Not one 1 loss Big 10 team should pass ND

[Buguit]

The Big 10 is a fraud ... there is not one signature win within the entire conference .... how they keep some of these teams even ranked is simply done by voter bias

Start with:

Michigan

Who have they beaten? .... Nobody .... Right now there best win is 7-3 Penn St ... who got beat at home by zero offense MSU .... Wisconsin? ... they're 6-4 and FINALLY unranked .... and MSU is a dumpster fire with their offense

Ohio St.

Who have they beaten? .... 2-8 Oregon State ..... 4-6 TCU ... they got SMOKED by 5-5 Purdue who got beat by Eastern Michigan at home AND Missouri AND Minnesota.... they squeaked by 3-7 Nebraska the following week after losing most of the game and into the 4th qtr .... their best win? ... a squeaker against Penn St. ... what would the Big 10 do without them to provide what the CFP voters consider a quality win?

Penn St

Fine ... Penn St. is such a quality win? ... who have they beaten? ... most would probably call their best win 6-4 unranked Iowa .. but is probably Pitt who I bet would kill Iowa today .. and should I remind people that these guys got TOTALLY smoked by the team we manhandled .. Michigan

Wisconsin

The other team team providing so called quality wins? ..... they're 6-4 ... their best win? ... Western Kentucky? .. New Mexico? ... 2-8 Nebraska? ... 4-6 Illinois? ..... apparently they couldn't pad their schedule enough (as they ALWAYS do) when they lost to 5-5 BYU at home ... best win? .. probably 6-4 unranked Iowa ... Iowa must be a quality win then?

Iowa

Maybe the biggest joke of a schedule even though Wisconsin is a close 2nd .... nonconference schedule is Northern Illinois, Iowa St., and Northern Iowa .. quality win there? ... sheesh .... best win? ... probably 5-5 Maryland .... 5-5 Indiana? .... 5-5 Minnesota? .. I digress .... they don't even play UM or Ohio St. ... we'd be in the college playoff AT LEAST every other year with this cupcake schedule

Northwestern

Are these guys supplying quality wins? .... they did beat Wisconsin, Iowa, and MSU (frauds yes).. and gave UM all they could handle ... but the losses .... they lost to 4-5 Akron at home .... and Duke at home .... they're 6-4 ... their best win? .... take your pick of the frauds

Michigan St.

Has anyone seen this team? ... defense is decent ..... but offense is god awful ... fans were screaming for backup Lombardi to play and if you saw Ohio St game Lombardi almost single handedly gave it away .. Lewerke back in .... best win? ... Penn St.! ... thank god for Penn St! ..... actually I'd say Utah St is probably better ... no joke! .... they did lose to 6-4 Arizona St ... meh ... if you saw them play UM (who we manhandled) and Ohio St ... they were never in it .. not even close

Who is left

3-7 Nebraska? .... 5-5 Maryland? .... 5-5 Indiana? ..... 1-9 Rutgers? .... 5-5 Purdue? .... 4-6 Illinois? ... 5-5 Minnesota?

The Big 10 has a formula for keeping themselves relevant .... horrific nonconference schedules and patsy members ..... the media and CFP voters (it's all related) want us to believe this conference is good simply due to reputation .... the reputation is a fraud if you ask me.

At this point if we lose it will be to a 12th ranked Syracuse on the road or USC on the road. I'd put USC with their top 10 recruiting classes every year against any Big 10 team sans UM or maybe Ohio St.

Are we supposed to drop if UM beats OSU ... or if Ohio St. or UM wins a conference championship game against Northwestern who with their resume won the Big 10 West ... Seriously???.... after manhandling UM ..... pundits are making this argument .... and it's a humungous joke

Even if we lose one we should still be in ahead of every Big 10 team regardless of how their season plays ... we manhandled their golden child right now ..... and OSU's loss is worse than any left on our schedule ..... where are their quality wins? ...... but like I always said ... it will never happen ..... until ND joins a conference we're screwed ... it's about $$$ and the CFP voters are all conference affiliated ..... their rationalizations for dropping us is total BS

 

[SiberianKnightmare]

All true.

