Re: College Football - Bowl Discussion

[imb]

You're not even coming close to understanding what he's talking about.

 

I'm stunned and speechless right now. Really.

 

dont we wish

[Mephistopheles]

You're not even coming close to understanding what he's talking about.

 

I'm stunned and speechless right now. Really.

So that's what it feels like to be owned.

 

I guess...

[TruffleShuffle]

i wonder how j.r. towles feels about the bowl games.

[imb]

i wonder how j.r. towles feels about the bowl games.

 

please, he's busy polishing up his rookie of the year trophy and getting ready to watch the ou-texas title game

[Hosak8]

You're not even coming close to understanding what he's talking about.

 

No, I get it. He's now suggesting that the 7 point swing should be distributed over two games, which was not the original point. He's adjusted his point in order to create the outcome that he wants to create. The original argument was that home-field advantage would only account for a 7 point swing. Never- NEVER- was neutral site part of the discussion.

[Hosak8]

...

 

Excellent post. This is probably your best post in a long, long time.

[Mark_R]

This is like watching a cripple fight.

[TruffleShuffle]

can we stop blowing va tech? they beat a lousy big east team (the best of 8 mediocre teams) to win the orange bowl. they also finished on top of a thoroughly mediocre acc this season. congrats.

[Hosak8]

can we stop blowing va tech? they beat a lousy big east team (the best of 8 mediocre teams) to win the orange bowl. they also finished on top of a thoroughly mediocre acc this season. congrats.

 

Ahh, Thom's just doing what he has to to convince people to not switch over to the Food Network.

[SouthSideRyan]

You're not even coming close to understanding what he's talking about.

 

No, I get it. He's now suggesting that the 7 point swing should be distributed over two games, which was not the original point. He's adjusted his point in order to create the outcome that he wants to create. The original argument was that home-field advantage would only account for a 7 point swing. Never- NEVER- was neutral site part of the discussion.

 

BUT YOU'RE THEN MAKING THE GAMES ROAD AND HOME AGAIN(ONLY REVERSED) YET MAKING THEM AS A DIRECT COMPARISON AGAIN

[Mephistopheles]

You're adjusting the point you want to make. You want to "convert" the scenario so that USC wins and Florida loses. The real difference between the performances is like one point. You're trying to make it sound more because of your backwards stupid understanding of the system. The point was never the fact Florida lost at home or USC lost on the road or even debating which loss was "worse". The point was that HFA is something overstated and not nearly as important as most people think. You decided to play around with numbers (wrongly) and try to make a point that doesn't exist.

 

If you want to get cute and technical and play around with numbers, like you are doing, and convert both games to home games for USC and Florida. The home team gets a bonus of 2.9 or so points. So we subtract under 6 points from the point difference of the USC and OSU game. USC still loses as did Florida. Not to mention Mississippi is a better football team than Oregon State.

 

I didn't get "owned". You made a fool of yourself. You completely misinterpreted what was an obvious comment, don't bitch at me and say you owned me. You owned yourself in a way that's not good. Everyone knew what I was saying (but you).

 

Let's read it again:

 

and in this place called reality, home/road is a touchdown swing max. home/road doesn't mean as much as people think.

 

That means the difference between playing home and road is a touchdown max, total. That's a swing on both sides. That means if Team A played at Team B and lost by fourteen, then it's comparable to them playing at home against Team B and only losing by seven. Not exactly a difficult concept.

[Mephistopheles]

BUT YOU'RE THEN MAKING THE GAMES ROAD AND HOME AGAIN(ONLY REVERSED) YET MAKING THEM AS A DIRECT COMPARISON AGAIN

 

Don't bark at him. I don't think he knows what he's doing.

[Hosak8]

You're not even coming close to understanding what he's talking about.

 

No, I get it. He's now suggesting that the 7 point swing should be distributed over two games, which was not the original point. He's adjusted his point in order to create the outcome that he wants to create. The original argument was that home-field advantage would only account for a 7 point swing. Never- NEVER- was neutral site part of the discussion.

 

BUT YOU'RE THEN MAKING THE GAMES ROAD AND HOME AGAIN(ONLY REVERSED) YET MAKING THEM AS A DIRECT COMPARISON AGAIN

 

Of course I am. The original argument was NEVER about neutral site games. The original point and statement was that home/road only equated to about a 7 point swing. There was never any stipulation about neutral sites and the point swing that might occur because of it. Seriously, reread the post I quoted a page ago. Did you just miss that one, or are you just ornery from watching the Big 10 lay another colossal egg during bowl season?

[Mark_R]

You're not even coming close to understanding what he's talking about.

 

No, I get it. He's now suggesting that the 7 point swing should be distributed over two games, which was not the original point. He's adjusted his point in order to create the outcome that he wants to create. The original argument was that home-field advantage would only account for a 7 point swing. Never- NEVER- was neutral site part of the discussion.

 

BUT YOU'RE THEN MAKING THE GAMES ROAD AND HOME AGAIN(ONLY REVERSED) YET MAKING THEM AS A DIRECT COMPARISON AGAIN

 

Of course I am. The original argument was NEVER about neutral site games. The original point and statement was that home/road only equated to about a 7 point swing. There was never any stipulation about neutral sites and the point swing that might occur because of it. Seriously, reread the post I quoted a page ago. Did you just miss that one, or are you just ornery from watching the Big 10 lay another colossal egg during bowl season?

 

What bowl game did Tennessee win?

