Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
The CFP committee is too schizo
Author Message
EvilVodka Offline
stuff

Posts: 3,585
Joined: Jan 2014
I Root For: FSU LSU
Location: Houston, TX
Post: #21
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-25-2015 07:42 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 05:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:07 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Notre Dame have actually played nobody. Clemson, Temple and Navy really the only ones until they faced Stanford. Notre Dame was really ranked too high.

Most computers say ND has played a tougher schedule than Oklahoma. The committee's actions are bizarro.

Computers are only as good as their initial input. Their actions aren't bizarro. Their actions are their actions. Just because you got it wrong doesn't mean you have to insult them.

The problem is no one knows what they have to do to get in...no one knows where the finish line is, th goalposts move every week....
11-25-2015 10:10 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,299
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #22
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-25-2015 10:10 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 07:42 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 05:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:07 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Notre Dame have actually played nobody. Clemson, Temple and Navy really the only ones until they faced Stanford. Notre Dame was really ranked too high.

Most computers say ND has played a tougher schedule than Oklahoma. The committee's actions are bizarro.

Computers are only as good as their initial input. Their actions aren't bizarro. Their actions are their actions. Just because you got it wrong doesn't mean you have to insult them.

The problem is no one knows what they have to do to get in...no one knows where the finish line is, th goalposts move every week....

And the arguments they use for keeping Iowa and Baylor low applied every bit as much, and probably more to Ohio St. who they kept in 2 and 3 until they lost.
11-25-2015 11:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #23
Re: RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-25-2015 07:42 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 05:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:07 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Notre Dame have actually played nobody. Clemson, Temple and Navy really the only ones until they faced Stanford. Notre Dame was really ranked too high.

Most computers say ND has played a tougher schedule than Oklahoma. The committee's actions are bizarro.

Computers are only as good as their initial input. Their actions aren't bizarro. Their actions are their actions. Just because you got it wrong doesn't mean you have to insult them.

By this point, all initial inputs have washed out.

Let's be clear. I got what they were going to do wrong. They got the rankings wrong. I'd rather be me, lol.
(This post was last modified: 11-25-2015 03:04 PM by quo vadis.)
11-25-2015 03:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #24
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-24-2015 11:26 PM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  Too many people are poll minded conditioned and don't fully grasp the concept of starting from scratch each week.

The problem isn't "grasping the concept". The problem is the ever-changing criteria. The criteria are the only things that seem to start from scratch each week. And why is that? The committee understands completely that their weekly rankings are totally meaningless, and nothing but theater to sell advertising on ESPN (who is the one paying the bills).
11-25-2015 03:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #25
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-25-2015 10:10 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 07:42 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 05:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:07 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Notre Dame have actually played nobody. Clemson, Temple and Navy really the only ones until they faced Stanford. Notre Dame was really ranked too high.

Most computers say ND has played a tougher schedule than Oklahoma. The committee's actions are bizarro.

Computers are only as good as their initial input. Their actions aren't bizarro. Their actions are their actions. Just because you got it wrong doesn't mean you have to insult them.

The problem is no one knows what they have to do to get in...no one knows where the finish line is, th goalposts move every week....

You have to win.
11-25-2015 06:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #26
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-25-2015 03:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 07:42 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 05:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:07 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Notre Dame have actually played nobody. Clemson, Temple and Navy really the only ones until they faced Stanford. Notre Dame was really ranked too high.

Most computers say ND has played a tougher schedule than Oklahoma. The committee's actions are bizarro.

Computers are only as good as their initial input. Their actions aren't bizarro. Their actions are their actions. Just because you got it wrong doesn't mean you have to insult them.

By this point, all initial inputs have washed out.

Let's be clear. I got what they were going to do wrong. They got the rankings wrong. I'd rather be me, lol.

Initial inputs are never washed out because initial rankings are what set the power level for each schedule to be figured out in the future. Each team is not figured equally at the beginning so therefore the initial inputs are never fully washed out. Anyone trying to make that argument either doesn't know what they are talking about or they actually think the creators of these "programs" are going to tell the truth about the greatest weakness of these programs.
11-25-2015 06:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,875
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 895
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #27
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-25-2015 06:18 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 10:10 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 07:42 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 05:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:07 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Notre Dame have actually played nobody. Clemson, Temple and Navy really the only ones until they faced Stanford. Notre Dame was really ranked too high.

Most computers say ND has played a tougher schedule than Oklahoma. The committee's actions are bizarro.

Computers are only as good as their initial input. Their actions aren't bizarro. Their actions are their actions. Just because you got it wrong doesn't mean you have to insult them.

The problem is no one knows what they have to do to get in...no one knows where the finish line is, th goalposts move every week....

You have to win.

Agreed. I don't see any reason to complain about the ruminations of the Committee.

They weren't the ones who turned the ball over 9 times against Clemson and BC.

If you give a reason for the Committee to drop you and control your fate, well, so it goes.

Win them all and take it out of their hands.
11-25-2015 07:44 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 732
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #28
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-25-2015 08:59 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:07 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Notre Dame have actually played nobody. Clemson, Temple and Navy really the only ones until they faced Stanford. Notre Dame was really ranked too high.

USC and Pitt are both receiving votes in the Top 25...do a little more research David.


Pitt. almost lost to a 5-6 Youngstown State. Pitt should have lost that game.

USC have been going up and down in the elevator rank and than unranked and than rank again.

ACC have been over rated from the start.
11-25-2015 07:56 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TexanMark Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 25,637
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 1326
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Post: #29
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-25-2015 07:56 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 08:59 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:07 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Notre Dame have actually played nobody. Clemson, Temple and Navy really the only ones until they faced Stanford. Notre Dame was really ranked too high.

USC and Pitt are both receiving votes in the Top 25...do a little more research David.


Pitt. almost lost to a 5-6 Youngstown State. Pitt should have lost that game.

USC have been going up and down in the elevator rank and than unranked and than rank again.

ACC have been over rated from the start.

Cool story...but do your homework...Notre Dame plays a solid schedule.
11-25-2015 08:33 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
shere khan Offline
Southerner
*

Posts: 60,509
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 7458
I Root For: Tulane
Location: Teh transfer portal
Post: #30
Re: RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-25-2015 03:07 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Notre Dame have actually played nobody. Clemson, Temple and Navy really the only ones until they faced Stanford. Notre Dame is always ranked too high.

Fify
11-25-2015 11:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #31
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-25-2015 06:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 07:42 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 05:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:07 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Notre Dame have actually played nobody. Clemson, Temple and Navy really the only ones until they faced Stanford. Notre Dame was really ranked too high.

Most computers say ND has played a tougher schedule than Oklahoma. The committee's actions are bizarro.

Computers are only as good as their initial input. Their actions aren't bizarro. Their actions are their actions. Just because you got it wrong doesn't mean you have to insult them.

By this point, all initial inputs have washed out.

Let's be clear. I got what they were going to do wrong. They got the rankings wrong. I'd rather be me, lol.

Initial inputs are never washed out because initial rankings are what set the power level for each schedule to be figured out in the future. Each team is not figured equally at the beginning so therefore the initial inputs are never fully washed out. Anyone trying to make that argument either doesn't know what they are talking about or they actually think the creators of these "programs" are going to tell the truth about the greatest weakness of these programs.

You're wrong - they wash out. At least in unbiased systems like Sagarin. Though of course only he knows that for sure, LOL.

Point is, there's no reason to not have initial rankings wash out, so it's safe to assume most computers do it that way.
(This post was last modified: 11-25-2015 11:58 PM by quo vadis.)
11-25-2015 11:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 122
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #32
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-25-2015 10:07 AM)TampaKnight Wrote:  How the hell is Navy only #15? Should be at least #11 with only one loss and a strong team.

Name the number of P5 wins that Navy has this year.
11-25-2015 11:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #33
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-25-2015 11:53 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 06:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 07:42 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 05:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Most computers say ND has played a tougher schedule than Oklahoma. The committee's actions are bizarro.

Computers are only as good as their initial input. Their actions aren't bizarro. Their actions are their actions. Just because you got it wrong doesn't mean you have to insult them.

By this point, all initial inputs have washed out.

Let's be clear. I got what they were going to do wrong. They got the rankings wrong. I'd rather be me, lol.

Initial inputs are never washed out because initial rankings are what set the power level for each schedule to be figured out in the future. Each team is not figured equally at the beginning so therefore the initial inputs are never fully washed out. Anyone trying to make that argument either doesn't know what they are talking about or they actually think the creators of these "programs" are going to tell the truth about the greatest weakness of these programs.

You are incorrect - the initial inputs are washed out. You just don't understand how these formulas work.

I am correct.
11-26-2015 12:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #34
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-25-2015 11:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 06:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 07:42 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 05:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Most computers say ND has played a tougher schedule than Oklahoma. The committee's actions are bizarro.

Computers are only as good as their initial input. Their actions aren't bizarro. Their actions are their actions. Just because you got it wrong doesn't mean you have to insult them.

By this point, all initial inputs have washed out.

Let's be clear. I got what they were going to do wrong. They got the rankings wrong. I'd rather be me, lol.

Initial inputs are never washed out because initial rankings are what set the power level for each schedule to be figured out in the future. Each team is not figured equally at the beginning so therefore the initial inputs are never fully washed out. Anyone trying to make that argument either doesn't know what they are talking about or they actually think the creators of these "programs" are going to tell the truth about the greatest weakness of these programs.

You're wrong - they wash out. At least in unbiased systems like Sagarin. Though of course only he knows that for sure, LOL.

Point is, there's no reason to not have initial rankings wash out, so it's safe to assume most computers do it that way.

Initial rankings affect where schools are ranked in later weeks and THOSE rankings are not washed out so the initial rankings are ALWAYS affecting the current rankings no matter what line of horse manure the programmers of each rating try to feed you.
11-26-2015 12:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,299
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #35
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-26-2015 12:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 11:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 06:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 07:42 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Computers are only as good as their initial input. Their actions aren't bizarro. Their actions are their actions. Just because you got it wrong doesn't mean you have to insult them.

By this point, all initial inputs have washed out.

Let's be clear. I got what they were going to do wrong. They got the rankings wrong. I'd rather be me, lol.

Initial inputs are never washed out because initial rankings are what set the power level for each schedule to be figured out in the future. Each team is not figured equally at the beginning so therefore the initial inputs are never fully washed out. Anyone trying to make that argument either doesn't know what they are talking about or they actually think the creators of these "programs" are going to tell the truth about the greatest weakness of these programs.

You're wrong - they wash out. At least in unbiased systems like Sagarin. Though of course only he knows that for sure, LOL.

Point is, there's no reason to not have initial rankings wash out, so it's safe to assume most computers do it that way.

Initial rankings affect where schools are ranked in later weeks and THOSE rankings are not washed out so the initial rankings are ALWAYS affecting the current rankings no matter what line of horse manure the programmers of each rating try to feed you.

There are some that keep those initial inputs. Most people think Dunkel does. I know how Sagarin's ELO works and it doesn't. Its a modification of the system used in chess. After a few weeks, those initial estimates are removed and they are treated as if they all started at the same point. He says his regular system also removes those initial inputs.
11-26-2015 08:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #36
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-26-2015 12:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 11:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 06:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 07:42 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Computers are only as good as their initial input. Their actions aren't bizarro. Their actions are their actions. Just because you got it wrong doesn't mean you have to insult them.

By this point, all initial inputs have washed out.

Let's be clear. I got what they were going to do wrong. They got the rankings wrong. I'd rather be me, lol.

Initial inputs are never washed out because initial rankings are what set the power level for each schedule to be figured out in the future. Each team is not figured equally at the beginning so therefore the initial inputs are never fully washed out. Anyone trying to make that argument either doesn't know what they are talking about or they actually think the creators of these "programs" are going to tell the truth about the greatest weakness of these programs.

You're wrong - they wash out. At least in unbiased systems like Sagarin. Though of course only he knows that for sure, LOL.

Point is, there's no reason to not have initial rankings wash out, so it's safe to assume most computers do it that way.

Initial rankings affect where schools are ranked in later weeks and THOSE rankings are not washed out so the initial rankings are ALWAYS affecting the current rankings no matter what line of horse manure the programmers of each rating try to feed you.

Truth is, we can't know for sure because guys like Sagarin keep their formulas secret. But if he isn't lying about his explanation for his "bias free" rankings, then there is no carryover from one week to the next so no continuous contamination from initial rankings. They really do wash out after about five weeks.

Look, i get it: Humans like Iowa right now more than computers. The AP, Coaches, and CFP all have Iowa in the top 4. Massey has Iowa at #8. But that doesn't mean the computers are biased the way you think they are.
(This post was last modified: 11-26-2015 09:20 AM by quo vadis.)
11-26-2015 09:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #37
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-26-2015 09:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-26-2015 12:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 11:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 06:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 03:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  By this point, all initial inputs have washed out.

Let's be clear. I got what they were going to do wrong. They got the rankings wrong. I'd rather be me, lol.