 

[tbonesays]

I just noticed Utah State on the rise and had forgotten Sparty beat them. That may prove to be the best OOC win in the P5 (but behind our discretionary scheduled win against Michigan).

 

[d1042]

No B10 team will jump over an undefeated ND. No No No. Stop giving it serious thought.

 

[wolve1972]

No B10 team will jump over an undefeated ND. No No No. Stop giving it serious thought.

Nope won't happen. How about if we just beat your a$$ in the playoffs.

 

[irish4life888]

Nope won't happen. How about if we just beat your a$$ in the playoffs.

Love the hypothitcals lol. ND already whipped meat chickens once with our backup qb and backup rb. Careful what you wish for we'll beat you much worse the second time chump.

 

[A2IrishFan]

What’s the argument for Michigan jumpin a one loss ND? Did I fall and hit my head? Didn’t we beat the pants off them earlier this year? Big 10 is working the media because they don’t want to miss on a huge payout for the conference. It’s the Big 10 media machine blowing smoke up everyone’s butt. I’m sure some of these college football puppets are on the payroll.

 

[8th Man]

What’s the argument for Michigan jumpin a one loss ND? Did I fall and hit my head? Didn’t we beat the pants off them earlier this year? Big 10 is working the media because they don’t want to miss on a huge payout for the conference. It’s the Big 10 media machine blowing smoke up everyone’s butt. I’m sure some of these college football puppets are on the payroll.

Well, they would have a better record and a conference championship, which the committee has said is important. Also all the computers seem to think they are the better team. Head to head breaks a tie (ND and Michigan were tied going into the first game of the year); but when the winner goes on to lose a game, that head to head tie breaker no longer is enough, and the two teams are back to square one.

 

[Buguit]

Well, they would have a better record and a conference championship, which the committee has said is important. Also all the computers seem to think they are the better team. Head to head breaks a tie (ND and Michigan were tied going into the first game of the year); but when the winner goes on to lose a game, that head to head tie breaker no longer is enough, and the two teams are back to square one.

The thing that cracks me up is that there is even a computer that tries to evaluate teams ... what criteria do they use? .... are there quantifiable variables that can be established to decided which teams who haven't played each other are better? ...... sooo many variables to consider ... I consider that whoever determines the variables to try and establish the reliability of the results could be biased ..... what is more important ? .... ND is 7th in power rankings? ... the computer says so? .... I question that computer ... the computer couldn't "possibly" be wrong could it ..... an old saying comes to mind ... a computer will give you exactly what you put into it ... if you put crap in ... you get crap out

 

[88ND]

The Big 10 is a fraud ... there is not one signature win within the entire conference .... how they keep some of these teams even ranked is simply done by voter bias

Start with:

Michigan

Who have they beaten? .... Nobody .... Right now there best win is 7-3 Penn St ... who got beat at home by zero offense MSU .... Wisconsin? ... they're 6-4 and FINALLY unranked .... and MSU is a dumpster fire with their offense

Ohio St.

Who have they beaten? .... 2-8 Oregon State ..... 4-6 TCU ... they got SMOKED by 5-5 Purdue who got beat by Eastern Michigan at home AND Missouri AND Minnesota.... they squeaked by 3-7 Nebraska the following week after losing most of the game and into the 4th qtr .... their best win? ... a squeaker against Penn St. ... what would the Big 10 do without them to provide what the CFP voters consider a quality win?

Penn St

Fine ... Penn St. is such a quality win? ... who have they beaten? ... most would probably call their best win 6-4 unranked Iowa .. but is probably Pitt who I bet would kill Iowa today .. and should I remind people that these guys got TOTALLY smoked by the team we manhandled .. Michigan

Wisconsin

The other team team providing so called quality wins? ..... they're 6-4 ... their best win? ... Western Kentucky? .. New Mexico? ... 2-8 Nebraska? ... 4-6 Illinois? ..... apparently they couldn't pad their schedule enough (as they ALWAYS do) when they lost to 5-5 BYU at home ... best win? .. probably 6-4 unranked Iowa ... Iowa must be a quality win then?

