All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > College Football > Playoffs, a season early
11/21/2013 9:21 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/21/2013 8:21:00 AM (view original):
Pretty sure you'd question anything that doesn't have OSU in the top three.     I already said I don't necessarily agree with all of it but OSU at 8 seems about right to me.

From 3:05 yesterday:
"I believe, on a neutral field, that OSU would be underdogs to Bama, FSU, Oregon, Stanford, Baylor.   I think they'd be pick 'ems with Auburn, Clemson, Mizzou, TAMU, SC and Mich St.

So, yeah, OSU at 8 sounds about right even if the 7 in front aren't quite right."

 
I could easily see OSU at 4 behind Baylor as well.  But any system that says Wisconsin is #4 should be questioned heavily.  It is the same thing with colonels ranking.  He might luck into 1 and 2 being correct, but there are so many flaws with the ranking on the whole that it can't be trusted.  That is all I'm saying.

And seriously, do you consider a 4 yard play on 1st and 10 a successful play or an unsuccessful play?

11/21/2013 9:23 AM
Posted by moranis on 11/21/2013 9:19:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/21/2013 8:52:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moranis on 11/21/2013 6:45:00 AM (view original):
Winston's DNA matches the sample from the alleged rape victim.  It would be interesting if Winston is charged prior to the final polls.
I don't think it makes any difference for OSU moving ahead of FSU.     But Winston's Heisman hopes might be trashed.    That said, DNA found in panties isn't always a sign of rape.  
I think the voters might hurt FSU if they think Winston isn't going to be playing in the bowl game.  Wouldn't be surprised at all to vote them lower?  I can't think of a time where a football team lost a major player late in the year, but I know in basketball teams have been voted (and seeded) lower when they lose a starter late in the year.
I wouldn't doubt a few voters would lower FSU.  I just don't think the impact will be enough.   And, quite honestly, if Baylor wins out, OSU is going to finish behind them. 
11/21/2013 9:26 AM
Posted by moranis on 11/21/2013 9:21:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/21/2013 8:21:00 AM (view original):
Pretty sure you'd question anything that doesn't have OSU in the top three.     I already said I don't necessarily agree with all of it but OSU at 8 seems about right to me.

From 3:05 yesterday:
"I believe, on a neutral field, that OSU would be underdogs to Bama, FSU, Oregon, Stanford, Baylor.   I think they'd be pick 'ems with Auburn, Clemson, Mizzou, TAMU, SC and Mich St.

So, yeah, OSU at 8 sounds about right even if the 7 in front aren't quite right."

 
I could easily see OSU at 4 behind Baylor as well.  But any system that says Wisconsin is #4 should be questioned heavily.  It is the same thing with colonels ranking.  He might luck into 1 and 2 being correct, but there are so many flaws with the ranking on the whole that it can't be trusted.  That is all I'm saying.

And seriously, do you consider a 4 yard play on 1st and 10 a successful play or an unsuccessful play?

I think any coach would take 4 on 1st down all day.   However, stat nerds go beyond the numbers we accept.   I assume, perhaps incorrectly, that 2nd and 6 is a failure of some sort when it comes to scoring. 

Personally, I think 2nd and 6 allows for a pass or a run.   Maybe the stats show that teams that run the ball in that situation fail to get a 1st down more often than not.   Therefore, it's a passing situation and any result that leads to a "forced" decision is a failure.
11/21/2013 9:52 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/21/2013 9:26:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moranis on 11/21/2013 9:21:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/21/2013 8:21:00 AM (view original):
Pretty sure you'd question anything that doesn't have OSU in the top three.     I already said I don't necessarily agree with all of it but OSU at 8 seems about right to me.

From 3:05 yesterday:
"I believe, on a neutral field, that OSU would be underdogs to Bama, FSU, Oregon, Stanford, Baylor.   I think they'd be pick 'ems with Auburn, Clemson, Mizzou, TAMU, SC and Mich St.

So, yeah, OSU at 8 sounds about right even if the 7 in front aren't quite right."

 
I could easily see OSU at 4 behind Baylor as well.  But any system that says Wisconsin is #4 should be questioned heavily.  It is the same thing with colonels ranking.  He might luck into 1 and 2 being correct, but there are so many flaws with the ranking on the whole that it can't be trusted.  That is all I'm saying.

And seriously, do you consider a 4 yard play on 1st and 10 a successful play or an unsuccessful play?

I think any coach would take 4 on 1st down all day.   However, stat nerds go beyond the numbers we accept.   I assume, perhaps incorrectly, that 2nd and 6 is a failure of some sort when it comes to scoring. 

Personally, I think 2nd and 6 allows for a pass or a run.   Maybe the stats show that teams that run the ball in that situation fail to get a 1st down more often than not.   Therefore, it's a passing situation and any result that leads to a "forced" decision is a failure.
But if you don't account for actual results with actual wins and losses what are you doing.  8-2 Wisconsin should never be ranked ahead of 10-0 Ohio State based on this season.
11/21/2013 10:18 AM
As I said yesterday, CFB is not the NFL.    Where do you put NIU or Fresno State?    Their actual results are what they are.  W/L are fine but, in CFB, I think you have to go beyond that.    Would OSU shitkick NIU or FS?   I certainly think so.    But I listed eight 1-2 loss teams(and left LSU off the list) that I think would be favored or pick 'ems vs undefeated OSU on a neutral field.     We should get to see at least one of those match-ups and, if OSU beats MSU, we'll see two of them. 
11/21/2013 11:57 AM
Posted by moranis on 11/21/2013 9:19:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/21/2013 8:52:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moranis on 11/21/2013 6:45:00 AM (view original):
Winston's DNA matches the sample from the alleged rape victim.  It would be interesting if Winston is charged prior to the final polls.
I don't think it makes any difference for OSU moving ahead of FSU.     But Winston's Heisman hopes might be trashed.    That said, DNA found in panties isn't always a sign of rape.  
I think the voters might hurt FSU if they think Winston isn't going to be playing in the bowl game.  Wouldn't be surprised at all to vote them lower?  I can't think of a time where a football team lost a major player late in the year, but I know in basketball teams have been voted (and seeded) lower when they lose a starter late in the year.
Chris weinke, fsu 1998
11/21/2013 3:25 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/21/2013 10:18:00 AM (view original):
As I said yesterday, CFB is not the NFL.    Where do you put NIU or Fresno State?    Their actual results are what they are.  W/L are fine but, in CFB, I think you have to go beyond that.    Would OSU shitkick NIU or FS?   I certainly think so.    But I listed eight 1-2 loss teams(and left LSU off the list) that I think would be favored or pick 'ems vs undefeated OSU on a neutral field.     We should get to see at least one of those match-ups and, if OSU beats MSU, we'll see two of them. 
I'd probably have NIU in the 20 range and Fresno in the 25 range.  Actual results doesn't mean ranking all of the unbeatens ahead of all of the 1 loss teams, which are ahead of the 2 loss teams, etc.  It means analyzing the complete package, which includes both subjective and objective factors.  Obviously record matters, but so does schedule strength, talent, etc. 
11/21/2013 3:28 PM
Posted by ncmusician_7 on 11/21/2013 11:57:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moranis on 11/21/2013 9:19:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/21/2013 8:52:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moranis on 11/21/2013 6:45:00 AM (view original):
Winston's DNA matches the sample from the alleged rape victim.  It would be interesting if Winston is charged prior to the final polls.
I don't think it makes any difference for OSU moving ahead of FSU.     But Winston's Heisman hopes might be trashed.    That said, DNA found in panties isn't always a sign of rape.  
I think the voters might hurt FSU if they think Winston isn't going to be playing in the bowl game.  Wouldn't be surprised at all to vote them lower?  I can't think of a time where a football team lost a major player late in the year, but I know in basketball teams have been voted (and seeded) lower when they lose a starter late in the year.
Chris weinke, fsu 1998
Not exactly the same thing since FSU went on to beat #4 ranked Florida after Weinke went down and before the national title game.  Thus FSU showed they were still worthy of the #2 ranking and playing Tennessee for the national title.
11/21/2013 7:10 PM (edited)

MikeT23 believing that there's "merit in the process" of the S&P+ ratings is interesting... the obvious first thought is that he's saying that as a fancy way of saying: "I believe that Ohio State is 8th, so any order for the rest of the teams is fine... as long as Ohio State is lower than 4th."

