congrats, florida!

[Guest]

Meph has completely disappeared since the end of the game...

 

After the mighty Gators were beaten by the 3rd best team in the lowly B10? Are you surprised?

 

For the record, Florida is the 3rd best team in the SEC. It's not like the best SEC team got beat by the Big 11 doormats.

 

right, the #3 SEC team got beat by the #3 Big 10 team, and we have been lead to believe that those are not in any way comparable

 

Minor nitpicking but Michigan was the #2 Big 10 team. After all, they did go on the road and beat Illinois.

[sneakypower]

if some of you would actually read what i posted, you'd realize that my point was that losses arent very important when you're outplaying the other team and losses generally are expected to happen. A loss like this obviously matters. florida wasnt outplayed in the auburn or lsu losses (georgia yes). "losses" are inherently taken account of when you look at say score among other things (the last i checked the losing team is outscored in a game... so losses matter quite a bit). Theyre just not end all be all that you guys think. A team with 1 or 2 more losses than another may certainly be the better team. It isnt a new concept. It isnt an earth-shattering one. You all accept the same principle in baseball, you would be stupid not to in football. look at USC. Theyre the best team in the country and have two losses.

 

this is asinine. aside from blatantly botched calls by referees, the team who plays better as a rule wins out in football. outgaining a team 500 yards to 100 is meaningless if you can't execute that yardage into scores. USC was outplayed the two Saturdays they were beaten. they're the best team in the nation because losses caused them to be outplayed, but the games were not indicative of their true talent level. football is in no way comparable to baseball for this concept.

[Mephistopheles]

if some of you would actually read what i posted, you'd realize that my point was that losses arent very important when you're outplaying the other team and losses generally are expected to happen. A loss like this obviously matters. florida wasnt outplayed in the auburn or lsu losses (georgia yes). "losses" are inherently taken account of when you look at say score among other things (the last i checked the losing team is outscored in a game... so losses matter quite a bit). Theyre just not end all be all that you guys think. A team with 1 or 2 more losses than another may certainly be the better team. It isnt a new concept. It isnt an earth-shattering one. You all accept the same principle in baseball, you would be stupid not to in football. look at USC. Theyre the best team in the country and have two losses.

 

this is asinine. aside from blatantly botched calls by referees, the team who plays better as a rule wins out in football. outgaining a team 500 yards to 100 is meaningless if you can't execute that yardage into scores. USC was outplayed the two Saturdays they were beaten. they're the best team in the nation because losses caused them to be outplayed, but the games were not indicative of their true talent level. football is in no way comparable to baseball for this concept.

 

so what's so different about these two scenarios:

 

Football team gains 500 yards on offense, score 7 points. They allow 100 yards, give up 10 points.

Baseball team gets 5 walks, 10 singles, 2 doubles and a triple, score 0 runs. They allow 1 hit no walks and one run.

 

They're analogous to each other.

 

A few points either way in a football game is a pretty random outcome. If a team wins by a field goal, then what's the difference? It's a 3 down conversion, or stopping one. It's very small and very random. Three touchdown loss? No. A loss within a touchdown? It's fairly random. What should we take away from the game? The same from each team. On that day they were pretty much equal. Who won has very little predicative power, if any. This isn't negotiable. It's a statistical fact that cannot be argued. Don't even think about trying.

 

So the team that wins is always the team that outplays the other? Florida lost today's game by a botched call (they had a TD called back on a penalty when they actually had enough men on the line thank you tivo and eventually a FG was blocked). Give them that TD and they win. Does that mean they outplayed Michigan? No...but they would have won.

[rocket]

if some of you would actually read what i posted, you'd realize that my point was that losses arent very important when you're outplaying the other team and losses generally are expected to happen. A loss like this obviously matters. florida wasnt outplayed in the auburn or lsu losses (georgia yes). "losses" are inherently taken account of when you look at say score among other things (the last i checked the losing team is outscored in a game... so losses matter quite a bit). Theyre just not end all be all that you guys think. A team with 1 or 2 more losses than another may certainly be the better team. It isnt a new concept. It isnt an earth-shattering one. You all accept the same principle in baseball, you would be stupid not to in football. look at USC. Theyre the best team in the country and have two losses.