Iowa

Maybe the biggest joke of a schedule even though Wisconsin is a close 2nd .... nonconference schedule is Northern Illinois, Iowa St., and Northern Iowa .. quality win there? ... sheesh .... best win? ... probably 5-5 Maryland .... 5-5 Indiana? .... 5-5 Minnesota? .. I digress .... they don't even play UM or Ohio St. ... we'd be in the college playoff AT LEAST every other year with this cupcake schedule

Northwestern

Are these guys supplying quality wins? .... they did beat Wisconsin, Iowa, and MSU (frauds yes).. and gave UM all they could handle ... but the losses .... they lost to 4-5 Akron at home .... and Duke at home .... they're 6-4 ... their best win? .... take your pick of the frauds

Michigan St.

Has anyone seen this team? ... defense is decent ..... but offense is god awful ... fans were screaming for backup Lombardi to play and if you saw Ohio St game Lombardi almost single handedly gave it away .. Lewerke back in .... best win? ... Penn St.! ... thank god for Penn St! ..... actually I'd say Utah St is probably better ... no joke! .... they did lose to 6-4 Arizona St ... meh ... if you saw them play UM (who we manhandled) and Ohio St ... they were never in it .. not even close

Who is left

3-7 Nebraska? .... 5-5 Maryland? .... 5-5 Indiana? ..... 1-9 Rutgers? .... 5-5 Purdue? .... 4-6 Illinois? ... 5-5 Minnesota?

The Big 10 has a formula for keeping themselves relevant .... horrific nonconference schedules and patsy members ..... the media and CFP voters (it's all related) want us to believe this conference is good simply due to reputation .... the reputation is a fraud if you ask me.

At this point if we lose it will be to a 12th ranked Syracuse on the road or USC on the road. I'd put USC with their top 10 recruiting classes every year against any Big 10 team sans UM or maybe Ohio St.

Are we supposed to drop if UM beats OSU ... or if Ohio St. or UM wins a conference championship game against Northwestern who with their resume won the Big 10 West ... Seriously???.... after manhandling UM ..... pundits are making this argument .... and it's a humungous joke

Even if we lose one we should still be in ahead of every Big 10 team regardless of how their season plays ... we manhandled their golden child right now ..... and OSU's loss is worse than any left on our schedule ..... where are their quality wins? ...... but like I always said ... it will never happen ..... until ND joins a conference we're screwed ... it's about $$$ and the CFP voters are all conference affiliated ..... their rationalizations for dropping us is total BS

The SEC is just as overrated.
The SEC is top heavy and the trendy crowd thinks all others just play intramural football

 

[francade]

When was head to head “no longer enough” when the two teams have 1 loss. (other than ‘93)? It may have happened in the past at some point, but it certainly is the far outlier. This is just an effort to squeeze ND, nothing more.

 

[ivan brunetti]

When was head to head “no longer enough” when the two teams have 1 loss. (other than ‘93)? It may have happened in the past at some point, but it certainly is the far outlier. This is just an effort to squeeze ND, nothing more.

You see it happen in the polls all the time. A defeats B, and then 2 months later when they have the same record, B is ahead of A in the polls.

 

[hfhmilkman]

The thing that cracks me up is that there is even a computer that tries to evaluate teams ... what criteria do they use? .... are there quantifiable variables that can be established to decided which teams who haven't played each other are better? ...... sooo many variables to consider ... I consider that whoever determines the variables to try and establish the reliability of the results could be biased ..... what is more important ? .... ND is 7th in power rankings? ... the computer says so? .... I question that computer ... the computer couldn't "possibly" be wrong could it ..... an old saying comes to mind ... a computer will give you exactly what you put into it ... if you put crap in ... you get crap out

You may agree or disagree with the algorithm. But it certainly is not biased towards any one team. It may be biased towards what the coders thought was more important.

What I think is more interesting is pretty much all of the models reflect UM as a stronger team. Since the loss UM has handled their opponents more impressively and the models believe UM's opponents are more difficult.

That all said its pretty clear that record is the most important criteria. A team that wins all of their games and plays a legit schedule should be in. It is the body of work not who is playing the best at the end of the year.

