beej would have canceled the 2006 ND game

GTKyle

GTKyle

Dodd-Like
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
6,625
That's right. No gameday, no hype, no excitement. Beej wants to make our schedule so pussified that nobody will ever want to watch a game at BDS unless we are playing FSU, clemson, or UGA.
 
Wasn't that the game in which beej threw the water bottle?
 
Well, I guess that depends on what your goals are, and whether you're willing to approach your goals rationally.

If your goal is to win a national championship, then the course is clear. Schedule patsies, go undefeated. Check (cough) Notre Dame's schedule recently? Yeah. They're not playing Georgia Techs any more. Not since the BCS caved to the AP and changed the formula to remove SOS.

If your goal is to bean refs with bottles, then we can do that vs Clemson or UGA or NC State.
 
beej67 said:
Well, I guess that depends on what your goals are, and whether you're willing to approach your goals rationally.

If your goal is to win a national championship, then the course is clear. Schedule patsies, go undefeated. Check (cough) Notre Dame's schedule recently? Yeah. They're not playing Georgia Techs any more. Not since the BCS caved to the AP and changed the formula to remove SOS.

If your goal is to bean refs with bottles, then we can do that vs Clemson or UGA or NC State.
Click to expand...

Of course the goal is a MNC, but not at the expense of entertainment. One very good non-conference opponent besides UGA would satisfy me.

And beej, do you know anything about how the computer rankings work? The computer rankings already inherently use SOS to rate teams so there really was no need for a separate SOS component.

This is the second time I've just flat out owned you this week. You're losing your touch.
 
beej67 said:
Well, I guess that depends on what your goals are, and whether you're willing to approach your goals rationally.

If your goal is to win a national championship, then the course is clear. Schedule patsies, go undefeated. Check (cough) Notre Dame's schedule recently? Yeah. They're not playing Georgia Techs any more. Not since the BCS caved to the AP and changed the formula to remove SOS.

If your goal is to bean refs with bottles, then we can do that vs Clemson or UGA or NC State.
Click to expand...

Yup. USC, for example, got no bonus points for scheduling and taking to the woodshed tOSU last year. Play 9 conference games from the best conference last year plus trounce a top 20 school? Nope, a team from a conference whose biggest OOC win from any member was Cincy will go to the championship game instead.

Even when you have the same record overall with a better OOC schedule, you may still not get in due to loss timing. The best argument for a playoff: the unwarranted power of loss timing in today's system.
 
And beej, do you know anything about how the computer rankings work? The computer rankings already inherently use SOS to rate teams so there really was no need for a separate SOS component.
Click to expand...
Yes there was, learn your history.

Auburn played 4 MAJOR OOC patsies in a year the SEC was down, went undefeated, and didn't get into the championship game. Ended AP #2 and didn't get in. So what happened?

OMGWTF THE BCS IS BROKEN!!!1!!1!one!!eleventy

So they changed the formula, such that Auburn would have gotten in.

Go back and run the numbers, and Auburn gets in with 4 OOC patsies.

Therefore, if you're undefeated with 4 OOC patsies, then you get in.

Period. End of story.

That SOS was "doublecounted" was by design, because SOS us undercounted in the polls. It must be doublecounted for the BCS to work.

You haven't owned ****, boy. If you were smart, you might try not pissing off one of the few people who doesn't hate you around here. You also might try paying attention to any of the other two dozen times this very argument has been brought up on Stingtalk and demolished by intelligent people like Floridajacket, who use actual examples to support their opinions instead of hollow rhetoric.
 
Actually the formula was overhauled after USC was #1 in both polls but OU and LSU went instead due to the "non-human" components. The system when USC, OU, and Auburn went undefeated was pretty much what it is now, with some minor tweaks.
 
One of Auburn, Oklahoma, or USC was going to be left out regardless so there was going to be the controversy over an undefeated BCS school not having a chance to play for a championship regardless of what components were altered or stripped altogether.

As for how we should schedule, I think beej is right in that we don't need to be making things more difficult than they have to be. Once you start talking about scheduling top tier teams in addition to the UGA game every year, you're effectively making things pointlessly difficult. The goal should be to get to play a powerhouse at the end of the year for all the marbles, not at the beginning or in the middle of the year. Not saying we should never schedule tough competition, just that we don't need to be playing a pair of top 15 teams non-conference every year...even with being in the ACC.