 

this is asinine. aside from blatantly botched calls by referees, the team who plays better as a rule wins out in football. outgaining a team 500 yards to 100 is meaningless if you can't execute that yardage into scores. USC was outplayed the two Saturdays they were beaten. they're the best team in the nation because losses caused them to be outplayed, but the games were not indicative of their true talent level. football is in no way comparable to baseball for this concept.

 

so what's so different about these two scenarios:

 

Football team gains 500 yards on offense, score 7 points. They allow 100 yards, give up 10 points.

Baseball team gets 5 walks, 10 singles, 2 doubles and a triple, score 0 runs. They allow 1 hit no walks and one run.

 

They're analogous to each other.

 

A few points either way in a football game is a pretty random outcome. If a team wins by a field goal, then what's the difference? It's a 3 down conversion, or stopping one. It's very small and very random. Three touchdown loss? No. A loss within a touchdown? It's fairly random. What should we take away from the game? The same from each team. On that day they were pretty much equal. Who won has very little predicative power, if any. This isn't negotiable. It's a statistical fact that cannot be argued. Don't even think about trying.

 

unless it's an sec team beating an inferior conference, then it's proof that the sec is better.

[Flames24Rulz]

if some of you would actually read what i posted, you'd realize that my point was that losses arent very important when you're outplaying the other team and losses generally are expected to happen. A loss like this obviously matters. florida wasnt outplayed in the auburn or lsu losses (georgia yes). "losses" are inherently taken account of when you look at say score among other things (the last i checked the losing team is outscored in a game... so losses matter quite a bit). Theyre just not end all be all that you guys think. A team with 1 or 2 more losses than another may certainly be the better team. It isnt a new concept. It isnt an earth-shattering one. You all accept the same principle in baseball, you would be stupid not to in football. look at USC. Theyre the best team in the country and have two losses.

 

this is asinine. aside from blatantly botched calls by referees, the team who plays better as a rule wins out in football. outgaining a team 500 yards to 100 is meaningless if you can't execute that yardage into scores. USC was outplayed the two Saturdays they were beaten. they're the best team in the nation because losses caused them to be outplayed, but the games were not indicative of their true talent level. football is in no way comparable to baseball for this concept.

 

so what's so different about these two scenarios:

 

Football team gains 500 yards on offense, score 7 points. They allow 100 yards, give up 10 points.

Baseball team gets 5 walks, 10 singles, 2 doubles and a triple, score 0 runs. They allow 1 hit no walks and one run.

 

They're analogous to each other.

 

A few points either way in a football game is a pretty random outcome. If a team wins by a field goal, then what's the difference? It's a 3 down conversion, or stopping one. It's very small and very random. Three touchdown loss? No. A loss within a touchdown? It's fairly random. What should we take away from the game? The same from each team. On that day they were pretty much equal. Who won has very little predicative power, if any. This isn't negotiable. It's a statistical fact that cannot be argued. Don't even think about trying.

 

Every single game matters in college football. Does the best team always win the game? Of course not. A loss is a loss no matter what the circumstances are. If you outgain an opponent by 400 yards and you still lose, wouldn't you say that's pretty pathetic and that they probably didn't deserve to win in the first place? Don't get me wrong, Florida is a very talented team on offense. But with that defense they had, there's no way you could say that they were a top 10 team this year.

 

I think one reason people continued to pile on you was because of the fact that you continued to rank Florida ahead of Georgia in your polls when Georgia beat Florida. I've heard your reasoning for your explanation on why "losses don't matter" or whatever you want me to call it. But college football is the one sport where regular season losses hurt you the most, right? If you lose two games in the season (with the exception of this year), you're out of the National Title hunt. But you can hang your hat on losing the game while playing better than the opponent. That's always fun too.

Edited January 2, 2008 by Flames24Rulz

[Mephistopheles]

you know the sec stuff is just dumb. its pretty damn obvious the sec is the best conference this year. so by me saying that it is you guys are making fun of me.

 

you guys are amazing.

[rocket]

you know the sec stuff is just dumb. its pretty damn obvious the sec is the best conference this year. so by me saying that it is you guys are making fun of me.

 

you guys are amazing.

 

they won't be when ohio st. wins by 2 touchdowns next week WOOOOOOOOOOO

[Flames24Rulz]

you know the sec stuff is just dumb. its pretty damn obvious the sec is the best conference this year. so by me saying that it is you guys are making fun of me.

 

you guys are amazing.

 

I think the SEC is the best conference, but it's not far and away better than the other major conferences. I think Michigan beating Florida and Wisconsin nearly beating Tennessee can justify that.

[Mephistopheles]

You seem to be forgetting the fact that college football has a regular season of 12, maybe 13 games. Compare that to baseball which has 162 games. Yeah, there's not that much of a difference there..

 

This kinda hurts your argument. I don't exactly what you're trying to say here. Are you saying that we should put more stock into Ws and Ls because they play less games? Because that's what you are suggesting.

 

Every single game matters in college football. Does the best team always win the game? Of course not. A loss is a loss no matter what the circumstances are. If you outgain an opponent by 400 yards and you still lose, wouldn't you say that's pretty pathetic and that they probably didn't deserve to win in the first place? Don't get me wrong, Florida is a very talented team on offense. But with that defense they had, there's no way you could say that they were a top 10 team this year.

 

You're right every single game matters. But that's why Wins and Losses need to be factored out. Looking at Ws and Ls classifies everything as black or white when each game is a shade of grey. Looking at everything (ie score, schedule, margin of victory, etc) tries to then put a correct shade on the game. If a team outgains another by 400 yards and loses they probably lost because of a fumble by Mike Hart (heh).

 

Florida's best offense allowed them to beat the crap out of some good teams (Tennessee, etc). I think the best way to describe the Florida defense this year is inconsistent. They had their moments, but a lapse here and there. Probably due to their inexperience more than anything. One thing that Florida has going for them. Put them on a field with anybody, and theyll get blown out less often than just about anyone in the country. They can beat anybody. They wont lose handidly to anyone. What is a top ten team? Missouri got their asses handed to them. So did Georgia. For whatever reason Florida is always going to stay in the game to the last few minutes and can beat anyone. That is more than some top ten teams can say. You put Florida on the field with anybody, including their crappy secondary and they'll be in the game until the last minute if they dont win. Does that make them one of the best ten teams in the country? Perhaps. You can't make the same claim with most top ten teams this year.

[Mephistopheles]

you know the sec stuff is just dumb. its pretty damn obvious the sec is the best conference this year. so by me saying that it is you guys are making fun of me.

 

you guys are amazing.

 

I think the SEC is the best conference, but it's not far and away better than the other major conferences. I think Michigan beating Florida and Wisconsin nearly beating Tennessee can justify that.

 

i never said it was far and away. it's a sizable difference. but its not the nl to the al here.

[Mephistopheles]

you know the sec stuff is just dumb. its pretty damn obvious the sec is the best conference this year. so by me saying that it is you guys are making fun of me.

 

you guys are amazing.

 

they won't be when ohio st. wins by 2 touchdowns next week WOOOOOOOOOOO

 

ohio state barely beat akron by two touchdowns.

[Flames24Rulz]

You seem to be forgetting the fact that college football has a regular season of 12, maybe 13 games. Compare that to baseball which has 162 games. Yeah, there's not that much of a difference there..

 

This kinda hurts your argument. I don't exactly what you're trying to say here. Are you saying that we should put more stock into Ws and Ls because they play less games? Because that's what you are suggesting.

 

Yeah, I completely read your statement wrong and I edited that out after I re-read your post. My mistake.

[Guest]

Florida lol. Michigan could have put up 60 today. They need to start spelling Florida without the D.

 

Did anyone on the Illinois roster show up? At least the Florida offense made an appearance.

 

 

Actually they did. A fumble at the USC 2 with a chance to cut the lead to 21-17 qualifies as showing up no? Turnovers killed the illini.

[TruffleShuffle]

florida: america's wang

[NewUserName]

Beaten????

 

 

The only thing that kept that from being a blowout were Michigans 4 turnovers. Michigan flat out thumped them.

 

yep. the florida defense was too busy breaking into cars and shooting up clubs in gainesville. kudos to michigan. they outplayed florida fair and square.

