Canes_Knights wrote:[ img ]

Fuckespn ranked Louisville #9 and doesn't even have UCF ranked?


Atleast the Cp ranked them :lolthumb

JdPat04 wrote:

Canes_Knights wrote:[ img ]

Fuckespn ranked Louisville #9 and doesn't even have UCF ranked?


Atleast the Cp ranked them :lolthumb

The only teams UCF has blown out are 2-6 Akron and 1-6 FIU. The rest were decided by 7 or less. That's why they don't have higher ratings. Can't get to an average of 3.0+ playing like that. The Memphis game really hurt them.

As I've said before, the ratings don't always agree with my personal view.

Plus the BCS doesn't use MOV. UCF is probably higher with my MOV 1 system (basically no MOV used).

FuckESPNdotCOM wrote:

JdPat04 wrote:

Canes_Knights wrote:[ img ]

Fuckespn ranked Louisville #9 and doesn't even have UCF ranked?


Atleast the Cp ranked them :lolthumb

The only teams UCF has blown out are 2-6 Akron and 1-6 FIU. The rest were decided by 7 or less. That's why they don't have higher ratings. Can't get to an average of 3.0+ playing like that. The Memphis game really hurt them.

As I've said before, the ratings don't always agree with my personal view.

Plus the BCS doesn't use MOV. UCF is probably higher with my MOV 1 system (basically no MOV used).

IMO if you should'nt use mov if you're going to cap it at just 16 :lolthumb


Anyways what if team A wins all season by 1 point, every game
Team B wins by 2 points every game
Team C wins all but 1 or 2 games by 50 points but loses by 1 or 2 points.


Wins are what matter


And when when a team beats another team head to head and have the same record in the same conference then it makes sense to have them team that won ranked ahead.

Just like Auburn should be ahead of atm

JdPat04 wrote:IMO if you should'nt use mov if you're going to cap it at just 16 :lolthumb


Anyways what if team A wins all season by 1 point, every game
Team B wins by 2 points every game
Team C wins all but 1 or 2 games by 50 points but loses by 1 or 2 points.


Wins are what matter


And when when a team beats another team head to head and have the same record in the same conference then it makes sense to have them team that won ranked ahead.

Just like Auburn should be ahead of atm

Beating somebody by 1 point doesn't prove you're better. It proves you were a little better that day, and not by much. Winning by 16+ proves you're better. If being undefeated 12-0 and outscoring your opponents by 12 points on the season (1 per game), and your best opponent was 5-7, do you really think that's a great team? I wouldn't.

Wins aren't all that matters. Otherwise NIU would be in the top 10 and LSU wouldn't be in the top 25 with 2 losses. Winning is important, but a team that crushes everyone (i.e. 1995 Nebraska) is better than a team that ekes out a lot of victories (2012 ND before BCSNCG).

I was gonna vote Lane Kiffin.

billys_back wrote:I was gonna vote Lane Kiffin.

:thought
:dog

Lets have two conferences with four divisions per conference. Wins equal two points per game. There will be wildcards like the NFL and the teams with the most points play in post season. Teams that are in the basement are relegated to division 1-AA and the best teams from 1-AA (FCS) get to move up to FBS. :2thumbs

Jimbo fischer used to supply jamarcus russell with codein cough syrup and weed at lsu

FuckESPNdotCOM wrote:

JdPat04 wrote:IMO if you should'nt use mov if you're going to cap it at just 16 :lolthumb


Anyways what if team A wins all season by 1 point, every game
Team B wins by 2 points every game
Team C wins all but 1 or 2 games by 50 points but loses by 1 or 2 points.


Wins are what matter


And when when a team beats another team head to head and have the same record in the same conference then it makes sense to have them team that won ranked ahead.

Just like Auburn should be ahead of atm

Beating somebody by 1 point doesn't prove you're better. It proves you were a little better that day, and not by much. Winning by 16+ proves you're better. If being undefeated 12-0 and outscoring your opponents by 12 points on the season (1 per game), and your best opponent was 5-7, do you really think that's a great team? I wouldn't.