 

[NDEwing18]

The Big 10 is a fraud ... there is not one signature win within the entire conference .... how they keep some of these teams even ranked is simply done by voter bias

Start with:

Michigan

Who have they beaten? .... Nobody .... Right now there best win is 7-3 Penn St ... who got beat at home by zero offense MSU .... Wisconsin? ... they're 6-4 and FINALLY unranked .... and MSU is a dumpster fire with their offense

Ohio St.

Who have they beaten? .... 2-8 Oregon State ..... 4-6 TCU ... they got SMOKED by 5-5 Purdue who got beat by Eastern Michigan at home AND Missouri AND Minnesota.... they squeaked by 3-7 Nebraska the following week after losing most of the game and into the 4th qtr .... their best win? ... a squeaker against Penn St. ... what would the Big 10 do without them to provide what the CFP voters consider a quality win?

Penn St

Fine ... Penn St. is such a quality win? ... who have they beaten? ... most would probably call their best win 6-4 unranked Iowa .. but is probably Pitt who I bet would kill Iowa today .. and should I remind people that these guys got TOTALLY smoked by the team we manhandled .. Michigan

Wisconsin

The other team team providing so called quality wins? ..... they're 6-4 ... their best win? ... Western Kentucky? .. New Mexico? ... 2-8 Nebraska? ... 4-6 Illinois? ..... apparently they couldn't pad their schedule enough (as they ALWAYS do) when they lost to 5-5 BYU at home ... best win? .. probably 6-4 unranked Iowa ... Iowa must be a quality win then?

Iowa

Maybe the biggest joke of a schedule even though Wisconsin is a close 2nd .... nonconference schedule is Northern Illinois, Iowa St., and Northern Iowa .. quality win there? ... sheesh .... best win? ... probably 5-5 Maryland .... 5-5 Indiana? .... 5-5 Minnesota? .. I digress .... they don't even play UM or Ohio St. ... we'd be in the college playoff AT LEAST every other year with this cupcake schedule

Northwestern

Are these guys supplying quality wins? .... they did beat Wisconsin, Iowa, and MSU (frauds yes).. and gave UM all they could handle ... but the losses .... they lost to 4-5 Akron at home .... and Duke at home .... they're 6-4 ... their best win? .... take your pick of the frauds

Michigan St.

Has anyone seen this team? ... defense is decent ..... but offense is god awful ... fans were screaming for backup Lombardi to play and if you saw Ohio St game Lombardi almost single handedly gave it away .. Lewerke back in .... best win? ... Penn St.! ... thank god for Penn St! ..... actually I'd say Utah St is probably better ... no joke! .... they did lose to 6-4 Arizona St ... meh ... if you saw them play UM (who we manhandled) and Ohio St ... they were never in it .. not even close

Who is left

3-7 Nebraska? .... 5-5 Maryland? .... 5-5 Indiana? ..... 1-9 Rutgers? .... 5-5 Purdue? .... 4-6 Illinois? ... 5-5 Minnesota?

The Big 10 has a formula for keeping themselves relevant .... horrific nonconference schedules and patsy members ..... the media and CFP voters (it's all related) want us to believe this conference is good simply due to reputation .... the reputation is a fraud if you ask me.

At this point if we lose it will be to a 12th ranked Syracuse on the road or USC on the road. I'd put USC with their top 10 recruiting classes every year against any Big 10 team sans UM or maybe Ohio St.

Are we supposed to drop if UM beats OSU ... or if Ohio St. or UM wins a conference championship game against Northwestern who with their resume won the Big 10 West ... Seriously???.... after manhandling UM ..... pundits are making this argument .... and it's a humungous joke

Even if we lose one we should still be in ahead of every Big 10 team regardless of how their season plays ... we manhandled their golden child right now ..... and OSU's loss is worse than any left on our schedule ..... where are their quality wins? ...... but like I always said ... it will never happen ..... until ND joins a conference we're screwed ... it's about $$$ and the CFP voters are all conference affiliated ..... their rationalizations for dropping us is total BS

Before we declare their entire conference a fraud, may I ask which conference our "signature win" opponent belongs to?

