6 in a Row

• enigmaax

  Skyhook79;1002845 wrote:To be fair they have also dominated all D-1AA schools also.

  As well as BCS Bowls and BCS National Championship games.
• centralbucksfan

  Sarigain ratings:
  1. Big12
  2.SEC
  3. PAC10
  4. Big10
  
  These rating take everything into account. Not just opinions from writers and coaches.
  
  Hey, congrats to the SEC for having 6 straight. But the national champion does't equal the best conference. Quite frankly, think the SEC is completely top heavy with LSU/Bama. Much what we heard when OSU/UM were dominating the Big Ten. But many SEC pumpers will turn to what fits their arguement the best.
  
  http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc11.htm?loc=interstitialskip
• vball10set

  centralbucksfan;1002947 wrote:Sagarin ratings:
  1. Big12
  2.SEC
  3. PAC10
  4. Big10
  
  These rating take everything into account. Not just opinions from writers and coaches.
  
  Hey, congrats to the SEC for having 6 straight. But the national champion does't equal the best conference. Quite frankly, think the SEC is completely top heavy with LSU/Bama. Much what we heard when OSU/UM were dominating the Big Ten. But many SEC pumpers will turn to what fits their arguement the best.
  
  http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc11.htm?loc=interstitialskip

  fify
• enigmaax

  centralbucksfan;1002947 wrote:Sarigain ratings:
  1. Big12
  2.SEC
  3. PAC10
  4. Big10
  
  These rating take everything into account. Not just opinions from writers and coaches.
  
  Hey, congrats to the SEC for having 6 straight. But the national champion does't equal the best conference. Quite frankly, think the SEC is completely top heavy with LSU/Bama. Much what we heard when OSU/UM were dominating the Big Ten. But many SEC pumpers will turn to what fits their arguement the best.
  
  http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc11.htm?loc=interstitialskip

  Bold - isn't that exactly what you are doing? You are going to tell me that you believe the following teams are ranked where Sagarin has them, which is what in turn makes up the conference rankings:
  
  #3 Oklahoma State
  #4 Oklahoma
  #10 Baylor
  #12 Kansas State
  #13 Texas A&M
  #15 Missouri
  #16 Texas
• Skyhook79

  

  enigmaax;1002974 wrote:Bold - isn't that exactly what you are doing? You are going to tell me that you believe the following teams are ranked where Sagarin has them, which is what in turn makes up the conference rankings:
  
  #3 Oklahoma State
  #4 Oklahoma
  #10 Baylor
  #12 Kansas State
  #13 Texas A&M
  #15 Missouri
  #16 Texas

  Use the BCS standings then, same result Big 12 is better than the SEC.
• enigmaax

  Skyhook79;1002982 wrote:Use the BCS standings then, same result Big 12 is better than the SEC.

  Great, then there's no problem with Alabama playing LSU, right? The BCS says so.
• centralbucksfan

  enigmaax;1002974 wrote:Bold - isn't that exactly what you are doing? You are going to tell me that you believe the following teams are ranked where Sagarin has them, which is what in turn makes up the conference rankings:
  
  #3 Oklahoma State
  #4 Oklahoma
  #10 Baylor
  #12 Kansas State
  #13 Texas A&M
  #15 Missouri
  #16 Texas

  No. I am not saying that. What I am saying is that his ranking system takes into account MANY different aspects, such as schedule strength. Is it perfect? Absolutely not. But to this day, he is the most respected guy in terms of what he puts out as well as being non bias. Lets be honest, within a conference, we know that those coaches are more than likely going to vote for their teams in their conference more than they would teams from another conference. Coaches are bias. Most have even said they don't watch many other teams as they dont' have the time. Some have said they pass the ballot off to their asst. coaches. The AP is not used, but I would even say this would be better used in the formula than coaches voting. But even at that, writers from the east/west are going to see every team play consistantly from week to week to really know. Sagarin doesn't have a bone to pick one way or the other.
  Personally, I don't know, nor do I really care who has the best conference this year. I personally think its pretty close when you look at TOP to BOTTOM. As it should be. The top two teams do not constitute the entire conference. If that were the case, then OSU and UM should have played in a rematch in 2006.
• Skyhook79

  

  enigmaax;1002989 wrote:Great, then there's no problem with Alabama playing LSU, right? The BCS says so.

