Missouri vs. W. Va. http://www.sportsline.com/columns/story/10495965 It does sound a little less sexy than say Ohio State - Florida etc. I think OSU-W Va sounds better because of the regional war aspect of that match-up and the fact an OSU fan told me the two teams somehow have never met...which is incredulous.
Crap, crap, crap. Don't insult my intelligence by telling me that USC or OSU or anyone other than WV and Mizzou are the two best teams in the country right now. Any argument to the contrary is subjective at best and most likely is heavily tinged with self-serving "analysis". As for the "most desirable" matchup, again it's subjective based on slanted perception. And don't try to feed me the BS that the SEC is the strongest conference in the land this year. Teams like Cal, South Florida, and LA-Monroe might disagree (Disclosure: I have contended for years that on balance the SEC tends to be the strongest conference, but not this year). It just isn't true. It certainly isn't the Pac10 or the Big10, and definitely not the ACC. You can argue SOS all you want but as as been said here by several posters, if you don't do it on the field, you haven't done it. USC very well may be the best two-loss team in the country. Maybe it's LSU or Oklahoma or Georgia. Who knows? One thing is certain....By the only objective measure available, none of those four comes close to being the best team overall. They had their chances and they did not get it done on the field. Period. College football can never satisfy the pro-playoff crowd because it never could have an all-inclusive playoff format. Whether it's a plus-one or plus-two format or 16 teams, there always will be an argument over who was excluded. College football will forever be controversial in that regard. How you see that controversy is a matter of personal perspective. I see it as part of the wonderful lore of the sport. In the end, there always is room for debate and analysis, which keeps fans occupied during the offseason. That's not a bad thing IMO.
A 16 team playoff would easily satisfy me. I'd feel pretty certain the best teams were captured in that number. If you get left out at #17 it's your own fault for not getting it done in the season, or for having a weak sched. The best part of a playoff (apart from having a true champion) would be the higher quality of games in the early season. Like in basketball, teams would be making a resume, and we'd see far less of the directional U OOC's we see now. It may never happen, but I can always hope...
Sid, unfortunately, any argument in support of WV and Mizzou suffers from the same flaws......therein lies the problem.
Terry, your comment shows that you did not understand my post. Your logic shows a nice attempt to water down the objectivity of all the elements of the rankings, but until you can come up with a better way to rank college football teams, the "getting it done on the field" approach trumps any subjective judgement to the contrary and neutralizes your logic.
Sid, perhaps I did misunderstand you post.....however, any ranking systems that puts 2/3 of its weight on the results of human polling will necessarily be subjective and heavily-tinged with self-serving "analysis" - it is fundamental human behavior, that is what we do. I don't know how much farther you can get from "getting done on the field" than that.....a play-off is the only way to "getting it done on the field", imho.
Sid, That "fan" I mentioned is an aquaintance.....not Freeman the author. In any event the SEC has taken some lumps but teams like Florida and LSU have also dished out a few lumps as well. Ask Frank Beamer and Bobby Bowden what they think of the SEC. :twisted: 8) The bowl games will tell us more.
is it true West Virginny fans all come to games with a piece of straw hanging out of their mouths?? :?: :twisted:
Terry, this is the kind of debate I enjoy in terms of tone and reason. Let me respond. This would be true only if there was a conspiracy among all the pollsters regarding a certain team or teams. Granted, the human polls which make up the 2/3 of the "system" contain all sorts of bias and self-serving analysis representing many diverse views geographically and analytically. However, when you have such a diverse group of opinions melding into one bottom-line result, plus throwing in SOS and the other elements, it would seem to me that there is as much neutralization of the subjective element as possible. Today's method certainly is an improvement over the singular-source AP and UPI polls of yesteryear (writers in one and coaches in the other, can't recall which was which). Lo and behold, the teams with the best bodies of work on the field tend to be properly ranked. Not always, but often enough to prove the reliability of the current polling system. Case in point.....FL jumping MI last year to provide the logically best matchup, given that MI and OSU already had played each other. If you want a playoff, you will see my argument as wrong, because it limits the importance of a playoff in determining the NC. However, to repeat what I said earlier, there is no playoff short of an almost all-inclusive (e.g., all D-1 teams with winning records) that could ever be truly objective in determining the best college FB team in the country. Anything short would leave open the argument that deserving teams were excluded in the mix.
I was well aware of those two games when I made my statement. My intent was not to denigrate the SEC but to point out that IMO in this particular season you (rhetorically) can't make the claim that a two-loss SEC team (LSU, GA) or a two-loss Pac10 team (USC and whoever) is better than a one-loss Big12 or BE team because there are so many cross-conference game results that refute that argument. In another season it might be a different story, but not this one.
Agreed on the discussion Sid.....however, :twisted: ....as possible for any inherently subjective system. In this system, it only takes a +1 nutball or block of nutballs to influence the results in such a manner as to eliminate a team with a material chance of success. While I grant the point about the deserving teams being excluded contoversy, we could surely agree that the probability of a #17 seed running the table in football and taking the crown is remote at best and dramatically less likely than a #3 - which in the current system is the guy on the outside looking in.... The downside of #17 situation is that he missed the party.....the downside of #3 is that he woulda been the champ.
I subscribe to the "entire season is a playoff" theory. It makes the sport one of the most exciting there is if not THE most exciting. Also, I don't think these bruising, physical FBS teams can survive a 4 game playoff without seriously diluting the talent by the end. If you want proof then tune in to the SEC CG this Sat. Both Tenn. and LSU finished their SEC seasons in brutal fashion and both teams are seriously banged up. How bad would it get if after this Sat. they had to play yet another top BCS team the next week just to get to a final.
Terry, I grant you that the system is subjective.....to a point. Certain facts in terms of on-the-field results speak for themselves and can't be ignored by the nutballs. the only other thing I'd say about probabilities is that we likely would agree that, while in football upsets are much less common than in basketball or baseball, once you commit to a multiple team playoff, you must assume that anything is possible, whether it's 4, 8, 16, 32, etc. Nice debate. We've probably taken it as far as we can......unless of course you are willing to concede. :twisted: :twisted: (just kidding) MCG, uh.........I......uh......gulp......wheeze......gasp......agree completely with your post. Man, that was hard. :wink:
ahhh <r>first you said<br/> <QUOTE><s> </e></QUOTE> then you said<br/> <QUOTE><s> </e></QUOTE> interesting, because you are citing this game<br/> <br/> Florida 45 FSU 12<br/> <br/> but you are ignoring this one<br/> <br/> FSU 21 Alabama 14<br/> <br/> It may just be that there's a whole lot of tough football out there besides the SEC, that's just as tough as the SEC.</r>
I'll admit Bama this year was not a very good rep for the SEC outside the conference. TB....don't know about the mullets except I hear it's the prevailing hairstyle north of the St. Mary's River :wink: WRT to jeans shorts....you have obviously never been to a hot game at the Swamp. Jeans shorts can be quite an exhilirating visual experience... :twisted: 8)