Text Size

College Sports Arena

LSU having fits with Kentucky.

Talk Buckeye football and hoops, Viking hoops, as well as all other discussion on college sports in here.

Moderators: peeker643, swerb, danwismar, furls

LSU having fits with Kentucky.

Unread postby FUDU » Sat Oct 13, 2007 6:59 pm

LSU 27-24 with just under 5 left in game, Kentucky with ball inside LSU 10.

Now lining up to kick game tying FG.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13356
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Sat Oct 13, 2007 8:04 pm

UK holds off LSU in OT. It's Any Given Saturday in Div I-A.
User avatar
Madre Hill, Superstar
Eternal Optimist
 
Posts: 4656
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 7:06 am
Location: Parma, OH
Favorite Player: The Playa
Least Favorite Player: The Game

Unread postby furls » Sat Oct 13, 2007 8:10 pm

Wow, that was one of the best college games that I have ever seen.

Win or lose you have to be proud of your team if they played in that game.
Coming from a Wolverine, we're the football equivalent of a formerly abused wife of a meth addict who just remarried the safe nice guy. We're just glad we have someone who's aware that it's a rivalry and that tackling on defense is integral. Baby steps.

-Kingpin74
User avatar
furls
Buckeye Insider
 
Posts: 6426
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Chic Harley
Least Favorite Player: Desmond Howard

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Sat Oct 13, 2007 10:04 pm

Furls wrote:Wow, that was one of the best college games that I have ever seen.

Win or lose you have to be proud of your team if they played in that game.


Being in the SEC must be a real pain in the ass. In that conference I think almost any team can win every week. The PAC-10 is starting to look near the same with Oregon State taking the lead on Cal and USC losing the Stanford last week.

Those two conferences are definitely a cut above all the others right now.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby FUDU » Sun Oct 14, 2007 12:16 am

Those two conferences are definitely a cut above all the others right now.


Interesting comment considering the number one team in the country is now from the Big Ten.

SEC is overrated this year and they are proving it, meaning they are only slightly better than any other conference mentioned.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13356
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Unread postby furls » Sun Oct 14, 2007 12:33 am

The SEC and the Pac-10 are the best conferences top to bottom, but I am now convinced that any of the current conference leaders could play with any of the other conference leaders except probably BC.

I think if there is one thing that has been proven this year, rankings (particularly preseason rankings) are garbage.

The reason I say those two conferences are a cut above is due to depth.

The Big East is garbage outside of USF.
The Big Ten is pretty bad outside of OSU.
The ACC is garbage.
The Big 12 is weak outside of OU and maybe Mizzou.
The SEC's and Pac 10's middle of the pack is better than the Big Ten's.
Coming from a Wolverine, we're the football equivalent of a formerly abused wife of a meth addict who just remarried the safe nice guy. We're just glad we have someone who's aware that it's a rivalry and that tackling on defense is integral. Baby steps.

-Kingpin74
User avatar
furls
Buckeye Insider
 
Posts: 6426
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Chic Harley
Least Favorite Player: Desmond Howard

Unread postby FUDU » Sun Oct 14, 2007 12:43 am

I think the Big Ten is underrated a bit this year, in that many teams in the conference appear to be able to handle the conference's best? NOT that they are good to great but they are not as bad as most think or thought.

I agree on the best teams v the best team's from each conference though.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13356
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Unread postby furls » Sun Oct 14, 2007 1:01 am

unfortunately, we will never know because under college football's current system teams generally just schedule patsies in their non conference schedule.
Coming from a Wolverine, we're the football equivalent of a formerly abused wife of a meth addict who just remarried the safe nice guy. We're just glad we have someone who's aware that it's a rivalry and that tackling on defense is integral. Baby steps.

-Kingpin74
User avatar
furls
Buckeye Insider
 
Posts: 6426
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Chic Harley
Least Favorite Player: Desmond Howard

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Sun Oct 14, 2007 1:05 am

FUDU wrote:Interesting comment considering the number one team in the country is now from the Big Ten.

SEC is overrated this year and they are proving it, meaning they are only slightly better than any other conference mentioned.


True, but where's the next ranked Big Ten team? Will there be any Big Ten team outside of OSU ranked above 20? Penn State and Michigan will likely get back in this week, but Illinois and Wisconsin are sure to fall out. How far up will Michigan and PSU be? PSU should be below UM due to their defeat at their hands.

Oregon, USC, and Cal should still all be Top 15 still.

LSU, South Carolina, Kentucky, and Florida will be Top 15 as well.

The ACC and Big 12 will be well represented, but not as well as the PAC-10 and SEC.

The Big East will have two Top Ten teams, but will they have any other Top 25 team? Cincy might stay in, but I doubt Rutgers will move back in. Rutgers was getting more votes than Penn State or Michigan in the Coaches Poll, so will they stay ahead of them or not?

Point being, while Ohio State will likely be #1 that doesn't mean that the Big Ten as a conference is considered the best at the moment. It just means that Ohio State is considered to be the best. The SEC and PAC-10 are certainly looked upon with much higher regards by the voters in the AP, Coaches, and Harris Polls along with all the computer polls. That would be what the "experts" say. They have been wrong before, though I agree with them. Just because those conferences are better than the Big Ten right now doesn't mean that Ohio State cannot be better than any or all of the teams in those conferences - it just means that those conferences are filled with teams perceived of a higher quality than those below OSU right now in the Big Ten.

Plus the Michigan loss to Appalachian State does hurt the whole conference no matter how unfair that is. If Michigan does pull off the upset and knock off the Buckeyes then that will leave some taint on them. If the Buckeyes win then they'll just be seen as beating a team they should have beaten. It's a crappy situation for them in many ways, though being a storied program helps them overcome it. I don't think Michigan's loss should affect perception like that, but human beings often think that way.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby FUDU » Sun Oct 14, 2007 1:13 am

mac I am not saying the Big Ten is the best or will be. But the conference cannot be that bad if they have the number one ranked team. Plus what about if OSU runs the table in the Big Ten? Or doesn't? Which scenario propels the rating of the Big Ten?

See it is all so subjective and just plain BS at times, not from you but from how the system is viewed and manipulated.

If OSU were to play a LSU or USF or OK or Cal and beat em in the NC game then what? Does the Big Ten's best beating another conference's best validate everything?

I hate this current system FTR.

I just want an 8 team playoff and I would be happy.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13356
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Sun Oct 14, 2007 1:40 am

FUDU wrote:mac I am not saying the Big Ten is the best or will be. But the conference cannot be that bad if they have the number one ranked team. Plus what about if OSU runs the table in the Big Ten? Or doesn't? Which scenario propels the rating of the Big Ten?


I think in perception then the bowl would. If OSU wins out and wins the title then the Big Ten looks good. If it is close then it can also reflect positively.

How good the conference is also depends on how OSU beats the other Big Ten teams. Let's say that they beat the crap out of all the Big Ten teams they play. I don't expect that to happen because that never happens in that conference, but let's go there for argument's sake. The Big Ten wouldn't look great even with an OSU victory because they pummeled them all. OSU would look good because they beat another great team from another conference, but perception of the conference outside of OSU would not be good.

See it is all so subjective and just plain BS at times, not from you but from how the system is viewed and manipulated.


I don't disagree. I've heard people all the time refer to my conference as the Big Least, which I never thought was fair. Our champion defeated the ACC and SEC champs over the past year yet we haven't gotten tons of respect. The departure of those three teams to the ACC still lingers as and I think the CUSA imports are still looked down upon outside of Big East territory.

The Michigan loss to App State and the loss last year to Florida do negatively impact the perception of the Big Ten with the public and those that vote. It obviously hasn't hurt Ohio State so much now, but I think in general many look down on the whole conference and I also agree that that isn't fair.

