(12-05-2014 12:49 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:43 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:33 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:21 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Well the argument about TCU is a different one entirely. It is also one where you wouldn't get an argument out of me. I deal with the here and now. Whether or not they deserve it is opinion and there are only 12 opinions that matter. Mine isn't one of them. I just try to get ahead of what happens.

You are right, I forgot to answer the FSU to #5 question. The honest answer is that there is nothing to stop them from doing that except....massive blowback. I really don't think they will kick out the undefeated defending champions. They might move them down to #4 but that is it in my opinion.

Take that for what you will.

And if they do move them down I hope the ACC declines every bowl bid

Very small chance that happens but...if it did, how in the hell does the ACC declining to go to any bowl games help their situation? That would be an emotional move, not a strong financial move.

If the committee devalues your undefeated champion by not including them in a playoff, what future message is that sending? That message also has financial ramifications. It would be the biggest slight in the history of college football and would basically put the ACC as a second rate conference in perception. How many millions would that cost?

I don't know but I don't think adding more millions to it is going to change anything except the bottom line of the ACC.

That being said, I would say there is zero percent chance that they bring either Ohio State or Baylor ahead of Florida State if FSU wins against GT.

Kansas State is ranked #9. GT is ranked #11. Wisconsin is ranked #13.

It is a wash between them. FSU wont go down if they win. Close wins and constant come from behind wins havnt cost a top 4 place for FSU yet so I highly doubt how a close win or a come from behind win against #11 ranked GT in the ACC Championship Game costs FSU a place in the top 4.

Come on, you are overreacting. FSU at #4 is only a slight if you refuse to see how it benefits FSU to be there instead of #3. Now, if FSU was worthy of being #1, you would have a strong argument. You would have to argue every other poll out there though as all of them have Alabama at #1. It is what it is. FSU at #4 instead of #3 is better for FSU. Hell it would have been better for TCU to be at #4 instead of #3. I guess that is hard for some folks to understand but location matters more than a number. Getting that Sugar Bowl spot is important for FSU.

Yeah it's a little extreme but you can't deny there's something behind what they're doing. FSU began the rankings at #2, haven't lost and are now #4. As a college football fan, I'd rather see FSU play Bama for the championship than the semifinal.

Like I said there is 1 scenario where FSU misses the playoffs with a win over Ga Tech. And that's if they win but Winston gets hurt and is out for the year. That's the only scenario where they could easily miss.

(12-05-2014 12:14 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 11:49 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 11:04 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Seriously folks, go buy some tissues or something and take a reality pill. Where FSU plays is more important than whether they are ranked third or fourth.

It is like children fighting over two identical toys because one is red and one is blue. Just because you told the two kids that the red toy is better than the blue toy, doesn't mean that it is.

Alabama is pretty much the undisputed #1 team. Personally I think Oregon could have just as easily been there but Alabama was the easier choice. After that choice, the rest of the rankings matter less about whether FSU or TCU is better than about where is the best locations to put the two teams at.

It's worth mentioning that while more FSU fans can make it to the sugar bowl, it will be more of a road game than if they playee in the rose bowl. Also TCU is closer to the sugar bowl than FSU. So that argument doesn't jive to me.

I'm not talking about TCU, I'm talking about FSU and all the people throwing a fit over the "massive insult" that being moved down to 4th place supposedly is.

As far as TCU goes, they just got into the top four and if Baylor wins Saturday, TCU wont even be the conference champion of their own conference. At least Florida State control their own destiny in that regard.

Your TCU counterpoint means nothing in a conversation about this. In fact, your little statement about TCU being even closer to the Sugar Bowl actually STRENGTHENS my argument that this likely was done to benefit FSU. TCU certainly would benefit from being in that #4 slot and going to the Sugar Bowl instead. They didn't get that though, instead the committee shocked everyone with a move that, on it's own, doesn't make any sense. Therefore the reasoning for it must be something different from the usual. The Committee is fixing the pairings and FSU actually got the better deal by being ranked #4.

You're making some good points in this thread. Keep up the good work.

(12-05-2014 12:43 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  If the committee devalues your undefeated champion by not including them in a playoff, what future message is that sending?

It would send the message that the committee was serious about picking what it believed were the "four best teams", not necessarily the ones that fans and pollsters think are the best.

And you CAN make a rational argument that FSU isn't among the four best teams. E.g., neither Sagarin nor Massey's composite of 100+ rankings has them among the top four. There's a reason for that: A relatively soft schedule, and a large number of lucky/unconvincing wins against bad teams.