Wins aren't all that matters. Otherwise NIU would be in the top 10 and LSU wouldn't be in the top 25 with 2 losses. Winning is important, but a team that crushes everyone (i.e. 1995 Nebraska) is better than a team that ekes out a lot of victories (2012 ND before BCSNCG).

Except Team A could beat those teams on their schedules 10/10 times by 1 point. It would still mean they're the better team, not just on that day. BTW when Utah beat Bama in 09, it was by more than 1 point but they were only the better team that day :wink:


Most of the time when a team wins wether or not its by 1 or 60 it means they're the better teams.


Sometimes its an upset and you can look at the stats to see.


Like when an offense doubled the other teams offense but loser by 7-10 points because they would drive I've 60-80 yards and ten fumble it in the end zone, and turn it over in their own red zone allowing the opponent short drives.




And again you are saying that 12-0 Bama is the same as 12-0 niu....


Not the same



However when we are talking about 6-1 Louisville and 6-1 UCF who PLAYED EACH OTHER & PLAY IN THE SAME CONFERENCE therefore LIKE OPPONENTS, and UCFs lost came to an SEC team while Louisvilles lost came to UCf....


Obviously UCF SHOULD BE RANKED HIGHER :facepalm :crazy

JdPat04 wrote:And again you are saying that 12-0 Bama is the same as 12-0 niu....


Not the same

No, you're the idiot who said winning is all that matters, so why should any 12-0 team be any different from another 12-0 team? I mean it only matters that you won, right?

JdPat04 wrote:However when we are talking about 6-1 Louisville and 6-1 UCF who PLAYED EACH OTHER & PLAY IN THE SAME CONFERENCE therefore LIKE OPPONENTS, and UCFs lost came to an SEC team while Louisvilles lost came to UCf....


Obviously UCF SHOULD BE RANKED HIGHER :facepalm :crazy

Team A beat FIU 72-0
Team B beat FIU 38-0
(only common opponent so far this year)

Team A is 2nd in points against, 18th in points for
Team B is 20th in points against, 49th in points for.

Team A has one loss by three points to a one-loss team
Team B has one loss by three points to a two-loss team

Which team is better?
Answer: Team A, which is Louisville.

Winning a battle doesn't mean you win the war.

FuckESPNdotCOM wrote:

JdPat04 wrote:And again you are saying that 12-0 Bama is the same as 12-0 niu....


Not the same

No, you're the idiot who said winning is all that matters, so why should any 12-0 team be any different from another 12-0 team? I mean it only matters that you won, right?

JdPat04 wrote:However when we are talking about 6-1 Louisville and 6-1 UCF who PLAYED EACH OTHER & PLAY IN THE SAME CONFERENCE therefore LIKE OPPONENTS, and UCFs lost came to an SEC team while Louisvilles lost came to UCf....


Obviously UCF SHOULD BE RANKED HIGHER :facepalm :crazy

Team A beat FIU 72-0
Team B beat FIU 38-0
(only common opponent so far this year)

Team A is 2nd in points against, 18th in points for
Team B is 20th in points against, 49th in points for.

Team A has one loss by three points to a one-loss team
Team B has one loss by three points to a two-loss team

Which team is better?
Answer: Team A, which is Louisville.

Winning a battle doesn't mean you win the war.

There is no need to use common opponents when the teams played each other FFS :facepalm

Yeah, there's no need to bring Team C into it when we already have a direct comparison between Team A and Team B.

JdPat04 wrote:There is no need to use common opponents when the teams played each other FFS :facepalm

Are you seriously going to sit there and say teams like 2012 NCSU were better than 2012 FSU?
2012 TAMU > 2012 Alabama?
2012 WSU > 2012 Washington?

I really want you to try and justify that and say that TAMU are the true defending national champions.

FuckESPNdotCOM wrote:

JdPat04 wrote:There is no need to use common opponents when the teams played each other FFS :facepalm

Are you seriously going to sit there and say teams like 2012 NCSU were better than 2012 FSU?
2012 TAMU > 2012 Alabama?
2012 WSU > 2012 Washington?

