Dude....

Boy, aren't we argumentitive today?

Again, I'm not giving an opinion, I'm explaining how the system works and providing everyone with what the records show as year end results (the facts).

If you want to use the National Champs. com rankings, that is fine with me, but keep in mind that those rankings carry very little to no weight compared to the BCS system, the AP Poll and the AFCA Poll.

Here is a link to the BCS web site that provides links to all 6 of the BCS Computer web sites. What I have provided throughout this thread is accurate, and regardless of you agreeing or not agreeing with the results, the results will not change.
http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfb/rankings

Re: Dude....

If you post an opinion, chances are someone will disagree with you. Kind of the nature of an internet forum...

When I claimed a statement of your's was opinion, it was in direct response to this:

As I pointed out correctly, this is your opinion. Stick with it if you wish, but at least try to get your quotes straight.

Not sure where this came from. I picked one of any number of SOS sites that can be used to show how wildly different and unexplainable their rankings are. I also dissected the ones you provided showing LSU at a range from #41 to #8. Sounds like some pretty bang on rankings to me. Pick any one you want.

What you have provided is accurate reports of the various computer rankings but does nothing to prove that the computer rankings are true. If they were so spot on, why do we need six of them? You believe them to be all-knowing and I do not. You also conspicuously did not reply to your assertion that the PAC-10 play more teams with higher ranks than the SEC. You at first provide a link stating this, but say nothing when I prove you wrong except fall back upon your vaunted computer rankings. I find them to be flawed and misleading

When I claimed a statement of your's was opinion, it was in direct response to this:

Quote:
Considering LSU only played 4 road games last year, you can only be talking about #1 UF, #9 Auburn, #15 Arkansas and #25 Tennessee. Please don't give me the old "they were ranked in the top 8 when they played them" line either, now that the season is long finished, the only ranking that counts is the final ranking.

No, those rankings that show LSU played only four road games last year vs. the #1, #9, #15 and #25 teams is not my opinion, that is opinion is of the Associated Press Poll. They have been doing this sort of thing since 1936, could be you haven't heard of them?

AP Top 25
1. Florida (64) 13-1 1,624 2. Ohio State 12-1 1,492 3. LSU 11-2 1,452 4. USC 11-2 1,389 5. Boise State (1) 13-0 1,383 6. Louisville 12-1 1,338 7. Wisconsin 12-1 1,288 8. Michigan 11-2 1,145 9. Auburn 11-2 1,11210. West Virginia 11-2 1,03511. Oklahoma 11-3 93312. Rutgers 11-2 88413. Texas 10-3 77214. California 10-3 69715. Arkansas 10-4 67716. Brigham Young 11-2 67317. Notre Dame 10-3 55318. Wake Forest 11-3 55119. Virginia Tech 10-3 40720. Boston College 10-3 35321. Oregon State 10-4 29122. TCU 11-2 27923. Georgia 9-4 20424. Penn State 9-4 18325. Tennessee 9-4 181

Now then, what rankings are you quoting that has Auburn, Tennessee, Arkansas and Florida all ranked in the top 8? It not the AFCA Poll, it's not the Harris Poll, it's not the BCS Standings, and as shown avove, it's not the AP Poll.

Again, This is NOT my opinion, this is what the BCS came up with in their final standings. I'm not defending it, nor am I endorsing it. What I am presenting to you is that these are the facts, regardless of you agreeing with them or not.

I never said they were "all-knowing", what I have said from the beginning is these are the facts and nothing more. If you don't agree with the BCS Computers, write to them with your arguments as to why you don't agree with them.

Here is your quote earlier about the Pac 10 and not playing teams that are higher ranked than the SEC....I was trying to be nice in my answer to you but I guess you just don't understand this.

