• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

2010 TSUN arguments & shenanigans (in-season)

Before the Dickinson system in 1926, there were no "active deciders" awarding titles at the end of the season. Any titles awarded before that year are retroactive. (Dickinson retroactively awarded the 1924 & 1925 title in 1926).

The Helms Athletic Foundation was founded by Paul Helms in 1936. In 1941, Bill Schroeder, the managing director, retroactively picked the champions from 1883 to 1940.

The National Championship Foundation was founded by Mike Riter in 1981. They retroactively awarded titles from 1869 to 1980.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting your post, but you seem to be implying that Helms and NCF were awarding those early titles as the seasons played out and that, depending on the time period, one or the other was considered the "real" title. The truth is that there were no "real" titles from that period as they were all retroactively awarded.

The list you provided above does not show who decided the "real" champion for those years. It simply shows which entities the website owner/s decided to recognize. College Football Data Warehouse has a similar list and the NCAA yet another.
Thanks for the info......and presenting it in a way that wasn't arrogant as hell.

I wasn't aware that they were retroactive....and yes, I'm going off the list saying which entities were the actual deciders based on what year is in question. CFBDW used to use the same list, but they decided to just count all of them at once.

I'll use 1994 as an example for obvious reasons:

Florida State: Dunkel
*Nebraska: Alderson, AP, Berryman, Billingsley, FACT, FB News, FW, National Championship Foundation, Sporting News, UPI, USA/CNN, USA/NFF
Penn State: DeVold, Eck, FACT, Matthews, National Championship Foundation, NY Times, Sagarin

All those fun "titles", but only the AP and USA/CNN ones actually count.

Interestingly enough, the NCF awarded their title to Penn State, yet the NCAA site doesn't list a title for Penn State. It's almost as if the NCF had a period of time when it really counted, and another when it didn't.



The site I found was the only one that explained what periods of time counted for each selector. Is there a better list out there (aside from just counting them all because I'm too lazy to do the work)?
 
Upvote 0
BuckeyeNation27;1843254; said:
Thanks for the info......and presenting it in a way that wasn't arrogant as hell.

I wasn't aware that they were retroactive....and yes, I'm going off the list saying which entities were the actual deciders based on what year is in question. CFBDW used to use the same list, but they decided to just count all of them at once.

I'll use 1994 as an example for obvious reasons:

Florida State: Dunkel
*Nebraska: Alderson, AP, Berryman, Billingsley, FACT, FB News, FW, National Championship Foundation, Sporting News, UPI, USA/CNN, USA/NFF
Penn State: DeVold, Eck, FACT, Matthews, National Championship Foundation, NY Times, Sagarin

All those fun "titles", but only the AP and USA/CNN ones actually count.

Interestingly enough, the NCF awarded their title to Penn State, yet the NCAA site doesn't list a title for Penn State. It's almost as if the NCF had a period of time when it really counted, and another when it didn't.



The site I found was the only one that explained what periods of time counted for each selector. Is there a better list out there (aside from just counting them all because I'm too lazy to do the work)?

College Football Data Warehouse actually has two different lists, a recognized championship list and a list of all possible selectors (the one to which you are referring). The list quoted below is what CFDW uses when determining recognized championships. This is also the list used by the NCAA. Note that in the text above the list, CFDW states that it also recognizes most championships claimed by the school. This is where the discrepancy between the two arises (NCAA-9, CFDW-11). Michigan claims the Dickinson championship in 1932 and the AP championship in 1947 for the poll which came out after the bowl games. For championships after 1998, the NCAA just lists BCS unless there is disagreement (e.g. AP and FWAA for USC in 2003).

College Football Data Warehouse said:
The following selectors are utilized for determining National Championships throughout this site. In general this site will also use what the schools claim prior to 1936 and most of what the schools claim from 1936-current.
1869-1935 National Championship Foundation
1883-1935 Helms Athletic Foundation
1919-1935 College Football Researches Association
1936-Current Associated Press Poll
1950-Current Coaches Poll
1954-Current Football Writers Association of America
1959-Current National Football Foundation and Hall of Fame
1998-Current Bowl Championship Series

As to which list is better, does it really matter? None were played out on the field, hence the term mythical national championship. I tend to use the NCAA list, but that is just my personal preference.
 
Upvote 0
Up until a few years ago, CFDW listed OSU and Michigan with 5 each (because those are real NCs). For the life of me I can't understand why they changed.....other than making my life a little harder.

It is odd to see their date ranges differ from the site I used....specifically the NCF. There's a slight difference between 1882 and 1935.
 
Upvote 0
BuckeyeNation27;1843437; said:
Up until a few years ago, CFDW listed OSU and Michigan with 5 each (because those are real NCs). For the life of me I can't understand why they changed.....other than making my life a little harder.

It is odd to see their date ranges differ from the site I used....specifically the NCF. There's a slight difference between 1882 and 1935.


If I had to guess, I would say that, for whatever reason, the site you use does not really like the NCF. They only use them before 1883 because they are the only credible selector to actually pick champions for those years. In my opinion, if you feel NCF is credible enough to use before 1883, you should be consistent and use them through 1935 (retroactive years), as their criteria for choosing the champion did not change.
 