Don't get me wrong: If FSU beats GT they will make the playoffs. But if they don't, it's not some kind of awful crime against justice, and it wouldn't be a slap at the ACC.

(12-05-2014 12:43 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  If the committee devalues your undefeated champion by not including them in a playoff, what future message is that sending? That message also has financial ramifications. It would be the biggest slight in the history of college football and would basically put the ACC as a second rate conference in perception. How many millions would that cost?

Assuming FSU remains in the top 10 (and thus, is an at-large team to a New Year's Six Bowl), it would cost the league $2 million spread over 14 teams (the difference between the $6M a playoff spot pays and the $4M paid to Access bowl teams).

The message sent - that a team can have more total wins, more top 25 wins, and be a conference champion, yet STILL be jumped by a bunch of one-loss teams at the whim of a committee composed of people with rooting interests in other conferences... THAT is a horrible message to send!

(12-05-2014 06:36 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:43 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  If the committee devalues your undefeated champion by not including them in a playoff, what future message is that sending?

It would send the message that the committee was serious about picking what it believed were the "four best teams", not necessarily the ones that fans and pollsters think are the best.

And you CAN make a rational argument that FSU isn't among the four best teams. E.g., neither Sagarin nor Massey's composite of 100+ rankings has them among the top four. There's a reason for that: A relatively soft schedule, and a large number of lucky/unconvincing wins against bad teams.

Don't get me wrong: If FSU beats GT they will make the playoffs. But if they don't, it's not some kind of awful crime against justice, and it wouldn't be a slap at the ACC.

So none of the other top teams have issues right?

So Alabama didn't LOSE a game or win by one point against Arkansas (blocked extra point), or have to beat LSU in OT (stupid penalty killed LSU), or give up 630 yards and 44 points to Auburn. Oh and they played 3 non-power 5 teams along the way.

So Oregon struggled to beat Washington St, one of the worst teams in the Pac 12. They lost at home to Arizona. Gave up over 500 yards and 40 points to Cal. I think they have less warts than Bama but still some nonetheless.

TCU...and I said this earlier. TCU struggled with Kansas, needed a last second FG to beat WV, and oh they lost by giving up 61 points to Baylor.

Somehow FSU playing close games but still winning is worse.

(12-05-2014 07:47 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 06:36 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:43 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  If the committee devalues your undefeated champion by not including them in a playoff, what future message is that sending?

It would send the message that the committee was serious about picking what it believed were the "four best teams", not necessarily the ones that fans and pollsters think are the best.

And you CAN make a rational argument that FSU isn't among the four best teams. E.g., neither Sagarin nor Massey's composite of 100+ rankings has them among the top four. There's a reason for that: A relatively soft schedule, and a large number of lucky/unconvincing wins against bad teams.

Don't get me wrong: If FSU beats GT they will make the playoffs. But if they don't, it's not some kind of awful crime against justice, and it wouldn't be a slap at the ACC.

So none of the other top teams have issues right?

So Alabama didn't LOSE a game or win by one point against Arkansas (blocked extra point), or have to beat LSU in OT (stupid penalty killed LSU), or give up 630 yards and 44 points to Auburn. Oh and they played 3 non-power 5 teams along the way.

So Oregon struggled to beat Washington St, one of the worst teams in the Pac 12. They lost at home to Arizona. Gave up over 500 yards and 40 points to Cal. I think they have less wards than Bama but still some nonetheless.

TCU...and I said this earlier. TCU struggled with Kansas, needed a last second FG to beat WV, and oh they lost by giving up 61 points to Baylor.

Somehow FSU playing close games but still winning is worse.

FSU did it with half their schedule and fell way behind in many cases. WV beat Baylor and gave KSU, OU and Alabama fits.

(12-05-2014 07:54 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 07:47 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 06:36 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:43 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  If the committee devalues your undefeated champion by not including them in a playoff, what future message is that sending?

It would send the message that the committee was serious about picking what it believed were the "four best teams", not necessarily the ones that fans and pollsters think are the best.

And you CAN make a rational argument that FSU isn't among the four best teams. E.g., neither Sagarin nor Massey's composite of 100+ rankings has them among the top four. There's a reason for that: A relatively soft schedule, and a large number of lucky/unconvincing wins against bad teams.

