North American SportsNFL, NBA, NHL, MLB, Golf. All the latest sports news, scores, rumors, fantasy games, and more.
Welcome to Wrestling Clique Wrestling Forums
Hello and Welcome to WrestlingClique - Wrestling Forums!
We are the premier wrestling forum and your source for wrestling news and rumors, wrestling divas, wrestling gifs, sports discussion, e-feds, writing and more. Wrestling fans participate in active discussion on all the major wrestling leagues and events including WWE, ECW & TNA pay per view events, live wrestling streams, wrestling video games, collectibles, and other wrestling related products and services.
You're currently viewing our site as an unregistered guest which means you are limited to most discussions and features.
Take a few minutes to browse around, and if you like what you see, Register a free account to gain access to :
• Richer content, access forums that are not viewable by the public.
• Complete access to post topics, respond to polls, communicate privately (PM), take part contests, arcade, photo sharing, networking, groups.
• Create your personal profile and bio
• Meet and Chat Live with other members who share similar interests
Registration is simple and fast. Won't take you more than a minute and of course it's completely free.
So Join our Community today!
Visit 21onlinecasinos.com for the most top rated online casinos and play the greatest casino games for real money or for free!
I think this deserved its own thread because its going to be fascinating to see how the pollsters view this..
Now.. pollsters generally seem to have a short memory, so I'm guessing they will vote in Oklahoma as the highest ranked team from the Big XII.
Problem is.. there are three one loss teams now in the conference so how could one conceivably vote in Texas over Texas Tech based on head-to-head or Oklahoma over Texas based on the same criteria??
If I had to choose, I would pick Texas.
For me, with nothing else to base my opinion on.. I would take the team who had the 'best' loss. Texas was on the road in Lubbock and lost to a Texas Tech team on the last play of the game. They defeated Oklahoma by 10 on a neutral field.
Texas Tech lost on the road to Oklahoma but it was not even competitive. Embarrassing would be the word.
So there you have it. I actually think Oklahoma is more talented than Texas but I would take Texas based on the 'best' loss idea.
Advertisement
Go Platinum, help support WrestlingClique and get rid of these ads!
I'm with you, I like the idea who has the best loss, but most pollsters don't think that way it seems and if you lose a game to a top team late in the season it matters much more than if you lose at the beginning because there is no time to redeem yourself.
OT: I'm not sure this deserves a separate thread from the college football one considering that this will be resolved by this time next week.
um, I actually agree with the "best loss" idea, just not the way you guys are implementing it. I consider the best loss to be the loss to the best team. As of right now, pretty much everyone would agree that Texas is a better than Tech, and that the toss-up for best team of the Big XII-South is between OU and UT....so...with that logic, Oklahoma lost to a better team than Texas lost to. It seems contradictory considering that Texas was that team, but looking pass the surface, it really isn't.
By that same logic, shouldn't Tech be ranked higher than Florida in the BCS? Tech's one loss was clearly to a better team than Florida's one loss. On the other hand, I think Florida is clearly the best team in the nation and would be an undisputed #1 right now had it not been for a missed extra point...
But I digress. This is college football afterall. It would be unrealistic for us to expect rankings to actually make sense. Like how the hell is USC in front of Utah in the BCS?
My top 10 (based on where they deserved to be ranked):
1. Alabama
2. Oklahoma
3. Utah
4. Florida
5. Texas
6. Penn State
7. Texas Tech
8. Boise State
9. USC
10. Oklahoma State
My Top 10 based purely on talent:
1. Florida
2. Texas
3. Oklahoma
4. USC
5. Alabama
6. Penn State
7. Georgia
8. Utah
9. Ohio State
10. Missouri
Of course, the real BCS top 10 will never look like either of these.