 

people are taking the loss thing way out of proportion. if some of you would actually read what i posted, you'd realize that my point was that losses arent very important when you're outplaying the other team and losses generally are expected to happen. A loss like this obviously matters. florida wasnt outplayed in the auburn or lsu losses (georgia yes). "losses" are inherently taken account of when you look at say score among other things (the last i checked the losing team is outscored in a game... so losses matter quite a bit). Theyre just not end all be all that you guys think. A team with 1 or 2 more losses than another may certainly be the better team. It isnt a new concept. It isnt an earth-shattering one. You all accept the same principle in baseball, you would be stupid not to in football. look at USC. Theyre the best team in the country and have two losses.

 

 

I have to agree with this. A four loss Michigan team who played most of the season with a hurt QB or a true freshman backup was clearly better than a three loss Florida.

[Banedon]

It's unfortunate that this was the best college football game all day yesterday.

 

It's unfortunate that a hockey game was more interesting than this game.

[shnsajax]

You seem to be forgetting the fact that college football has a regular season of 12, maybe 13 games. Compare that to baseball which has 162 games. Yeah, there's not that much of a difference there..

 

This kinda hurts your argument. I don't exactly what you're trying to say here. Are you saying that we should put more stock into Ws and Ls because they play less games? Because that's what you are suggesting.

 

Every single game matters in college football. Does the best team always win the game? Of course not. A loss is a loss no matter what the circumstances are. If you outgain an opponent by 400 yards and you still lose, wouldn't you say that's pretty pathetic and that they probably didn't deserve to win in the first place? Don't get me wrong, Florida is a very talented team on offense. But with that defense they had, there's no way you could say that they were a top 10 team this year.

 

You're right every single game matters. But that's why Wins and Losses need to be factored out. Looking at Ws and Ls classifies everything as black or white when each game is a shade of grey. Looking at everything (ie score, schedule, margin of victory, etc) tries to then put a correct shade on the game. If a team outgains another by 400 yards and loses they probably lost because of a fumble by Mike Hart (heh).

 

I'm sorry, but this makes no sense. The single point of even playing the game is to determine a winner and a loser, regardless of how you reach that point. This is the single reason for even playing sports. I understand what you are saying about factoring in score and schedule and agree with you, but the base line for any determining factor is wins and losses.

[CuseCubFan69]

The state of Florida went 0-4 in the bowls which is pretty surprising.

[UMFan83]

The state of Florida went 0-4 in the bowls which is pretty surprising.

 

And the U wasn't even involved!

[Soul]

It's unfortunate that this was the best college football game all day yesterday.

 

It's unfortunate that a hockey game was more interesting than this game.

 

Well......I don't know if it was unfortunate. Hockey really needed something like that. It's unfortunate that it got put up against the bowls -- I'm not sure how many people were watching.

[AI]

you know the sec stuff is just dumb. its pretty damn obvious the sec is the best conference this year. so by me saying that it is you guys are making fun of me.

 

you guys are amazing.

 

they won't be when ohio st. wins by 2 touchdowns next week WOOOOOOOOOOO

Oh yeah! It'll be just like last year! Wait...

[Post Count Padder]

This thread is Meph vs. NSBB.

 

But isn't that most threads?

[Soul]

This thread is Meph vs. NSBB.

 

But isn't that most threads?

 

Well, in fairness to Meph, Michigan should have been better than a non-ranked 4 loss team this year. Carr was fired pretty much because there was no excuse for them being this bad.

 

It just so happens it took until the bowl game for them to put forth a great game, and Florida got caught a little unsuspecting in the crossfire.

[Post Count Padder]

This thread is Meph vs. NSBB.

 

But isn't that most threads?

 

Well, in fairness to Meph, Michigan should have been better than a non-ranked 4 loss team this year. Carr was fired pretty much because there was no excuse for them being this bad.

 

It just so happens it took until the bowl game for them to put forth a great game, and Florida got caught a little unsuspecting in the crossfire.

Yeah, this is true. Who expected Michigan to lose to App State and Oregon? It was just a topsy turvy season.

[Derwood]

Carr was not fired