 

[Buguit]

You may agree or disagree with the algorithm. But it certainly is not biased towards any one team. It may be biased towards what the coders thought was more important.

What I think is more interesting is pretty much all of the models reflect UM as a stronger team. Since the loss UM has handled their opponents more impressively and the models believe UM's opponents are more difficult.

That all said its pretty clear that record is the most important criteria. A team that wins all of their games and plays a legit schedule should be in. It is the body of work not who is playing the best at the end of the year.

Your point explains my point .... any algorithm that says UM is better after we beat them and did so decisively ... is garbage ... how can UM be better? ... we played them .. which is more telling? .... the results of actually playing for real? .... or a computer based result? ... Should this question even have to be asked?

 

[Buguit]

Before we declare their entire conference a fraud, may I ask which conference our "signature win" opponent belongs to?

UM is our signature win ..... in UM's case we shouldn't have to be comparing that particular team's schedule to ours because we played them for real .... yet people want to contend their schedule is tougher and I point out it's not .... certainly ND's schedule looked much tougher when it was made 5 or so years ago .... and yet some of the bigger teams are having down years this year (FSU, Stanford, USC) .... it happens .... people can say what they want about our schedule but it isn't easier than ANY Big 10 team's schedule ... which college football pundits keep comparing and saying their schedules are tougher .... it's bogus

 

[hfhmilkman]

Your point explains my point .... any algorithm that says UM is better after we beat them and did so decisively ... is garbage ... how can UM be better? ... we played them .. which is more telling? .... the results of actually playing for real? .... or a computer based result? ... Should this question even have to be asked?

The point is all of the algorithms state this. All agencies that attempt to build a statistical rating are in general agreement. Your problem is you depend on a single data point. Are the Detroit Lions better than NE because they beat NE early in the season? If Detroit and NE were to meet again would you put your money on the Lions? How about the Lions and Packers? After all the Lions beat them. Surely they are the better team. NOT!

A thousand unique variables go into a single game. Just because a result occurred does not mean it is deterministic especially if it occurred earlier. It has meaning for judging who is more worthy. If the stats and the eyeball test say that the 2nd place team is better we can still say that even if the 1st place team moves on.

If ND goes undefeated and UM beats OSU by 70, ND gets a spot ahead of UM. That is the rules. You have a right to troll and state "we have beaten them already" But if I am a sports better and I see the statistics and the eyeball test of both teams with no fan bias, I am putting my money on UM in a neutral setting.

On a tactical level UM does great verse ND's strength. Wimbush worked out better because he was good at throwing 50/50 balls. I have been saying this all year, the strength of the defense is the secondary. UM's nickel has better ratings than most teams best cover guy. Of course I might get mud on my face if Haskins lights them up. But than a moot point as that would be the 2nd loss. But not a bad season.

 

[Telx1]

The Big 10 is a fraud ... there is not one signature win within the entire conference .... how they keep some of these teams even ranked is simply done by voter bias

Start with:

Michigan

Who have they beaten? .... Nobody .... Right now there best win is 7-3 Penn St ... who got beat at home by zero offense MSU .... Wisconsin? ... they're 6-4 and FINALLY unranked .... and MSU is a dumpster fire with their offense

Ohio St.

Who have they beaten? .... 2-8 Oregon State ..... 4-6 TCU ... they got SMOKED by 5-5 Purdue who got beat by Eastern Michigan at home AND Missouri AND Minnesota.... they squeaked by 3-7 Nebraska the following week after losing most of the game and into the 4th qtr .... their best win? ... a squeaker against Penn St. ... what would the Big 10 do without them to provide what the CFP voters consider a quality win?

Penn St

Fine ... Penn St. is such a quality win? ... who have they beaten? ... most would probably call their best win 6-4 unranked Iowa .. but is probably Pitt who I bet would kill Iowa today .. and should I remind people that these guys got TOTALLY smoked by the team we manhandled .. Michigan

Wisconsin

The other team team providing so called quality wins? ..... they're 6-4 ... their best win? ... Western Kentucky? .. New Mexico? ... 2-8 Nebraska? ... 4-6 Illinois? ..... apparently they couldn't pad their schedule enough (as they ALWAYS do) when they lost to 5-5 BYU at home ... best win? .. probably 6-4 unranked Iowa ... Iowa must be a quality win then?

