far — controlled their own fate by having the opportunity to win all their games. I’ve also said that the Mountain West Conference should probably get an auto-bid in the BCS instead of the Big East — and, if that happened, Utah would have every right to complain. Heck, they probably have the right to complain now. But that doesn’t do anything for the arguments of Texas and Southern Cal, because they didn’t go undefeated. Utah took care of its business against Oregon State — why couldn’t the GREAT AND POWERFUL TROJANS. And after watching Ole Miss play Texas Tech a few days ago, forgive me if I think Florida has a better loss than Texas.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 4, 2009 6:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Dude

Florida LOST AT HOME to Ol’ Miss, already! They weren’t THAT good in the earlier part of their season. Besides, Harrell just had SURGERY.
Texas lost to T-Tech in Lubbock! On a last second, OMIGOD, TD reception.

Talk about “flawed” analysis? WTF?

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 5, 2009 7:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And. . . .I just have to ask

What’s your story regarding USC? I asked you a few questions over there. Right here. (hint: it’s the one with 4 questions) You haven’t responded. Was I too _? (fill in your own blank, ‘cause obviously you’ve got issues)

You sounded all cool and shit in a few of your posts, but with your “GREAT AND POWERFUL TROJANS” crap, forgive me if it appears you’ve got a split-personality with regards to our team and/or our comments. And even if you’ve “apparently” read a few things from “pro-bloggers”, why be so transparent of your dislike for USC here on your site, yet talk a good talk over at Conquest Chronicles?

I don’t get it. You’ve lost a ton of points cocknfire, with me. (not that it means jack-shit in the grand scheme of things. . . . .)

Don’t answer the questions, that’s fine with me- it’s your perogative. Don’t even respond to this, that TOO is fine. Whatever cocknfire? Good luck in your endeavors! I mean it.

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 5, 2009 7:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If it's not too much to ask

“I said Texas and Southern Cal — who have been the loudest complainers so far” - I’m calling you on this:

Kindly, link us to where you see the complainers. (I’m talking about USC posts, comments, blogs- A. complaining about NOT being in the BCS title game. B. claiming we deserve to be #1)

YOU HAVE TO ANSWER THIS ONE, or you’ll credibility with EVERYONE who’s reading this!

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 5, 2009 8:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

-edit-

". . or you’ll LOSE credibility. . " (is what I meant to write. i’m ticked, is all)

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 5, 2009 8:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hey

Bix-

Dude how the hell did i get banned from the USC blog? I didn’t flame….cuss or anything close to that! I just disagreed with one of the Admins….see what you can do but only if you want to. My good name has been slammed over there and it bugs the hell out of me i cant defend myself!

When you are an Alabama fan you are expected to hate Auburn, I hate Tennessee because I want to.

by bammer on Jan 5, 2009 8:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

bammer

Hey man, first off- I hope things are good with you, and a hearty HAPPY NEW YEAR’S to you.

I, for one, know you ARE A VERY GOOD MAN and quite knowledgeable about sports, in general- college football FOR SURE! Besides, I dig your comments about things like something else!

That being said, I haven’t got ANY JUICE with Conquest Chronicles. But I promise, I’ll email ParagonSC tonight and state a case for you personally. (keep in mind, he’s quite a principled-man. that much- I do know about him. he’s also fair and reasoned. still. . . .?)

Again, I hope all is well with you and yours- I’ve read a few things between BRO7 and you. I hope all that works itself out too.

the reason I haven’t been commenting over at RBR, but I’ve read it religiously- is because 1. I haven’t wanted to “jinx” Bama (sports-superstition crap that- as an athlete myself, can’t seem to let go of) and 2. it’s kinda hard having your passions split between two hardcore football programs (without becoming a pariah in one, or worse- a “traitor” for another) That being said, I’ve loved the Tide’s season- hated the Utah game. (my new girlfriend has become a total ’Bama fan though! she thinks JPW is “cute” or something?)

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 5, 2009 8:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

I appreciate the vote of confidence. Things are good. My wife and I are expecting our first child here in about a week so that has my mind on things greater than football. It still bothers me i can stand up for myself.

Thanks for sticking with your principles and staying away from RBR. :) The Utah game sucked but there are good things coming. I get the whole being spilt between two worlds but its not like USC and Bama have anything in common or will ever cross paths (unless in the NCG). Its obvious your heart is with SC but your balls with Bama! Or is it the other way around…

Yeah im not sure whats going on with BR07. That kinda came out of nowhere and caught me off guard. Im hoping he was just pissed about losing and will get over it pretty soon. He’s a cool guy and i dont like having a rift with a fellow bama fan.

Great news on converting your GF into a bama fan….JP does have those bangs that make the girls go wild!

When you are an Alabama fan you are expected to hate Auburn, I hate Tennessee because I want to.

by bammer on Jan 5, 2009 10:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You gotta be kiddin' right?

If the Tide beat ass on Florida (ooooh! another dark day for me, I really thought they were gonna) and USC didn’t f_ck that game up in Corvallis? And everything else stayed the way they played out this year (sorry Utah. . .)- can you imagine?

Holy hatfields and the mccoys! (my family would have been brawling!)

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 5, 2009 10:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

thats true...

i guess at some point you have choose sides.I was just hoping it be Alabama.

When you are an Alabama fan you are expected to hate Auburn, I hate Tennessee because I want to.

by bammer on Jan 5, 2009 10:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It's lunchtime Tuesday Jan. 6th 2009

And still, nothing from cocknfire? I noticed you wrote a little something, “Um, it’s a blog”, but haven’t responded here to defend your, “. . .forgive me if I think Florida has a better loss than Texas” and “’I’m talking about BCS teams. I said Texas and Southern Cal — who have been the loudest complainers so far” comments that you’ve made in your replies to comments left here stemming from your “ticked off” response in writing this post. (I’m not even going to worry about the questions I left for you over at Conquest Chronicles, that’s prolly over and done with?)

Now, after the Rose Bowl- I’m sure there was a few articles written nationwide in both professional journalist’s media outlets and/or blogs, that- pretty much much should be expected. Those guys must sell space and print hyperbole.

However, when you wrote this post and answered replies- I’m not so sure where you saw people writing that USC should have been in the BCS title game (instead of Oklahoma or Florida), or where people were writing that USC should be voted #1 or share the national title as a split champion?

The SB Nation blog covering USC is Conquest Chronicles, and if you look at that poll, you’ll see that a number of respondents placed/voted Utah as their #1 FBS team. ???? Not so sure why you wrote all this sarcastic “GREAT AND POWERFUL TROJANS” stuff? Not sure why you’re telling all your readers for us to “Kindly, Shut Up!”?

I didn’t want to have to come over here to write any of what I’ve written since this post was put up by you cocknfire. I’ve responded and replied to what’s been written here, not to come over here and rain on anyone’s parade. They’ve been replies to comments you specifically made. Hopefully, in the future- we can read posts here at Team Speed Kills that reflect the true tenor and opinions to what rival fans, members, and blogs have posited. Otherwise, like you wrote over at Conquest Chronicles, " I like people who back up their opinions with fact . . . Good job there." (your written words)- not only will your opinions suffer, you’ll lose at least one reader – me – and a little degree of respect. Something a blog, not much more than 3 months old, should be so inclined to dismiss as “so what?”.

I sincerely wish you and Team Speed Kills well. Happy New Year! (good luck with SEC champ Florida. I think they’ve got the defense to beat Oklahoma, they sure as hell got the offense. In my heart though, because the Tide ain’t in the #1 discussion- I want to see the Sooners pull it out- and that the game turns out to be played like last night’s Fiesta Bowl. A little sloppy, lotsa turnovers, and a closely scored contest where Oklahoma pulls out a last minute victory. Good luck nonetheless)

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 6, 2009 4:19 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Dude, I've been moving to Tallahassee

I spent all Sunday night packing (save doing my Fiesta Bowl preview), all Monday driving down here and getting a few things in my apartment, and took a few minutes around break time at my new job today to shoot off a few short comments. I’m getting around to it, but this is really the first time I’ve had any free time on a computer, and it’s at a Panera Bread on a six-year-old computer with a wireless card.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 6, 2009 8:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I lived in Tally for 6 years! What part are you living in?

When you are an Alabama fan you are expected to hate Auburn, I hate Tennessee because I want to.

by bammer on Jan 6, 2009 8:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Blairstone, over by Gov Square Mall

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 6, 2009 8:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

not a bad area...

I had some friends that lived in those apartments…I kinda miss Tally. If you aren’t a party animal there isn’t much to do. I went to FSU for college so i always had something to do :) Then i turned my life around and was completely bored….Anyway i know the area pretty well and know of some good churches if you are interested.

When you are an Alabama fan you are expected to hate Auburn, I hate Tennessee because I want to.

by bammer on Jan 7, 2009 9:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I hope it's good eating for you!

No worries, and I look forward to your reply(ies).

Just so you know, there are absolutely no hard feelings or animosities in any of this, I just felt I had to answer to the “loudest complainers” comment and the fact that I know absolutely no one here in Los Angeles or through “the internets” who’ve been campaigning/complaining about USC not being in the BCS title game.

The remarks by Coach Carroll, some of the players, and a homer or two in the LA-print media who said what they said post-Rose Bowl, are the handful of people I can honestly attest to being “complaining”. But even still, there hasn’t been an iota of complaining, that I’m aware of, from Conquest Chronicles or the handful of blogs that I peruse which has stated a case for being left out of the BCS title game. And. . . I’m seriously curious.

If I’ve been “too much”, I apologize. I hope it’s somewhat understandable, considering the comments and circumstances of where we’re at right now- as it applies to the bowl season and the surprising outcomes.

Be safe and . . . .is the weather any better down there in Tallahassee than it was in Atlanta?

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 6, 2009 8:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I kind of like cold weather

So not so much.

Though it is kinda nice …

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 6, 2009 8:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Tallahassee + Co-eds = Kinda nice

Sheeeee! I’ll bet buddy! (have they come back, in full-force yet?)

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 7, 2009 4:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

girls out number guys at FSU

3-1….zoink!!!

When you are an Alabama fan you are expected to hate Auburn, I hate Tennessee because I want to.

by bammer on Jan 8, 2009 10:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh, I forgot

Here’s that poll at Conquest Chronicles that clearly shows the opinions heavily reflect that most ’SC members/readers think Utah is the deserving AP #1. (it reflected a high of @ 90% “yes” up and until last night/this morning- it now shows an 85% voting "yes")

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 6, 2009 4:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Bix- I hate to say it

but im either agreeing with cocknfire (i bet that name is killing you) or not understanding your point.

Maybe CC is saying Utah is #1 but plenty of other people are bitching up a storm. Though you are right about most writers only putting up hype just to make the pay check. That loss to OSU early and the terrible state that is the Pac-10 is what kept SC from the NCG. And dont throw the “the Pac-10 had 5 bowl teams!” Dude! The SEC had 8!!!!

Can you also clarify your “USC has no low quality wins”. That makes absolutely no sense to me. Perhaps im just reading it wrong. Because if you are saying that wins over WSU or UW are any better than a win over a AA team or Tulane then i have to disagree. When you almost go 0-12….i don’t care what conference you are in…thats low quality.

On a personal note. I would love to see the BCS have a four way tie. That would blow the whole thing into a million bits and will bring us a playoff. But what are we waiting for again? Oh yeah the Pac-10 and Big televen to go to a 12 team format! You do know that its the because of these two elitist conferences that we don’t have a playoff and are stuck with the BCS?

Also ( sorry i really dislike the Pac-10 which was made worse by your boys at CC this week) Sure you guys play all the teams in the league which is great and all. But a team from the SEC or Big 12 has to play that extra game to even get them into the NCG. That alone puts them ahead of SC/ Penn State/ OSU.

Im just trying to get some clarification here. I read through all the comments and all have “facts” and “opinions” in them. So im not sure who is right in this “debate”

When you are an Alabama fan you are expected to hate Auburn, I hate Tennessee because I want to.

by bammer on Jan 6, 2009 5:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Naw bammer, I value your opinions and you have great points

And in saying that, I believe cocknfire has GREAT points too. He’s as solid as they come! I welcome your comments and questions- that’s what all this is about.

