• 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!

Ohio State or Oregon for the BCS Bowl?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Nightmares, hmm. I like the Kuhn paradigm shift reference, but
otherwise I still think my point is not being understood. In your
hypothetical of a team that plays USC and ten patsies, you forget
that my assumption is that the Pac 10 is an equivalent conference
to the Big Ten. You don't have to agree that it is, but my argument
depends on that first assumption. And it still seems at least odd
to argue that wins really do matter less than style points. What
would Tressel say to =that=?
 
Upvote 0
nickofthewoods said:
Folks, look at what I wrote. I said that one loss is better than two losses,
assuming that both teams in question are playing in roughly comparable
conferences. I didn't say that MAC or Mountain West teams were part of
this discussion. It's frustrating to think that a difference of opinion is
meant with such quick dismissal. I understand the SOS argument well. That
simply isn't what I was discussing. If two teams have the same number of
losses, I think that SOS should be the difference. But I stand by the idea that
wins matter. Why in the world is this seen as such a traitorous position?
Click to expand...
And what we're trying to explain is that you can't, on one hand, dismiss SOS to determine the quality of a win or loss, while on the other hand assume the Big-10 and Pac-10 are roughly comparable conferences.

How do you compare conferences without SOS? Either you use the component or you don't. Without SOS, how do you conclude that the Big-10, Pac-10, or ACC, or SEC, or Big-XII are equivilent?

Again:
The Pac-10 has six teams that will likely finish with losing records.
The Big-10 has seven team that have finished with records of 7-4 or better.

Did it ever occur to you that the Pac-10 is down this year? Look, the third best team in the Pac-10 is probably Fresno St., and they're actually in the WAC.
 
Upvote 0
nickofthewoods said:
Nightmares, hmm. I like the Kuhn paradigm shift reference, but
otherwise I still think my point is not being understood. In your
hypothetical of a team that plays USC and ten patsies, you forget
that my assumption is that the Pac 10 is an equivalent conference
to the Big Ten. You don't have to agree that it is, but my argument
depends on that first assumption. And it still seems at least odd
to argue that wins really do matter less than style points. What
would Tressel say to =that=?
Click to expand...
That was a hypothetical of USC and 10 patsies? I thought we were still talking about Oregon :p
 
Upvote 0
I've been trying to stay out of this, but I just can't leave this unsaid; even though others have said it.

DO YOU REALLY WANT TO REWARD PEOPLE FOR PLAYING THE LITTLE SISTERS OF THE POOR AND MARY'S SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND INSTEAD OF TEXAS??????


IF ONE-LOSS TEAMS WERE ALWAYS GIVEN PRIORITY OVER TWO-LOSS TEAMS, EVEN WHEN THE 2nd LOSS CAME TO A TEAM THAT WOULD HAVE DESTROYED THE ONE-LOSS COWARD; THEN WHAT INCENTIVE DOES ANYONE HAVE FOR SCHEDULING ANYTHING BUT I-AA GAMES?????

This is without a doubt the 2nd-most baseless, meritless argument on this board. The only thing worse is the ridiculous assertion that Gonzo wasn't forced out of bounds.
 
Upvote 0
I think the problem with your argument is obvious, the PAC-10 does not equal the Big-10. The whole thing is based off of a faulty assumption. If you want to go any further with this then you have to defend that assumption. Let's remember, not all conferences were created equal.
 
Upvote 0
I think that Kuhn says that paradigm shifts finally happen when the
proponents of the old ideas retire or die. I wish neither to any of the
readers of this thread! I like the idea above that SOS is used to measure
the quality of a conference no less than a team, so that I seem to be
inconsistent in applying it unevenly. I guess I imagine that the strength
of the major conferences do vary from year to year and that a judgment
of comparable conferences ought to be more longitudinal than a one-year
snapshot of any particular team. I don't know. Utah, Boise State, and
Miami OH have had great teams in recent years, but I don't think that means
that their conferences are or were on a par with the major conferences. And
it may be that West Virginia has a great team this year. Really, who knows?
Even bowl games are not enough to tell us with certainty.
 
Upvote 0
I read the links to the Oregon newspapers and most of their writers have beef with Notre Dame and not us. Strength of Schedule needs to be a part of equation otherwise this will start the trend of scheduling weaker teams. Personally lets have OSU meet Oregon in St. Louis while the other teams are playing their conference champ games and settle this discussion. I believe they would never show up!
 
Upvote 0
"Meet me in St. Louis, Louis, meet me at the Fair." It's all just song
and dance, really, from our end. The CFN articles about which
teams belong and which ones don't make the same point: deserved
or not, ND gets a slot, meaning that more deserving teams like
Auburn, Oregon, and Ohio State have to sweat for now and curse
later.
 
Upvote 0
buckeyeboy said:
I'm not counting the Cal win as a great win b/c Cal, with 4 losses all of which came in a weak Pac-10, has failed to live up to expectations this year, a la Iowa.
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->
Click to expand...

Pretty bold to discount an Oregon win just because it was against a 4-loss team that failed to live up to expectations. Does tOSU have a win over a team with less than 4 losses? I guess we should also throw out tOSU's wins over Michigan and Iowa since those are 4-loss teams who failed to live up to expectations.

That leaves tOSU's best wins as 4-loss Minny and 4-loss Northwestern.
 
Upvote 0
nickofthewoods said:
Nightmares, hmm. I like the Kuhn paradigm shift reference, but
otherwise I still think my point is not being understood. In your
hypothetical of a team that plays USC and ten patsies, you forget
that my assumption is that the Pac 10 is an equivalent conference
to the Big Ten. You don't have to agree that it is, but my argument
depends on that first assumption. And it still seems at least odd
to argue that wins really do matter less than style points. What
would Tressel say to =that=?
Click to expand...

In that case we can't help you because your assumption is wrong. Now if you compared the SEC, ACC, and Big 10 you would have a point, but since the only 1 loss SEC and ACC teams are ranked above a 2 loss OSU it looks like the system works. If you are trying to convince us that The Pac 10 is as good as the Big 10 you might as well give up now because it's never going to happen. There is only 1 Pac 10 team that would have a shot in the Big 10 and I don't think USC would make it through a Big 10 schedule undefeated.

Give USC this schedule and see how they do.

Toledo
Notre Dame
Fresno St
MSU
Purdue
scum
Indiana
PSU
OSU
Nothwestern
Iowa
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top