Iowa

Maybe the biggest joke of a schedule even though Wisconsin is a close 2nd .... nonconference schedule is Northern Illinois, Iowa St., and Northern Iowa .. quality win there? ... sheesh .... best win? ... probably 5-5 Maryland .... 5-5 Indiana? .... 5-5 Minnesota? .. I digress .... they don't even play UM or Ohio St. ... we'd be in the college playoff AT LEAST every other year with this cupcake schedule

Northwestern

Are these guys supplying quality wins? .... they did beat Wisconsin, Iowa, and MSU (frauds yes).. and gave UM all they could handle ... but the losses .... they lost to 4-5 Akron at home .... and Duke at home .... they're 6-4 ... their best win? .... take your pick of the frauds

Michigan St.

Has anyone seen this team? ... defense is decent ..... but offense is god awful ... fans were screaming for backup Lombardi to play and if you saw Ohio St game Lombardi almost single handedly gave it away .. Lewerke back in .... best win? ... Penn St.! ... thank god for Penn St! ..... actually I'd say Utah St is probably better ... no joke! .... they did lose to 6-4 Arizona St ... meh ... if you saw them play UM (who we manhandled) and Ohio St ... they were never in it .. not even close

Who is left

3-7 Nebraska? .... 5-5 Maryland? .... 5-5 Indiana? ..... 1-9 Rutgers? .... 5-5 Purdue? .... 4-6 Illinois? ... 5-5 Minnesota?

The Big 10 has a formula for keeping themselves relevant .... horrific nonconference schedules and patsy members ..... the media and CFP voters (it's all related) want us to believe this conference is good simply due to reputation .... the reputation is a fraud if you ask me.

At this point if we lose it will be to a 12th ranked Syracuse on the road or USC on the road. I'd put USC with their top 10 recruiting classes every year against any Big 10 team sans UM or maybe Ohio St.

Are we supposed to drop if UM beats OSU ... or if Ohio St. or UM wins a conference championship game against Northwestern who with their resume won the Big 10 West ... Seriously???.... after manhandling UM ..... pundits are making this argument .... and it's a humungous joke

Even if we lose one we should still be in ahead of every Big 10 team regardless of how their season plays ... we manhandled their golden child right now ..... and OSU's loss is worse than any left on our schedule ..... where are their quality wins? ...... but like I always said ... it will never happen ..... until ND joins a conference we're screwed ... it's about $$$ and the CFP voters are all conference affiliated ..... their rationalizations for dropping us is total BS

Damn good post Buguit.

 

[francade]

“You see it happen in the polls all the time. A defeats B, and then 2 months later when they have the same record, B is ahead of A in the polls”

I’m not talking about middling teams, I’m talking about when teams have 1 loss or are undefeated and are battling for playoff positions. Middling teams can lose 4 or 5 in a row and still have the same record as a team they beat that has won 5 in a row. That dynamic doesn’t exist w/ 1 loss or undefeated teams.

 

[ivan brunetti]

“You see it happen in the polls all the time. A defeats B, and then 2 months later when they have the same record, B is ahead of A in the polls”

I’m not talking about middling teams, I’m talking about when teams have 1 loss or are undefeated and are battling for playoff positions. Middling teams can lose 4 or 5 in a row and still have the same record as a team they beat that has won 5 in a row. That dynamic doesn’t exist w/ 1 loss or undefeated teams.

Believe what you want; but if ND loses to either Syracuse or USC, they will likely drop out of the top four.

 

[francade]

“Believe what you want; but if ND loses to either Syracuse or USC, they will likely drop out of the top four.”

No shit. Whether it makes sense or not is another thing though.

 

[twalsh]

Believe what you want; but if ND loses to either Syracuse or USC, they will likely drop out of the top four.

If history is an indication, we will plummet down to 6 or 7, maybe even 8.