EVER???
If you really want to be proved wrong one more time, well OK, you asked for it.

http://www.collegefootballpoll.com

2000 Final AP Poll
[SIZE=-1]
1. Oklahoma
2. Miami (Fla.)
3. Washington...........Pac 10
4. Oregon State.........Pac10
5. Florida St.
6. Virginia Tech
7. Oregon.................Pac 10
8. Nebraska
9. Kansas State
10. Florida.................SEC[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE]2001 Final AP Poll
[SIZE=-1]1. Miami (Fla.)
2. Oregon..................Pac10
3. Florida...................SEC
4. Tennessee.............SEC
5. Texas
6. Oklahoma
7. LSU.......................SEC
8. Nebraska
9. Colorado
10. Washington St.....Pac10[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]2002[/SIZE][SIZE=-1] Final AP Poll[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]1. Ohio State
2. Miami (Fla.)
3. Georgia...................SEC
4. USC........................Pac 10
5. Oklahoma
6. Texas
7. Kansas State
8. Iowa
9. Michigan
10. Washington State...Pac10[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]2003 Final AP Poll
[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]1. USC........................Pac 10
2. LSU........................SEC
3. Oklahoma
4. Ohio State
5. Miami (Fla.)
6. Michigan
7. Georgia....................SEC
8. Iowa
9. Washington State......Pac10
10. Miami (Ohio)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1]2004 Final AP Poll
[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]1. USC.........................Pac 10
2. Auburn......................SEC
3. Oklahoma
4. Utah
5. Texas
6. Louisville
7. Georgia......................SEC
8. Iowa
9. California....................Pac 10
10. Virginia Tech
[/SIZE]
Hmmm......I count 11 Pac 10 teams on this list and only 9 SEC teams over a 5 year period.
[/SIZE]

But you did say.....

So I guess that makes your statement correct!

Condescension won't work on me. Your claim is that in season rankings (AP) don't matter and only end of season rankings (AP) count. You stated so clearly, and do so again now. Since you cannot arrive at a final AP ranking without a poll from the previous week, your assertion is hopelessly flawed and laughable. The final poll is a result of team play during the year and a team's ranking during the year. The AP doesn't crap out final rankings, they are based upon the 12-13 games before. Your are claim implies it happens in a vacuum. Again, nobody buys that crap here.

It's not the AP as shown above, because again, your entire argument relies upon everyone suspending their belief in the AP during the season when two teams actually meet. Accessing the polls on a weekly basis is very easy, but since you claim they mean nothing, I don't expect you to bother doing that. Again, nobody buys that crap here.

You really have trouble with reading comprehension don't you? Check your quotes buddy. I am addressing the same thing I have addressed in the previous two statements, and the only thing you keep parroting over and over again. You claim that the final rankings are the only thing that matters. Matters to what? BCS placement? SOS? What exactly are you trying to prove, because you suck at it. Again, nobody buys that crap here.

I am assuming you are using the computers as proof of a tougher schedule for PAC-10 teams over SEC teams. Actually I don't have to agree with them, and I don't have to write anyone to have them changed. They are a weighted part of the BCS process and in my opinion flawed. You present them here as if they are the only thing that is factual or matters. Again, nobody buys that crap here.

Are you getting the emphasis implied by my redundancy? Perhaps you should try a PAC-10 board as they are the last free-thinking people in America that believe the PAC-10 is tougher.

I understand perfectly, but obviously you don't. Again you reduce the parameters to TOP 10 when nothing of the sort was implied. I have been quite clear that TOP 25 is the standard for being "ranked". You do not dispute this, but merely ignore it and paste the TOP 10 again. I will not waste space or bandwidth pasting the TOP 25 for each year, but merely tell everyone to use your link and count themselves. Can you count that high? If you can, give it a shot, but of course it will only prove you wrong, again.

You have to prove me wrong the first time, before you can claim another one. Perhaps you use the same math ND uses to count it's championships?

These conversations would be short and sweet if one simply looked at each team's respective schedule at the end of each season and noted the number of ranked teams LSU or SC played.

What do you think a final (end of season) poll is?
It is, and always has been a compilation of the entire season and that is why I have ALWAYS and ONLY used final polls/standings. I don't know why you are bringing this up again but you are clearly confused. Sure the AP poll, and all the other polls are a work in progress before the final poll, but that is all it is, a work in progress and at the end of the season it is worth nothing more than the grade you recieved on the first weeks math test in second grade (or H.S. or college ect).

This is due to the fact that you are having great trouble with basic thinking skills.

