Posted by MyGeneration on 3/20/2014 2:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 3/20/2014 1:58:00 PM (view original):Why "exactly?" While it may be true that dear Ivy (Phelan) notches only one NT win this season (and it sure will not be from my rebuilding Dartmouth), there is no basis for saying that Ivy teams are "manipulating their RPI to look better than they are," or scheduling OOC in any manner, shape or form different from power conferences (or any conferences, for that matter), & a quick look at Phelan IVY OOC disproves the contention of gamesmanship. That's just silly, irresponsible journalism, fellas.
Posted by Lizak on 3/20/2014 12:10:00 PM (view original):exactly...
"Find it amusing that so many people that were saying it is near impossible for mid majors to compete with BCS conferences have steered clear of this thread."
They aren't competing with the BCS conferences. They are manuipulating their RPI to look better than they are. They won't likely get more than one NT win over the entire conference and might be lucky to get that. When they actually starting winning games against BCS teams both regular season and NT then you have something to talk about.
Honor remains intact in Phelan Ivy. If any member team was suspected of manipulating its RPI in some untoward way, we would be required, as men of the Ivy, to turn them in.
the "exactly" was really to kmason. he brings up this example that in no way demonstrates anything, in reference to the original argument about the difficulty of mid majors competing at a high level. i did avoid posting because really he is better than that :) this is a worthless waste of time example and he knows it (see his post about 6 up).
the "exactly" had nothing to do with the ivy conference or anyone in it. i was not questioning your honor and i doubt lizak was either. also, by saying, "this proves nothing", im not slamming the ivy league in any way. it just proves nothing re: the mid major argument. its a ****** example for kmason to bring up because he basically forces the response, "well, they haven't done anything big enough to talk about yet", which is hard to say in a non-offensive way. but please take it that way, because no offense is intended :) or at least, if you take offense, blame kmason - its his crappy example :) to me its really more along the lines of baiting than attempting to further a substansive discussion - thats why i avoided responding in the first place, and kept my original response to 1 word.