|
Post by bluehen on Oct 29, 2017 23:59:30 GMT
Maryland wasn’t a slouch when it scored 51 points in its win over Texas. Big Ten undefeateds Ohio State and Wisconsin are in the top-4 in each of the major polls. Each trounced Maryland, 62-14 and 38-13 respectively. But, undefeated UCF also trounced Maryland, 38-10. The question I posed, that no one has yet answered, is: “where would UCF stand in the AP and Coaches polls today if, rather than Florida State, it had been ranked #3 in each of the preseason polls? That question, FHF, beautifully demonstrates the un- American idiocy and criminality of this TV name brand driven, make believe, pretend, exclusive mythical championship system...aahhh, that felt good.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Oct 30, 2017 1:36:05 GMT
Probably, they were. Texas is NOT a good team. Our defense has improved, but... in that first game, we were totally lost. Plus, what injuries has NC State had since that game? No one has answered because it's a stupid question. You correctly pointed out that there was NO REASON to rank UCF at #3 before the season started. Where teams START isn't what matters... it's where they FINISH. Nonsense. Texas could very easily be 7-1, even 8-0. Its losses to Oklahoma, USC and Oklahoma State were by a combined total of 11 points. Maryland deserves credit for its 10-point win over Texas. It is the only game that Texas didn’t have an opportunity to win in the final minute. You are dead wrong. It does matter greatly where a team starts. UCF has had a long slow uphill climb from 0 votes. If the Knights had been ranked #3 preseason, that is where they would be today, if not higher. Show me where I supposedly pointed out that there was no reason to rank UCF #3 before the season started. I didn’t. You made that up out of thin air. I make no pretense of being an expert, but the voters in the AP and Coaches polls are supposed to have at least a modicum of expertise. Yet, not one in either poll gave UCF a single vote. And, most of these so-called “experts” gave FSU the undeserved benefit of the doubt. The point is, where a team starts in the polls establishes a ceiling on its final rankings. In 1999, most of the preseason college football annuals predicted Marshall to be a top-10 team by the end of the season. 1999 Marshall was the same team at the beginning of the season, yet started out unranked in both polls. It was a season long, arduous climb for Marshall to eventually reach its ceiling of #10. Face it, the polls are biased against talented teams from G5 conferences. Always have been and always will be. So, my question remains unanswered: “where would UCF be ranked today if it began the season at #3 in the major polls”? Probably right where they are now.
Despite winning, they would have continued to fall based on their schedule strength relative to other teams.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Oct 30, 2017 2:14:12 GMT
Probably right where they are now. Despite winning, they would have continued to fall based on their schedule strength relative to other teams. Exactly
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Oct 30, 2017 6:02:06 GMT
Probably right where they are now. Despite winning, they would have continued to fall based on their schedule strength relative to other teams. Exactly Nonsense. Highly ranked teams have never suffered in the polls after dominating wins over weak opponents.
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Oct 30, 2017 9:49:11 GMT
Nonsense. Texas could very easily be 7-1, even 8-0. Its losses to Oklahoma, USC and Oklahoma State were by a combined total of 11 points. Maryland deserves credit for its 10-point win over Texas. It is the only game that Texas didn’t have an opportunity to win in the final minute. You are dead wrong. It does matter greatly where a team starts. UCF has had a long slow uphill climb from 0 votes. If the Knights had been ranked #3 preseason, that is where they would be today, if not higher. Show me where I supposedly pointed out that there was no reason to rank UCF #3 before the season started. I didn’t. You made that up out of thin air. I make no pretense of being an expert, but the voters in the AP and Coaches polls are supposed to have at least a modicum of expertise. Yet, not one in either poll gave UCF a single vote. And, most of these so-called “experts” gave FSU the undeserved benefit of the doubt. The point is, where a team starts in the polls establishes a ceiling on its final rankings. In 1999, most of the preseason college football annuals predicted Marshall to be a top-10 team by the end of the season. 1999 Marshall was the same team at the beginning of the season, yet started out unranked in both polls. It was a season long, arduous climb for Marshall to eventually reach its ceiling of #10. Face it, the polls are biased against talented teams from G5 conferences. Always have been and always will be. So, my question remains unanswered: “where would UCF be ranked today if it began the season at #3 in the major polls”? Probably right where they are now.
Despite winning, they would have continued to fall based on their schedule strength relative to other teams.
Wow, a common sense answer based on logic. Herd will never stand for that.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Oct 30, 2017 10:51:02 GMT
Nonsense. Highly ranked teams have never suffered in the polls after dominating wins over weak opponents. Sure they have.
Just a couple of years ago, TCU beat the crap out of a weak WV and dropped from #3.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Oct 30, 2017 11:59:57 GMT
Nonsense. Highly ranked teams have never suffered in the polls after dominating wins over weak opponents. Sure they have.
