(09-04-2018 08:01 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 05:08 AM)Fanhood Part Deaux Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 05:28 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 05:02 PM)Fanhood Part Deaux Wrote:  Good, we agree. This is what I have been saying to you for two years. people only care about the top of the conference, this the "depth"'of the AAC the past few years has never mattered. Now,'that depth does not appear to exist this year, so it matters even less.

Enjoy the games my friend. They matter.

woah, woah... i didnt say they never mattered...they definitely matter...the depth is what pushs the top to be actually good..depth insures replacements when a top team is down.

coming out of the aac as the champion meant you are actually good. coming out as the g5 champ out of anyone other conference meant you werent as bad as the others..which is why we have won all our access bowls....and no one not named boise has outside of the aac

i just said "for national perception" and the p6 movement, how good your top is is all that "the national media" cares about..it matter every where else...including deciding who gets the NY6

also the aac is deeper than the mwc even this year, and its not close....as usual your bias is blind you

any aac that lost isnt good..but you are counting teams who had blowout loses in the mwc as part of the mwc depth..because you still see them as good..

aka your team..sdsu

tulane took a projected top 6 acc team in ot...and honestly should have won .. you added them to the not good aac list (and actually mocked me in the mwc forum for saying they could still end up good)

unlv loses by over 20 to USC you added them to the mwc depth in the mwc forum...utah state lost you are adding them to the mwc depth....

I always enjoy being called biased by the guy who is speaking in absolutes. Could you point to evidence that supports your claim that the AAC is deep this year?

Disclaimer - early rankings low-value, I don't know which ones still tie to pre-season projections, etc etc etc

Looking at Massey Composite after week one results (further disclaimer, only a composite of 26 rankings as I type this, so there will be movement just within the week one Massey Composite rankings):
#1 vs #1, #2 vs #2, on down to #12 vs #12, AAC ranked higher in 10 of 12 of those comparisons - even with Boise above UCF as of now.
Average ranking for all twelve, AAC wins.
Median (which has value in talking top-to-bottom) AAC wins.
Top 4 avg ranking, Middle 4 avg ranking, Bottom 4 avg ranking: AAC wins, AAC wins,and AAC wins.


I looked really quickly at Sagarin too (his conference comparisons (which end up being division comparisons) keep me from having to look line by line)
#1 vs #1, #2 vs #2, on down to #12 vs #12, AAC ranked higher in 9 of 12 of those comparisons - even with Boise above UCF.
Average Sagarin rating for all twelve, AAC wins.
Median (which has value in talking top-to-bottom) rank, AAC wins.
Top 4 avg ranking, Middle 4 avg ranking, Bottom 4 avg ranking: AAC wins, AAC wins,and AAC wins.

Let's flip it - can you find any data driven way to dispute that the AAC top,middle, and bottom is better than the mwc (even if mwc #1 MIGHT beat out AAC #1)?

Honestly, the formatting of your post was hard for me to read. I give you my word, I will look at this data later this week.

One piece of evidence of the MW's strength in the middle or the bottom of the conference would be Hawaii beating Navy handily. Hawaii was predicted last in the MW West Division, and Navy was predicted to finish third I believe. I would say Temple losing to an FCS team, when they were predicted to finish third in their division is indicative of a general down year for the middle of the pack.

With all that being said, pre-season predictions mean very little. Time will tell. Talk later.

(09-03-2018 07:35 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 05:28 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 05:02 PM)Fanhood Part Deaux Wrote:  Good, we agree. This is what I have been saying to you for two years. people only care about the top of the conference, this the "depth"'of the AAC the past few years has never mattered. Now,'that depth does not appear to exist this year, so it matters even less.