Initial inputs are never washed out because initial rankings are what set the power level for each schedule to be figured out in the future. Each team is not figured equally at the beginning so therefore the initial inputs are never fully washed out. Anyone trying to make that argument either doesn't know what they are talking about or they actually think the creators of these "programs" are going to tell the truth about the greatest weakness of these programs.

You're wrong - they wash out. At least in unbiased systems like Sagarin. Though of course only he knows that for sure, LOL.

Point is, there's no reason to not have initial rankings wash out, so it's safe to assume most computers do it that way.

Initial rankings affect where schools are ranked in later weeks and THOSE rankings are not washed out so the initial rankings are ALWAYS affecting the current rankings no matter what line of horse manure the programmers of each rating try to feed you.

Truth is, we can't know for sure because guys like Sagarin keep their formulas secret. But if he isn't lying about his explanation for his "bias free" rankings, then there is no carryover from one week to the next so no continuous contamination from initial rankings. They really do wash out after about five weeks.

Look, I agree that we don't truly know because these guys keep their formula's to themselves but if they were truly bias free then we would have some very strange rankings that would appear very different from the opinion polls. The fact that they don't just goes to show that they aren't as unbiased as they want us to believe. They want us to believe this because they have a financial reason to do so. The fact that they bear such a close resemblance to completely biased polls just goes to show that their claims of being bias free are a joke.
11-26-2015 09:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #38
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-26-2015 09:21 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-26-2015 09:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-26-2015 12:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 11:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 06:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Initial inputs are never washed out because initial rankings are what set the power level for each schedule to be figured out in the future. Each team is not figured equally at the beginning so therefore the initial inputs are never fully washed out. Anyone trying to make that argument either doesn't know what they are talking about or they actually think the creators of these "programs" are going to tell the truth about the greatest weakness of these programs.

You're wrong - they wash out. At least in unbiased systems like Sagarin. Though of course only he knows that for sure, LOL.

Point is, there's no reason to not have initial rankings wash out, so it's safe to assume most computers do it that way.

Initial rankings affect where schools are ranked in later weeks and THOSE rankings are not washed out so the initial rankings are ALWAYS affecting the current rankings no matter what line of horse manure the programmers of each rating try to feed you.

Truth is, we can't know for sure because guys like Sagarin keep their formulas secret. But if he isn't lying about his explanation for his "bias free" rankings, then there is no carryover from one week to the next so no continuous contamination from initial rankings. They really do wash out after about five weeks.

Look, I agree that we don't truly know because these guys keep their formula's to themselves but if they were truly bias free then we would have some very strange rankings that would appear very different from the opinion polls. The fact that they don't just goes to show that they aren't as unbiased as they want us to believe.

Actually, they do. E.g., Sagarin has Iowa at #17 right now. Michigan State is #15. Ole Miss is #10. That's a lot different from the polls.
(This post was last modified: 11-26-2015 10:09 AM by quo vadis.)
11-26-2015 10:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 732
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #39
RE: The CFP committee is too schizo
(11-26-2015 10:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-26-2015 09:21 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-26-2015 09:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-26-2015 12:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-25-2015 11:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  You're wrong - they wash out. At least in unbiased systems like Sagarin. Though of course only he knows that for sure, LOL.

Point is, there's no reason to not have initial rankings wash out, so it's safe to assume most computers do it that way.

Initial rankings affect where schools are ranked in later weeks and THOSE rankings are not washed out so the initial rankings are ALWAYS affecting the current rankings no matter what line of horse manure the programmers of each rating try to feed you.

Truth is, we can't know for sure because guys like Sagarin keep their formulas secret. But if he isn't lying about his explanation for his "bias free" rankings, then there is no carryover from one week to the next so no continuous contamination from initial rankings. They really do wash out after about five weeks.

Look, I agree that we don't truly know because these guys keep their formula's to themselves but if they were truly bias free then we would have some very strange rankings that would appear very different from the opinion polls. The fact that they don't just goes to show that they aren't as unbiased as they want us to believe.

Actually, they do. E.g., Sagarin has Iowa at #17 right now. Michigan State is #15. Ole Miss is #10. That's a lot different from the polls.



These computers would point out that Oklahoma would have blown out Boise State in the Fiesta Bowl, but not Boise State on winning. Putting in these numbers tend to under rate strong teams in the G5, and over inflate the weak teams in the P5. They treat Kansas a strong P5 team when we know from the eyeball test that they are the worst team in the whole FBS. Ole Miss. at 10 is over flat them. The whole SEC was over rated. Alabama at Number 2 is a big joke. They are only up there because they are SEC.
11-26-2015 10:48 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.