(07-21-2015 04:38 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 04:34 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

Kinda sums up what being a fan of GT must feel like.

(07-21-2015 04:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Kinda sums up what being a fan of GT must feel like.

john, keep crying. I'm enjoying it.

(07-21-2015 05:22 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  john, keep crying. I'm enjoying it.

I enjoy getting PMs from mods telling me you are an ass.

Do you think I care about you or what you have to say?

(07-21-2015 04:34 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 04:23 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 10:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 09:32 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 08:38 PM)john01992 Wrote:  You know full well that's not what i was implying. Which school played in a major bowl? Which school played in the Citrus? Which school had to justify themselves to a team with two controversial wins and a loss despite being undefeated?

As already stated, the Big 8 was the contracted conference for the Orange Bowl from 1968 through about 1992 or 1993, whenever the Bowl Coalition (the precursor to the BCS) came about. The only years the Big 8 champ didn't play in that bowl were the 1973 and 1974 seasons when the Big 8 champ Oklahoma didn't go to any bowl game due to a post-season ban.

Your arguments are legit for Colorado in terms of tougher perceived schedule but this "better bowl" argument is just weird.

Cheers,
Neil

It's not weird. We have a documented history of using the bowl arrangements to determine power and non power conference status. We then use said status to punish/reward schools for whether or not a team has earned a NC.

Honestly, you HAD NO IDEA whatsoever about the OB arrangement until I brought it to your attention. I tried to do it nicely to give you some room to back out of this particular point, but so much for that.

So let me spell it out for you - the argument is weird because all it does is show that the Big 8 was in general perceived to be a better football conference than the ACC. It has nothing whatsoever to do with that particular year itself.

Colorado got the Orange Bowl because the Big 8 Champ went to the OB.

Now if you want to continue to argue they were the better team based upon SOS that is fine. Reasonable minds can disagree on that. But to say that Colorado was the better team because they played in the OB is a stupid argument to make.

Cheers,
Neil

You are a freaking punk dude. It's annoying as hell when someone says "you have no idea about X until I brought it up" line. It's annoying as hell because you don't know jack s*** about what goes on in my head, and I don't know what goes on in yours.

Well I apologize if you knew beforehand that the Big 8 Champ (except when said champ had a post-season ban) always went to the Orange Bowl from 1968 to the early 90s when the Bowl Coalition came into being.

Of course, this makes this piece of your argument - Colorado is the better team since they went to the better bowl - an example of not having the needed critical thinking skills to properly assess the known fact at hand.

Seems to me proper analysis of this known fact would say that Colorado played in a conference that was in general (year in and year out) more highly regarded in football than Georgia Tech's conference. Not that Colorado was the better team because they played in the Orange Bowl and GT played in the Citrus Bowl.

Anyway, this thread is going nowhere.

Peace
Neil

Everyone needs to just calm down here. John, enough with all the name calling.

(07-21-2015 08:08 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 04:34 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-21-2015 04:23 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 10:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 09:32 PM)omniorange Wrote:  As already stated, the Big 8 was the contracted conference for the Orange Bowl from 1968 through about 1992 or 1993, whenever the Bowl Coalition (the precursor to the BCS) came about. The only years the Big 8 champ didn't play in that bowl were the 1973 and 1974 seasons when the Big 8 champ Oklahoma didn't go to any bowl game due to a post-season ban.

Your arguments are legit for Colorado in terms of tougher perceived schedule but this "better bowl" argument is just weird.

Cheers,
Neil

It's not weird. We have a documented history of using the bowl arrangements to determine power and non power conference status. We then use said status to punish/reward schools for whether or not a team has earned a NC.

Honestly, you HAD NO IDEA whatsoever about the OB arrangement until I brought it to your attention. I tried to do it nicely to give you some room to back out of this particular point, but so much for that.

So let me spell it out for you - the argument is weird because all it does is show that the Big 8 was in general perceived to be a better football conference than the ACC. It has nothing whatsoever to do with that particular year itself.

Colorado got the Orange Bowl because the Big 8 Champ went to the OB.

Now if you want to continue to argue they were the better team based upon SOS that is fine. Reasonable minds can disagree on that. But to say that Colorado was the better team because they played in the OB is a stupid argument to make.

Cheers,
Neil

You are a freaking punk dude. It's annoying as hell when someone says "you have no idea about X until I brought it up" line. It's annoying as hell because you don't know jack s*** about what goes on in my head, and I don't know what goes on in yours.

Well I apologize if you knew beforehand that the Big 8 Champ (except when said champ had a post-season ban) always went to the Orange Bowl from 1968 to the early 90s when the Bowl Coalition came into being.

Of course, this makes this piece of your argument - Colorado is the better team since they went to the better bowl - an example of not having the needed critical thinking skills to properly assess the known fact at hand.

Seems to me proper analysis of this known fact would say that Colorado played in a conference that was in general (year in and year out) more highly regarded in football than Georgia Tech's conference. Not that Colorado was the better team because they played in the Orange Bowl and GT played in the Citrus Bowl.

Anyway, this thread is going nowhere.

Peace
Neil

Of course, this makes this piece of your argument - Colorado is the better team since they went to the better bowl

Except that that is not my argument. Did this forum just go full on stupid forgetting that we have recently seen three non-power schools go undefeated and miss out on a NC or am I simply imagining Utah, Boise State, & TCU doing that?

The point I am making is not that the better bowl means CU was a better team. I am saying that back then the ACC didn't get anywhere near the amount of respect as the Big Eight hence the reason Colorado was expected to sweep both polls and was considered better than an undefeated GT despite having a loss and two highly controversial wins. That along with SOS is what I am arguing.

In the context of 2015 in looks a lot less clear because the passage of time has propelled the ACC into undisputed power conference status since that season. I believe in looking at NCs based on the context of the era in which the season they were played which is why I think CU is the more legitimate champion.

(07-21-2015 09:07 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  Everyone needs to just calm down here. John, enough with all the name calling.

WTF has happened to this place when a legitimate debate turns into this cluster****?

It's one thing to have a different opinion but when yall start taking potshots at someone simply for having a minority opinion the quality of a forum goes downhill real fast.

Really John