College Football - Early Season Fun

[Drake Tungsten]

At least I try to justify my rankings using something other than glorified guesswork.

[Guynemer]

The better team doesn't always win, but who you think is the better team isn't always correct no matter what flim flam you use to justify it.

Exactly.

Who we think is better is one thing. What the score says is another. The former is subjective; the latter, objective. Does the better team always win? Almost certainly not. But the superior teams find a way to win, even when they should lose, whether they're at home or on the road or at a neutral site.

Wins and losses matter. That's it.

[Guynemer]

At least I try to justify my rankings using something other than glorified guesswork.

You are one funny mother****er.

[Drake Tungsten]

My rankings are completely objective, for obvious reasons.

[Drake Tungsten]

Wins and losses matter. That's it.

If you really hold to this, then you've given up any pretense of trying to determine who the "best" team is.

Not that I mind. I've always said that the polls should recognize achievement and limit the use of determinations of quality to situations where a choice has to be made between two equally deserving teams.

[DanS]

I would go so far as to suggest that college football games should give a 3 point handicap to the visiting team.

[Guynemer]

Wins and losses matter. That's it.

If you really hold to this, then you've given up any pretense of trying to determine who the "best" team is.

Not that I mind. I've always said that the polls should recognize achievement and limit the influence of determinations of quality to situations where a choice has to be made between two equally deserving teams.

The thing is, there is no real way to determine who the "best" team is, depending on your definition of "best".

I will happily settle for "most successful" on a year-to-year basis.

[Drake Tungsten]

The thing is, there is no real way to determine who the "best" team is, depending on your definition of "best".

No, but some ways are better than others. Using just wins-and-losses is probably the worst way to go about it.

I will happily settle for "most successful" on a year-to-year basis.

Obviously not, or you wouldn't be arguing with me and advocating an inferior method for determining who the best team in any given season is.

[Guynemer]

I'm afraid I'm not following your logic there, Drake.

I don't see how a subjective vote is an superior method when compared to an objective game or series of games between teams chosen on objective measures.

[Drake Tungsten]

I don't see how a subjective vote is an superior method when compared to an objective game or series of games between teams chosen on objective measures.

I've been advocating statistical analysis, which is obviously both objective and superior to just looking at wins-and-losses. Ming and MRT are the ones advocating in favor of subjective votes.

[Guynemer]

I'm afraid I just can't stomach a method where the undefeated Amherstville Albatrosses defeat the previously undefeated Bridgeton Bandicoots in the season's final game, but the Bandicoots are crowned as the best team due to statistical analysis.

If the final score doesn't matter, why keep score at all?

[Drake Tungsten]

If the final score doesn't matter, why keep score at all?

Good lord, what is wrong with you people? When did I say that final scores didn't matter? All I said is that a very close loss on the road can indicate that the losing team is actually the objectively better team, which should be obvious to anyone with half a brain...

[MRT144]

If the final score doesn't matter, why keep score at all?

Good lord, what is wrong with you people? When did I say that final scores didn't matter? All I said is that a very close loss on the road can indicate that the losing team is actually the objectively better team, which should be obvious to anyone with half a brain...

Or it COULD mean that the home team just had a blundering unlucky day yet still pulled out a win. Objectively better using magical mind points? Okay Drake.

You're interpreting an event a certain way and trying to cover your subjective interpretation with the words statistical analysis.

[Guynemer]

If the final score doesn't matter, why keep score at all?

Good lord, what is wrong with you people? When did I say that final scores didn't matter? All I said is that a very close loss on the road can indicate that the losing team is actually the objectively better team, which should be obvious to anyone with half a brain...

NO.

You can not lose, under any circumstances, and be the objectively better team that day.

[Ming]

I've been advocating statistical analysis, which is obviously both objective and superior to just looking at wins-and-losses. Ming and MRT are the ones advocating in favor of subjective votes.

I'm not the one being subjective... you are. One team beats another, has had a tougher schedule and has the same record (You are correct that I let my enthusiasm get to me and say perfect instead of the same, me bad).. We are talking about the 2nd toughest schedule in the nation vs the 40th. We are talking about a team that is 2 - 1 vs top 30 teams. Their one loss was to high powered/ranked team that is hasn't lost yet and is one of the top 5 teams in the country depending on the poll. VT is ranked higher in every poll I saw vs Nebraska... And when they played head to head, Nebraska lost.

And you still want to say that Nebraska is a better team because VT was at home and didn't win by more than 1 point... Even though every expert/poll disagrees with you?

You are obviously being the one that is subjective. The FACTS point to VT as the better team.