Let’s maintain the context as to all this has come about:

1. cocknfire wrote this post following our Rose Bowl win, which is totally fair and absolutely within his rights and opinions- afterall, this is HIS blog and he can do what he so chooses. What’s not fair is he says he put the post up is because a “pro-blogger” or ??? (something he’s either seen written, heard, or otherwise) has the opinion or has complained that we should be in the NCG game OR should be given the AP #1 ranking (insinuating that bloggers, commenters, or otherwise have the opinion that we should share a split-national title). This is clearly not the case.

2. I’ve answered the “low quality wins” disagreement already. He called out “my” LQW’s as “flawed analysis”, but in my follow-up reply I tried to rectify any confusion over what LQW meant to me (“Low quality wins to me means wins over non-conference teams that are FCS schools, or very low tier FBS”) Furthermore, I conveyed, “But you raise good points about the Washington Schools- however Stanford? They’re pretty good- how about we include ASU instead? ASU was a major disappointment, Stanford is getting better with Harbaugh and he’ll only work that program to get better”. As well as writing “I honestly (in my heart of hearts) believe that the world has a very good and sound match-up for the BCS/FSB championship next week” – in hopes that it was/is understood by anyone reading, that I truly don’t believe that USC CANNOT credibly move into the BCS nor AP #1 by any stretch of my imagination.

Because if you factor in his argument- which is totally fair and quite sound ("what about the Washington schools, etc) : USC would end up 6 LQW and one-loss: with – in order

Florida – Tennessee (2-5 / 4-7), Arkansas (2-5/ 5-7) + 1 (Citadel) = 3 LQW (and I’ll let Hawaii in WAC slide, cool?)

Oklahoma – Baylor (2-5 / 4-8), Kansas State (2-5 / 5-7), Texas A&M (2-6 / 4-8), Washington (0-9 / 0-12)+ 1 (Chattanooga) = 5 LQW

Texas – Arkansas (2-5 SEC / 5-7), Colorado (2-6 / 5-7), Baylor (2-5 / 4-8), Texas A&M (2-6 / 4-8) + 2 (Florida Atlantic and UTEP) = 6 LQW

Utah – Michigan (although #23 when they played- went 2-6 / 3-9), Wyoming (1-7 / 4-8), New Mexico (2-6 / 4-8), UNLV (2-6 / 5-7), San Diego St. (1-7 / 2-10) + 2 (Weber State & Utah State) = 7 LQW (in being generous and giving the benefit of the doubt: we could take out Weber St because they DID have a winning record, BUT are OOC and are in the lower-tier Big Sky conference, so we’ll give them a) 6 LQW with wins over 4 ranked teams to keep them in this discussion.

Here’s how USC’s LQW would look like:
USC – Virginia (4-4 / 5-7), Arizona St. (4-4 / 5-7), Washington St. (1-8 / 2-11), Washington (0-9 / 0-12), Stanford (4-5 / 5-7), UCLA (3-6, 4-8), and I WILL NOT give you Notre Dame (whatever the universal feelings are for Notre Dame- they did have a 7-6 winning record, and won their bowl game- who beat Hawaii ~~7-7 in WAC, and afterall~~ I let you slide on that, give this one to me, cool?) = 6 LQW

So, if we couple both cocknfire’s idea of “low quality wins” (losing record in BCS, even if it’s “in conference”, rivalry game or not), as well as mine (I’m trying to be rational with this)- cocknfire wins that point hands down. And as I’ve stated in my reply- the two teams who are in the BCS title game DEFINITELY DESERVE their placings. So, to that end- the rightful winning team of the BCS title game AND their records will reflect (according to our truce on the LQW point / definition) the true champion for this year’s FBS is the true champion. (no argument from me- besides, that’s NOT what this whole argument/discussion is between us- it’s STILL the “complaining” about NOT being in the BCS title game, post USC’s Rose Bowl victory. that’s what this is all about)

Regarding “your” opinion on the “extra-game” being played in the SEC, two things:

1. it’s stipulated that if a conference has more than 10 teams competing (not sure if that means 11, or 12- it must be 12 because the Big Televen doesn’t have one) – than a championship game will decide the champion, as the conference would be broken up in 2 divisions.