I have to disagree that Oklahoma's loss was better than Texas' loss.. Sure, we can throw out the fact that Texas is the one who beat them, but they did so on a neutral field and won the game by 10 points. I watched the game and yes, Oklahoma did play well in the first half especially.. but Texas lost on the road on the final play of the game to a team that is pretty decent even if they aren't in Texas's or OU's league.. talent wise.
It's a good debate imo. It's also the only debate. I don't think Utah has been impressive enough in some of their wins to garner real consideration. they are at a disadvantage schedule wise to begin with, it would take them to totally dismantle their opponents week after week for me to vote them any higher than #5.
I made the "best loss" argument a few years ago for Michigan when they were undefeated going into the OSU game.
My argument was that Michigan's only loss came to the undefeated #1 team in the country, whereas Florida's lone loss came to a 2-loss team.
However, considering the pollsters are stupid, there were three things working against Michigan:
1. The fact that they already played Ohio State. Even though it was only by 3 points on the road, people said "Well, they already had their shot at Ohio State and they lost". Stupid stupid stupid. So, by circumstance of the schedule, they happened to play the #1 team, so they forfeit their right to play for the national championship? bullshit
2. The fact that the Big Ten schedule ends earlier than the SEC schedule. After Michigan's loss to Ohio State, Florida had two more games to "impress" pollsters, whereas there was nothing Michigan could do. And that leads to...
3. The timing of their losses. In college football, it's better to lose early than to lose late. If pollsters need to choose between two 1-loss teams, they'll usually pick the team that lost earlier in the season, because the other team's loss is fresher in their minds. Stupid.
So, what does this have to do with the Big 12? Nothing really, except to show that the people who vote on the BCS (and wiill ultimately decide who wins this sub-conference) are fucking retarded.
On a different note, remember my 16-team playoff idea? (some of you newbies probably never saw it before...it's basically all 11 conference champions and 5 at-large bids, winners of BCS conferences automatically get top 6 seeds). This is how it would shake out....
#1 Alabama vs. #16 Troy
#2 Oklahoma vs. #15 Houston
#3 Penn State vs. #14 Ball State
#4 Cincinnati vs. #13 Ohio State
#5 Oregon State vs. #12 Boise State
#6 Georgia Tech vs. #11 Utah
#7 Florida vs. #10 Texas Tech
#8 Texas vs. #9 USC
It doesn't look as good as previous years, because there are so many mediocre BCS conference champions (Cincy, Ga. Tech, Oregon State). The three left out (according to current BCS standings) would be Oklahoma State, Missouri, and Georgia
Here'smy original post where I outlined my system:
I have to disagree that Oklahoma's loss was better than Texas' loss.. Sure, we can throw out the fact that Texas is the one who beat them, but they did so on a neutral field and won the game by 10 points. I watched the game and yes, Oklahoma did play well in the first half especially.. but Texas lost on the road on the final play of the game to a team that is pretty decent even if they aren't in Texas's or OU's league.. talent wise.
The thing is....voters don't analyze the games like that. Neutral field? Margin of victory? Playing well in the first half? Try having a conversation about any one of these factors with someone like Lee Corso. You'll be ready to shoot yourself less than 2 minutes into the convo. Voters don't take that stuff into consideration. They probably should, but they don't.
So with my "best loss" judgment, I was trying to simplify it to just looking at who the loss was to. Texas is clearly better than Texas Tech, therefore Oklahoma had the better loss. It really is a difference in what we consider the best loss to be, and what factors we use to determine it.
Oh, and I thought I'd throw the Texas/Texas Tech stats out there real quick:
Note the difference in total yards and possession. The game may have came down to the last play, but Texas lost this game long before the final play...
It's a good debate imo. It's also the only debate. I don't think Utah has been impressive enough in some of their wins to garner real consideration. they are at a disadvantage schedule wise to begin with, it would take them to totally dismantle their opponents week after week for me to vote them any higher than #5.