  There is a problem because it was the human polls and their bias that kept Okla St out not the computers.
• enigmaax

  centralbucksfan;1003002 wrote:No. I am not saying that. What I am saying is that his ranking system takes into account MANY different aspects, such as schedule strength. Is it perfect? Absolutely not. But to this day, he is the most respected guy in terms of what he puts out as well as being non bias. Lets be honest, within a conference, we know that those coaches are more than likely going to vote for their teams in their conference more than they would teams from another conference. Coaches are bias. Most have even said they don't watch many other teams as they dont' have the time. Some have said they pass the ballot off to their asst. coaches. The AP is not used, but I would even say this would be better used in the formula than coaches voting. But even at that, writers from the east/west are going to see every team play consistantly from week to week to really know. Sagarin doesn't have a bone to pick one way or the other.

  Agree with most of this. But, if Texas A&M is #13 in the country then some of you guys have some apologizing to do to CGW on Texas A&M is overrated thread. Sagarin has ratings before any games are played - respected or not, he's built some kind of bias into the formula. Obviously this year it was toward the Big XII. The conference has a grand total of 2 wins against other winning BCS conference schools and somehow has each of the top 10 schedule strengths in his ratings.
  

  Personally, I don't know, nor do I really care who has the best conference this year. I personally think its pretty close when you look at TOP to BOTTOM. As it should be. The top two teams do not constitute the entire conference. If that were the case, then OSU and UM should have played in a rematch in 2006.

  I don't really care either. I just want to know what everyone wants to base their opinions on. First I hear the BCS is a farce because Alabama is number two. Then I see the BCS being used as the gold standard for determining the best conference. Then the computers tell us that the Big XII is the best conference, but those same computers have Alabama as #2, so are they reliable or not?
• enigmaax

  Skyhook79;1003012 wrote:There is a problem because it was the human polls and their bias that kept Okla St out not the computers.

  But Alabama was #2 in two of the computer ratings. So there's a flaw with those computers, right?
• centralbucksfan

  enigmaax;1003014 wrote:Agree with most of this. But, if Texas A&M is #13 in the country then some of you guys have some apologizing to do to CGW on Texas A&M is overrated thread. Sagarin has ratings before any games are played - respected or not, he's built some kind of bias into the formula. Obviously this year it was toward the Big XII. The conference has a grand total of 2 wins against other winning BCS conference schools and somehow has each of the top 10 schedule strengths in his ratings.
  
  
  
  I don't really care either. I just want to know what everyone wants to base their opinions on. First I hear the BCS is a farce because Alabama is number two. Then I see the BCS being used as the gold standard for determining the best conference. Then the computers tell us that the Big XII is the best conference, but those same computers have Alabama as #2, so are they reliable or not?

  Where within the BCS does it say that the SEC is the best overall conference? Did I miss this? Just because it has one more ranked teams? Again, the entire conference has to be used. Which Sagarin does within his rankings. Again, its not perfect. But is there a better one out there? BCS doesn't rank conferences BTW.
• enigmaax

  centralbucksfan;1003017 wrote:Where within the BCS does it say that the SEC is the best overall conference? Did I miss this? Just because it has one more ranked teams? Again, the entire conference has to be used. Which Sagarin does within his rankings. Again, its not perfect. But is there a better one out there? BCS doesn't rank conferences BTW.

  I didn't say the BCS says the SEC is the best overall conference. Skyhook used the BCS to "prove" the Big XII was better than the SEC, even though he's been railing against the BCS for having Alabama at #2. You used Sagarin to prove the Big XII is better than the SEC. I'm cool with that; are you cool with Alabama being in the title game since Sagarin also has them at #2?
• centralbucksfan

  enigmaax;1003026 wrote:I didn't say the BCS says the SEC is the best overall conference. Skyhook used the BCS to "prove" the Big XII was better than the SEC, even though he's been railing against the BCS for having Alabama at #2. You used Sagarin to prove the Big XII is better than the SEC. I'm cool with that; are you cool with Alabama being in the title game since Sagarin also has them at #2?

