(09-08-2015 12:42 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 04:52 PM)MUther Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 02:50 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 01:59 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  I agree with East is Purple solely on the basis he refers to. For instance, UTEP lost to an 18th rank team in Arky. So how can that be the same as winning against a Vandy or a Purdue who aren't even in the same level. I'm not disparaging your teams or its wins but seriously those two teams aren't even in the same league as far as strength to arkansas.

What I'm trying to get at is that there should be a leveling point when a team plays a ranked team, that's all.

They give you credit even for losing against ranked opponents in basketball so why not in football.

I agree also because the same goes for UTSA losing to a #22 Arizona in Tempe, in a game where we essentially outplayed 'em. Congrats to Marshall for example, but Purdue is basically the Vandy of the Big Ten and it was a home game. But I do think it would even out, for the most part, over time. And besides, there's no perfect system anyway. It just struck me as a simple/straight forward way to assess the conferences over the course of a season without requiring too much analysis across the full range of the weekly G5 slate of games, which can get time-consuming.

We'll see how you feel if you beat KState at home next week. I'm sure you'll consider it a quality win and KState has sucked about as long as Purdue has. The average college football fan assumed WKU and Marshall would lose because we were facing "the big boys." I don't mind throwing on an extra point for a ranked P5 win, but the goal here is to stick it to the perception that the gap is wide. It is not nearly so wide as the masses want to believe.

? Do you watch college football? Kansas State is very competitive in the big 12 and is consistently ranked almost every year. Purdue hasn't competed for anything in years and is one the worst P5 programs out there. Sorry beating KState would be way more impressive than Purdue and would definitely turn some voter's heads. Someone that actually follows college football knows that the good G5 teams are very capable of beating the bottom rung P5 teams such as Vandy and Purdue

As a fan of a team that has actually beaten Kansas State's overrated team on the road when they were ranked #6, color me not impressed. But the point remains they haven't done anything in years, either, of national significance. All I'm saying is that we don't need to be ashamed of beating a P5 team at home and you won't be either, no matter who it is.

And national perception isn't based on people that are particularly knowledgeable about college football. It's based on people that recognize the name of a team based on the conference they're in and who automatically conclude that conference affiliation means they trump anyone not in one of those power conferences. The Big Ten Channel's comment section was full of people that "just knew" Purdue was going to win because they were in the Big Ten and Marshall was not. That's the perception. And they are shocked today that lowly Marshall beat them.

Giving points for quality losses is exactly what got Boise in the access bowl last year. You get credit for what you accomplish not for what you might have accomplished. UTSA played a good game against a good team. They lost. Moral victories shouldn't count in the rankings. Ask yourself if you'd rather have a good showing against Arizona or a win over Purdue right now in the books.

Lets put something in perspective over the last 3 years ...

Vandy ranked twice (ranked 3 times and 4 bowls in 7 years)
Arkansas ranked once (ranked 3 times in last 7 years)
Purdue been 9 years since they were ranked won 7 games once in 7 years..7 years ago

So to say Vandy is a bad program? historically, yes. But not over the last 7 years and no matter how bad they were last year...they still have most of the last 4 recruiting classes which were top 30 or top 40...I can't remember what I heard the talking heads on the radio say but it was one of those. Now being ranked in 2 of the last 3 and 3 of the last 7 years is a helluva better than most schools...G5 or P5

So with that getting your head kicked in by 35 points by a team running clock for 1.5 qts is not even close to actually beating a team that's been ranked 2 out of the last 3 years on their home field. No matter how bad they were last year. Because if we want to base it on last year...Arkansas won 2 more sec games than Vandy.

KST has averaged 9.5 wins over the last 4 seasons and ranked as high as #2 in 2012 and top 10 two other times. Didn't finish that high but still top 20 three out last four years

Kansas State has firmly established itself as a program to be taken seriously, especially these last few years, and they've been relatively consistent over that stretch. Both Purdue and Vanderbilt are several tiers below them right now, and even average fans know that those programs are extremely susceptible to losing to just about any FBS team.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all about some C-USA wins and I applaud the guys for pulling them off, but knocking off the likes of KState is way more of a landmark win than beating some programs presently on life support.

(09-08-2015 01:27 AM)MUther Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 12:42 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 04:52 PM)MUther Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 02:50 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 01:59 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  I agree with East is Purple solely on the basis he refers to. For instance, UTEP lost to an 18th rank team in Arky. So how can that be the same as winning against a Vandy or a Purdue who aren't even in the same level. I'm not disparaging your teams or its wins but seriously those two teams aren't even in the same league as far as strength to arkansas.

What I'm trying to get at is that there should be a leveling point when a team plays a ranked team, that's all.

They give you credit even for losing against ranked opponents in basketball so why not in football.

I agree also because the same goes for UTSA losing to a #22 Arizona in Tempe, in a game where we essentially outplayed 'em. Congrats to Marshall for example, but Purdue is basically the Vandy of the Big Ten and it was a home game. But I do think it would even out, for the most part, over time. And besides, there's no perfect system anyway. It just struck me as a simple/straight forward way to assess the conferences over the course of a season without requiring too much analysis across the full range of the weekly G5 slate of games, which can get time-consuming.

We'll see how you feel if you beat KState at home next week. I'm sure you'll consider it a quality win and KState has sucked about as long as Purdue has. The average college football fan assumed WKU and Marshall would lose because we were facing "the big boys." I don't mind throwing on an extra point for a ranked P5 win, but the goal here is to stick it to the perception that the gap is wide. It is not nearly so wide as the masses want to believe.

? Do you watch college football? Kansas State is very competitive in the big 12 and is consistently ranked almost every year. Purdue hasn't competed for anything in years and is one the worst P5 programs out there. Sorry beating KState would be way more impressive than Purdue and would definitely turn some voter's heads. Someone that actually follows college football knows that the good G5 teams are very capable of beating the bottom rung P5 teams such as Vandy and Purdue

As a fan of a team that has actually beaten Kansas State's overrated team on the road when they were ranked #6, color me not impressed. But the point remains they haven't done anything in years, either, of national significance. All I'm saying is that we don't need to be ashamed of beating a P5 team at home and you won't be either, no matter who it is.

And national perception isn't based on people that are particularly knowledgeable about college football. It's based on people that recognize the name of a team based on the conference they're in and who automatically conclude that conference affiliation means they trump anyone not in one of those power conferences. The Big Ten Channel's comment section was full of people that "just knew" Purdue was going to win because they were in the Big Ten and Marshall was not. That's the perception. And they are shocked today that lowly Marshall beat them.

Giving points for quality losses is exactly what got Boise in the access bowl last year. You get credit for what you accomplish not for what you might have accomplished. UTSA played a good game against a good team. They lost. Moral victories shouldn't count in the rankings. Ask yourself if you'd rather have a good showing against Arizona or a win over Purdue right now in the books.

Not really, KState just went to an access Bowl in 2012 and if I remember correctly was ranked #2 or #3 at some point that year. They went 11-2 and were Big 12 co-champions

(09-08-2015 08:01 AM)Hopeful Wrote:  Kansas State has firmly established itself as a program to be taken seriously, especially these last few years, and they've been relatively consistent over that stretch. Both Purdue and Vanderbilt are several tiers below them right now, and even average fans know that those programs are extremely susceptible to losing to just about any FBS team.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all about some C-USA wins and I applaud the guys for pulling them off, but knocking off the likes of KState is way more of a landmark win than beating some programs presently on life support.

Definitely