Upvote 0
BuckeyeNation27;1843208; said:
By the way...CollegeFootballPoll.com isn't a gambling site. It's a site that collects data, same as CollegeFootballDataWarehouse.com.
Sorry, my bad. CollegeFootballPoll.com talks a lot about "feature picks" and "against the spread" and "straight up" and "point spreads" and "opening lines" and "live odds" and "handicapping" and "oddsmakers" and "underdogs" ... and they have a link to VegasInsiders.com ... so for some crazy reason I thought that it was site that had something to do with gambling. Silly me! Thanks for setting me straight.
 
Upvote 0
I thought you were done here? Or did you have more Administrator-like qualities to pass on to us all?

They also have this:
BACKGROUND INFO
Online since June of 1999, CollegeFootballPoll.com is independently owned and operated.
It hosts the Congrove Computer Rankings created by Dave Congrove, a college football fanatic who desired to create an unbiased comparison of major college football teams. He was looking for answers, and not attempting to validate a theory. Thus, he devised a formula that contains only hard data and nothing which could be perceived as opinion. In 1993, the Congrove Computer Rankings were born and were initially syndicated on radio with a twice-weekly show. When the website was launched in 1999, the radio show was retired.
The rankings and website have been referenced by numerous newspapers, sports radio stations, college game day programs, and school media guides across the country. Mr. Congrove has been interviewed on ESPN radio affiliates and other sports stations.
Dave Congrove is a:
- member of the Football Writers Association of America
- voting member of the Vince Lombardi Award
- voting member for the Eddie Robinson Coach of the Year Award
- nominating member for the Bronko Nagurski Trophy
- nominating member for the Outland Trophy
- nominating member for the 25-player FWAA All-America Team
CollegeFootballPoll.com is also a member of the Big Lead Sports network of quality internet sites that cover the entire spectrum of collegiate and professional sports.
ABOUT THE RANKINGS
Congrove's approach is vastly different from the numerous computer rankings available and the goals can be summarized in two words - simplicity and accountability.
Simplicity. The computer program is designed to predict who is supposed to beat who and by how much.
What actually happens when the game is played directly alters subsequent predictions. A unique "season-averaging variable" prevents wild fluctuations due to anomalies, and renders it meaningless to "run up the score".
A strong team that is supposed to whip an obviously out-matched opponent by 40, but wins by 60, only sees a fraction of the difference added to their power rating. If they win by only 20, the failure to "cover" the other 20 points also declines their power rating only fractionally.
The rise and fall of a team's Power Rating is relevant to the strength of the team it played, whether it won or lost, and how other teams fared against similar opponents.
Accountability. The Congrove Computer Rankings are designed to predict the outcome. Success is determined by how many games were predicted correctly.
College Football Poll.com not only publishes the rankings, but also provides the computer's pick of every game and tracks the success rate by each team and conference. Our users can plainly see where the computer is right, and where it is wrong. Or, as Congrove half-jokingly likes to say, "You can plainly see where teams failed to do what they were supposed to do. Nothing ticks me off more than two football teams blowing a perfectly good prediction."
Additionally, the Season Preview section features team pages that highlight the computer's predicted record of every team for every year since 1993, and compares it to their actual record.
Results. The Congrove Computer Rankings have picked the winner in 74.8% of all games played since 1993 (9,039-3,046) while beating the spread in 53.9% of those games (5,968-5,103). In the 2009 season, the computer won 75.1% SU and 53.8% ATS. (year-by-year record of computer).
For 2009, it projected the exact regular season record of 23 teams, came within one victory on 34 others, and within two victories on 23 more teams.
The computer has predicted the national title match-up three times (1993, 1998 and 2005), and at least one contestant every year except 1994, 1997, 2001 and 2006. The team it picked to win the title did so three times (1993, 1998, and 1999), and lost in the title game four times (2000, 2003, 2004, 2005).
More. We bring you much more than college football computer rankings. Pre-game and post-game columns are just a small part of the original editorial content, plus there is season historical data and one of the most complete portals to official college sites and resources found anywhere on the net.
See more content choices by visiting our Site Map.
Thank you for visiting CollegeFootballPoll.com.

but it's just a gambling site.
 
Upvote 0
LordJeffBuck;1843468; said:
Sorry, my bad. CollegeFootballPoll.com talks a lot about "feature picks" and "against the spread" and "straight up" and "point spreads" and "opening lines" and "live odds" and "handicapping" and "oddsmakers" and "underdogs" ... and they have a link to VegasInsiders.com ... so for some crazy reason I thought that it was site that had something to do with gambling. Silly me! Thanks for setting me straight.


I thought you were done here? Or did you have more Administrator-like qualities to pass on to us all?

They also have this:
but it's just a gambling site.

I bet this part of the discussion isn't finished. I also bet that the thread TSUN arguments and shenanigans will someday resume.
 
Upvote 0
If TSUN fans really do want to shoot themselves in the foot and get rid of the top coach in America, I'd like to suggest that they set their sights on a guy who's recruited the Midwest and knows his way around the Big House. OK, not an idol like RichRod, but perhaps the next best thing.

charlie-weis-gun-450sm.jpg
 
Upvote 0
I like how the game thread and most of the related threads about DickRod's future are either removed or locked over at Stadium and Main :slappy:

WetDream and his girlfriend Beaver must be waiting for further marching orders :lol:
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top