Don't get me wrong: If FSU beats GT they will make the playoffs. But if they don't, it's not some kind of awful crime against justice, and it wouldn't be a slap at the ACC.

So none of the other top teams have issues right?

So Alabama didn't LOSE a game or win by one point against Arkansas (blocked extra point), or have to beat LSU in OT (stupid penalty killed LSU), or give up 630 yards and 44 points to Auburn. Oh and they played 3 non-power 5 teams along the way.

So Oregon struggled to beat Washington St, one of the worst teams in the Pac 12. They lost at home to Arizona. Gave up over 500 yards and 40 points to Cal. I think they have less wards than Bama but still some nonetheless.

TCU...and I said this earlier. TCU struggled with Kansas, needed a last second FG to beat WV, and oh they lost by giving up 61 points to Baylor.

Somehow FSU playing close games but still winning is worse.

FSU did it with half their schedule and fell way behind in many cases. WV beat Baylor and gave KSU, OU and Alabama fits.

Yeah and Boston College beat USC and Florida crushed Georgia. The teams FSU beat you guys act like they can't play with the big boys.

(12-05-2014 07:54 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 07:47 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 06:36 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:43 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  If the committee devalues your undefeated champion by not including them in a playoff, what future message is that sending?

It would send the message that the committee was serious about picking what it believed were the "four best teams", not necessarily the ones that fans and pollsters think are the best.

And you CAN make a rational argument that FSU isn't among the four best teams. E.g., neither Sagarin nor Massey's composite of 100+ rankings has them among the top four. There's a reason for that: A relatively soft schedule, and a large number of lucky/unconvincing wins against bad teams.

Don't get me wrong: If FSU beats GT they will make the playoffs. But if they don't, it's not some kind of awful crime against justice, and it wouldn't be a slap at the ACC.

So none of the other top teams have issues right?

So Alabama didn't LOSE a game or win by one point against Arkansas (blocked extra point), or have to beat LSU in OT (stupid penalty killed LSU), or give up 630 yards and 44 points to Auburn. Oh and they played 3 non-power 5 teams along the way.

So Oregon struggled to beat Washington St, one of the worst teams in the Pac 12. They lost at home to Arizona. Gave up over 500 yards and 40 points to Cal. I think they have less wards than Bama but still some nonetheless.

TCU...and I said this earlier. TCU struggled with Kansas, needed a last second FG to beat WV, and oh they lost by giving up 61 points to Baylor.

Somehow FSU playing close games but still winning is worse.

FSU did it with half their schedule and fell way behind in many cases. WV beat Baylor and gave KSU, OU and Alabama fits.

Actually 2/3, not half of FSU's schedule was made up of games that were not settled until 2 minutes to go.

(12-05-2014 08:00 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 07:54 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 07:47 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 06:36 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:43 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  If the committee devalues your undefeated champion by not including them in a playoff, what future message is that sending?

It would send the message that the committee was serious about picking what it believed were the "four best teams", not necessarily the ones that fans and pollsters think are the best.

And you CAN make a rational argument that FSU isn't among the four best teams. E.g., neither Sagarin nor Massey's composite of 100+ rankings has them among the top four. There's a reason for that: A relatively soft schedule, and a large number of lucky/unconvincing wins against bad teams.

Don't get me wrong: If FSU beats GT they will make the playoffs. But if they don't, it's not some kind of awful crime against justice, and it wouldn't be a slap at the ACC.

So none of the other top teams have issues right?

So Alabama didn't LOSE a game or win by one point against Arkansas (blocked extra point), or have to beat LSU in OT (stupid penalty killed LSU), or give up 630 yards and 44 points to Auburn. Oh and they played 3 non-power 5 teams along the way.

So Oregon struggled to beat Washington St, one of the worst teams in the Pac 12. They lost at home to Arizona. Gave up over 500 yards and 40 points to Cal. I think they have less wards than Bama but still some nonetheless.

TCU...and I said this earlier. TCU struggled with Kansas, needed a last second FG to beat WV, and oh they lost by giving up 61 points to Baylor.

Somehow FSU playing close games but still winning is worse.

FSU did it with half their schedule and fell way behind in many cases. WV beat Baylor and gave KSU, OU and Alabama fits.

Yeah and Boston College beat USC and Florida crushed Georgia. The teams FSU beat you guys act like they can't play with the big boys.

Only 2 opponents are ranked. Two teams FSU struggled with are 5-7. Not one opponent has fewer than 3 losses.

