(10-17-2014 01:39 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 11:08 PM)WEARE Wrote:  It certainly makes that "quality win" against VT less impressive.

Less impressive than what? That's what it probably comes down to for the selection committee.

Less impressive than our quality win over Akron

(10-16-2014 11:09 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  I do think ECU and Marshall are very close but lets just let the season play out and see what happens.

Deep down, you know it ain't close.

(10-16-2014 11:08 PM)WEARE Wrote:  It certainly makes that "quality win" against VT less impressive.

Only to a certain degree. You have to keep in mind that during the preseason we weren't predicted to be this good. We only returned 5 on offense and 4 on defense. You guys were ranked higher than us in preseason polls. We were ranked to be no better than 4 in the AAC where as you guys were ranked first and predicted to win cusa. Also we were predicted to be 1-3 in OOC. So yea the vtech and unc wins might not look so great now. Yet for us to be favored to get the access bowl compared to were we where predicted to be at the beginning of the season is still worth a lot.

(10-17-2014 01:39 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 11:08 PM)WEARE Wrote:  It certainly makes that "quality win" against VT less impressive.

Less impressive than what? That's what it probably comes down to for the selection committee.

You and I do not have a dog in this fight... Ours was in 2011....

I've updated my original post to include Va Tech and UNC as well since many considered UNC a decent team.

My point is that its looking more and more like Akron is a quality win on Marshalls schedule. Akron very well could be the best team in the Mac. Yes, better than NIU that just got beat. And lets not forget that Akron got that win over Pitt while playing on the road.

After last nights results, one could make the argument that Akron is as good or better than Va Tech and UNC considering they beat Pitt.

(10-17-2014 01:39 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 11:08 PM)WEARE Wrote:  It certainly makes that "quality win" against VT less impressive.

Less impressive than what? That's what it probably comes down to for the selection committee.

Try, real hard. It will come to you.

(10-17-2014 07:31 AM)pcm0103 Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 11:08 PM)WEARE Wrote:  It certainly makes that "quality win" against VT less impressive.

Only to a certain degree. You have to keep in mind that during the preseason we weren't predicted to be this good. We only returned 5 on offense and 4 on defense. You guys were ranked higher than us in preseason polls. We were ranked to be no better than 4 in the AAC where as you guys were ranked first and predicted to win cusa. Also we were predicted to be 1-3 in OOC. So yea the vtech and unc wins might not look so great now. Yet for us to be favored to get the access bowl compared to were we where predicted to be at the beginning of the season is still worth a lot.

I can't really argue with anything you are saying, however you must consider the fact that these wins that were considered "quality" at the time are the reasons you were able to pass us in the polls. Now that the facts seem to prove the these were not actually such quality wins afterall, should you still get the credit for them by being ranked ahead of us still?

ECU is a better team than what most expected preseason, but it is very arguable if they are as good as everyone thought after those wins also. If those wins came in the last couple of weeks, ECU would likely still be ranked well behind the Herd, IMHO.

It seems to me that ECU has benefited not from the actual quality of their wins, but from the timing of those wins.

Point is, ECU's 'best' win against Va Tech no longer looks that impressive. Pitt was a "crappy" team before last night's game (according to AAC supporters) and a Va Tech win last night was supposed to prove that. Funny thing happened on the way to the Forum though, Va Tech lost, and looked really bad doing it; they had 26 yards of rushing (FIU's anemic offense managed more than twice that).

So now their "quality" wins are against Va Tech and UNC? Any team that can allow 70 points to be hung on them can't be considered a quality win.

Big step backwards for ECU's arguement last night.

(10-16-2014 10:24 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

+1,000,000

(10-17-2014 07:32 AM)nastybunch Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 01:39 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 11:08 PM)WEARE Wrote:  It certainly makes that "quality win" against VT less impressive.

Less impressive than what? That's what it probably comes down to for the selection committee.

You and I do not have a dog in this fight... Ours was in 2011....

Yup. CUSA should have had a team in the BCS that year. But Houston blew it by not beating S Miss and S Miss blew it by dropping a game to UAB. Both teams were one game away from a BCS. That was the best chance CUSA had of landing a BCS bowl during the BCS era. I wonder how many times a conference has had 2 ranked teams and not landed a team in the BCS? I bets it's extremely rare.

Can we just turn this into the ultimate transitive property thread for the year?

(10-17-2014 08:07 AM)MUHerd00 Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 07:31 AM)pcm0103 Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 11:08 PM)WEARE Wrote:  It certainly makes that "quality win" against VT less impressive.

Only to a certain degree. You have to keep in mind that during the preseason we weren't predicted to be this good. We only returned 5 on offense and 4 on defense. You guys were ranked higher than us in preseason polls. We were ranked to be no better than 4 in the AAC where as you guys were ranked first and predicted to win cusa. Also we were predicted to be 1-3 in OOC. So yea the vtech and unc wins might not look so great now. Yet for us to be favored to get the access bowl compared to were we where predicted to be at the beginning of the season is still worth a lot.

I can't really argue with anything you are saying, however you must consider the fact that these wins that were considered "quality" at the time are the reasons you were able to pass us in the polls. Now that the facts seem to prove the these were not actually such quality wins afterall, should you still get the credit for them by being ranked ahead of us still?

ECU is a better team than what most expected preseason, but it is very arguable if they are as good as everyone thought after those wins also. If those wins came in the last couple of weeks, ECU would likely still be ranked well behind the Herd, IMHO.

It seems to me that ECU has benefited not from the actual quality of their wins, but from the timing of those wins.

Yes we should still get credit for them because when we played them they were ranked and no one knew they would turn out the way they did. Just like you are not getting credit for beating Akron just because they beat Pitt. No team will or should ever drop in polls just because the teams that they played earlier in the season are not living up to expectations. We have no control over that.

It's debatable whether or not we would be behind you in the polls. I think it would depend on where unc and vtech would be ranked vs the teams you have played. Obviously neither would be ranked in the top 25 later in the season but they would have some type of ranking between 50 and 125.

(10-17-2014 08:07 AM)MUHerd00 Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 07:31 AM)pcm0103 Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 11:08 PM)WEARE Wrote:  It certainly makes that "quality win" against VT less impressive.

Only to a certain degree. You have to keep in mind that during the preseason we weren't predicted to be this good. We only returned 5 on offense and 4 on defense. You guys were ranked higher than us in preseason polls. We were ranked to be no better than 4 in the AAC where as you guys were ranked first and predicted to win cusa. Also we were predicted to be 1-3 in OOC. So yea the vtech and unc wins might not look so great now. Yet for us to be favored to get the access bowl compared to were we where predicted to be at the beginning of the season is still worth a lot.

I can't really argue with anything you are saying, however you must consider the fact that these wins that were considered "quality" at the time are the reasons you were able to pass us in the polls. Now that the facts seem to prove the these were not actually such quality wins afterall, should you still get the credit for them by being ranked ahead of us still?

ECU is a better team than what most expected preseason, but it is very arguable if they are as good as everyone thought after those wins also. If those wins came in the last couple of weeks, ECU would likely still be ranked well behind the Herd, IMHO.

It seems to me that ECU has benefited not from the actual quality of their wins, but from the timing of those wins.

(10-16-2014 11:14 PM)blazerwkr Wrote:  So where's Kevin Bacon involved in all this?

Thinking the same.

So basically, ECU's arguement for being ahead of Marshall (SOS, Quality wins, where the opponent was ranked 'when we played them', , etc.) is becoming very thin and all these elephants standing on this platform are looking around very nervously.

ECU beat UNC 70-41

ND beat UNC 50-43

Clemson beat UNC 50-35

Does this mean ECU Is better than ND and Clemson?

(10-17-2014 11:33 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  ECU beat UNC 70-41
ND beat UNC 50-43
Clemson beat UNC 50-35
Does this mean ECU is better than ND and Clemson?

No! But it does mean that UNC gives up a helluvalota points.

(10-17-2014 11:34 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 11:33 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  ECU beat UNC 70-41
ND beat UNC 50-43
Clemson beat UNC 50-35
Does this mean ECU is better than ND and Clemson?

No! But it does mean that UNC gives up a helluvalota points.

LMAO!!!

(10-17-2014 11:33 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  ECU beat UNC 70-41

ND beat UNC 50-43

Clemson beat UNC 50-35

Does this mean ECU Is better than ND and Clemson?

It is not about transitive wins. They mean nothing; however, having your best win against a team that loses to "inferior" competition doesn't look great. It's not that difficult of a concept. You want the teams you beat to keep winning. You also want the teams that beat you to win out.

(10-16-2014 10:02 PM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  ECU beat Va Tech 28-21

ECU beat UNC 71-40

Va Tech beat UNC 34-17

Marshall beat Akron 48-17

Akron beat Pitt 21-10

Pitt beats Va Tech tonight 21-16.......

VT beat Ohio State 35-21

ND beat UNC 50-43

Does that mean ECU is better than Ohio State and Notre Dame? I dunno doesn't really prove anything. Transitive property doesn't work in football. An example that proves exactly how stupid it is has taken place in the SEC east this year

South Carolina beat UGA 38-35
Missouri beat South Carolina 21-20
UGA beat Missouri 34-0

wasn't ohio state missing their best player against va tech?