Just a couple of years ago, TCU beat the crap out of a weak WV and dropped from #3.
In the history of college football, that is the best you can come up with? Show me an example of an undefeated team that had convincing wins over each and every opponent dropping from #3 to #15 over the course of any number of weeks.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Oct 30, 2017 12:13:50 GMT
Sure they have.
Just a couple of years ago, TCU beat the crap out of a weak WV and dropped from #3.
In the history of college football, that is the best you can come up with? Show me an example of an undefeated team that had convincing wins over each and every opponent dropping from #3 to #15 over the course of any number of weeks. Asked and answered.
You said definitively it *never* happened.
And now, you want to move the goalposts....
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Oct 30, 2017 12:46:13 GMT
I’m not the one contending that an undefeated team ranked #3 would drop 12 spots following a string of convincing wins over a mix of weak and not so weak teams.
|
|
|
Post by doc on Oct 30, 2017 13:07:52 GMT
Nonsense. Highly ranked teams have never suffered in the polls after dominating wins over weak opponents. Sure they have.
Just a couple of years ago, TCU beat the crap out of a weak WV and dropped from #3.
Actually they beat Iowas State 55-3 but dropped in the final rankings after Ohio State beat Wisconsin 59-0. At least my mentioning Iowa State keeps this thread on topic!
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Oct 30, 2017 13:33:56 GMT
Sure they have.
Just a couple of years ago, TCU beat the crap out of a weak WV and dropped from #3.
Actually they beat Iowas State 55-3 but dropped in the final rankings after Ohio State beat Wisconsin 59-0. At least my mentioning Iowa State keeps this thread on topic! It's not all that complicated: Winning keeps you where you are (USUALLY, not always) or moves you up. Losing moves you down... (Not very far if you're Ohio State or Notre Dame) Ending the season strong, having a good number of returnees and some decent recruits gets you ranked higher in the early polls next year. Then, the cycle starts all over again. At least, the CFP guys wait until a significant # of games are played BEFORE making ANY ranking. I don't know why they bother doing any rankings until the end. THAT is the ONLY one that matters. (Well, Actually I DO know why.... nothing but $$$)
|
|
|
Post by doc on Oct 30, 2017 13:46:57 GMT
OSU went from 2 to 9 after their loss to Oklahoma and actually dropped as far down as #11 at one point in the season. I'm wearing scarlet colored glasses but I think they typically get hammered in the polls after losing a game.
No worries - just win!
BTW., how did you like Finding Neverland?
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Oct 30, 2017 13:57:58 GMT
BTW., how did you like Finding Neverland? It was incredible. The music was great. Those people can freaking SING! But, they stage effects were just stunning. Must have been really good in NYC.
|
|
|
Post by doc on Oct 30, 2017 14:20:25 GMT
BTW., how did you like Finding Neverland? It was incredible. The music was great. Those people can freaking SING! But, they stage effects were just stunning. Must have been really good in NYC. It really was awesome in NYC. We got 4th row seats the day before we saw it and the ending was absolutely spectacular, as I'm sure you saw on Saturday. The only bummer was Kelsey Grammer was supposed to play the theater owner and since we saw it on a Saturday matinee, his understudy played the role. He was great but I kept thinking 'it would have been awesome to see Kelsey Grammer play the part! We're going to NYC the second week of March and hoping to see Dear Evan Hanson but right now the tickets are pretty pricey. We'll see if we can pull it off. Hamilton is coming to Cincinnati next year. We saw it in Chicago back in February and it is spectacular - you've gotta see it if it comes to town. We'll probably gret tickets for when it's here next season.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Oct 30, 2017 15:16:38 GMT
It was incredible. The music was great. Those people can freaking SING! But, they stage effects were just stunning. Must have been really good in NYC. It really was awesome in NYC. We got 4th row seats the day before we saw it and the ending was absolutely spectacular, as I'm sure you saw on Saturday. The only bummer was Kelsey Grammer was supposed to play the theater owner and since we saw it on a Saturday matinee, his understudy played the role. He was great but I kept thinking 'it would have been awesome to see Kelsey Grammer play the part! We're going to NYC the second week of March and hoping to see Dear Evan Hanson but right now the tickets are pretty pricey. We'll see if we can pull it off. Hamilton is coming to Cincinnati next year. We saw it in Chicago back in February and it is spectacular - you've gotta see it if it comes to town. We'll probably gret tickets for when it's here next season. Funny, John Davidson (old popular game show host) was supposed to play that role here. But, they had a sub for the Matinee. And, as with yours.. the sub was phenomenal! But, we were bummed not to see John. Chicago is coming here this season. I think in the spring. Also, Rent and How the Grinch stole Christmas. Something else, too... but, I don't remember. The tickets for this were pretty pricey. But, it's worth it to be able to spend a fun Saturday with MamaBevo.
|
|