FSU deserves to be in the top 4 but that team could very easily have 4 losses right now. The only wins they out away early were two 3 win teams, 5-6 UVA, and the Citadel.

How you play does matter.

(12-05-2014 01:16 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:49 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:43 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:33 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  And if they do move them down I hope the ACC declines every bowl bid

Very small chance that happens but...if it did, how in the hell does the ACC declining to go to any bowl games help their situation? That would be an emotional move, not a strong financial move.

If the committee devalues your undefeated champion by not including them in a playoff, what future message is that sending? That message also has financial ramifications. It would be the biggest slight in the history of college football and would basically put the ACC as a second rate conference in perception. How many millions would that cost?

I don't know but I don't think adding more millions to it is going to change anything except the bottom line of the ACC.

That being said, I would say there is zero percent chance that they bring either Ohio State or Baylor ahead of Florida State if FSU wins against GT.

Kansas State is ranked #9. GT is ranked #11. Wisconsin is ranked #13.

It is a wash between them. FSU wont go down if they win. Close wins and constant come from behind wins havnt cost a top 4 place for FSU yet so I highly doubt how a close win or a come from behind win against #11 ranked GT in the ACC Championship Game costs FSU a place in the top 4.

Come on, you are overreacting. FSU at #4 is only a slight if you refuse to see how it benefits FSU to be there instead of #3. Now, if FSU was worthy of being #1, you would have a strong argument. You would have to argue every other poll out there though as all of them have Alabama at #1. It is what it is. FSU at #4 instead of #3 is better for FSU. Hell it would have been better for TCU to be at #4 instead of #3. I guess that is hard for some folks to understand but location matters more than a number. Getting that Sugar Bowl spot is important for FSU.

Yeah it's a little extreme but you can't deny there's something behind what they're doing. FSU began the rankings at #2, haven't lost and are now #4. As a college football fan, I'd rather see FSU play Bama for the championship than the semifinal.

I'm not denying there is something to what they are doing. I have been quite emphatic about it and I have been very detailed as to what I think they are doing. What I don't think they are doing is pushing FSU out of the tournament. What I do think they are doing is manufacturing match ups.

As far as when you want to play Alabama? Are you planning on buying tickets to that game or just watching it on TV? Because if you are just watching it on TV then you will watch it whenever ESPN shows it and they know it. What the Committee would be more worried about is ticket sales and making sure FSU doesn't end up having a massively undersized crowd there to support them which in essence would make them the visiting team.

(12-04-2014 11:25 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 11:22 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  This guy telling others to go buy tissues. O rly? Fascinating considering the topics you fixate on.

So incredibly weak. This is one of the topics that I "fixate" on and low and behold.....here you are.


Don't make it so damn easy to laugh at you FSU fan. Would you really rather have FSU playing in the Rose Bowl than in the Sugar Bowl?

Something tells me you will just attack me again rather than answer the question but how about you go ahead and surprise me?

Oh dear. I'm terribly sorry. It was never my intention to verbally assault you, as you claim. Was merely implying, in a rather straight forward, non aggressive manner, that I found you to be a hypocrite. I hope you weren't injured by my unwitting attack.

(12-05-2014 08:27 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 01:16 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:49 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:43 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Very small chance that happens but...if it did, how in the hell does the ACC declining to go to any bowl games help their situation? That would be an emotional move, not a strong financial move.

If the committee devalues your undefeated champion by not including them in a playoff, what future message is that sending? That message also has financial ramifications. It would be the biggest slight in the history of college football and would basically put the ACC as a second rate conference in perception. How many millions would that cost?

I don't know but I don't think adding more millions to it is going to change anything except the bottom line of the ACC.

That being said, I would say there is zero percent chance that they bring either Ohio State or Baylor ahead of Florida State if FSU wins against GT.

Kansas State is ranked #9. GT is ranked #11. Wisconsin is ranked #13.

It is a wash between them. FSU wont go down if they win. Close wins and constant come from behind wins havnt cost a top 4 place for FSU yet so I highly doubt how a close win or a come from behind win against #11 ranked GT in the ACC Championship Game costs FSU a place in the top 4.

Come on, you are overreacting. FSU at #4 is only a slight if you refuse to see how it benefits FSU to be there instead of #3. Now, if FSU was worthy of being #1, you would have a strong argument. You would have to argue every other poll out there though as all of them have Alabama at #1. It is what it is. FSU at #4 instead of #3 is better for FSU. Hell it would have been better for TCU to be at #4 instead of #3. I guess that is hard for some folks to understand but location matters more than a number. Getting that Sugar Bowl spot is important for FSU.