Enjoy the games my friend. They matter.

woah, woah... i didnt say they never mattered...they definitely matter...the depth is what pushs the top to be actually good..depth insures replacements when a top team is down.

coming out of the aac as the champion meant you are actually good. coming out as the g5 champ out of anyone other conference meant you werent as bad as the others..which is why we have won all our access bowls....and no one not named boise has outside of the aac

i just said "for national perception" and the p6 movement, how good your top is is all that "the national media" cares about..it matter every where else...including deciding who gets the NY6

also the aac is deeper than the mwc even this year, and its not close....as usual your bias is blind you

any aac that lost isnt good..but you are counting teams who had blowout loses in the mwc as part of the mwc depth..because you still see them as good..

aka your team..sdsu

tulane took a projected top 6 acc team in ot...and honestly should have won .. you added them to the not good aac list (and actually mocked me in the mwc forum for saying they could still end up good)

unlv loses by over 20 to USC you added them to the mwc depth in the mwc forum...utah state lost you are adding them to the mwc depth....

Don't go down the rabbit hole.

I agree. Pesik DONT FEED THE TROLL. I still don't understand how this troll is allowed back but BEARCAT #1 isn't.

(09-04-2018 09:57 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 07:35 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 05:28 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 05:02 PM)Fanhood Part Deaux Wrote:  Good, we agree. This is what I have been saying to you for two years. people only care about the top of the conference, this the "depth"'of the AAC the past few years has never mattered. Now,'that depth does not appear to exist this year, so it matters even less.

Enjoy the games my friend. They matter.

woah, woah... i didnt say they never mattered...they definitely matter...the depth is what pushs the top to be actually good..depth insures replacements when a top team is down.

coming out of the aac as the champion meant you are actually good. coming out as the g5 champ out of anyone other conference meant you werent as bad as the others..which is why we have won all our access bowls....and no one not named boise has outside of the aac

i just said "for national perception" and the p6 movement, how good your top is is all that "the national media" cares about..it matter every where else...including deciding who gets the NY6

also the aac is deeper than the mwc even this year, and its not close....as usual your bias is blind you

any aac that lost isnt good..but you are counting teams who had blowout loses in the mwc as part of the mwc depth..because you still see them as good..

aka your team..sdsu

tulane took a projected top 6 acc team in ot...and honestly should have won .. you added them to the not good aac list (and actually mocked me in the mwc forum for saying they could still end up good)

unlv loses by over 20 to USC you added them to the mwc depth in the mwc forum...utah state lost you are adding them to the mwc depth....

Don't go down the rabbit hole.

I agree. Pesik DONT FEED THE TROLL. I still don't understand how this troll is allowed back but BEARCAT #1 isn't.

I am not sure why I upset you. I am simply saying that that AAC was definitely top to bottom, the best G5 conference last year. However, it is cyclical, and the top to bottom, that may not be true this year.

I also am simply saying that the top of the MW, and Sun Belt, and even CUSA is competitive with the AAC, and vice versa. Hardly controversial, and certainly not absolutist.

(09-04-2018 10:08 AM)Fanhood Part Deaux Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 09:57 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 07:35 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 05:28 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 05:02 PM)Fanhood Part Deaux Wrote:  Good, we agree. This is what I have been saying to you for two years. people only care about the top of the conference, this the "depth"'of the AAC the past few years has never mattered. Now,'that depth does not appear to exist this year, so it matters even less.

Enjoy the games my friend. They matter.

woah, woah... i didnt say they never mattered...they definitely matter...the depth is what pushs the top to be actually good..depth insures replacements when a top team is down.

coming out of the aac as the champion meant you are actually good. coming out as the g5 champ out of anyone other conference meant you werent as bad as the others..which is why we have won all our access bowls....and no one not named boise has outside of the aac

i just said "for national perception" and the p6 movement, how good your top is is all that "the national media" cares about..it matter every where else...including deciding who gets the NY6

also the aac is deeper than the mwc even this year, and its not close....as usual your bias is blind you

any aac that lost isnt good..but you are counting teams who had blowout loses in the mwc as part of the mwc depth..because you still see them as good..

aka your team..sdsu

tulane took a projected top 6 acc team in ot...and honestly should have won .. you added them to the not good aac list (and actually mocked me in the mwc forum for saying they could still end up good)

unlv loses by over 20 to USC you added them to the mwc depth in the mwc forum...utah state lost you are adding them to the mwc depth....

Don't go down the rabbit hole.