If OSU were to play a LSU or USF or OK or Cal and beat em in the NC game then what? Does the Big Ten's best beating another conference's best validate everything?


I think it depends. It certainly validates that top team. If the SEC beats the Big Ten in the CapOne Bowl and at the Outback then the perception would be that the best team in the Big Ten is better than the best team in the SEC but that the rest of the conference doesn't compare to the rank-and-file of the SEC. Same goes for any conference they play.

I just want an 8 team playoff and I would be happy.


Agreed. I'd prefer a 16 team playoff, though I believe that we'd get there eventually if we start with an eight team one. Eventually other teams, conferences, and fans will be disenfranchised. Sixteen is the number in the other NCAA divisions, so that would probably be the final setup and it would give the major conferences two representatives unless they didn't warrant it for the season. Each current winner of BCS conferences now would probably automatically get in.

It is a crappy system and it's also hard to really put any solid ratings on the conferences when they don't play each other all that often. The Big Ten only regularly plays the SEC in bowl games and that doesn't necessarily see teams from either conference bring their best. Plenty of time off and a vacation atmosphere can impede performance. I think it's less so in the title game with so much on the line and I do believe the Big Ten and PAC-10 teams take the Rose Bowl very seriously. SEC teams are serious almost all the time and they're used to the nice winter weather, so that may positively impact them in bowls.

I'd love to see the Big Ten regularly play the SEC. It'd be interesting to see Michigan play LSU, Ohio State play UF, Wisconsin play Auburn, etc. I'd love to see the Big Ten play the Big East so we can gauge how they measure up against each other. Problem is that there's no real incentive for any of the conferences to do that. Why should Ohio State try to schedule more than one really good team outside of the Big Ten when their conference is often tough and they have national title aspirations?

A playoff would help that because losses outside of the conference would not prevent you from playing for a title, but tough games and wins would help you get a better seed.

There's the solution, along with the conferences maybe signing rotational deals with the other big conferences.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby furls » Sun Oct 14, 2007 1:45 am

But the conference cannot be that bad if they have the number one ranked team.


Right now you could make a case for USF as the #1 team too, actually probably a better case because at least they have played a good team. That doesn't change the fact that I think the rest of the Big East is trash, and the same goes for the Big Ten. Even if Michigan gets its shit together and runs the table all anyone will remember is the Oregon ass whooping (similar to the situation Arkansas had a couple of years ago after losing to USC) and the App State loss.

The Big Ten has shown its ass this year, that is for sure. Does it mean that the conference is that bad or that they started slow? My advice, if you really care about it, watch a lot of football, ignore the numbers next to the team's number and believe what your eyes tell you. The polls have been misleading all year long and we would be better off without them this year.
Coming from a Wolverine, we're the football equivalent of a formerly abused wife of a meth addict who just remarried the safe nice guy. We're just glad we have someone who's aware that it's a rivalry and that tackling on defense is integral. Baby steps.

-Kingpin74
User avatar
furls
Buckeye Insider
 
Posts: 6426
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Chic Harley
Least Favorite Player: Desmond Howard

Unread postby furls » Sun Oct 14, 2007 1:49 am

A playoff would help that because losses outside of the conference would not prevent you from playing for a title, but tough games and wins would help you get a better seed.


I like that idea. The important thing is that SOS needs to be heavily weighted, so much so that it is better to lose a close game to a good team than to pound Kent State or Elon. Unfortunatley, the way I see this season playing out is that the experts will use this season as proof of parity, not proof of mediocrity. Programs will use this "parity" argument as a means to justify putting mid majors on schedules.
Coming from a Wolverine, we're the football equivalent of a formerly abused wife of a meth addict who just remarried the safe nice guy. We're just glad we have someone who's aware that it's a rivalry and that tackling on defense is integral. Baby steps.

-Kingpin74
User avatar
furls
Buckeye Insider
 
Posts: 6426
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Chic Harley
Least Favorite Player: Desmond Howard

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Sun Oct 14, 2007 2:03 am

Furls wrote:
I like that idea. The important thing is that SOS needs to be heavily weighted, so much so that it is better to lose a close game to a good team than to pound Kent State or Elon. Unfortunatley, the way I see this season playing out is that the experts will use this season as proof of parity, not proof of mediocrity. Programs will use this "parity" argument as a means to justify putting mid majors on schedules.


The final parity argument would be bad, but I think the mid-majors would have to put up some good wins. If UCF or Kent State won then that argument could and would be made, but they got pummeled and both had been decent in mid major play with UCF putting up a fight against a shaky Texas team, though UCF's opening of their stadium probably jacked them up.

If the BCS teams pound the mid majors but are pretty even when playing other BCS teams (like UConn-Virginia today - neither team is great and both are worse than their records, but they show parity between that level of the ACC and BE) then I think that validates a playoff argument that has an open door for the mid majors should they meet certain qualifications but guarantees spots to the established conferences.

I agree on the weighted schedule. A 35-0 win against Podunk U should count like a 35-0 win against an Oklahoma team that proves itself over the season. If you end up losing to one of those good teams by a field goal then that shouldn't kill you in seeding, especially if you lose on the road.

Of course the problem is the human factor because subjectivity is always in play. There will also be biases. I favor the Big East because my school is there, so I play up the conference. Others play up their conference and that would happen in any evaluation leading to a playoff seeding. Still, I think the NCAA method for basketball works pretty well and that it could work in I-A as long as they realize that the mid majors in basketball are not equivalents to those in football. The door might open if they do perform strongly, but I find that less likely in football.

The playoff could put an end to conference pissing contests, at least at the top. Any team that could get through and win will have deserved it.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby furls » Sun Oct 14, 2007 12:07 pm

The final parity argument would be bad


Exactly, but I would not expect that to stop anyone from using it, much the same way that they justify ranking teams highly (or lowly) based on a previous season.

Due to the insane turnover in NCAA Football, you cannot even really guess how good a team will be going into the season and most of the time they don't bother to see who is replacing starters; they just assume that since a guy is young that he will not contribute or will require a season or 2 to be a serious contributor.

And don't even get me started on recruiting rankigns. These are the guys who continuously rank USC's classes #1 or #2 in spite of what they recruit. It is not enough to recruit talented athletes with great measurables. THose measurables often hurt guys that are not coachable and rely to much on their physical abilities. This works in high school where they have a huge physical advantage; not so much in the NCAA (see O'Neal, Jemario). They also don't account for how deep a school already is at a position or whether that player actually fits the system that the school runs. Vertical receivers are not as valuable to OSU as they are to other schools, and I am not impressed by USC's 17 5* Running backs, they only get to use 2 at a time unless they bring back the wishbone.

My rant is over...... for now.

Of course the problem is the human factor because subjectivity is always in play.


That is why they need to put a fair portion of the emphasis on the computers, and the computer rankings need to be unconcerned with Preseason rankings which cause huge biases early in the season and grossly fucked up.
Coming from a Wolverine, we're the football equivalent of a formerly abused wife of a meth addict who just remarried the safe nice guy. We're just glad we have someone who's aware that it's a rivalry and that tackling on defense is integral. Baby steps.

-Kingpin74
User avatar
furls
Buckeye Insider
 
Posts: 6426
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Chic Harley
Least Favorite Player: Desmond Howard

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Sun Oct 14, 2007 12:32 pm

Furls wrote:Exactly, but I would not expect that to stop anyone from using it, much the same way that they justify ranking teams highly (or lowly) based on a previous season.

Due to the insane turnover in NCAA Football, you cannot even really guess how good a team will be going into the season and most of the time they don't bother to see who is replacing starters; they just assume that since a guy is young that he will not contribute or will require a season or 2 to be a serious contributor.


Agreed. It's not fair unless that team is returning pretty much every one and was unbelievably good the year before. I'd love to get rid of preseason polls and wait a month before issuing the polls.