  I never said Sagarin was the end all. I don't beleive the BCS should be the end all. I personally think Bama had their shot, on their home field vs #1. I would like to see someone else get a chance. OSU also has a pretty good resume in terms of the number of ranked teams they beat. There can be a good arguement either way. But the one that sticks with me, is that Bama had their shot already, on their own field. They didn't even win their divisions or play in a conference championship. Do I think Bama and LSu are the top two teams? Yes. Does that mean they should or HAVE to play in the title game? No. In NCAA basketball, the two best teams on the season often don't make the title game. This is a year that the BCS can be argued against.
• OhioStatePride2003

  The fact that you guys are even arguing about this crap shows that the system is flawed. Everyone is making good points to "fit their argument", and this is something that not everyone should be right about. You guys want to argue computers and human polls and this and that, but for me, the fact that there is THIS much wrong with the system is sad.
  
  As it was stated earlier, as college football fans, we deserve better. Money hungry political figures should not have any influence on the game of college football, but they do.
  
  The fact that LSU is playing Alabama in a rematch is all you need to know in order to determine that the system is corrupt. The entire Big 12 conference could be ranked in the top 25, but if LSU and Alabama are ranked #1 and #2, then they play for the championship. That's just the way that it is.
  
  When does the current contract with the BCS run out? Maybe they just wanted to get their "All-SEC" championship game before their contract runs out. You look at the BCS games that are set-up and really it's the best match-ups we've had in years, but it's also the most money the BCS will have made. When you replace a Boise or TCU with a scUM or Va Tech...much bigger fan bases, plus, more money.
• firestonefan

  

  Seems like the best two teams in the nation, isn't that how a national championship should be decided?
• sleeper

  

  firestonefan;1003151 wrote:Seems like the best two teams in the nation, isn't that how a national championship should be decided?

  Prove it.
• Skyhook79

  

  enigmaax;1003016 wrote:But Alabama was #2 in two of the computer ratings. So there's a flaw with those computers, right?

  No Okla St was ahead of Alabama in 4 of the 6 computers. The human (bias) polls put Alabama over the top. Do some research.
• enigmaax

  Skyhook79;1003322 wrote:No Okla St was ahead of Alabama in 4 of the 6 computers. The human (bias) polls put Alabama over the top. Do some research.

  6-4= 2, right? Didn't I say two of the computers had Alabama #2? So how do we know which of the six computers is actually right? If "computers" don't lie, how can they arrive at different conclusions? Sounds like some good, level-headed human thinking was just what we needed. Thank God for this system!!!
• Skyhook79

  

  enigmaax;1003393 wrote:6-4= 2, right? Didn't I say two of the computers had Alabama #2? So how do we know which of the six computers is actually right? If "computers" don't lie, how can they arrive at different conclusions? Sounds like some good, level-headed human thinking was just what we needed. Thank God for this system!!!

  4 is greater than 2 so the computer average is higher for Okla St. Is that better for you?
• KnightRyder

  

  sleeper;1003161 wrote:Prove it.

  prove that they arent. as much as you tried you still havent.
• 0311sdp

  Saban voted Ok State #4 IN THE COACHES POLL, Gundy does not have a vote, if Saban had voted Ok State #3 like he should have then they probably pass Alabama who won by .0086 of a point. I'm not saying Ok. State is better than Alabama because they don't play much defense but I sure as hell would rather watch them play LSU than watch a replay of a game that we've already seen.
• enigmaax

  0311sdp;1003797 wrote:Saban voted Ok State #4 IN THE COACHES POLL, Gundy does not have a vote, if Saban had voted Ok State #3 like he should have then they probably pass Alabama who won by .0086 of a point. I'm not saying Ok. State is better than Alabama because they don't play much defense but I sure as hell would rather watch them play LSU than watch a replay of a game that we've already seen.

  Ok State would not have passed Alabama even if Saban had voted the Cowboys #1. Alabama was ahead by 32 points in the final poll, not to mention the much bigger lead in the Harris Poll.
• Rotinaj

  

  sleeper;1002832 wrote:Conferences don't win championships so that's irrelevant.
  
  The SEC is 16-17 against the B1G since the inception of the BCS, so they aren't even dominating the B1G much less any other conference besides the Sun Belt.

  Where did you find the 16-17 record between the conferences?
• sleeper

  

  KnightRyder;1003787 wrote:prove that they arent. as much as you tried you still havent.

  Well they didn't win their conference so that's at least 11 teams that are better than them for starters.
• sleeper

  

  Rotinaj;1003888 wrote:Where did you find the 16-17 record between the conferences?

  On the internet. #facts