(10-18-2017 09:22 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:16 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(10-17-2017 09:24 AM)Tygrys Wrote:  The AAC teams are currently proving it. However, performance alone does not generate change at that level. You have to put pressure on the G5 in other ways as well. It is a little cheesy but a smart move by the conference officials, IMO...

Ehhh....


Oklahoma State 59 Tulsa 24
Toledo 54 Tulsa 51
Oklahoma 56 Tulane 14
TCU 56 SMU 36
Houston 19 Arizona 16
Texas Tech 27 Houston 24
Memphis 48 UCLA 45
Navy 48 AFA 45
Michigan 36 Cinci 14
Marshall 38 Cinci 21
James Madison 34 ECU 14
WVU 56 ECU 20
VPI 64 ECU 17
UVA 38 UConn 18
ND 49 Temple 16
UCF 38 Maryland 10
USF 47 Illinois 23

The American is 1-16 vs. top 25 teams with the lone win being Memphis over Navy.

Wasn't UCLA # 25?

I count 4-9 vs the P5. A lot of that is the AAC's bottom feeders vs some good P5 teams, and some is the better AAC teams vs the P5 bottom feeders.

Yeah, that's why I took it off--the current stats reflect record vs. current T25 teams and I didn't want the post to devolve into which method is a better reflection of measuring T25 wins.

I think best case scenario would be the P5 gobbling up the best of us.


This P6 stuff is prolly Aresco's marketing-- to get better TeeVee contracts and to keep the best of us from trying to escape.

(10-18-2017 12:38 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  I think best case scenario would be the P5 gobbling up the best of us.


This P6 stuff is prolly Aresco's marketing-- to get better TeeVee contracts and to keep the best of us from trying to escape.

Oh, there's not probably about it. He advertised this around the conference. He's done interviews with the media on the subject of "Mike, what is the purpose behind your P6 campaign?" It is definitely his child, and I love it.

(10-18-2017 12:41 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 12:38 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  I think best case scenario would be the P5 gobbling up the best of us.


This P6 stuff is prolly Aresco's marketing-- to get better TeeVee contracts and to keep the best of us from trying to escape.

Oh, there's not probably about it. He advertised this around the conference. He's done interviews with the media on the subject of "Mike, what is the purpose behind your P6 campaign?" It is definitely his child, and I love it.

o....my bad. I hadn't read anything

The marketing will work in our favor, no matter what. The powers that be will take note of individual teams within the AAC.

Wait.......
I think I hear the mating call of the ACC, the SEC , the Big10
Screw the Big 12

(10-18-2017 09:27 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:22 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:16 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(10-17-2017 09:24 AM)Tygrys Wrote:  The AAC teams are currently proving it. However, performance alone does not generate change at that level. You have to put pressure on the G5 in other ways as well. It is a little cheesy but a smart move by the conference officials, IMO...

Ehhh....


Oklahoma State 59 Tulsa 24
Toledo 54 Tulsa 51
Oklahoma 56 Tulane 14
TCU 56 SMU 36
Houston 19 Arizona 16
Texas Tech 27 Houston 24
Memphis 48 UCLA 45
Navy 48 AFA 45
Michigan 36 Cinci 14
Marshall 38 Cinci 21
James Madison 34 ECU 14
WVU 56 ECU 20
VPI 64 ECU 17
UVA 38 UConn 18
ND 49 Temple 16
UCF 38 Maryland 10
USF 47 Illinois 23

The American is 1-16 vs. top 25 teams with the lone win being Memphis over Navy.

Wasn't UCLA # 25?

I count 4-9 vs the P5. A lot of that is the AAC's bottom feeders vs some good P5 teams, and some is the better AAC teams vs the P5 bottom feeders.

Yeah, that's why I took it off--the current stats reflect record vs. current T25 teams and I didn't want the post to devolve into which method is a better reflection of measuring T25 wins.

I'm missing something. What is that random list of games? Thought it was P5 matchups, but there's Marshall, James Madison, etc.

Also what does the 1-16 mean? We beat Navy and UCLA when they were ranked. If you say it's current top 25 record, then our win over Navy doesn't count. The UCF win over us would though.

Where were the top 25 games played for context?

Very confusing data. I'm sure your point is we aren't as good as some think - it's a common theme with your posts. But the data doesn't really fit.

To really justify being in a P6 we need to hold 4 spots consistently.

(10-18-2017 03:28 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:27 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:22 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:16 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(10-17-2017 09:24 AM)Tygrys Wrote:  The AAC teams are currently proving it. However, performance alone does not generate change at that level. You have to put pressure on the G5 in other ways as well. It is a little cheesy but a smart move by the conference officials, IMO...

Ehhh....