I keep telling you, these are not my rankings, nor is it my opinion, these are the BCS/AP/AFCA/ rankings, and regardless of you agreeing with them or not, it is the way it is, and as for the 2006 football season, there is nothing you can do to change the results.

Actually the final BCS poll is what is used in placing teams in the BCS Championship game and SOS is part of that poll, so yes, where a team ends up in the final poll makes everything before that irrelevant.

Who cares about the standings the first week of the season? Who cares about the standings the 4th week of the season? The true strength of a team is only known after all the games have been played. That means the final grade is the grade in which that teams true strength has been measured, not the week 4 grade.

No, I'm not using the computers as proof of the Pac 10 playing a tougher schedule than the SEC, the BCS is.

No, you don't have to agree with the computers, but that doesn't change the results.

Quite frankly, if you play the #1 ranked team and the #130 ranked team, and you know going into those games that they are averaged out, one would think that it's not good to schedule the #130 ranked team, right? Well, the SEC seems to be having a difficult time figuring out this simple logic.

And yes, in getting to the BCS CG, the only thing that does matter is the BCS standings, not "The Dude" standings.

It was your assertion that the SEC plays more ranked teams than the PAC 10, tell you what, you can look up every teams games in both the SEC and Pac 10 and prove your claim, otherwise, it's nothing more than hot air without any fact to back it up.

What I do know is that you will only believe what you want to believe and nothing else. Kind of reminds me of when people thought the world was flat, and one day, low and behold, someone told them it was round.

You can keep arguing that I am the one confused and say that rankings from week to week do not count except how they add to the final rankings, but do you see anyone agreeing with you here? Why are you even on this board? What exactly are you trying to prove? Are you selling subscriptions to the computer SOS rankings or what? Nobody buys your asinine assertions that we did not play 4 teams ranked in the TOP 10 last year. Get over it.

Considering where my IQ ranks out, it's cute that you would say that. Keep telling yourself that.

I am not changing results. You are indicating that in season rankings do not matter in order to dispute what ranking a team had when we played them. You are wrong. Who are you trying to convince here?

Yes, SOS is part of that poll, as I stated. You also listed 5 SOS calculations that show a range form 8-41, and cannot answer as to the disparity. Are they part of the calculation? Yes, and I said so, but also said they are flawed and the ridiculous range is a perfect indicator of this.

Actually the final grade is a function of the grades previous to that, and is not a reflection of where any student(or team) is at any given time. It is not, and cannot be taken separately. You will never figure this out.

The BCS is not on TF arguing this, you are.

Keep ripping off that PAC-10 logic to us, it's a joke. Not unlike your claims, and the PAC-10 as a conference, with the exclusion of USC.

You really just can't read can you? I never said anything about the NCG until you brought it up nor did I mention BCS standings. I said "reward respect and championships". Can you at any time actually attribute something to me that I really did say? USC won the AP NC despite not being in the NCG. Their SOS did not give them this championship, but just the opposite. Address this if you can, instead of making up quotes of mine.

I did look it up. You changed the parameters to only include teams ranked in the TOP 10 at the end of the year. I used the link you provided for the TOP 25(which is what the link was for), and counted the teams just as you have obviously not done. You conveniently ignored this in every subsequent reply. Take your hot air somewhere else. Your own link proves you wrong.
http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/p...present_h.html

Right back at ya smart guy. :hihi: And since your posts certainly show you to be no fan of LSU but merely a fan of the PAC-10 here to "explain to us how things really are", it is a complete waste of time to banter with you. I have more challenging things to attend to, like sorting my sock drawer.

But I will leave you with one final thought before I banish you to my ignore file. If the PAC-10 is so damn tough, why have they not produced more than 3 teams to win a NC since 1950? Hell, I could go back further, but what's the point? It doesn't get better for you. Since 1950, the PAC-10 has won the NC 9 times, with USC winning 7 of them. The SEC in that same period has won 15 with 6 different winners, 4 of those teams winning more than one NC. Wait, don't tell me, if the PAC-10 wasn't so tough, you would have more? You are fighting a battle between the PAC-10 and the rest of the known world. Nobody buys that your conference is tougher. Now go get your shine box.