Yeah it's a little extreme but you can't deny there's something behind what they're doing. FSU began the rankings at #2, haven't lost and are now #4. As a college football fan, I'd rather see FSU play Bama for the championship than the semifinal.

I'm not denying there is something to what they are doing. I have been quite emphatic about it and I have been very detailed as to what I think they are doing. What I don't think they are doing is pushing FSU out of the tournament. What I do think they are doing is manufacturing match ups.

As far as when you want to play Alabama? Are you planning on buying tickets to that game or just watching it on TV? Because if you are just watching it on TV then you will watch it whenever ESPN shows it and they know it. What the Committee would be more worried about is ticket sales and making sure FSU doesn't end up having a massively undersized crowd there to support them which in essence would make them the visiting team.

Playing Alabama first then playing either TCU or Oregon would be a letdown. It's just fact. Bama and FSU are the two most watched teams in the country.

(12-05-2014 07:54 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 07:47 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 06:36 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:43 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  If the committee devalues your undefeated champion by not including them in a playoff, what future message is that sending?

It would send the message that the committee was serious about picking what it believed were the "four best teams", not necessarily the ones that fans and pollsters think are the best.

And you CAN make a rational argument that FSU isn't among the four best teams. E.g., neither Sagarin nor Massey's composite of 100+ rankings has them among the top four. There's a reason for that: A relatively soft schedule, and a large number of lucky/unconvincing wins against bad teams.

Don't get me wrong: If FSU beats GT they will make the playoffs. But if they don't, it's not some kind of awful crime against justice, and it wouldn't be a slap at the ACC.

So none of the other top teams have issues right?

So Alabama didn't LOSE a game or win by one point against Arkansas (blocked extra point), or have to beat LSU in OT (stupid penalty killed LSU), or give up 630 yards and 44 points to Auburn. Oh and they played 3 non-power 5 teams along the way.

So Oregon struggled to beat Washington St, one of the worst teams in the Pac 12. They lost at home to Arizona. Gave up over 500 yards and 40 points to Cal. I think they have less wards than Bama but still some nonetheless.

TCU...and I said this earlier. TCU struggled with Kansas, needed a last second FG to beat WV, and oh they lost by giving up 61 points to Baylor.

Somehow FSU playing close games but still winning is worse.

FSU did it with half their schedule and fell way behind in many cases. WV beat Baylor and gave KSU, OU and Alabama fits.

Florida gave Georgia fits. Boston College gave USC fits.

...

(12-05-2014 08:51 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 08:27 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 01:16 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:49 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 12:43 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  If the committee devalues your undefeated champion by not including them in a playoff, what future message is that sending? That message also has financial ramifications. It would be the biggest slight in the history of college football and would basically put the ACC as a second rate conference in perception. How many millions would that cost?

I don't know but I don't think adding more millions to it is going to change anything except the bottom line of the ACC.

That being said, I would say there is zero percent chance that they bring either Ohio State or Baylor ahead of Florida State if FSU wins against GT.

Kansas State is ranked #9. GT is ranked #11. Wisconsin is ranked #13.

It is a wash between them. FSU wont go down if they win. Close wins and constant come from behind wins havnt cost a top 4 place for FSU yet so I highly doubt how a close win or a come from behind win against #11 ranked GT in the ACC Championship Game costs FSU a place in the top 4.

Come on, you are overreacting. FSU at #4 is only a slight if you refuse to see how it benefits FSU to be there instead of #3. Now, if FSU was worthy of being #1, you would have a strong argument. You would have to argue every other poll out there though as all of them have Alabama at #1. It is what it is. FSU at #4 instead of #3 is better for FSU. Hell it would have been better for TCU to be at #4 instead of #3. I guess that is hard for some folks to understand but location matters more than a number. Getting that Sugar Bowl spot is important for FSU.

Yeah it's a little extreme but you can't deny there's something behind what they're doing. FSU began the rankings at #2, haven't lost and are now #4. As a college football fan, I'd rather see FSU play Bama for the championship than the semifinal.

I'm not denying there is something to what they are doing. I have been quite emphatic about it and I have been very detailed as to what I think they are doing. What I don't think they are doing is pushing FSU out of the tournament. What I do think they are doing is manufacturing match ups.