Oklahoma State 59 Tulsa 24
Toledo 54 Tulsa 51
Oklahoma 56 Tulane 14
TCU 56 SMU 36
Houston 19 Arizona 16
Texas Tech 27 Houston 24
Memphis 48 UCLA 45
Navy 48 AFA 45
Michigan 36 Cinci 14
Marshall 38 Cinci 21
James Madison 34 ECU 14
WVU 56 ECU 20
VPI 64 ECU 17
UVA 38 UConn 18
ND 49 Temple 16
UCF 38 Maryland 10
USF 47 Illinois 23

The American is 1-16 vs. top 25 teams with the lone win being Memphis over Navy.

Wasn't UCLA # 25?

I count 4-9 vs the P5. A lot of that is the AAC's bottom feeders vs some good P5 teams, and some is the better AAC teams vs the P5 bottom feeders.

Yeah, that's why I took it off--the current stats reflect record vs. current T25 teams and I didn't want the post to devolve into which method is a better reflection of measuring T25 wins.

I'm missing something. What is that random list of games? Thought it was P5 matchups, but there's Marshall, James Madison, etc.

Also what does the 1-16 mean? We beat Navy and UCLA when they were ranked. If you say it's current top 25 record, then our win over Navy doesn't count. The UCF win over us would though.

Where were the top 25 games played for context?

Very confusing data. I'm sure your point is we aren't as good as some think - it's a common theme with your posts. But the data doesn't really fit.

Argue to argue. And you fulfilled my concern.

See bolded above in a post made at 9:16 this morning.

I guess you were so giddy to get on it you skipped to the ending.

As for the comment to which I initially responded, the poster claimed (in reference to the legitimacy of the P6 moniker) that the AAC schools were "proving it."

I just put a list of up games where AAC played P5 schools and then threw in a couple of other games where AAC schools weren't "proving it." Mostly AAC schools taking lumps, save Memphis and a couple others.

Saluki, it was a ridiculous list. Another in a endless series of you creating data to fit your narrative.

When Top 25 wins are tallied, it is by the ranking of the Top 25 team on the day of the game. Obviously. You are literally the only person I have ever seen try to twist this your way. The reason UCLA and Navy are no longer in the Top 25 is because we beat them, yet you would use that against us somehow.

Then you throw in random AAC losses to Toledo, Marshall, James Madison and VCI for some unknown reason. Of course not showing all the AAC OOC wins wins against other G5 or FBS schools. Just the 4 losses. Again, "data" to fit your narrative.

And we still have no idea where you get your AAC 1-16 record vs. Top 25 fallacy from.

Very typical, unfortunately.

(10-18-2017 12:41 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 12:38 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  I think best case scenario would be the P5 gobbling up the best of us.


This P6 stuff is prolly Aresco's marketing-- to get better TeeVee contracts and to keep the best of us from trying to escape.

Oh, there's not probably about it. He advertised this around the conference. He's done interviews with the media on the subject of "Mike, what is the purpose behind your P6 campaign?" It is definitely his child, and I love it.

Yep, and you can identify all the AAC employees at the games, wearing the P6 lapel thingy.

(10-18-2017 03:37 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 03:28 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:27 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:22 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:16 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  Ehhh....


Oklahoma State 59 Tulsa 24
Toledo 54 Tulsa 51
Oklahoma 56 Tulane 14
TCU 56 SMU 36
Houston 19 Arizona 16
Texas Tech 27 Houston 24
Memphis 48 UCLA 45
Navy 48 AFA 45
Michigan 36 Cinci 14
Marshall 38 Cinci 21
James Madison 34 ECU 14
WVU 56 ECU 20
VPI 64 ECU 17
UVA 38 UConn 18
ND 49 Temple 16
UCF 38 Maryland 10
USF 47 Illinois 23

The American is 1-16 vs. top 25 teams with the lone win being Memphis over Navy.

Wasn't UCLA # 25?

I count 4-9 vs the P5. A lot of that is the AAC's bottom feeders vs some good P5 teams, and some is the better AAC teams vs the P5 bottom feeders.

Yeah, that's why I took it off--the current stats reflect record vs. current T25 teams and I didn't want the post to devolve into which method is a better reflection of measuring T25 wins.

I'm missing something. What is that random list of games? Thought it was P5 matchups, but there's Marshall, James Madison, etc.

Also what does the 1-16 mean? We beat Navy and UCLA when they were ranked. If you say it's current top 25 record, then our win over Navy doesn't count. The UCF win over us would though.

Where were the top 25 games played for context?

Very confusing data. I'm sure your point is we aren't as good as some think - it's a common theme with your posts. But the data doesn't really fit.

Argue to argue. And you fulfilled my concern.

See bolded above in a post made at 9:16 this morning.

I guess you were so giddy to get on it you skipped to the ending.

As for the comment to which I initially responded, the poster claimed (in reference to the legitimacy of the P6 moniker) that the AAC schools were "proving it."

I just put a list of up games where AAC played P5 schools and then threw in a couple of other games where AAC schools weren't "proving it." Mostly AAC schools taking lumps, save Memphis and a couple others.

I read everything, amigo (s/o Hoop). Your further explanations just confused it more. I will actually agree that the "vs top 25" debate of current vs time played can murky up any discussion. My point was that the Memphis win over Navy wouldn't even count by your rules, as Navy is not in the current top 25.

But good to see you're admitting you're cherry picking your data this time. And fulfilling my concerns in the process.

Peanut butter and jelly much?

All I Know is this:

The Tigers beat 2 teams in the AP/Coaches poll Top 25

We lost one game to an undefeated team who is now ranked in the Teens after beating us

The Tigers have played exceptionally awesome for a team whose been depleted with injuries on defense

Personally, I like where we are. We will likely lose another game or 2. Even if we lose 2 more we are still 9-3

NOT TOO SHABBY FOR MEMPHIS TIGER FOOTBALL

(10-18-2017 04:16 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 03:37 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 03:28 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:27 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:22 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  Wasn't UCLA # 25?

I count 4-9 vs the P5. A lot of that is the AAC's bottom feeders vs some good P5 teams, and some is the better AAC teams vs the P5 bottom feeders.

Yeah, that's why I took it off--the current stats reflect record vs. current T25 teams and I didn't want the post to devolve into which method is a better reflection of measuring T25 wins.

I'm missing something. What is that random list of games? Thought it was P5 matchups, but there's Marshall, James Madison, etc.

Also what does the 1-16 mean? We beat Navy and UCLA when they were ranked. If you say it's current top 25 record, then our win over Navy doesn't count. The UCF win over us would though.

Where were the top 25 games played for context?

Very confusing data. I'm sure your point is we aren't as good as some think - it's a common theme with your posts. But the data doesn't really fit.

Argue to argue. And you fulfilled my concern.

See bolded above in a post made at 9:16 this morning.

I guess you were so giddy to get on it you skipped to the ending.

As for the comment to which I initially responded, the poster claimed (in reference to the legitimacy of the P6 moniker) that the AAC schools were "proving it."

I just put a list of up games where AAC played P5 schools and then threw in a couple of other games where AAC schools weren't "proving it." Mostly AAC schools taking lumps, save Memphis and a couple others.

I read everything, amigo (s/o Hoop). Your further explanations just confused it more. I will actually agree that the "vs top 25" debate of current vs time played can murky up any discussion. My point was that the Memphis win over Navy wouldn't even count by your rules, as Navy is not in the current top 25.

But good to see you're admitting you're cherry picking your data this time. And fulfilling my concerns in the process.

Yep. If your team is beating MULTIPLE top 25 teams and those teams STAY in the top 25, that's when you are competing for national championships, not access spots.

(10-18-2017 04:16 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  I read everything, amigo (s/o Hoop). Your further explanations just confused it more. I will actually agree that the "vs top 25" debate of current vs time played can murky up any discussion. My point was that the Memphis win over Navy wouldn't even count by your rules, as Navy is not in the current top 25.

But good to see you're admitting you're cherry picking your data this time. And fulfilling my concerns in the process.

Argue with ESPN, not me.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sta.../group/151

(10-18-2017 06:40 PM)Nobody4Prez Wrote:  All I Know is this:

The Tigers beat 2 teams in the AP/Coaches poll Top 25

We lost one game to an undefeated team who is now ranked in the Teens after beating us

The Tigers have played exceptionally awesome for a team whose been depleted with injuries on defense

Personally, I like where we are. We will likely lose another game or 2. Even if we lose 2 more we are still 9-3

NOT TOO SHABBY FOR MEMPHIS TIGER FOOTBALL

If we finish 3-2 our record would be 8-3. We only play 11 since the GA game was canceled.

If we r gonna move up, we need to crush houston

(10-18-2017 08:06 PM)Hernando Hills Tiger Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 06:40 PM)Nobody4Prez Wrote:  All I Know is this:

The Tigers beat 2 teams in the AP/Coaches poll Top 25

We lost one game to an undefeated team who is now ranked in the Teens after beating us

The Tigers have played exceptionally awesome for a team whose been depleted with injuries on defense

Personally, I like where we are. We will likely lose another game or 2. Even if we lose 2 more we are still 9-3

NOT TOO SHABBY FOR MEMPHIS TIGER FOOTBALL

If we finish 3-2 our record would be 8-3. We only play 11 since the GA game was canceled.

OK...I still think 8-3 is a great record

I attended the UCF game and they kicked our tail.

Again based on our loss of depth on defense I still see a 3 loss year as a fantastic accomplishment

Ive suffered many bad years. 4th and 26 still haunts me.

anytime the Tigers go to a bowl game is an awesome year