I really want you to try and justify that and say that TAMU are the true defending national champions.

It's not the same comparison, because UCF and Louisville both have 1 loss. When NC State played FSU, they were 3-2 and FSU was 5-0. When Texas A&M played Alabama, they were 7-2 and Alabama was 9-0.

So you're talking about comparing teams that both have 1 loss vs a team with 1 loss and a team with 2 losses.

FuckESPNdotCOM wrote:

JdPat04 wrote:There is no need to use common opponents when the teams played each other FFS :facepalm

Are you seriously going to sit there and say teams like 2012 NCSU were better than 2012 FSU?
2012 TAMU > 2012 Alabama?
2012 WSU > 2012 Washington?

I really want you to try and justify that and say that TAMU are the true defending national champions.

Look above and you'll see my answer to that. Its been posted.


Also was NcSt the same record as FSu?

Was ATM the same record as Bama? (ATM had the heisman btw)

And did WSU have the same record as UW?

JdPat04 wrote:Look above and you'll see my answer to that. Its been posted.


Also was NcSt the same record as FSu?

Was ATM the same record as Bama? (ATM had the heisman btw)

And did WSU have the same record as UW?

Okay. Since you're harping on the same record (UCF is 5-1, bro. UL is 6-1), let's think about this a moment.

Let's say that:
Team A has 1 loss, and their loss came at the hands of a 4-8 team.
Team B has 1 loss, and their loss came at the hands of an 11-1 team.

Which team is better?
Team B, for most people

1 game does not excuse you for the rest of your performances, and one game does not totally screw you for the entire year. Louisville has just done better than UCF this year. Yes, Louisville lost to UCF. But Louisville also didn't struggle in most of their games. You can't say that UCF is better period just because they played the better game that day. If they played like they did against Memphis, they would have been laughed out of the stadium.

My ratings work based on what teams have done this year, and in all but 2 games UL has been very impressive. UCF has struggled in all but 2 games.

These ratings are going into Week X

Week 6
12) Loui 6.2750 (BYE)
60) UCFl 1.9750 (-3 SCAR)

Week 7
12) + 5.89333                  louisville   5-0 [ 8] [ 8] [-1] AAC (+16 Temple)
57) + 1.76333                         ucf   4-1 [-1] [-1] [-1] AAC (+7 Memphis)

Week 8
9)  + 5.88095             louisville   6-0 [ 8] [ 6] [-1] AAC (+14 Rutgers)
54) + 1.57048                    ucf   4-1 [-1] [-1] [-1] AAC (BYE)

Week 9
9)  + 5.24150             louisville   6-1 [18] [16] [20] AAC (-3 UCF)
51) + 1.92460                    ucf   5-1 [21] [25] [23] AAC (+3 Louisville)

Through 4 weeks, Louisville's net MOV is 27
Through 4 weeks, UCF's net MOV is 7
Both are weighted by opponent records.
That's why, man. Do you see the point differences?

You can see how the ratings changed from week to week. UCF has steadily been moving up in the rankings, but unless they get some convincing wins against decent teams, they're not going to move up by much.

FuckESPNdotCOM wrote:

JdPat04 wrote:Look above and you'll see my answer to that. Its been posted.


Also was NcSt the same record as FSu?

Was ATM the same record as Bama? (ATM had the heisman btw)

And did WSU have the same record as UW?

Okay. Since you're harping on the same record (UCF is 5-1, bro. UL is 6-1), let's think about this a moment.

Let's say that:
Team A has 1 loss, and their loss came at the hands of a 4-8 team.
Team B has 1 loss, and their loss came at the hands of an 11-1 team.

Which team is better?
Team B, for most people

1 game does not excuse you for the rest of your performances, and one game does not totally screw you for the entire year. Louisville has just done better than UCF this year. Yes, Louisville lost to UCF. But Louisville also didn't struggle in most of their games. You can't say that UCF is better period just because they played the better game that day. If they played like they did against Memphis, they would have been laughed out of the stadium.

My ratings work based on what teams have done this year, and in all but 2 games UL has been very impressive. UCF has struggled in all but 2 games.