I'm just going to go ahead and say it: the Mountain West was the third best conference this season, and actually isn't that far behind the SEC in my book (and I know the game wasn't even close, but had TCU beaten Oklahoma, or had that game been close, Utah would be getting NC consideration right now). Utah played several very good teams. They've beaten 3 teams currently ranked in the BCS top 25, and are undefeated. NO OTHER TEAM CAN SAY THIS. Included in those 3 teams Utah beat is the only team that USC couldn't beat, Oregon State. That alone should ensure that at the least, Utah should be ranked higher than USC.
Originally Posted by Dr. Giganto
On a different note, remember my 16-team playoff idea? (some of you newbies probably never saw it before...it's basically all 11 conference champions and 5 at-large bids, winners of BCS conferences automatically get top 6 seeds). This is how it would shake out....
#1 Alabama vs. #16 Troy
#2 Oklahoma vs. #15 Houston
#3 Penn State vs. #14 Ball State
#4 Cincinnati vs. #13 Ohio State
#5 Oregon State vs. #12 Boise State
#6 Georgia Tech vs. #11 Utah
#7 Florida vs. #10 Texas Tech
#8 Texas vs. #9 USC
It doesn't look as good as previous years, because there are so many mediocre BCS conference champions (Cincy, Ga. Tech, Oregon State). The three left out (according to current BCS standings) would be Oklahoma State, Missouri, and Georgia
Here'smy original post where I outlined my system:
I wouldn't dream of placing USC ahead of Utah at this stage but I would certainly argue for Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, and Alabama ahead of them..
As for the Texas Tech and Texas game, the total yards and time of possession may be skewed from the first half of play which Texas Tech dominated but from the 3rd quarter on, I would wager that Texas was far better in both of those categories and besides that..seeing as I don't hav the raw numbers in front of me, it says something about the game as well that Texas was leading with mere seconds to play even after being owned in those categories..
I wouldn't dream of placing USC ahead of Utah at this stage but I would certainly argue for Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, and Alabama ahead of them..
...well I already explained why I give the considerations to Utah that I give them, and I've shown exactly where I would rank everyone. Would you care to actually make an argument in opposition? Or are you resting your case on, "I wouldn't dream of.....", followed by whatever it is I just said, with nothing to substantiate it?
As for the Texas Tech and Texas game, the total yards and time of possession may be skewed from the first half of play which Texas Tech dominated but from the 3rd quarter on, I would wager that Texas was far better in both of those categories
I hate to get nit-picky, but you're still wrong, and you're making statements regardless of whether they are supported by facts. Tech still had the ball more in the second half (by about 4 minutes), and while Texas did outgain Tech in the second half, where do you get this logic that the first half is insignificant? The stats I posted were obviously from the whole game. No matter how good Texas played in the second half, it obviously wasn't good enough because not only were the stats for the game still lopsided, they still lost the game as well.
and besides that..seeing as I don't hav the raw numbers in front of me, it says something about the game as well that Texas was leading with mere seconds to play even after being owned in those categories..
...what it says is that the score wasn't as close as the game really was.
*sigh*
Please don't tell you're one of those people who only look at the score of a game to determine what happened in the game. Sure, the score determines who wins and loses, but when you're trying to make an argument between a group of teams and you're trying to determine who deserves what, or who is the best, etc, you've got to look at more than just points. Texas Tech won this decisively. The score was close. The game was not.
We are the premier wrestling forum and your source for wrestling news and rumors, wrestling divas, wrestling gifs, sports discussion, e-feds, writing and more. Wrestling fans participate in active discussion on all the major wrestling leagues and events including WWE, ECW & TNA pay per view events, live wrestling streams, wrestling video games, collectibles, and other wrestling related products and services. read more...
View Awards
Black Theme ( Fluid Width )
White Theme ( Fluid Width )
</TD><TD>
</TD></TR><TR class=colhead align=right><TD class=bi align=left>1st Downs</TD><TD>18</TD><TD>31</TD></TR><TR class=evenrow align=right><TD align=left>3rd down efficiency 
Linear Mode