 

[ivan brunetti]

“Believe what you want; but if ND loses to either Syracuse or USC, they will likely drop out of the top four.”

No shit. Whether it makes sense or not is another thing though.

MOV matters to the committee. That is the same reason why a 12-1 Bama who loses to Georgia will get in over a 12-1 Michigan.

 

[irish4life888]

You see it happen in the polls all the time. A defeats B, and then 2 months later when they have the same record, B is ahead of A in the polls.

You do? I don't remember that especially when team A beats team B and have the same record and team B is ranked higher. You have examples I'm sure

 

[irish4life888]

If we lose this late in the season against the competition thats left we won't be in the playoffs and probably rightfully so.

 

[tbonesays]

Your point explains my point .... any algorithm that says UM is better after we beat them and did so decisively ... is garbage ... how can UM be better? ... we played them .. which is more telling? .... the results of actually playing for real? .... or a computer based result? ... Should this question even have to be asked?

The algorithm doesn't care about H2H. It only knows that Michigan, or FSU in 93, lost to a better team and therefore played a tougher schedule. Statistically teams with a tougher schedule are better than their peers that had easier roads. That's why even the computers have an SEC bias. Their schedules have 3 extra wins built into them hence the computer thinks their schedules are all strong.

 

[ivan brunetti]

You do? I don't remember that especially when team A beats team B and have the same record and team B is ranked higher. You have examples I'm sure

20th Kentucky (7-3) beat 15th Florida (7-3). Unranked Duke (7-3) beat 24th Northwestern (6-4)

Happens every year.

 

[Irishjohn68]

Nope won't happen. How about if we just beat your a$$ in the playoffs.

You couldn't beat us in game #1, no reason to think you would beat us in the playoffs. Remember while UM has gotten better over the season, so has the Irish! And we beat you with backups at QB and RB.

 

[Irishjohn68]

You may agree or disagree with the algorithm. But it certainly is not biased towards any one team. It may be biased towards what the coders thought was more important.

What I think is more interesting is pretty much all of the models reflect UM as a stronger team. Since the loss UM has handled their opponents more impressively and the models believe UM's opponents are more difficult.

That all said its pretty clear that record is the most important criteria. A team that wins all of their games and plays a legit schedule should be in. It is the body of work not who is playing the best at the end of the year.

When you play next to no one it's easy to "handle their opponents more impressively." UM plays a God awful Indiana team at home and will most likely win by 25 or more points. Is the impressive? IU sucks.

 

[SiberianKnightmare]

20th Kentucky (7-3) beat 15th Florida (7-3). Unranked Duke (7-3) beat 24th Northwestern (6-4)

Happens every year.

It does. It's fairly common I think, although I don't have specific example. I just remember seeing it every year and thinking, "How does this make any sense?"

 

[BGI User 1596]

When you play next to no one it's easy to "handle their opponents more impressively." UM plays a God awful Indiana team at home and will most likely win by 25 or more points. Is the impressive? IU sucks.

Appalachian State is better than most Big teams! Zero for Bo!

 

[ivan brunetti]

When you play next to no one it's easy to "handle their opponents more impressively." UM plays a God awful Indiana team at home and will most likely win by 25 or more points. Is the impressive? IU sucks.

Sagarin SOS:

Michigan 36th
ND 49th

 

[francade]

“20th Kentucky (7-3) beat 15th Florida (7-3). Unranked Duke (7-3) beat 24th Northwestern (6-4)

Happens every year.”

Ignore what I said about this all you want. When teams have only 1 loss or are undefeated, there is no movement in the polls as there is when middling teams w/ middling records are trending upwards & down. You have no examples other than the one I cited when it comes down to teams vying for the playoffs (or the major bowls or the BCS from the past). You’d be screaming bloody murder if the talking heads were trying to make a case for ND if Michigan had beaten us, was undefeated & ND squeaked by the only common opponent when Michigan won more convincingly, and you know it. So spare us the “it’s reasonable” & “happens all the time BS”, it doesn’t happen all the time. Almost never.

 

[Buguit]

The point is all of the algorithms state this. All agencies that attempt to build a statistical rating are in general agreement. Your problem is you depend on a single data point. Are the Detroit Lions better than NE because they beat NE early in the season? If Detroit and NE were to meet again would you put your money on the Lions? How about the Lions and Packers? After all the Lions beat them. Surely they are the better team. NOT!

A thousand unique variables go into a single game. Just because a result occurred does not mean it is deterministic especially if it occurred earlier. It has meaning for judging who is more worthy. If the stats and the eyeball test say that the 2nd place team is better we can still say that even if the 1st place team moves on.

If ND goes undefeated and UM beats OSU by 70, ND gets a spot ahead of UM. That is the rules. You have a right to troll and state "we have beaten them already" But if I am a sports better and I see the statistics and the eyeball test of both teams with no fan bias, I am putting my money on UM in a neutral setting.

On a tactical level UM does great verse ND's strength. Wimbush worked out better because he was good at throwing 50/50 balls. I have been saying this all year, the strength of the defense is the secondary. UM's nickel has better ratings than most teams best cover guy. Of course I might get mud on my face if Haskins lights them up. But than a moot point as that would be the 2nd loss. But not a bad season.

This whole reasoning excludes the value of playing each other .... which should trump everything and which I shouldn't have to explain .... UM also didn't handle Northwestern better than us .... I guess we shouldn't play the games and let the computers decide who wins and loses

 

[Buguit]

Believe what you want; but if ND loses to either Syracuse or USC, they will likely drop out of the top four.

Of course they will ... but it shouldn't be to a Big 10 team ..... although I know ND will ... it's garbage

 

[ivan brunetti]

“20th Kentucky (7-3) beat 15th Florida (7-3). Unranked Duke (7-3) beat 24th Northwestern (6-4)

Happens every year.”

Ignore what I said about this all you want. When teams have only 1 loss or are undefeated, there is no movement in the polls as there is when middling teams w/ middling records are trending upwards & down. You have no examples other than the one I cited when it comes down to teams vying for the playoffs (or the major bowls or the BCS from the past). You’d be screaming bloody murder if the talking heads were trying to make a case for ND if Michigan had beaten us, was undefeated & ND squeaked by the only common opponent when Michigan won more convincingly, and you know it. So spare us the “it’s reasonable” & “happens all the time BS”, it doesn’t happen all the time. Almost never.

It happens every year. If you don't want to acknowledge it, fine. The polls and the committee look at ALL the games; not just head to head and not just common opponents.

If you lose you will see it happen for yourself.

 

[tbonesays]

Sagarin SOS:

Michigan 36th
ND 49th

Yes we didn't get to play ourselves. That given, Michigan playd a pretty good schedule for this era, with 9 conf games and a power road game.

That given, Michigan made sure IU, MD, and Rutgers were perpetually part of the 9 games.

 

[francade]

“It happens every year. If you don't want to acknowledge it, fine. The polls and the committee look at ALL the games; not just head to head and not just common opponents.”

You can keep banging your thick head against the wall all you want. It doesn’t happen every year in the manner that I’m talking about but you keep saying that it does. It doesn’t, but if it makes you feel better to say so, knock yourself out, just know that it doesn’t happen all the time, almost never.

 

[ivan brunetti]

“It happens every year. If you don't want to acknowledge it, fine. The polls and the committee look at ALL the games; not just head to head and not just common opponents.”

You can keep banging your thick head against the wall all you want. It doesn’t happen every year in the manner that I’m talking about but you keep saying that it does. It doesn’t, but if it makes you feel better to say so, knock yourself out, just know that it doesn’t happen all the time, almost never.

Sure it does. All the time. I was able to pull two instances in this week's polls in about five minutes. There are probably more examples if you dig.

 

[ivan brunetti]

Yes we didn't get to play ourselves. That given, Michigan playd a pretty good schedule for this era, with 9 conf games and a power road game.

That given, Michigan made sure IU, MD, and Rutgers were perpetually part of the 9 games.

Michigan and ND are so close that you "not getting to play yourself" barely registers.

And conferences always have middling and bad teams. Look at the other sports where ND is a member of a conference.