Bama was NOT the best team in CFB this year!

#26
#26
UTK said:
Bama is a better team than Ohio State. It’s hard to ignore that ugly loss to Iowa. But it is weird that a team that couldn’t even win their division are considered national champs. I thought Wisconsin had a better claim to be in the championship than Bama. They at least won their division.
Click to expand...

Eh...i don't like having geography dictate quality. Who cares if Wisconsin is the best of a bunch of crap midwest teams. They made zero effort to schedule anyone of substance. They only won their division due to geographical location. Meanwhile, Bama at least schedules FSU and dominated before the QB went down. Bama plays in the toughest division in NCAA. Geography works against them in this case.
 
#27
#27
#28
#28
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#31
#31
Glocker_Alum_2005 said:
Stats prove it out Ohio State was a slightly better football team than Alabama this year. At minimum they should have been in the playoff. And PSU should have been in the playoff as well. Stats prove it out. Clemson a playoff team...b*tch please! Eliminate the bias of the committee. Dilly Dilly!

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2017 NCAA FOOTBALL S&P+ RATINGS
Click to expand...

Ohio State? The same team that lost 55-24 to Iowa? Lol

UCF should have been in and not Alabama.

It appears you want a big ten bais....just sayin
 
#34
#34
Glocker_Alum_2005 said:
Maybe if Tua had played all year stats would have proved Bama the best team. But they played their second best QB until their final two quarters of the year. So it is what it is. Would Bama have beat OSU or Penn State? Guess we'll never know, cause recency bias and Heisman Hype put Clemson and Oklahoma in instead of OSU or Penn State.
Click to expand...

Maybe if OSU wouldn't have lost at home to OU and got scorched by 30 to an unranked Iowa team and NOT gotten blown out last time the committee snuck them in past PSU last year, maybe, JUST MAYBE they would have been in but please. Trying to justify one team better than an another based on stats ignores the level of competition in the Big10 versus the SEC and I would contend that even a Miss State team could beat the majority of the Big10 teams.
 
#35
#35
UTK said:
Bama is a better team than Ohio State. It’s hard to ignore that ugly loss to Iowa. But it is weird that a team that couldn’t even win their division are considered national champs. I thought Wisconsin had a better claim to be in the championship than Bama. They at least won their division.
Click to expand...


Not if you studied the history of CCG. They are tits on a bull. They seldom have allowed the 2 best teams in a conference to play the game. Do you need examples?
 
#36
#36
TUSKtimes said:
Not if you studied the history of CCG. They are tits on a bull. They seldom have allowed the 2 best teams in a conference to play the game. Do you need examples?
Click to expand...

Not to mention, Wisconsin didn't exactly go through a murderer's row to win that division. South Carolina could have probably won that division
 
#37
#37
Why didn't OSU get in? It's pretty simple. They lost to Oklahoma. And unranked Iowa embarrassed them. I like the butthurt OSU fans saying Bama didn't win conference. Yet last year OSU didn't win the BIG, and got embarrassed in first round of the playoffs.
 
#38
#38
TDawg said:
Maybe if OSU wouldn't have lost at home to OU and got scorched by 30 to an unranked Iowa team and NOT gotten blown out last time the committee snuck them in past PSU last year, maybe, JUST MAYBE they would have been in but please. Trying to justify one team better than an another based on stats ignores the level of competition in the Big10 versus the SEC and I would contend that even a Miss State team could beat the majority of the Big10 teams.
Click to expand...

Read how the ranking is computed.It most definitely accounts for SoS and Point Differential. Bottomline...Stats are agnostic. A committee is not. Human prejudice always factors in. The committee wanted the Baker Mayfield show in the playoffs. The committee wanted the Clemson/Bama rematch in the playoffs. And that is what we got.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#39
#39
Glocker_Alum_2005 said:
Read how the ranking is computed.It most definitely accounts for SoS and Point Differential. Bottomline...Stats are agnostic. A committee is not. Human prejudice always factors in. The committee wanted the Baker Mayfield show in the playoffs. The committee wanted the Clemson/Bama rematch in the playoffs. And that is what we got.
Click to expand...

The committee didn't want another Big 10 team performing the part of "victim #1" in a nationally televised snuff film.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#40
#40
Glocker_Alum_2005 said:
Read how the ranking is computed.It most definitely accounts for SoS and Point Differential. Bottomline...Stats are agnostic. A committee is not. Human prejudice always factors in. The committee wanted the Baker Mayfield show in the playoffs. The committee wanted the Clemson/Bama rematch in the playoffs. And that is what we got.
Click to expand...


And it was glorious! Best pay close attention to this humanoid eye test partner, the next time you have to go before a court system, they won't be processing your stats through a computer. That's life, get use to it.
 
#42
#42
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#43
#43
Glocker_Alum_2005 said:
Read how the ranking is computed.It most definitely accounts for SoS and Point Differential. Bottomline...Stats are agnostic. A committee is not. Human prejudice always factors in. The committee wanted the Baker Mayfield show in the playoffs. The committee wanted the Clemson/Bama rematch in the playoffs. And that is what we got.
Click to expand...

no, they really aren't. they can be made to say whatever it is you want them to say. seems that at least 2 of the standards they used were based on numbers their own system came up with.

at the end of the day most of those stats don't matter, its only the score at the end of the game that matters. and it only matters so much as was it >+1 or <-1.

you honestly believe FAU was the 11th best team in the nation? laughable.
 
#45
#45
Should we make them a Champions of Life belt or a consolation trophy?

On the field, not on the stat sheet.

Glocker_Alum_2005 said:
Stats prove it out Ohio State was a slightly better football team than Alabama this year. At minimum they should have been in the playoff. And PSU should have been in the playoff as well. Stats prove it out. Clemson a playoff team...b*tch please! Eliminate the bias of the committee. Dilly Dilly!

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2017 NCAA FOOTBALL S&P+ RATINGS
Click to expand...
 
#47
#47
Glocker_Alum_2005 said:
Read how the ranking is computed.It most definitely accounts for SoS and Point Differential. Bottomline...Stats are agnostic. A committee is not. Human prejudice always factors in. The committee wanted the Baker Mayfield show in the playoffs. The committee wanted the Clemson/Bama rematch in the playoffs. And that is what we got.
Click to expand...

You think the ranking methodology is so perfectly designed that a difference of 3/10s of one percentage point declares that one team is better than another?

That's absurd.

It's obviously flawed big time anyway. It must not actually account for losses.

BTW, all three FBS teams that Tennessee beat this year were ranked significantly higher in this ranking.
 
Last edited:
#49
#49
Glocker_Alum_2005 said:
Stats prove it out Ohio State was a slightly better football team than Alabama this year. At minimum they should have been in the playoff. And PSU should have been in the playoff as well. Stats prove it out. Clemson a playoff team...b*tch please! Eliminate the bias of the committee. Dilly Dilly!

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2017 NCAA FOOTBALL S&P+ RATINGS
Click to expand...

Best team rarely wins in March Madness also.
It's the team that gets hot at the right time.
So what, who cares.
 
#50
#50
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top