2. not everyone plays each other each and every year, and it’s kinda weird considering all of the teams in the SEC have a reasonable proximity to each other. that’s not either here nor there, it just is something to think about.

this last part I wanted to reply to because you brought it up, but has nothing to do with what’s been going on in this thread.

Otherwise, the question I have regarding the Ol’ Miss victory at The Swamp (a HOME SEC crowd in Florida’s favor, plus the fact that Mississippi WASN’T even ranked at the time) coupled with the fact that they beat Texas Tech in the Cotton Bowl (home game for T-Tech?) AFTER the fact that they (Ol’ Miss) agreeably got better and better throughout their season, plus T-Tech playing with a “semi-injured” / “recovering from surgery” Graham Harrell in which Ol’ Miss hung on to eek out the win- to me- is hardly convincing, and easily debatable.

Oklahoma -

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 6, 2009 7:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

A few things

Washington is even worse than Bammer said, because they didn’t almost go 0-12 — they did go 0-12.

Second … Pete Carroll is one of the ones who implied several times that Southern Cal should be in the national championship game. Then, he did what he always did — smiled afterward and gave winning answers about that being for other people to decide, he thinks this team could defeat any team in the country, etc. etc. etc.

And I didn’t want to do this — because I have an immense amount of respect for him ~~- but if I’m going to be called a liar, here’s~~ ?urn=ncaaf,131863#remaining-content" >example one:

Nothing against the Gators or Sooners, who earned their positions at the top of the polls, but I can’t respect the legitimacy of any game that excludes any team as overwhelming as this edition of Southern Cal.

Not a USC blog, but I can pull some of Carroll’s quotes if you want.

As far as Ole Miss — I haven’t ever bought into the concept that teams get magically “better” or “worse” as the season goes by, unless a player returns or the team changes schemes, or something. The Rebels were better than their record for the first part of the year — two of their losses came from a bad turnover (Vanderbilt) and Chris Smelley mysteriously choosing the game in Oxford to have the game of his life (South Carolina).

Answer me this question: How does a team that goes down 14-0, then ends up winning 47-34, “h[a]ng on to eek out the win,” because you must have been watching a different Cotton Bowl than I saw. And while Harrell might have been injured, Ole Miss did manage to get some pressure on him.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 6, 2009 8:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Don't know why that happened on the link, and SBN still doesn't have an edit button

So we’ll try this …

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Another-Rose-Bowl-laugher-and-the-joke-s-still-?urn=ncaaf,131863#remaining-content

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 6, 2009 8:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Should we count the Washington wins as losses?

Anyway, I’ve conceded the point(s) on “low quality wins”.

I hope.

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 6, 2009 8:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hey

I gotta get out of here, for now. My work day is over and I gotta get on the good foot. I’ll check back later.

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 6, 2009 8:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Lastly

The fact will remain that:

Texas lost (AWAY) to a ranked team.
Florida lost (at HOME) to an unranked team, no matter what.

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 6, 2009 8:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

My comment

from above is solely “on point”.

Texas doesn’t have a good case for #1, even though they barely beat tOSU last night. There LQW is high/strength of schedule is weak compared to either Oklahoma and Florida- as far as the larger picture is concerned. This I would agree with.

It will come down to Oklahoma, Florida, and Utah to fight for the AP #1’s. This has been and is my point all along.

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 6, 2009 8:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So, just to be clear

Southern Cal’s win over then-No. 23 Oregon is less impressive than LSU’s win over then-No. 10 Auburn? After all, the Tigers were ranked higher…

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 7, 2009 1:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What the?

Let’s be even CLEARER.

What the hell does USC and LSU have to do with it (AP #1 votes) right now? We’re discussing AP #1 votes for Texas, I thought.

LSU has absolutely nothing to do with this.

This part of our discussion has to do with your comments, “Utah would have every right to complain. Heck, they probably have the right to complain now. But that doesn’t do anything for the arguments of Texas and Southern Cal, because they didn’t go undefeated”, as well as “. . . . And after watching Ole Miss play Texas Tech a few days ago, forgive me if I think Florida has a better loss than Texas.”