Personally, I like our upcoming schedule in regards to OOC. We play one FCS cupcake, two SEC schools that we should beat, and the mutts.
 
GTKyle said:
One very good non-conference opponent besides UGA would satisfy me.
Click to expand...

Guys, let's be realistic here. GTKyle isn't asking for much. Just the best OOC schedule of any major football program year-in and year-out, with one perennial top 10 team and another "very good"(read: top 15? top 10?) opponent. That's really not much to ask...anyone who disagrees is just a pussy.
 
Personally, I like our upcoming schedule in regards to OOC. We play one FCS cupcake, two SEC schools that we should beat, and the mutts.
Click to expand...

Agreed. This year's OOC schedule is ideal in my mind. Georgia, 2 bad-to-okay teams from good conferences who probably have some fans in Atlanta, and a cupcake for game 1.

We can start scheduling top flight competition other than Georgia once we break their spine and turn them into a perennial bottom dweller. Not before.
 
beej67 said:
Yes there was, learn your history.

Auburn played 4 MAJOR OOC patsies in a year the SEC was down, went undefeated, and didn't get into the championship game. Ended AP #2 and didn't get in. So what happened?

OMGWTF THE BCS IS BROKEN!!!1!!1!one!!eleventy

So they changed the formula, such that Auburn would have gotten in.

Go back and run the numbers, and Auburn gets in with 4 OOC patsies.

Therefore, if you're undefeated with 4 OOC patsies, then you get in.

Period. End of story.

That SOS was "doublecounted" was by design, because SOS us undercounted in the polls. It must be doublecounted for the BCS to work.

You haven't owned ****, boy. If you were smart, you might try not pissing off one of the few people who doesn't hate you around here. You also might try paying attention to any of the other two dozen times this very argument has been brought up on Stingtalk and demolished by intelligent people like Floridajacket, who use actual examples to support their opinions instead of hollow rhetoric.
Click to expand...

NO CHANGE WAS MADE AFTER THE 13-0 AUBURN SEASON! That SOS change was made because of USC not getting in the BCS NC game in 2003. Not only that, but that change was MINOR. The biggest change was the way the polls were weighted.

2004 change
"Computer Average: The BCS used six ranking systems, with the New York Times opting not to participate. In the calculation, the highest and lowest ranking for each team are dropped. Then, it will give a team 25 points for a Number 1 ranking in an individual system, 24 points for Number 2, and so on down to 1 point. Each team's set of numbers is then added, conveniently making the number compatible with the percentages from the two polls. To address concerns about loss of the schedule strength factor, the description of the computer rankings explicitly included schedule strength as a consideration."

Isn't that what I said?

Damn, beej. Damn.
 
beej67 said:
Well, I guess that depends on what your goals are, and whether you're willing to approach your goals rationally.
Click to expand...

Kyle's first goal was to become the fastest poster to 3000 posts and to achieve Dodd-Like status. He approached this goal by constantly posting garbage after garbage without really caring what substance he put out there. Kind of like this thread.
 
BarrelORum said:
Kyle's first goal was to become the fastest poster to 3000 posts and to achieve Dodd-Like status. He approached this goal by constantly posting garbage after garbage without really caring what substance he put out there. Kind of like this thread.
Click to expand...

Where is your latest masterpiece post, barrel of dumb?
 
When this was taken out:

Strength of Schedule: This was the team's NCAA rank in strength of schedule divided by 25. A team's strength of schedule was calculated by win/loss record of opponents (66.6%) and cumulative win/loss record of team's opponents' opponents (33.3%). The team who played the toughest schedule was given .04 points, second toughest .08 points, and so on.
Click to expand...

...strength of schedule became meaningless.

End of story.
 
beej67 said:
When this was taken out:



...strength of schedule became meaningless.

End of story.
Click to expand...

The computers already implicitly use SOS. What don't you get about that? It was taken out because it didn't needed to be double counted.

It wasn't changed because of Auburn playing a weak schedule. Where the **** is your argument?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top