I agree. Pesik DONT FEED THE TROLL. I still don't understand how this troll is allowed back but BEARCAT #1 isn't.

I am not sure why I upset you. I am simply saying that that AAC was definitely top to bottom, the best G5 conference last year. However, it is cyclical, and the top to bottom, that may not be true this year.

I also am simply saying that the top of the MW, and Sun Belt, and even CUSA is competitive with the AAC, and vice versa. Hardly controversial, and certainly not absolutist.

(Using Massey with 31 rankings compiled to date)
What do you mean by "The top"?

Top ranked team:
mwc - #18 Boise
AAC - #19 UCF
MAC - #48 Toledo
CUSA - #51 FAU
SunBelt - #58 App St.

Avg ranking of top two teams:
AAC - 23
mwc - 29.5
MAC - 56
CUSA - 56.5
SunBelt - 62

Avg ranking of top three teams:
AAC 30.3
mwc 38
CUSA 61
MAC 63.3
SunBelt 66.3

Avg ranking of top four teams:
AAC - 36
mwc 45.25
CUSA 64.25
MAC 69.25
SunBelt 76

(09-04-2018 10:39 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 10:08 AM)Fanhood Part Deaux Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 09:57 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 07:35 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 05:28 PM)pesik Wrote:  woah, woah... i didnt say they never mattered...they definitely matter...the depth is what pushs the top to be actually good..depth insures replacements when a top team is down.

coming out of the aac as the champion meant you are actually good. coming out as the g5 champ out of anyone other conference meant you werent as bad as the others..which is why we have won all our access bowls....and no one not named boise has outside of the aac

i just said "for national perception" and the p6 movement, how good your top is is all that "the national media" cares about..it matter every where else...including deciding who gets the NY6

also the aac is deeper than the mwc even this year, and its not close....as usual your bias is blind you

any aac that lost isnt good..but you are counting teams who had blowout loses in the mwc as part of the mwc depth..because you still see them as good..

aka your team..sdsu

tulane took a projected top 6 acc team in ot...and honestly should have won .. you added them to the not good aac list (and actually mocked me in the mwc forum for saying they could still end up good)

unlv loses by over 20 to USC you added them to the mwc depth in the mwc forum...utah state lost you are adding them to the mwc depth....

Don't go down the rabbit hole.

I agree. Pesik DONT FEED THE TROLL. I still don't understand how this troll is allowed back but BEARCAT #1 isn't.

I am not sure why I upset you. I am simply saying that that AAC was definitely top to bottom, the best G5 conference last year. However, it is cyclical, and the top to bottom, that may not be true this year.

I also am simply saying that the top of the MW, and Sun Belt, and even CUSA is competitive with the AAC, and vice versa. Hardly controversial, and certainly not absolutist.

(Using Massey with 31 rankings compiled to date)
What do you mean by "The top"?

Top ranked team:
mwc - #18 Boise
AAC - #19 UCF
MAC - #48 Toledo
CUSA - #51 FAU
SunBelt - #58 App St.

Avg ranking of top two teams:
AAC - 23
mwc - 29.5
MAC - 56
CUSA - 56.5
SunBelt - 62

Avg ranking of top three teams:
AAC 30.3
mwc 38
CUSA 61
MAC 63.3
SunBelt 66.3

Avg ranking of top four teams:
AAC - 36
mwc 45.25
CUSA 64.25
MAC 69.25
SunBelt 76

Good data. About what I expected. Thanks.

I would say break the conferences into thirds, thus the top third is "The Top."

(09-04-2018 10:41 AM)Fanhood Part Deaux Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 10:39 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 10:08 AM)Fanhood Part Deaux Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 09:57 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 07:35 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  Don't go down the rabbit hole.

I agree. Pesik DONT FEED THE TROLL. I still don't understand how this troll is allowed back but BEARCAT #1 isn't.

I am not sure why I upset you. I am simply saying that that AAC was definitely top to bottom, the best G5 conference last year. However, it is cyclical, and the top to bottom, that may not be true this year.

I also am simply saying that the top of the MW, and Sun Belt, and even CUSA is competitive with the AAC, and vice versa. Hardly controversial, and certainly not absolutist.