As far as when you want to play Alabama? Are you planning on buying tickets to that game or just watching it on TV? Because if you are just watching it on TV then you will watch it whenever ESPN shows it and they know it. What the Committee would be more worried about is ticket sales and making sure FSU doesn't end up having a massively undersized crowd there to support them which in essence would make them the visiting team.

Playing Alabama first then playing either TCU or Oregon would be a letdown. It's just fact. Bama and FSU are the two most watched teams in the country.

I don't see that as a fact and I don't think it matters. Just look at the NCAA Basketball tournament. The tournament isn't all about FSU. They were gonna be third or fourth. They actually got the better deal geographically by getting the fourth spot.

You can come up with whatever you want to say to defend your dislike of what the committee did, that's fine. It is pretty obvious though what they did. Jumping TCU over FSU in their first week in the top four? Pretty obvious.

I'm just telling you how I see it, whether you like the match up or not doesn't really account into the situation. Sorry you don't like it.

(12-05-2014 08:40 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 11:25 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 11:22 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  This guy telling others to go buy tissues. O rly? Fascinating considering the topics you fixate on.

So incredibly weak. This is one of the topics that I "fixate" on and low and behold.....here you are.


Don't make it so damn easy to laugh at you FSU fan. Would you really rather have FSU playing in the Rose Bowl than in the Sugar Bowl?

Something tells me you will just attack me again rather than answer the question but how about you go ahead and surprise me?

Oh dear. I'm terribly sorry. It was never my intention to verbally assault you, as you claim. Was merely implying, in a rather straight forward, non aggressive manner, that I found you to be a hypocrite. I hope you weren't injured by my unwitting attack.

And my response was about how you are a hypocrite yourself. I have seen you make plenty of attacks on folks and you are spending time in the exact same threads so yeah....it is funny that you are trying to paint me as a hypocrite while being a hypocrite.

Congrats on that.

Trust me though, I take far worse attacks from folks on here than what you mustered up. Work on it a little more if you are actually thinking and wanting to "hurt" me.

I just love how folks think that it's finished. As of right now, you can make the arguement that TCU has a better body of work so far compared to FSU. However this weekend, FSU adds a far better piece than TCU does. So to think the committee has it pre-ordained that it's gonna be Ala/FSU and Ore/TCU if all win out- that's a load of hooey.

(12-05-2014 08:25 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 08:00 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 07:54 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 07:47 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 06:36 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  It would send the message that the committee was serious about picking what it believed were the "four best teams", not necessarily the ones that fans and pollsters think are the best.

And you CAN make a rational argument that FSU isn't among the four best teams. E.g., neither Sagarin nor Massey's composite of 100+ rankings has them among the top four. There's a reason for that: A relatively soft schedule, and a large number of lucky/unconvincing wins against bad teams.

Don't get me wrong: If FSU beats GT they will make the playoffs. But if they don't, it's not some kind of awful crime against justice, and it wouldn't be a slap at the ACC.

So none of the other top teams have issues right?

So Alabama didn't LOSE a game or win by one point against Arkansas (blocked extra point), or have to beat LSU in OT (stupid penalty killed LSU), or give up 630 yards and 44 points to Auburn. Oh and they played 3 non-power 5 teams along the way.

So Oregon struggled to beat Washington St, one of the worst teams in the Pac 12. They lost at home to Arizona. Gave up over 500 yards and 40 points to Cal. I think they have less wards than Bama but still some nonetheless.

TCU...and I said this earlier. TCU struggled with Kansas, needed a last second FG to beat WV, and oh they lost by giving up 61 points to Baylor.

Somehow FSU playing close games but still winning is worse.

FSU did it with half their schedule and fell way behind in many cases. WV beat Baylor and gave KSU, OU and Alabama fits.

Yeah and Boston College beat USC and Florida crushed Georgia. The teams FSU beat you guys act like they can't play with the big boys.

Only 2 opponents are ranked. Two teams FSU struggled with are 5-7. Not one opponent has fewer than 3 losses.

FSU deserves to be in the top 4 but that team could very easily have 4 losses right now. The only wins they out away early were two 3 win teams, 5-6 UVA, and the Citadel.

How you play does matter.

ALL teams COULD have more losses.

Quote:What Does it Mean?

Using this objective approach, it’s clear that Florida State’s schedule is under-appreciated. The Seminoles played two more power-five games and two more bowl-eligible teams than did TCU.