These ratings are going into Week X

Week 6
12) Loui 6.2750 (BYE)
60) UCFl 1.9750 (-3 SCAR)

Week 7
12) + 5.89333                  louisville   5-0 [ 8] [ 8] [-1] AAC (+16 Temple)
57) + 1.76333                         ucf   4-1 [-1] [-1] [-1] AAC (+7 Memphis)

Week 8
9)  + 5.88095             louisville   6-0 [ 8] [ 6] [-1] AAC (+14 Rutgers)
54) + 1.57048                    ucf   4-1 [-1] [-1] [-1] AAC (BYE)

Week 9
9)  + 5.24150             louisville   6-1 [18] [16] [20] AAC (-3 UCF)
51) + 1.92460                    ucf   5-1 [21] [25] [23] AAC (+3 Louisville)

Through 4 weeks, Louisville's net MOV is 27
Through 4 weeks, UCF's net MOV is 7
Both are weighted by opponent records.
That's why, man. Do you see the point differences?

You can see how the ratings changed from week to week. UCF has steadily been moving up in the rankings, but unless they get some convincing wins against decent teams, they're not going to move up by much.

Yo nobody gives a fuck your stupid little rating system is worse than the BCS :wave2

Beaver3332 wrote:Yo nobody gives a fuck your stupid little rating system is worse than the BCS :wave2

Teams better than Miami:

1)  +10.56349          florida_state   6-0 [ 3] [ 3] [ 2] ACC
2)  + 8.61225               missouri   7-0 [ 5] [ 7] [ 5] SEC
3)  + 7.18367                 oregon   7-0 [ 2] [ 2] [ 3] PAC
4)  + 7.09524                 baylor   6-0 [ 6] [ 5] [ 8] B12
5)  + 6.48299                alabama   7-0 [ 1] [ 1] [ 1] SEC
6)  + 6.10204             ohio_state   7-0 [ 4] [ 4] [ 4] B10
7)  + 6.00850               stanford   6-1 [ 8] [ 8] [ 6] PAC
8 ) + 5.40816                clemson   6-1 [ 9] [10] [ 9] ACC
9)  + 5.24150             louisville   6-1 [18] [16] [20] AAC
10) + 5.20068             texas_tech   7-0 [10] [ 9] [10] B12
11) + 4.87982         michigan_state   6-1 [-1] [-1] [-1] B10
12) + 4.70833               texas_am   5-2 [14] [15] [16] SEC
13) + 4.69388          arizona_state   5-2 [-1] [-1] [-1] PAC
14) + 4.66667                    lsu   6-2 [13] [13] [13] SEC
15) + 4.65306               michigan   6-1 [24] [23] [22] B10
16) + 4.41270                   ucla   5-1 [12] [11] [12] PAC
17) + 4.33674          brigham_young   5-2 [-1] [-1] [-1] Ind

:trolldance :trolldance :trolldance :trolldance :trolldance

FuckESPNdotCOM wrote:

Beaver3332 wrote:Yo nobody gives a fuck your stupid little rating system is worse than the BCS :wave2

Teams better than Miami:
[pre]1) +10.56349 florida_state 6-0 [ 3] [ 3] [ 2] ACC
2) + 8.61225 missouri 7-0 [ 5] [ 7] [ 5] SEC
3) + 7.18367 oregon 7-0 [ 2] [ 2] [ 3] PAC
4) + 7.09524 baylor 6-0 [ 6] [ 5] [ 8] B12
5) + 6.48299 alabama 7-0 [ 1] [ 1] [ 1] SEC
6) + 6.10204 ohio_state 7-0 [ 4] [ 4] [ 4] B10
7) + 6.00850 stanford 6-1 [ 8] [ 8] [ 6] PAC
:trolldance :trolldance :trolldance :trolldance :trolldance

Those are the only ones that I would halfway bet on over Miami.

Others could be better, but I'd take Miami over the rest.



Even some of the above I would probably take Miami on.

I'm unsure about (most to least) Baylor, Mizzou, Stanford, osu, t3 Oregon, FSU, Bama