Again, why bring up a ‘SC win over Oregon and a LSU win over Auburn? I don’t get it. Help me now will you? (I gotta know the context in which you bring this reply up, because I’m a bit confused right now. Thanks)

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 7, 2009 4:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'll check back later on in the week, okay?

Because, one blogger and one coach doesn’t make a lick of sense- if you’re going to write, “Texas and Southern Cal — who have been the loudest complainers so far” – thereby “insinuating” some pervasive national uproar that falsely insinuates the USC Trojans fanbase has been complaining for being left out of the BCS title game. (with regards to Texas or their fans? I don’t know, I don’t follow them that much and to be honest- I haven’t read much on that front either. at least, not yet. But I digress with Texas, let’s stay on topic. Why I’m even here to begin with. . . .)

With regards to “Southern Cal being the loudest complainers – am I missing something? Where are ALL THESE COMPLAINERS (plural, not singular. You’ve only fingered Coach Carroll. Matt Hinton is a Southern Miss-fan. Wrong "Southern” !) Afterall, THAT IS the basis of motivation behind writing this post- isn’t it? Where are they?

You see, when you write stuff like that- it leaves your readers with the impression that you’ve read or heard some major griping from all over the media or something? When you’re shouting, “Kindly, Shut Up” to an, in fact, muted-fanbase- it sounds kinda silly at best. . . .fill in your own blank, at worst.

So I’ll await the other complainers information for later on in the week. Most of which, I hope- is dated links, quotes, comments for the dates covering Jan. 1st, 2009 -up and until Jan. 7th, 2009 (and that’s being generous).

After the Oklahoma/Florida, if it turns out to be god-awful. . . .I can just imagine what “some people” might say, and how some people might comment. But, I’m calling you on this post, and your most recent replies- that have to do with “what you’ve heard lately”.

Otherwise, this was just an exercise of telling people to “shut up” for nothing.

(now as for Texas? they’re not my concern, they’ll have to fight their own fights)

Thanks for responding over at Conquest Chronicles, and thanks for your limited responses here. I look forward to hearing more from you cocknfire.

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 7, 2009 1:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry, didn't notice you asked me a question in this comment? Here it is

“How does a team that goes down 14-0, then ends up winning 47-34, "h[a]ng on to eek out the win," because you must have been watching a different Cotton Bowl than I saw.” – The game that I saw (admittedly, I was fiddling with my new iPod- lost mine on a short Christmas trip, was imbibing with Red Bull & Ketel One, and smooching with my g-friend)- I witnessed a T-Tech that wasn’t exactly putting up a “Nittany Lion” fight of a game, but that – apart from a TO or two kept the game interesting/driving for a score or two in the 4th qtr. Am I thinking of the wrong game?

Maybe I was looking at it with the same sort of “glasses” of someone who witnessed/watched a visiting and unranked Ole Miss Running Rebels team (coming off 4 straight losing seasons and a 3-8 campaign with no conference wins in 2007) come in and NOT only charge back on the arguably BEST team in the SEC but score 24 points in the 2nd half- on the (then) 4th ranked Florida Gators and seal the school’s 600th victory at the venerable, LOUD, and highly-partisan Ben Hill Griffin Stadium in Gainesville, FL. . . and think “no big deal”? Did we watch a different game on THAT one?

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 7, 2009 3:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Again, you're stopping at a point in time only because it benefits your argument

By that standard, South Carolina had a great team last year because they were ranked No. 6. Then came the rest of the season — and that part counts too.

You can’t pick and choose your timeframe because it makes your argument look better.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 7, 2009 1:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Tell me

Then what are you doing using it against Texas? Your words, “And after watching Ole Miss play Texas Tech a few days ago, forgive me if I think Florida has a better loss than Texas.”

Texas lost to a ranked T-Tech (when T-Tech was ranked). T-Tech lost to Ole Miss (in a bowl game). Ol’ Miss beat Florida IN FLORIDA while they were unranked.

Who’s using what and where?

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 7, 2009 3:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And. . .

. . .I’m not calling you a hypocrite.

Like I never called you a liar. “And I didn’t want to do this — because I have an immense amount of respect for him – but if I’m going to be called a liar,”

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 7, 2009 3:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Here's what I mean

And here’s why I used the LSU/Southern Cal example above:

I could care less what a team was ranked earlier in the season. Doesn’t matter to me at all. What are they ranked now — after they’ve played all of their games, after the sample size is large enough to make some conclusion about how good they are.

The reason I referred to Auburn above is that they were ranked No. 10 in the nation at the time they played LSU. Anyone who puts that down as a quality win for LSU is out of their minds. Early season rankings are worthless. Several people took to calling Ole Miss “the best 3-4 team in the country.” At the time, I was skeptical — but I was wrong.

Ole Miss is a good team. Were a good team at the beginning of the season. Got beat by an opportunistic team (Vandy) and a team riding a QB’s career day (South Carolina). Otherwise, they start the season 5-2, the losses being to Wake Forest and Alabama, and they probably are ranked.

Early- and mid-season rankings don’t tell me anything about Texas Tech, don’t tell me anything about Ole Miss. We’ve got to take into account all of the data up until now — and seeing what we’ve seen from Ole Miss over the course of the whole season, I’d say that’s not a bad loss for Florida to have

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 7, 2009 7:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks

But here’s where I’m coming from:

We’ve taken into account who gets “voted” into the #1 and #2 slots for the BCS/FBS national title game. When doing so, most people, fans, voters take into account the W-L records of teams, their losses during the season are weighed by “who” they lost to (ranked or unranked teams/home or away games), and the quality of their wins, strengths of schedule, etc. Nothing can change the fact that Oklahoma and Florida are in the BCS title game- because before the bowls were played- who was to say that a Utah, Texas, USC, Alabama, or Penn State couldn’t have been there too? “Flawed system”? we’ve already gone over that. It obviously is.

So, in being “voted” into the #1 and #2 slots, “we” use such data as: did these teams win quality games? did these teams lose to quality teams?

We can’t just all of the sudden STOP using that data as criteria for continuing to view “this” team as having a bad loss, or “that” team as having a quality win. And even using your “body of work” analysis, why deny a person from doing so. Look, you’ve already stated a distaste for USC over at Conquest Chronicles- so as far as everything is concerned, nothing can or will change your mind about that. That’s fine. It should be “fine” that you won’t convince me or change my mind on this, your “body of work” analysis.

This isn’t a Speech and Debate class. Nothing is at stake here. No awards are gonna be handed out. And I say that because earlier- I could have NOT been generous and stuck to MY version of what a “low quality win” is. . . and not conceded anything. This is a blog with an open forum, I’m not self-important enough to think I can change yours or anyone’s mind on things, as I’m sure you’re not either.

With that said, I won’t concede here. There are any rules and regulations at “deducing” here on Team Speed Kills, if there are- I haven’t read it.

I’ll deduce the loss that Florida suffered as a loss to a ranked team as a colossal loss, as much as I’ll deduce their win over ranked ‘Bama as a quality win. You’ll deduce what you wanna deduce. . . and that will be that.

We’ve both got our facts, and we both have our opinions. Our health and spirits continue to be left intact.

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 7, 2009 7:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

{edit}

corrections:

“There AREN’T any rules and regulations”
“Florida suffered a loss to an UNRANKED team”

typing too fast and trying to get outta work.

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 7, 2009 7:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, let me put the question this way then

What makes Ole Miss’ ranking (or non-ranking) when they played Florida more valuable than their ranking now? Why is the old ranking more reliable than the new one?

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 7, 2009 9:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

May I use the MIGHTY AND POWERFUL SEC . . .

. . .label?

Y’all always talk about the SEC, and even at RBR- they show a poll that clearly states (on a SEC/’Bama centric blog) that HOME GAMES mean A LOT.

No matter how you slice it cocknfire, home games (SEC or not) are VERY VERY hard for a visiting team to win. Winning an away game in the SEC is one of the most difficult things to do, would you agree? A #4 ranked team in the SEC losing (let’s be generous) to a “unranked 5-2 team” AT HOME is worst than a visiting #1 team in the Big 12 losing to a home #5 team, regardless of the body of work analysis.

So, a #8 Texas Tech team, with a post-surgically repaired starting quarterback losing to a #24 ranked (and you’ve said yourself, better team than they’ve been given credit for) Ole Miss team in a bowl game only tells me that T-Tech won a game that could have gone either way to begin with, NOT that it is understandable that Florida lost a home game to a “misunderstood” or “better than everyone truly knew” Ole Miss team.

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 7, 2009 10:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Also

We’ll see how the Florida / Oklahoma game plays out, okay?

If Florida beats Oklahoma, I’ll reluctantly cede this argument.
If Oklahoma beats Florida, what will you say?

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 7, 2009 10:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Now that I've re-read your comment. . .

. . . Ole Miss’ ranking IS NOT more valuable when they played Florida than their ranking now- it JUST IS. So, in comparing “time to fit the argument” – you’re the one who highlights it more than anyone when you say "forgive me if I think Florida has a better loss than Texas." (you’re the one who asserts a given, then tries to take away the powers of information to work out the equation).

As far as reliability, it’s neither here nor there. It’s subjective to the one who’s asserting it.

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 7, 2009 11:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Where do you stand?

Ranking – important or not?
Early season ranking – important or not?
End of season ranking – important or not?
Home game – important or not?
Away game – important or not?
(I have to ask you both “home” or “away” because you’re the one who appears to like to “split hairs”)
Close win – important or not?
Blow out win – important or not?
Good, back and forth game – important or not?

Where do you stand?
(and puh-leaze, don’t answer “depends on this or that” with ANY OF THE QUESTIONS . . .it’s like pulling teeth here now!)

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 7, 2009 11:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually. . .

. . . .INCLUDE your “depends on this or thats”. . . .I’m a glutton for punishment and I GOTTA HEAR them!

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 8, 2009 12:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Okay

Ranking — Important

Early season ranking — Important only at the time; by the end of the season, completely irrelevant

End of season raking — Very important, because all data points (aka games) are included

Home game — Somewhat important. And, yes, it does depend — playing at Papa John’s Cardinal Stadium is probably a bit easier on the road team than the Big House most years — wouldn’t you say?

Away game — A little more important. I’m more impressed by a team winning on the road than I am disappointed by a team losing at home.

Close win — Now that really does depend. Georgia almost always beats South Carolina narrowly, no matter the year or the quality of the respective teams. Rivalries tend to be closer than other games. Close wins over mid-major or FCS teams early in the season don’t bother me — later in the season, they do.

Blowout win — Very important, but only if the teams are both BCS teams or BCS-caliber teams. If it’s Florida vs. The Citadel, it’s only got minor importance.

Good, back and forth game — As a fan, very important. When it comes to ranking teams — again, depends. Is it a team that gets a 21-0 lead in the first quarter, then blows it? Is there defense being played, or are the teams just marching up and down the field against one another? Each game is its own, and can’t be defined in that broad a stroke.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Jan 8, 2009 1:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You're a very "interesting" guy!

Your answers to the “home game” and “blow out win” questions are- I mean, call me crazy and all, but almost completely anti-thetical to the way the majority of football fans/analysts (both professional and college) would have answered. Home game losses to ~~especially an unranked underdog – weigh heavily in most people’s minds. Apparently, not yours. And blow out wins aren’t calculated (or not heavily weighed~~ and/or shouldn’t be) in the BCS quotient, as well as most fans and analysts.

Still, I think I’ve got enough information to pay your site a visit next year- as the teams work their way through the FBS system AND GET BETTER (not "magically- but through nailing down their systems and GAIN EXPERIENCE – as far as underclassmen as concerned) as their respective season progresses.

This has been an interesting back and forth.

Hope those Gators prove you right, but I have a strong feeling Oklahoma is going to smoke them tonight. We’ll see?

Later for now, and I’ll be reading . . . .

"I was INVERTED!" -Maverick in Top Gun

by BixBeiderbecke on Jan 8, 2009 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed

Search

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

New FanPost All FanPosts

Team Speed Kills: An SB Nation Community

Login Bar

Network Bar

SEC football begins in 62 days