CuseCubFan69

How many times can they win by 7?

Honestly you shouldn't look at one non conference game to grade a team. Over the course of the season there are numerous mathematical paths to get from one conference to another. For instance here are three (of thousands) chains to link LSU and Oregon: LSU beat Florida by 4. Florida beat Tennessee by 39. Tennessee lost to Cal by 14. Cal beat Oregon 7. Thus for that chain LSU is 4 + 39 - 14 + 7 = 36 points over Oregon. LSU beat Alabama by 7. Alabama beat Houston by 6. Houston lost to Oregon by 21. Thus for that Chain LSU is 7 + 6 - 21 = -8 points over Oregon. LSU beat MTSU by 44. MTSU lost to FAU by 13. FAU lost to Okie State by 38. Okie State beat Nebraska by 31. Nebraska lost to USC by 18. USC lost to Oregon by 7. Thus for that chain LSU is -1 points over Oregon You can do this over and over across each possible chain in D1. You then average them to get a rating which allows you to compare teams. I simplified the system significantly, but that's essentially how Saragin's ratings work. I've done a ton of research on systems like this and hope to publish a paper on it some time next semester. In the Saragin rating the score is in points. So if team A has a score of 90 and team B 75, then we'd expect A to beat B by 15. A system like this is by far the best way to objectively analyze teams and their conferences. Doing this over and over we get something like this: 1. 95.8 Oregon 2. 93.4 LSU 3. 93.2 Kansas 4. 92.8 Oklahoma 5. 92.5 Ohio State 6. 92.2 Florida 7. 91.5 West Virginia 8. 89.5 USC 9. 87.5 Cincinnati 10. 87.3 Arizona State 11. 86.6 South Florida 12. 86.2 Clemson 13. 86.1 Missouri 14. 84.2 Texas 15. 83.5 Boise State 16. 83.3 Georgia 17. 82.5 Virginia Tech 18. 82.4 Texas Tech 19. 82.4 Penn State 20. 82.4 Kentucky 21. 81.6 Auburn 22. 81.4 Connecticut 23. 81.3 Arkansas 24. 81.2 Michigan 25. 81.0 UCLA Now to grade the conferences you can simply take the teams and average them. 1. 80.8 SEC 2. 79.0 Big East 3. 78.3 Pac Ten 4. 77.4 Big XII 5. 76.6 Big Ten 6. 76.2 ACC The difference between the SEC and the Big Ten is almost as big as the difference between the Big Ten and Mountain West. Yes the SEC is the best conference in football and it's not really debatable. I don't see this logic and it just works for the teams that run up the score and don't play anybody out of conference. WV didn't play White for the whole second half against Miss St so they get punished while Florida throws for 2 TD's in the last 3 minutes of a blowout against Florida International and that is better thing? Your examples are of SEC teams playing horrible teams and somehow getting credit for it. Number 2, it doesn't take into account where the games are played like road wins out of conference, another thing that helps the SEC teams.

Wow...TT, are you joking or drunk? The SEC has 11 bowl eligible teams this year...11. I think we'd played this game last year, and your SEC hatred is again clouding your judgment a bit, IMO. The SEC's weak teams consist of Ole Miss and Ole Miss alone this year. That's funny because 3 weeks ago you said Mississippi St was bad after they got blown out by West Virginia but then they beat Kentucky and Alabama and now they're good? