|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
JZer
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Location: South Korea
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:49 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Thundarr wrote:
| Quote: |
| The premise is that the better team beat Vanderbilt by a larger margin. You have yet to show by anything other than opinion that this premise is a valid way to compare the strength of two teams. I, however, have shown that it is not valid. At all. Ever. Florida scraped by Vandy. Florida scraped by Tennessee. If the Vandy barometer is valid, Tennessee will either scrape by Vandy or lose. Are you following? However, Tennessee blew Vandy out of the water. If we were comparing Tennessee and Florida on the basis of nothing other than the Vanderbilt game (like you want to do with Florida and Michigan) we would conclude that Tennessee is the better team (much how you conclude that Michigan is better than UF.) |
Thundarr, flakfizer is not so crazy for using the Vanderbilt game to gage what team is better. It appears that someone on ESPN.com agrees with him.
Gene Wojciechowski wrote:
| Quote: |
Ask the coaches at Vanderbilt (the Commodores played both Michigan and Florida this season) who is the better team, and the consensus pick -- privately, of course -- is the Wolverines. Florida has more speed and a handful of players to die for, they say, but Michigan is more physical, would control both sides of the line of scrimmage, has wonderful wide receivers, and is led by a quarterback who doesn't make many mistakes.
Ask them who would give Ohio State the better game, and you'll get the same answer. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apparently this just hasn't sunk in yet.
| Thunndarr wrote: |
You have yet to show by anything other than opinion that this premise is a valid way to compare the strength of two teams.
|
Everyone's entitled to their opinion. I've used facts. Say it with me now. FACTS.
And, who do you think Vanderbilt would say is the best team they've played this year? Maybe, um, the team that beat them by 29? (Hint: It's not Florida or Michigan.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JZer
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| didn't lose it's final game. |
Not losing you last game cannot be used to prove that one team is better than the other.
| Quote: |
| Everyone's entitled to their opinion. I've used facts. Say it with me now. FACTS. |
If you think you have used some indisputable facts, you must be a tool. There are some arguements to be made that the Big Ten is better. They do have more top 25 wins than the SEC against non-conference teams.
Not to mention that the Big Ten has three of the top six teams in the AP Poll. There is about no way to really prove that one confence is better until January. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thunndarr wrote: |
Edit: You've got some serious blinders on if you can read that article and claim that Michigan was the second best team in the country. If anything, that article is way more pro-Florida than Michigan.
"Heck, I'm a Gator," he said. "I went there. So I had a lot of reason to vote for them right there. It just appeared they're 12-1, the other team is 11-1, I guess that's about it."
"Did I want to see a rematch? No," he said. "But my job was to vote for the top 25 teams, not who should play who, and after watching as much college football as anybody, I believed Michigan was the second-best team." |
No, the article is not pro-Florida. The article explains why several voters became pro-Florida at the 11th hour. The article isn't pro-Michigan either, per se. It just point out that people voted UF number 2 for different reasons-many of which have nothing to do with which team is actually the 2nd best team. Look at the two quotes above. One guy votes UF because "he's a gator" the other guy votes UM because, even though he doesn't want a rematch, he votes UM 2nd because they are indeed the 2nd best team. It is truly amazing that so many people have a hard time seeing this logically. "Rankings" exist for teams to be ranked according to how good people believe they are. This year was different. People looked at what the effects of the rankings would be, and adjusted their ranking accordingly. Anyone who says, "Don't want no rematch" as a reason to put UF second, is taking the term and ideal of "rank" and flushing it down the toilet. There is only one reason to rank UF higher than UM and that is you truly believe they are better. I'm sure there are several voters who felt that way and UF higher than UM before USC lost to UCLA and I don't have a problem with them (though I disagree with them). However, more voters had UM higher at that time. It was not UF's pedestrian win over Ark. that changed voters' minds, it was USC's loss to UCLA that changed everything. WHen faced with the reality that a rematch was on its way, the voters responded by ranking teams not according to their level, but according to whom they wished to see in the title game.
Here are some quotes you used from that article to prove it is "pro-Florida"
| Quote: |
| "If there's a viable alternative, I stay away from a rematch and I think Florida gives them a viable alternative." |
| Quote: |
| "I had to reconcile a fundamental problem with giving Michigan a chance to win the national championship when it didn't even win a conference championship," he said. |
The first guy wants to stay away from a rematch. He's not supposed to care about that. He's supposed to rank the teams according to who is better. He's not looking at who is better, he's looking at the title game matchup and deciding how to vote according to which matchup he prefers.
The second guy is also looking at the title game. He doesn't want to give UM a chance to win the title because it didn't win its conference. That is not his job. His job is not to think backwards from the title game, but to rank teams according to level and let the title game take care of itself. If he doesn't like the idea of a non-conference winner in the title game, perhaps he can lobby for some sort of clause in the BCS rules next year. But it is not his job to rank teams according to which teams won conferences or according to which team has already played OSU or according to which team wears his favorite colors. He and all the voters are supposed to rank teams according to level without any regard for what matchup that will bring about.
They didn't, they admit it, and it seems that they and many sports fans don't see a problem with that. I do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JZer wrote: |
| Quote: |
| didn't lose it's final game. |
Not losing you last game cannot be used to prove that one team is better than the other.
| Quote: |
| Everyone's entitled to their opinion. I've used facts. Say it with me now. FACTS. |
If you think you have used some indisputable facts, you must be a tool. There are some arguements to be made that the Big Ten is better. They do have more top 25 wins than the SEC against non-conference teams.
Not to mention that the Big Ten has three of the top six teams in the AP Poll. There is about no way to really prove that one confence is better until January. |
Dude, I was specifically answering your last post about the Vanderbilt guys. If you can't understand that, you must be a tool. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flakfizer wrote: |
| Blah blah blah |
Yes, when you take the quotes out of context, as you've done, you can certainly spin things that way. However, I didn't do that. ONE guy in that column says he thinks Michigan is better. More than one guy says Florida is better. Advantage: Florida. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JZer
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Yes, when you take the quotes out of context, as you've done, you can certainly spin things that way. However, I didn't do that. ONE guy in that column says he thinks Michigan is better. More than one guy says Florida is better. Advantage: Florida. |
You are taking flakfizer out of context. He is not trying to show Michigan is better because of any quote. He is just saying that people are on record to having voted for Flordia not because they are the second best team but because they don't want to see a rematch. I think flakfizer would have no quams about Flordia being second even if he did not agree, as long as everyone was voting Flordia second because they thought they were the second best team. I think flakfizer would have no problems if the vote were between USC and Flordia (in this senario Michigan would be a 2 loss team), even if he did not agree with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flakfizer wrote: |
What I notice is that none of those reasons equals "UF is the second best team." Those reasons are all equal to "I really want to put UF in the number 2 position on my ballot." The only guy in there who actually claimed to believe UF was better than UM, was the guy who put them first, even ahead of OSU.  The rest are just rationalizing why they put a team in the number 2 spot despite not actually believing them to be the 2nd best team in the nation. They don't even pretend. They're not even saying boldly, "I put UF number 2 because I think they are the 2nd best team in the country-simple as that." |
See the blue. Then see the following:
| Quote: |
Tom Luicci, a Harris voter who bumped Florida up to second, said he made his assessment based on Florida's body of work -- not one game.
"Michigan has quality wins over Wisconsin, which played no one, and Notre Dame, which won the Commander's-in-Chief trophy (a reference to wins over the service academies) which I don't consider a major coup."
As for Florida, Luicci noted its weak nonconference schedule "but that doesn't matter when you play every good team in the SEC and have quality road wins, too."
Florida played 10 bowl teams and beat nine, including road wins against Tennessee and Florida State, neutral site wins against Georgia and Arkansas and home victories against LSU and Alabama. The Gators lone loss? At Auburn, 27-17. |
That guy clearly thinks Florida is better.
| Quote: |
It was such a big deal for Jim Walden, a former Washington State head coach, that he picked Florida No. 1 in the Harris poll, calling Florida's schedule "murderous."
"In my heart of hearts, I believe that neither Ohio State or Michigan could get through Florida's schedule with only one loss." |
That guy clearly thinks Florida is better.
| Quote: |
AP voter Jon Wilner of the San Jose Mercury News said a rematch was appealing, but Florida deserves a title shot based on strength of schedule.
"Beating Arkansas, a 10-win team on a neutral field in December gave Florida that extra push," said Wilner. |
This guy thinks Florida had a harder schedule. (Note, he says nothing about avoiding a rematch.)
| Quote: |
South Carolina's Steve Spurrier, who coached the Gators to the '96 national championship, moved Florida past Michigan in the coaches' poll.
His reasoning?
"Heck, I'm a Gator," he said. "I went there. So I had a lot of reason to vote for them right there. It just appeared they're 12-1, the other team is 11-1, I guess that's about it." |
He thinks Florida is better. And he's admittedly biased. So what? I would bet you my life savings that he's not the only coach who was biased one way or other in that poll.
| Quote: |
"Michigan had its shot," said Harris voter Joe Biddle of The Tennessean. "If you replayed that game it would be nothing more than a Big Ten championship -- and I don't think you get mulligans in college football.
"If there's a viable alternative, I stay away from a rematch and I think Florida gives them a viable alternative." |
THIS guy mentions a rematch. However, does he actually say he thinks Michigan is better?
| Quote: |
| "Did I want to see a rematch? No," he said. "But my job was to vote for the top 25 teams, not who should play who, and after watching as much college football as anybody, I believed Michigan was the second-best team." |
This is the ONE dude in the poll who said he thought Michigan was better.
Now, look way back up at the top. See that blue quote of Flakfizer's? Read the quotes. Look at the blue quote again. Read the quotes again. It should sink in sooner or later. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JZer wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Yes, when you take the quotes out of context, as you've done, you can certainly spin things that way. However, I didn't do that. ONE guy in that column says he thinks Michigan is better. More than one guy says Florida is better. Advantage: Florida. |
You are taking flakfizer out of context. He is not trying to show Michigan is better because of any quote. He is just saying that people are on record to having voted for Flordia not because they are the second best team but because they don't want to see a rematch. I think flakfizer would have no quams about Flordia being second even if he did not agree, as long as everyone was voting Flordia second because they thought they were the second best team. I think flakfizer would have no problems if the vote were between USC and Flordia (in this senario Michigan would be a 2 loss team), even if he did not agree with it. |
Don't be so reasonable. Reason is of no use here. Remember the old adage: "The brighter and more illuminating the burst of light, the louder and longer the thunder grumbles." As for me, what's done is done. UM got screwed but there's nothing to be done but for Buckeyes to start making celebration plans. Time to start a new thread about the bowls in general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flakfizer wrote: |
| JZer wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Yes, when you take the quotes out of context, as you've done, you can certainly spin things that way. However, I didn't do that. ONE guy in that column says he thinks Michigan is better. More than one guy says Florida is better. Advantage: Florida. |
You are taking flakfizer out of context. He is not trying to show Michigan is better because of any quote. He is just saying that people are on record to having voted for Flordia not because they are the second best team but because they don't want to see a rematch. I think flakfizer would have no quams about Flordia being second even if he did not agree, as long as everyone was voting Flordia second because they thought they were the second best team. I think flakfizer would have no problems if the vote were between USC and Flordia (in this senario Michigan would be a 2 loss team), even if he did not agree with it. |
Don't be so reasonable. Reason is of no use here. Remember the old adage: "The brighter and more illuminating the burst of light, the louder and longer the thunder grumbles." As for me, what's done is done. UM got screwed but there's nothing to be done but for Buckeyes to start making celebration plans. Time to start a new thread about the bowls in general. |
This, from the guy who came up with the Vanderbilt Tiebreaker? Forgive me if I take a moment to guffaw after hearing you espouse the virtues of reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JZer
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 1:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Thundarr wrote:
That guy clearly thinks Florida is better.
Quote:
It was such a big deal for Jim Walden, a former Washington State head coach, that he picked Florida No. 1 in the Harris poll, calling Florida's schedule "murderous."
"In my heart of hearts, I believe that neither Ohio State or Michigan could get through Florida's schedule with only one loss."
That guy clearly thinks Florida is better.
Quote:
AP voter Jon Wilner of the San Jose Mercury News said a rematch was appealing, but Florida deserves a title shot based on strength of schedule.
"Beating Arkansas, a 10-win team on a neutral field in December gave Florida that extra push," said Wilner.
This guy thinks Florida had a harder schedule. (Note, he says nothing about avoiding a rematch.)
Quote:
South Carolina's Steve Spurrier, who coached the Gators to the '96 national championship, moved Florida past Michigan in the coaches' poll.
His reasoning?
"Heck, I'm a Gator," he said. "I went there. So I had a lot of reason to vote for them right there. It just appeared they're 12-1, the other team is 11-1, I guess that's about it."
He thinks Florida is better. And he's admittedly biased. So what? I would bet you my life savings that he's not the only coach who was biased one way or other in that poll.
Quote:
"Michigan had its shot," said Harris voter Joe Biddle of The Tennessean. "If you replayed that game it would be nothing more than a Big Ten championship -- and I don't think you get mulligans in college football.
"If there's a viable alternative, I stay away from a rematch and I think Florida gives them a viable alternative."
THIS guy mentions a rematch. However, does he actually say he thinks Michigan is better?
Quote:
"Did I want to see a rematch? No," he said. "But my job was to vote for the top 25 teams, not who should play who, and after watching as much college football as anybody, I believed Michigan was the second-best team."
|
Thundarr, no one even said that there are not some people that think Flordia is better. What is your point? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 5:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| flakfizer wrote: |
What I notice is that none of those reasons equals "UF is the second best team." Those reasons are all equal to "I really want to put UF in the number 2 position on my ballot." The only guy in there who actually claimed to believe UF was better than UM, was the guy who put them first, even ahead of OSU. The rest are just rationalizing why they put a team in the number 2 spot despite not actually believing them to be the 2nd best team in the nation. They don't even pretend. They're not even saying boldly, "I put UF number 2 because I think they are the 2nd best team in the country-simple as that." |
| JZer wrote: |
| Thundarr, no one even said that there are not some people that think Florida is better. What is your point? |
| Flakfizer wrote: |
| What I notice is that none of those reasons equals "UF is the second best team." |
| Flakfizer wrote: |
| The rest are just rationalizing why they put a team in the number 2 spot despite not actually believing them to be the 2nd best team in the nation. |
Ok. Let's take this slowly.
Flakfizer linked an article.
Flakfizer made a claim that none of the coaches (except one) thought Florida was the second best team in the country (or, at least, better than Michigan.)
I then provided the quotes of every coach listed in the article, in context. (Incidentally, do you think I'm going out scouring the net trying to support my argument? I'm not. I'm using Flakfizer's article, the one he mistakenly thought supported his claim, and showing that it doesn't.)
The quotes show that the majority of the coaches mentioned DO in fact, think Florida is better.
This refutes Flakfizer's ridiculous claim that the coaches in the article don't think Florida is better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifter2009
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Location: wisconsin
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifter2009
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Location: wisconsin
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JZer
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| With two Big Ten wins today, we can finally see that the Big Ten is a superior conference to the SEC. PSU 20-10 over Tennessee and a Wisconsin win over Arkansas. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