And don't even get me started on recruiting rankigns. These are the guys who continuously rank USC's classes #1 or #2 in spite of what they recruit. It is not enough to recruit talented athletes with great measurables. THose measurables often hurt guys that are not coachable and rely to much on their physical abilities. This works in high school where they have a huge physical advantage; not so much in the NCAA (see O'Neal, Jemario). They also don't account for how deep a school already is at a position or whether that player actually fits the system that the school runs. Vertical receivers are not as valuable to OSU as they are to other schools, and I am not impressed by USC's 17 5* Running backs, they only get to use 2 at a time unless they bring back the wishbone.


Agreed. I think there's also a lot of rankings that go up because a USC, UF, OSU, Michigan, etc is pursuing them.

Talented athletes do not always make good players. Coach Leavitt has focused on finding guys that he can develop instead of recruiting raw athletes and that's what the good programs do.

I found the hype for USC at the beginning of the season funny because of so much focus on how may RBs they had. I don't understand how so many "highly talented" backs would go there when having that many other 5* guys would certainly hurt their playing time and possible future NFL draft status. I'm sure UCLA, Arizona, Cal, Washington, or other west coast teams would have taken them and probably given them more prominence. Either that or they are all hype because Carroll recruited them and he apparently makes no errors in that arena.
My rant is over...... for now.

That is why they need to put a fair portion of the emphasis on the computers, and the computer rankings need to be unconcerned with Preseason rankings which cause huge biases early in the season and grossly fucked up.


No matter what there is a human issue because biases will inform the algorithms that the computers use. The problem there is that those algorithms are not made public and the computer pollsters often do not share what they deem important enough to put into the polls. They get to use style points, but how do they award them? Does a blowout win against Troy count for more than a slim win versus Oklahoma? If it does then we have a problem because of the difference in quality of those two teams.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby Bayou Tribe » Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:07 pm

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaggggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhh.

If the LSU games continue on like they have the last two weekend (Florida and Kentucky), I'm going to have heart disease before I'm 30. Geez.

Also, Furls, I know you being an OSU fan are probably tired of hearing about the SEC, but I don't know if the Kentucky win proves the SEC as being bad or overrated. I think that just shows the depth in the conference. Between Auburn, LSU, Florida, SC, and Kentucky they have some serious players in the conference and you can't just sleepwalk through the conferece (as LSU learned this weekend).

No disrespect to any other conference out there, but I think the SEC is the conference that you most have to bring it every weekend. The Mississippi schools and Vandy are really the only teams you can sort of breathe easy for.
User avatar
Bayou Tribe
"Rickey wants to play baseball"
 
Posts: 2817
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 11:47 pm
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Favorite Player: Drew Brees
Least Favorite Player: Steve Smith

Unread postby FUDU » Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:22 pm

Well doesn't what is happening in the Big Ten this year say the same thing about that conference.

Wisky ranked up there and they lose to an up and coming Illinois program.

PSU ranked and they lose their first two conference games then beat the crap out of Wisky.

Then out of no where an Iowa team beats up and coming Illinois.

I'm not saying the Big Ten is the best or better than one particular conference but according to your logic how does the SEC get viewed as the conference that you have to bring it every week (b/c their good teams get beat by their lesser teams) and when the same thing happens in the Big Ten it means the conference sucks or is not very good?

College football (mainly the fans) cannot have it both ways.

That POV either sticks with all conferences when it happens or it doesn't stick.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13356
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Unread postby Bayou Tribe » Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:48 pm

I agree with you 100%, I think the Big 10 is vastly underrated. I actually see them above the Pac 10, and behind the SEC in my books (for whatever that is worth).
User avatar
Bayou Tribe
"Rickey wants to play baseball"
 
Posts: 2817
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 11:47 pm
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Favorite Player: Drew Brees
Least Favorite Player: Steve Smith


Return to College Sports Arena

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Who is online

In total there are 2 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 181 on Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests