(01-15-2016 10:26 PM)WolfBird Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 09:16 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  Troy will finish top 4 in the conference in 2016

I've got a shiny nickel to bet against ya.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd say they probably will finish 3rd-5th.

(01-20-2016 03:45 PM)APPrising Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 10:26 PM)WolfBird Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 09:16 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  Troy will finish top 4 in the conference in 2016

I've got a shiny nickel to bet against ya.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd say they probably will finish 3rd-5th.

I'll say 6-8


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To be honest, I think it'll be a three horse race again next year as all three of the top three have a lot coming back. However, I think the gap between those three and the rest of the conference will be a lot less than it was this year. If Georgia State finds a good replacement for Arbuckle, I think they'll be in that top group too.

(01-15-2016 05:38 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 05:22 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 03:31 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  0 FBS OOC wins isn't better than App's OOC results no matter how you spin it.

It isn't worse.

You beat Wyoming and ODU and lost to Clemson
We lost to Toledo, Mizzou and USC.

If you swapped schedule's the results would have almost certainly been reversed for our teams.

Neither of us was going to beat Clemson or USC but Mizzou and Toledo are far tougher opponents than ODU and Wyoming.

We can justify a worse result based on opponent, but pretty sure that less wins is actually worse.

Nonsense. If you don't take strength of opponent into account then a comparison is meaningless. We could just schedule all SWAC opponents in OOC and go 4-0 every year I suppose since more wins always= better.

(01-20-2016 04:55 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 05:38 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 05:22 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 03:31 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  0 FBS OOC wins isn't better than App's OOC results no matter how you spin it.

It isn't worse.

You beat Wyoming and ODU and lost to Clemson
We lost to Toledo, Mizzou and USC.

If you swapped schedule's the results would have almost certainly been reversed for our teams.

Neither of us was going to beat Clemson or USC but Mizzou and Toledo are far tougher opponents than ODU and Wyoming.

We can justify a worse result based on opponent, but pretty sure that less wins is actually worse.

Nonsense. If you don't take strength of opponent into account then a comparison is meaningless. We could just schedule all SWAC opponents in OOC and go 4-0 every year I suppose since more wins always= better.

That's justifying the worse results based on opponent...which is fine (as I already said). Perfectly legit.

But the results are indeed worse because results are actually measured by wins and losses. 0-3 really is a worse result than 1-2.

(01-20-2016 04:55 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 05:38 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 05:22 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 03:31 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  0 FBS OOC wins isn't better than App's OOC results no matter how you spin it.

It isn't worse.

You beat Wyoming and ODU and lost to Clemson
We lost to Toledo, Mizzou and USC.

If you swapped schedule's the results would have almost certainly been reversed for our teams.

Neither of us was going to beat Clemson or USC but Mizzou and Toledo are far tougher opponents than ODU and Wyoming.

We can justify a worse result based on opponent, but pretty sure that less wins is actually worse.

Nonsense. If you don't take strength of opponent into account then a comparison is meaningless. We could just schedule all SWAC opponents in OOC and go 4-0 every year I suppose since more wins always= better.

That's justifying the worse results based on opponent...which is fine (as I already said). Perfectly legit.

But the results are indeed worse because results are actually measured by wins and losses. 0-3 really is a worse result than 1-2.

(01-20-2016 06:03 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 04:55 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 05:38 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 05:22 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 03:31 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  0 FBS OOC wins isn't better than App's OOC results no matter how you spin it.

It isn't worse.

You beat Wyoming and ODU and lost to Clemson
We lost to Toledo, Mizzou and USC.

If you swapped schedule's the results would have almost certainly been reversed for our teams.

Neither of us was going to beat Clemson or USC but Mizzou and Toledo are far tougher opponents than ODU and Wyoming.

We can justify a worse result based on opponent, but pretty sure that less wins is actually worse.

Nonsense. If you don't take strength of opponent into account then a comparison is meaningless. We could just schedule all SWAC opponents in OOC and go 4-0 every year I suppose since more wins always= better.

That's justifying the worse results based on opponent...which is fine (as I already said). Perfectly legit.

But the results are indeed worse because results are actually measured by wins and losses. 0-3 really is a worse result than 1-2.

Not necessarily . . . losing to Alabama on the road by 1 is a better result than beating most teams at home.

Crump let it go. It's OK to be wrong, brining get it up next week won't help either. Bowl games count too.

(01-20-2016 08:33 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 06:03 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 04:55 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 05:38 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-15-2016 05:22 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  It isn't worse.

You beat Wyoming and ODU and lost to Clemson
We lost to Toledo, Mizzou and USC.

If you swapped schedule's the results would have almost certainly been reversed for our teams.

Neither of us was going to beat Clemson or USC but Mizzou and Toledo are far tougher opponents than ODU and Wyoming.

We can justify a worse result based on opponent, but pretty sure that less wins is actually worse.

Nonsense. If you don't take strength of opponent into account then a comparison is meaningless. We could just schedule all SWAC opponents in OOC and go 4-0 every year I suppose since more wins always= better.

That's justifying the worse results based on opponent...which is fine (as I already said). Perfectly legit.

But the results are indeed worse because results are actually measured by wins and losses. 0-3 really is a worse result than 1-2.

Not necessarily . . . losing to Alabama on the road by 1 is a better result than beating most teams at home.

And again...you are justifying the worse results by strength of schedule. Which is ok and legit debating point. But strength of schedule does not actually make the result change or turn a loss into a win or make losses better than wins.

App State is 33rd in the nation until August 2016.

Arkansas State is #1 in the Sun Belt until Nov/Dec 2016.

(01-24-2016 06:27 PM)asuwon Wrote:  Arkansas State is #1 in the Sun Belt until Nov/Dec 2016.

To be the man, you've gotta beat the man!!!!

Woooooooooooooooo!!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(01-24-2016 07:09 PM)WolfBird Wrote:  

(01-24-2016 06:27 PM)asuwon Wrote:  Arkansas State is #1 in the Sun Belt until Nov/Dec 2016.

To be the man, you've gotta beat the man!!!!

Woooooooooooooooo!!!!!

I think we stay around the same place in the standings, really just depends whether or not our new QB is a screw up