(Using Massey with 31 rankings compiled to date)
What do you mean by "The top"?

Top ranked team:
mwc - #18 Boise
AAC - #19 UCF
MAC - #48 Toledo
CUSA - #51 FAU
SunBelt - #58 App St.

Avg ranking of top two teams:
AAC - 23
mwc - 29.5
MAC - 56
CUSA - 56.5
SunBelt - 62

Avg ranking of top three teams:
AAC 30.3
mwc 38
CUSA 61
MAC 63.3
SunBelt 66.3

Avg ranking of top four teams:
AAC - 36
mwc 45.25
CUSA 64.25
MAC 69.25
SunBelt 76

Good data. About what I expected. Thanks.

I would say break the conferences into thirds, thus the top third is "The Top."

No argument with top third - middle third - bottom third.

The top third then is that last group of average rankings. Look deeper, too...AAC's top third finishes with our fourth-ranked Houston, #53 at the moment. Drawing a line there, at the AAC top third, the mwc's top two are ranked above that (comfortably above that), while the CUSA and MAC #1s BARELY slide in within the AAC's top third and the SunBelt #1 has yet to appear.
That's not all comparable, we're all the same, it's cyclical...

You can maybe make the case as of this morning that the top of the mwc is comparable/competitive...

(09-03-2018 10:01 PM)MemTiger90 Wrote:  Will ECU ever be "ECU" again?

Of course they will...i had the same thought about uconn basketball tbh...but now we are making the right moves and it should a come together in the next couple of years. ECU is a football school and that takes longer rebuild. Be patient pirate fans. You guys will be back in top 25 beating the snot out your p5 rivals eventually. the rebuild will just take time.

(09-04-2018 03:37 PM)Huskypride Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 10:01 PM)MemTiger90 Wrote:  Will ECU ever be "ECU" again?

Of course they will...i had the same thought about uconn basketball tbh...but now we are making the right moves and it should a come together in the next couple of years. ECU is a football school and that takes longer rebuild. Be patient pirate fans. You guys will be back in top 25 beating the snot out your p5 rivals eventually. the rebuild will just take time.

Yup, and it all starts with getting rid of the Coach. Even if it's a messy/costly break-up, it will be worth it in the long-run.

(09-04-2018 03:37 PM)Huskypride Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 10:01 PM)MemTiger90 Wrote:  Will ECU ever be "ECU" again?

Of course they will...i had the same thought about uconn basketball tbh...but now we are making the right moves and it should a come together in the next couple of years. ECU is a football school and that takes longer rebuild. Be patient pirate fans. You guys will be back in top 25 beating the snot out your p5 rivals eventually. the rebuild will just take time.

Yeah---no doubt they will be back. That said, I seriously doubt it happens with the current coach. I see zero signs of progress so far under Montgomery. Heck---they may even be regressing.

Huh.

Opened this up expecting it to be about the Big XII.

They suck.

(09-02-2018 09:01 PM)TheOrigamiJimmyChin Wrote:  

(09-02-2018 08:52 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(09-02-2018 08:48 PM)TheOrigamiJimmyChin Wrote:  

(09-02-2018 08:40 PM)st932253 Wrote:  

(09-02-2018 08:38 PM)justin_sane15 Wrote:  Title. While I expect the top half of the conference to take care of business, we really need teams like Temple, ECU and Navy to have a solid year. Matchups aren't looking too good next week either.

To be fair, there was absolutely no way anyone could have seen these additions being bad moves for the league...

:)

great movie based from a novel buy a great writer Cormac McCarthy.

I fell in love with it the first scene of the movie. I recognized the road...it's one I've traveled down at least a dozen times. The county put a bit more maintenance into it, so it's not quite the adventure it once was, but still a worthwhile drive if you want to take the scenic route to Ruidosa Texas.

Definitely a great movie. I just watched it again last week. You have no idea how many times that quote has popped into my head in the days since...like almost every time I talk to a human being. :)

One of my favorites. Javier Bardem was perfect for his role. Tommy Lee Jones had some great stoic lines in the movie!