But, as moranis has tried to point out... the rest matters. If you can't trust it to rank Wisconsin, Auburn, Utah or a whole host of other teams close to properly, why would anyone trust it to rank Ohio State properly & why should we put stock in it? I've got a set of rankings that I'll present right here... they are not my personal rankings, but I believe they are far more trustworthy than S&P+:

1. Alabama

2. Florida State

3. Ohio State

4. Oregon

5. Baylor

6. Stanford

7. Auburn

8. Clemson

9. Missouri

10. Wisconsin

11. Arizona State

12. Oklahoma State

13. Michigan State

14. Texas A&M

15. South Carolina

16. UCLA

17. LSU

18. USC

19. Georgia

20. Northern Illinois

21. UCF

22. Oklahoma

23. Louisville

24. Mississippi

25. Washington

On the radar: Fresno State, BYU, Duke, Notre Dame, Florida, Virginia Tech & Minnesota


Unlike MikeT23, I won't give any fancy talk about how they aren't really even that close to correct, but since they have a certain team or two in a spot that's not laughable, I'll say there's "merit in the process" of them. I actually believe these rankings are at least close to right, nothing too much out of the realm of reality.

11/21/2013 8:50 PM

I don't think you understand the meaning of "merit".    Which isn't surprising at all.   How old are you?    12?

11/21/2013 8:54 PM
Posted by moranis on 11/21/2013 3:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/21/2013 10:18:00 AM (view original):
As I said yesterday, CFB is not the NFL.    Where do you put NIU or Fresno State?    Their actual results are what they are.  W/L are fine but, in CFB, I think you have to go beyond that.    Would OSU shitkick NIU or FS?   I certainly think so.    But I listed eight 1-2 loss teams(and left LSU off the list) that I think would be favored or pick 'ems vs undefeated OSU on a neutral field.     We should get to see at least one of those match-ups and, if OSU beats MSU, we'll see two of them. 
I'd probably have NIU in the 20 range and Fresno in the 25 range.  Actual results doesn't mean ranking all of the unbeatens ahead of all of the 1 loss teams, which are ahead of the 2 loss teams, etc.  It means analyzing the complete package, which includes both subjective and objective factors.  Obviously record matters, but so does schedule strength, talent, etc. 
I have no idea where I'd put either of them.    I haven't seen them or their opponents play enough to judge.    But, when i put a team ahead of unbeaten OSU, I do so because I've seen plenty of OSU and the teams I put in front of them.   I wouldn't even try to rank 25, like our 'rasslin' fan did, because I don't know enough about those 25.
11/21/2013 10:09 PM
Let's find out who understands the word "merit" better & we can start by taking a look at the definition:

"the quality of being particularly good or worthy, esp. so as to deserve praise or reward."

If the process is particularly good or worthy, then why did that process come up with Auburn at 22nd & Louisville 7th or how about Utah in the Top 25? There's way too many flaws for the process that came up with those rankings to have "merit". So, keep reading the definition of the word & then come talk to me when your opinion has some of it.
11/22/2013 6:39 AM
Jeez.   They examined the stats waaaaaaay deeper than you, me, moranis or anyone else with an opinion in this thread.   As I said earlier, they consider a 4 yard gain on 1st down a failure.    I don't know why but, if you'll read my theory, it makes sense.

Out of curiousity, how many times have you seen each team in your top 25 play?
11/22/2013 8:35 AM
Anyway, back to my point, the statnerds dig a lot deeper than we do.    From your top 25, I've seen the majority of 3+ games from your top 9.   I feel I have a valid opinion of them.    I've seen virtually nothing but highlights(and a game against OSU) from 10-11.   I wouldn't venture to compare them to the top 9.   12-19 with the exception of UCLA, 3+ again.    NIU-0, UCF-2, OK-2, LOU-1.5, Miss/Wash-0.

Now, how in the hell could I have a valid opinion on a team that I haven't really seen play at least twice?   So, like you, I'd look at stats.    Which is EXACTLY what the S&P+ people do.   Except, rather than using final score and total yards, they dig a LOT deeper than that.   That's why their process has MERIT.   Whereas your process is virtually meaningless by comparison. 

IOW, when we start discussing the WCW champ, you'll be a fine source.    CFB, not so much.
11/22/2013 12:34 PM
Based on the s&p rankings, their analysis sucks -I don't care how much effort they've put into it-.
of 28
All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > College Football > Playoffs, a season early

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.