College Football: Championship Weekend!

[Japher]

has anyone bothered not to give a sheit?

all the kids are winners for getting a free education

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Apples to apples, oranges to pinapples?

Do you anything to say other than absurd strawmen? Didn't realize that college football had a playoff.

Man, you are so dumb

didnt realize your 'unbiased computers' worked so well that theres no need for a playoff system, or even better, have a playoff system were you exlude cal but include Pitt.

they should hire you.

[Drake Tungsten]

EDIT: I will also run a Drake Invitational, with just the five undefeated teams.

[Imran Siddiqui]

its not

Yeah, the truth hurts.

[q]for the third time, you take it at the time of the game. show me an official document which shows otherwise[/Quote]

Show me an official document that says you consider the rankings of the team at the time of the game for the final rankings. There is no official document either way. It's common sense. You take the final ranking because that takes into account the entire year and not just wrong beliefs of what they should be ranked.

YES THEY INCLUDE THEM. the computer exists to weigh different statistics and ranks, and one of those is the preseason.

NO THEY DON'T! The computers do not include the preseason in any way, shape, or form. The votes of AP and Coaches don't count in the computer polls and there are no stats to go by. What magical number do they use?

OH WAIT - there is. its how the computer weights each statistic. if thats not bias, then tell me what is.

Bias is when you push up a certain team because you like the team for who they are. A computer can't do that. It can't play favorites, it has no favorites. Texas coaches can change their votes in favoritism of Texas, but computers don't.

YEAH? if its so good, explain to me what happened last year? DID THE SYSTEM WORK? HELL NO. DID IT WORK THIS YEAR? HELL NO.

You are insane. This is worse than the Red Sox threads where you were a raving loony. I'm against the BCS, but Auburn had the weakest season of the three. That simple.

Try reading, you know the 'absense of a playoff' part, before you shoot your mouth off. What's your solution? The LoA poll?

would you use it over head to head matchups? i didnt think so.

And like I pointed out I'm in favor of playoffs. But you have a reading comprehension problem, I see.

colorado won the Big 12 N. or take Pittsburgh. YOUR style would have PITT in the playoffs, a team that went 8 -3. AGain, i show how system is worse than what we have now.

The Big 12 North isn't a Conference! Man, you show how little you know of college football.

And yes, my playoff would have Pitt. They won the Big East, they deserve in. Conferences play each other and that is the best way to know which team is better than others, when teams can play each other.

How can we tell if Texas or Cal is better? We can't. They don't play each other.

The difference between top 3 teams is slim, AS you get to #6, #7, #8, the difference between them GETS LARGER, therefore, the system is more accurate

Suffers from the same biases. The same preseason wrong rankings. The same homerism. Conference champions doesn't. Invariably some at-large teams do have to be put in and the bias of invidiual votes must be taken out of it.

[Guynemer]

Upsets abound!

Virginia Tech romps, as the Hokies destroy the Utes, 30-3.

And in a stunning turn of events, Boise State outlasts Auburn in a defensive duel. Broncos over the Tigers, 13-6.

Louisville-Oklahoma getting underway...

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
didnt realize your 'unbiased computers' worked so well that theres no need for a playoff system, or even better, have a playoff system were you exlude cal but include Pitt.

they should hire you.

CAPTAIN STRAWMAN is in the building! I've only been advocating for playoffs throughout the whole thread and pointed out that in absense of a playoff computers are useful.

But you need to go back to reading "See Spot Run" so you can understand simple arguments.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Bias is when you push up a certain team because you like the team for who they are. A computer can't do that. It can't play favorites, it has no favorites. Texas coaches can change their votes in favoritism of Texas, but computers don't.

not necessairly, bias can also be where teams built a certain way will get an advantage over similary record teams because of how the stats shake out and how they are weighed.

You are insane. This is worse than the Red Sox threads where you were a raving loony. I'm against the BCS, but Auburn had the weakest season of the three. That simple.

so who did auburn lose to? who did auburn blow out by 18 or more points?

And yes, my playoff would have Pitt. They won the Big East, they deserve in. Conferences play each other and that is the best way to know which team is better than others, when teams can play each other.

How can we tell if Texas or Cal is better? We can't. They don't play each other.

you dont see anything wrong with including Pitt over Cal? so are you saying that Pitt is the better team, and if they went head to head Pitt would win? because thats the only way to justify putting them into the playoffs in your style.

How can we tell if Texas or Cal is better? We can't. They don't play each other.

dont need to. have them play head to head in the playoffs in my style.

Suffers from the same biases. The same preseason wrong rankings. The same homerism. Conference champions doesn't. Invariably some at-large teams do have to be put in and the bias of invidiual votes must be taken out of it.

IN YOUR SYSTEM EVEN IF CAL BEATS PITT DURING THE REGULAR SEASON, PITT WILL STILL GO TO THE PLAYOFFS IF THEY WIN. thats downright wrong. you cant justifty that.

Suffers from the same biases. The same preseason wrong rankings. The same homerism. Conference champions doesn't. Invariably some at-large teams do have to be put in and the bias of invidiual votes must be taken out of it.

who said I use preseason rankings? this system is perfect for college football. top 8 teams as determined by human polls, and thats it. all undefeated's make it, some 1 loss teams make it.

CAPTAIN STRAWMAN is in the building! I've only been advocating for playoffs throughout the whole thread and pointed out that in absense of a playoff computers are useful.

a playoff system THATS WORSE THAN WE HAVE NOW.

i have now shown everyone that im right and you're wrong and maybe we should end this embarrasement before it goes any further.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

in the absense of playoffs, polls and computer still doesnt work. Did last years BCS system work? NOPE.

[Guynemer]

Oh for heaven's sake!




...the both of ya!

[Imran Siddiqui]

bias can also be where teams built a certain way will get an advantage over similary record teams because of how the stats shake out and how they are weighed.

So you are claiming a conspiracy theory on the part of computer poll makers... nice... you are sounding more rational all the time .

so who did auburn lose to? who did auburn blow out by 18 or more points?

Who did USC lose to? Who did Oklahoma lose to? Neither of those teams played anyone as pitiful as LA-Monroe, LA Tech, or Citidel either.

you dont see anything wrong with including Pitt over Cal? so are you saying that Pitt is the better team, and if they went head to head Pitt would win? because thats the only way to justify putting them into the playoffs in your style.

A. I don't see anything wrong with putting Pitt in a playoff over Cal, because they won their conference and Cal didn't. It doesn't mean that Pitt is better than Cal, it means that we don't know who is better, so best to have a playoff between the conference winners, because we know the conference winners are the best teams in the conference.

We don't say in the NFL lets rank every team 1-16 and have a playoff that way. We say let's have the division winners and in the end have the NFC Champion vs. the AFC Champion. Not the #1 team vs. the #2 team.

dont need to. have them play head to head in the playoffs in my style.

Your 'style' says Boise State is out of the playoffs even though they are undefeated. THAT is wrong! Your 'style' has Virginia Tech out of the playoffs and that's wrong.

IN YOUR SYSTEM EVEN IF CAL BEATS PITT DURING THE REGULAR SEASON, PITT WILL STILL GO TO THE PLAYOFFS IF THEY WIN. thats downright wrong. you cant justifty that.

Of course I can. Cal didn't win their conference. It's the same justification used in the NFL. Pittsburgh beat Philadephia during the regular season, that doesn't mean that Philly can't win the Superbowl without playing Pittsburgh again. If you don't win your conference you can't go one.

who said I use preseason rankings? this system is perfect for college football. top 8 teams as determined by human polls, and thats it.

Human polls have a slavish devotion to preseason rankings.

a playoff system THATS WORSE THAN WE HAVE NOW.

i have now shown everyone that im right and you're wrong and maybe we should end this embarrasement before it goes any further.

No, a system that's better than any other. Showing, conclusively, that I'm right and you are so incorrect that you belong with Stu Scott and the ESPN people .

You want to back out because you are getting slammed.

in the absense of playoffs, polls and computer still doesnt work. Did last years BCS system work? NOPE.

What is your answer in the absense of a playoff? You have none.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

So you are claiming a conspiracy theory on the part of computer poll makers... nice... you are sounding more rational all the time

im not claiming anything. im saying that the way the stats are weighed, its possible that undeserving teams get ranked higher - hence the BIAS. is that too hard the understand?

Who did USC lose to? Who did Oklahoma lose to? Neither of those teams played anyone as pitiful as LA-Monroe, LA Tech, or Citidel either.

AGAIN, you dont measure a team aganst the weakest they play, you measure it against the strongest. Auburn blew out 2 top 10 teams, USC and OU didnt.

A. I don't see anything wrong with putting Pitt in a playoff over Cal, because they won their conference and Cal didn't. It doesn't mean that Pitt is better than Cal, it means that we don't know who is better, so best to have a playoff between the conference winners, because we know the conference winners are the best teams in the conference.

then your playoff system is no better than the BCS since the 'national champion' still isnt the best team.

It's the same justification used in the NFL. Pittsburgh beat Philadephia during the regular season, that doesn't mean that Philly can't win the Superbowl without playing Pittsburgh again. If you don't win your conference you can't go one.

but you forget, the NFL has WILD CARDS. your system doesnt. the wild card is the balancing of the unbalanced divisions.

Human polls have a slavish devotion to preseason rankings.

WHICH IS WHY YOU DONT CONDUCT A PRESEASON POLL.

You want to back out because you are getting slammed.

is that what your computer told you to say?

What is your answer in the absense of a playoff? You have none.

this shouldnt even be a question. having an absense of playoff isnt an option and shouldnt even be discussed.

[Imran Siddiqui]

im not claiming anything. im saying that the way the stats are weighed, its possible that undeserving teams get ranked higher - hence the BIAS. is that too hard the understand?

You may want to open a dictionary. That ain't bias. Bias is partiality or unfair favoritism.

AGAIN, you dont measure a team aganst the weakest they play, you measure it against the strongest. Auburn blew out 2 top 10 teams, USC and OU didnt.

Georgia is the only Top 10 team they played. OU blew out Texas and you obviously didn't see the game or else you wouldn't be talking out of your ass saying Texas could have gotten into it .

And USC played a much better Top 10 team in Cal. They also beat Virginia Tech who is a Top 10 team.

then your playoff system is no better than the BCS since the 'national champion' still isnt the best team.

If you can't win your conference then you aren't the 'best team'. Period.

but you forget, the NFL has WILD CARDS. your system doesnt. the wild card is the balancing of the unbalanced divisions.

I also for 'Wild Cards' because the is an odd number of conferences. I wish I didn't, but I have to because of that. If you can't win the division, frankly, I'd like to see you lose in the first round because you've proven that you aren't worthy to be called champion, even if you get hot at the end of the year and run the table.

WHICH IS WHY YOU DONT CONDUCT A PRESEASON POLL.

What are you going to do? You gonna ask pretty please?

this shouldnt even be a question. having an absense of playoff isnt an option and shouldnt even be discussed.

Hey numnuts, there is no playoff NOW and that isn't going to change soon if you listen to college Presidents. So, not only is it an option, it's how it'll be for the foreseeable future, so yah, it's gotta be discussed.

[DanS]

all the kids are winners for getting a free education

I think they're being exploited. They aren't being paid very much for the benefits that the schools derive.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

You may want to open a dictionary. That ain't bias. Bias is partiality or unfair favoritism.

why? bias is when there is favoritism. this is favoritism with regard to the weight of certain stats and teams who use those weights properly (like OU who feels the need to run up the score because thats what helps them get ahead)

Georgia is the only Top 10 team they played. OU blew out Texas and you obviously didn't see the game or else you wouldn't be talking out of your ass saying Texas could have gotten into it

WRONG AGAIN!!!!!. Auburn played 3 top ten teams: Tennessee (twice) LSU and Georgia. OU didnt blow out Texas, they only won by twelve. and trust me, I saw the game, and all texas needed was a big play to get them back in it.

And USC played a much better Top 10 team in Cal. They also beat Virginia Tech who is a Top 10 team.

whom they beat by less than three feet. They also almost lost to oregon st, and UCLA two unranked teams.

If you can't win your conference then you aren't the 'best team'. Period.

you dont have the chance to prove that you're the best team if you allow Pitt in over Cal. Tell me, is Pitt a better team than Cal this year?

I also for 'Wild Cards' because the is an odd number of conferences. I wish I didn't, but I have to because of that. If you can't win the division, frankly, I'd like to see you lose in the first round because you've proven that you aren't worthy to be called champion, even if you get hot at the end of the year and run the table.

yeah, so Cal deserves to lose in the first round? How can you be so consistently wrong? face it, YOUR SYSTEM BLOWS, its so much worse than what we have now, and would reward teams in weak conferences to play weak out of conference teams to fatten up their record and go to the next round.

Hey numnuts, there is no playoff NOW and that isn't going to change soon if you listen to college Presidents. So, not only is it an option, it's how it'll be for the foreseeable future, so yah, it's gotta be discussed.

then its simple, there is no way of correctly determining the national champ. THESE LAST TWO YEARS SHOULD SHOW YOU THAT THE BCS SYSTEM DOESNT WORK. YOUR PRECIOUS COMPUTERS cant pick winners, the only way to have a wnner is to have my playoff system, whnere the BEST TEAMS, not those who play the weakest teams, can get into.

its not worth discussing if University Prez dont wanna adapt it.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Cal lost out on $14 million cuz some sportswriters in texas changed their votes after texas whined like little *****es