[TruffleShuffle]

http://smartmortgageadvice.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/head-up-ass.jpg

[Mephistopheles]

and you're converting Florida's game to a road game (which is still a loss) and USC game to a home game (which is a close loss) and trying to use that to make some point about how USC is better than UF. I think you need to stop bleeding orange and think before you post. The two losses are comparable by point differential and Florida lost to a better team, so USC's loss was "worse".

[Hosak8]

You're adjusting the point you want to make. You want to "convert" the scenario so that USC wins and Florida loses. The real difference between the performances is like one point. You're trying to make it sound more because of your backwards stupid understanding of the system. The point was never the fact Florida lost at home or USC lost on the road or even debating which loss was "worse". The point was that HFA is something overstated and not nearly as important as most people think. You decided to play around with numbers (wrongly) and try to make a point that doesn't exist.

 

If you want to get cute and technical and play around with numbers, like you are doing, and convert both games to home games for USC and Florida. The home team gets a bonus of 2.9 or so points. So we subtract under 6 points from the point difference of the USC and OSU game. USC still loses as did Florida. Not to mention Mississippi is a better football team than Oregon State.

 

I didn't get "owned". You made a fool of yourself. You completely misinterpreted what was an obvious comment, don't bitch at me and say you owned me. You owned yourself in a way that's not good. Everyone knew what I was saying (but you).

 

Let's read it again:

 

and in this place called reality, home/road is a touchdown swing max. home/road doesn't mean as much as people think.

 

That means the difference between playing home and road is a touchdown max, total. That's a swing on both sides. That means if Team A played at Team B and lost by fourteen, then it's comparable to them playing at home against Team B and only losing by seven. Not exactly a difficult concept.

 

Really? Funny, because here's what was posted...

 

 

Florida lost at home. The Trojans lost on the road.

 

and in this place called reality, home/road is a touchdown swing max. home/road doesn't mean as much as people think.

[Mephistopheles]

uh...

[Hosak8]

and you're converting Florida's game to a road game (which is still a loss) and USC game to a home game (which is a close loss) and trying to use that to make some point about how USC is better than UF. I think you need to stop bleeding orange and think before you post. The two losses are comparable by point differential and Florida lost to a better team, so USC's loss was "worse".

 

My lord, you lack basic reading comprehension. Please find ANYWHERE that I have said that USC is better than UF. I actually agree with you that they are very close to one another, and I agree that a USC-UF MNC game would be the best possible match up.

 

Forgive me for not agreeing with your math on who the better team is (in terms of the Ole Miss vs. Oregon State discussion). After all, your math showed that the ACC actually widened the gap on the SEC following two ACC losses to SEC teams yesterday.

 

Meth Math might say one thing. Common sense says another completely.

[Hosak8]

 

What bowl game did Tennessee win?

 

Oh, geez. And there it is.

 

Who ever said anything about Tennessee? They sucked this year. Does that make you feel better?

[Hosak8]

uh...

 

You said the point was never an argument over which team's loss was worse. I pointed out the fact that, indeed, it was. TVOR pointed out that USC lost on the Road, supporting his stance that it was a better loss than Florida losing to Ole Miss at home. Not that hard to grasp Meph. Come on, I realize that you're a math genius, but you can figure this reading stuff out.

[Mephistopheles]

Forgive me for not agreeing with your math on who the better team is (in terms of the Ole Miss vs. Oregon State discussion). After all, your math showed that the ACC actually widened the gap on the SEC following two ACC losses to SEC teams yesterday.

 

Now you're just being blind. As I posted that difference between the conferences was compared to the rankings before all the bowls...and the gap between the SEC and ACC actually shrunk.

 

conference rankings right after the LSU game, direct quote

 

New - Old

60.26 60.01 Big 12

58.50 59.69 ACC

57.91 56.47 SEC

54.58 55.81 Big Ten

54.49 52.97 PAC 10

53.87 53.30 Big East

50.99 51.13 MWC

41.91 40.70 CUSA

41.76 42.56 WAC

41.39 41.60 IND

40.16 41.92 MAC

34.82 34.13 Sun Belt

 

Um, the ACC was down 1.19 and the SEC was up 1.44, the gap went from 3.22 to 0.59. Are you drunk?

 

and you say I can't read...

Edited January 2, 2009 by Mephistopheles

[SouthSideRyan]

Once you realize you're supporting Voice of Reason's argument you should stop right there. The guy's a raging imbecile.

[Hosak8]

Forgive me for not agreeing with your math on who the better team is (in terms of the Ole Miss vs. Oregon State discussion). After all, your math showed that the ACC actually widened the gap on the SEC following two ACC losses to SEC teams yesterday.

 

Now you're just being blind. As I posted that difference between the conferences was compared to the rankings before all the bowls...and the gap between the SEC and ACC actually shrunk.

 

conference rankings right after the LSU game, direct quote

 

New - Old

60.26 60.01 Big 12

58.50 59.69 ACC

57.91 56.47 SEC

54.58 55.81 Big Ten

54.49 52.97 PAC 10

53.87 53.30 Big East

50.99 51.13 MWC

41.91 40.70 CUSA

41.76 42.56 WAC

41.39 41.60 IND

40.16 41.92 MAC

34.82 34.13 Sun Belt

 

Um, the ACC was down 1.19 and the SEC was up 1.44, the gap went from 3.22 to 0.59. Are you drunk?

 

and you say I can't read...

 

Not drunk at all, but I certainly did misread. You absolutely deserve to take that shot at me. :blush:

 

My gaffe notwithstanding, I still assert that your point of Ole Miss being the better team (and therefore the better loss) is incorrect.

[imb]

the point still remains that meph is a total fraud, so you were like, half right