If you’re thinking its how the Seminoles played as opposed to who they played, you may be on to something.

Here’s the average margin of victory each contender achieved in its power-five wins: TCU 22.4, Oregon 21.7, Baylor 21, Ohio State 20, Alabama 16 and Florida State 13.9

Though these stats ooze with meaning, is it any coincidence that Alabama and Florida State have the lowest margin of victory and played the highest quality group of opponents?

FSU has played 11(soon to be 12) P5 opponents this year; more than anyone else in the country. FSU has more P5 bowl eligible opponents than Oregon, Baylor, TCU, and Ohio State (1 less than Alabama). Six of FSU's opponents had a bye or FCS game the week before. All objective facts.

(12-05-2014 09:07 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 08:25 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 08:00 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 07:54 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 07:47 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  So none of the other top teams have issues right?

So Alabama didn't LOSE a game or win by one point against Arkansas (blocked extra point), or have to beat LSU in OT (stupid penalty killed LSU), or give up 630 yards and 44 points to Auburn. Oh and they played 3 non-power 5 teams along the way.

So Oregon struggled to beat Washington St, one of the worst teams in the Pac 12. They lost at home to Arizona. Gave up over 500 yards and 40 points to Cal. I think they have less wards than Bama but still some nonetheless.

TCU...and I said this earlier. TCU struggled with Kansas, needed a last second FG to beat WV, and oh they lost by giving up 61 points to Baylor.

Somehow FSU playing close games but still winning is worse.

FSU did it with half their schedule and fell way behind in many cases. WV beat Baylor and gave KSU, OU and Alabama fits.

Yeah and Boston College beat USC and Florida crushed Georgia. The teams FSU beat you guys act like they can't play with the big boys.

Only 2 opponents are ranked. Two teams FSU struggled with are 5-7. Not one opponent has fewer than 3 losses.

FSU deserves to be in the top 4 but that team could very easily have 4 losses right now. The only wins they out away early were two 3 win teams, 5-6 UVA, and the Citadel.

How you play does matter.

ALL teams COULD have more losses.

Quote:What Does it Mean?

Using this objective approach, it’s clear that Florida State’s schedule is under-appreciated. The Seminoles played two more power-five games and two more bowl-eligible teams than did TCU.

If you’re thinking its how the Seminoles played as opposed to who they played, you may be on to something.

Here’s the average margin of victory each contender achieved in its power-five wins: TCU 22.4, Oregon 21.7, Baylor 21, Ohio State 20, Alabama 16 and Florida State 13.9

Though these stats ooze with meaning, is it any coincidence that Alabama and Florida State have the lowest margin of victory and played the highest quality group of opponents?

FSU has played 11(soon to be 12) P5 opponents this year; more than anyone else in the country. FSU has more P5 bowl eligible opponents than Oregon, Baylor, TCU, and Ohio State (1 less than Alabama). Six of FSU's opponents had a bye or FCS game the week before. All objective facts.

The last stat you present- big ******* deal. FSU played 2 teams all year long that are ranked. And you want to know what FSU had before playing them. A bye.

(12-05-2014 09:01 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 08:40 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 11:25 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 11:22 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  This guy telling others to go buy tissues. O rly? Fascinating considering the topics you fixate on.

So incredibly weak. This is one of the topics that I "fixate" on and low and behold.....here you are.


Don't make it so damn easy to laugh at you FSU fan. Would you really rather have FSU playing in the Rose Bowl than in the Sugar Bowl?

Something tells me you will just attack me again rather than answer the question but how about you go ahead and surprise me?

Oh dear. I'm terribly sorry. It was never my intention to verbally assault you, as you claim. Was merely implying, in a rather straight forward, non aggressive manner, that I found you to be a hypocrite. I hope you weren't injured by my unwitting attack.

And my response was about how you are a hypocrite yourself. I have seen you make plenty of attacks on folks and you are spending time in the exact same threads so yeah....it is funny that you are trying to paint me as a hypocrite while being a hypocrite.

Congrats on that.

Trust me though, I take far worse attacks from folks on here than what you mustered up. Work on it a little more if you are actually thinking and wanting to "hurt" me.

I often call idiots idiots. Yes. But you're the one making the tissue comments. Hard for me to be a hypocrite when I didn't tell people to quit crying. So me being in this thread doesn't help your argument or prove your point. But I'm sure you once again think I've attacked you.