Had to post this… BEAT THE IRISH !!!
Well Maximus, at least you can sleep tonight knowing that UCLA got their asses handed to them.
I have a question for anyone out there. I’m a little unfamiliar with how the rankings work for the BCS.
Take Stanford, for instance. They beat San Jose State in their first game of the year, 20-17. At the time it looked bad for Stanford because San Jose State is usually fucking horrendous. No one thought they’d be this good this year, but regardless of whether they beat Louisiana Tech tonight they’re actually a pretty damn good football that could probably finish well-above .500 in the Pac-12.
So do the BCS rankings reflect the fact that Stanford’s 20-17 win wasn’t as surprising in hindsight that it seemed at the time. Or when they beat USC earlier this year when they were still #2 in the nation and have now fallen out of the top-25, does that win enter the BCS equation as a win against a #2 team or an unranked team?
Does that make sense? When a team beats a team that is ranked do the computers adjust the magnitude of that win as the losing team’s ranking goes up or down?
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Yes DB, I think Stanford has clearly earned a spot in the national scene for major accolades, they either beat or did very well against some very good teams.
Shit, I saw the ending of your game against Notre Dame, and when I saw that guy barely inch himself into the endzone, I argued that he did not get in. From what I saw on the reply, I did not agree that he crossed the line.[/quote]
He crossed the line.
The loss to Washington though was what killed us (and Washington lost to Washington State, who we destroyed). We were never going to touch top five in the rankings after that.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Well Maximus, at least you can sleep tonight knowing that UCLA got their asses handed to them.
I have a question for anyone out there. I’m a little unfamiliar with how the rankings work for the BCS.
Take Stanford, for instance. They beat San Jose State in their first game of the year, 20-17. At the time it looked bad for Stanford because San Jose State is usually fucking horrendous. No one thought they’d be this good this year, but regardless of whether they beat Louisiana Tech tonight they’re actually a pretty damn good football that could probably finish well-above .500 in the Pac-12.
So do the BCS rankings reflect the fact that Stanford’s 20-17 win wasn’t as surprising in hindsight that it seemed at the time. Or when they beat USC earlier this year when they were still #2 in the nation and have now fallen out of the top-25, does that win enter the BCS equation as a win against a #2 team or an unranked team?
Does that make sense? When a team beats a team that is ranked do the computers adjust the magnitude of that win as the losing team’s ranking goes up or down?[/quote]
I don’t have too much info on the BCS other than my own opinion. When I played, it was only the AP and UPI polls.
I am not sure if the BCS takes into account the caliber of opponent, or the margin of victory (or loss) when those wins or losses take place. Or if they measure a win or a loss based on that team’s overall final ranking.
I think they could launch the shuttle easier than figuring this out.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
So do the BCS rankings reflect the fact that Stanford’s 20-17 win wasn’t as surprising in hindsight that it seemed at the time. Or when they beat USC earlier this year when they were still #2 in the nation and have now fallen out of the top-25, does that win enter the BCS equation as a win against a #2 team or an unranked team?
Does that make sense? When a team beats a team that is ranked do the computers adjust the magnitude of that win as the losing team’s ranking goes up or down?[/quote]
The computer portion of the BCS ranking is actuallly made up of 6 different computer rankings that are equally weighted. This makes up 1/3 of the BCS ranking. I’m pretty sure none of the 6 computer rankings take into account margin of victory, due to the BCS not wanting that considered in the computer portion. Most of the computer rankings are probabilistic type ranking systems.
Some of the computer rankings only care what each team is ranked at the time of the game and future wins or losses of opponents don’t matter for a given teams ranking, while other that consider more “strength of schedule” and future wins or losses of opponents can help/hurt their rankings.
http://www.bcsknowhow.com/tag/explanation - this gives a high level overview of each of the 6 computer rankings. While I don’t think any of the formula’s used are actually public, I’m sure you can find some people who think they have the formula’s figured out if you really wanted that level of detail.
The other 2/3 of the BCS ranking are polls with human voters (Harris and Coaches poll), and voters can and most likely do take into account magnitude of victory in their voting.
I was actually rooting for USC and was disappointed when ND won.
So, who do you say for the Heisman? Manziel or Te’o?
Personally, I think Manziel’s gotta get it.
[quote]Sweet Revenge wrote:
I was actually rooting for USC and was disappointed when ND won.
So, who do you say for the Heisman? Manziel or Te’o?
Personally, I think Manziel’s gotta get it.[/quote]
If it’s just between those two, I chose Te’o. He’s had to play out of his mind this year to keep that defense relevant, and he’s done an outstanding job under tremendous pressure. Manziel has had a kickass season as well, but on the national scale, it’s Te’o in my mind.
There are so many other players that could be mentioned for the Heisman though, the QB from K-State, the QB and RB from Northwestern just to name a couple. It’ll be a tough decision.
^ Yea but some how its always the QB who gets it now. Like player of the year in NFL is always QB
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
^ Yea but some how its always the QB who gets it now. Like player of the year in NFL is always QB[/quote]
Ingram was a RB though… Stranger things have happened.
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
^ Yea but some how its always the QB who gets it now. Like player of the year in NFL is always QB[/quote]
Ingram was a RB though… Stranger things have happened.
[/quote]
I know, but how often is that happening any more, used to when we were growing up it was RB’s, QB’s and even some WR’s. Now its 90% QB’s and then maybe the rest. Not hating just stating.
Who will be the top QB this year? I have been unable to get a real clear picture.
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
^ Yea but some how its always the QB who gets it now. Like player of the year in NFL is always QB[/quote]
Ingram was a RB though… Stranger things have happened.
[/quote]
I know, but how often is that happening any more, used to when we were growing up it was RB’s, QB’s and even some WR’s. Now its 90% QB’s and then maybe the rest. Not hating just stating.
Who will be the top QB this year? I have been unable to get a real clear picture.[/quote]
Mccaron from Bama has had a solid year. A good showing in the SEC Championship might seal the deal for him?
I hate to admit it Brad but I watch College ball mostly as a scouting mentality for the NFL.
<---------------NFL whore. 
Would be my dream job is a NFL Scout.
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
I hate to admit it Brad but I watch College ball mostly as a scouting mentality for the NFL.
<---------------NFL whore.
Would be my dream job is a NFL Scout. [/quote]
That does sound like a badass job. I’d probably be better recruiting for college though.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
What a crazy weekend in college football.
My Trojans have to play Notre Dame without Barkley, he had his shoulder sprained against UCLA.[/quote]
Max,
How do you feel about almost every QB that USC starts coming from Mater Dei, and if not Mater Dei then somewhere in Orange County?
I can only think of Booty and Otton as the only two in the last couple decades that came from somewhere other than the OC. Is the OC just that deep with QB’s or is it some sort of weird habit that USC has?
Where are the GA Bulldog fans? Seems we had some here at one time. I think the game this weekend will be a war but I do believe the Tide will pull it out. The A
Te’o is good but Manziel put up an SEC offense record of 4600 yards. That’s insane!
^Damn Straight. Matched Cam Newtons numbers in 2 less games.
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
^Damn Straight. Matched Cam Newtons numbers in 2 less games.[/quote]
Homer
Looks like Les Miles played LSU again, and now the Hogs can say to their fanbase “We’re talking to the very best there is…”
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]Sweet Revenge wrote:
I was actually rooting for USC and was disappointed when ND won.
So, who do you say for the Heisman? Manziel or Te’o?
Personally, I think Manziel’s gotta get it.[/quote]
If it’s just between those two, I chose Te’o. He’s had to play out of his mind this year to keep that defense relevant, and he’s done an outstanding job under tremendous pressure. Manziel has had a kickass season as well, but on the national scale, it’s Te’o in my mind.
There are so many other players that could be mentioned for the Heisman though, the QB from K-State, the QB and RB from Northwestern just to name a couple. It’ll be a tough decision.
[/quote]
You know what fellas I’ll admit when I’m wrong.
Just watched some highlights for Johnny Manziel, I think he does deserve the nod.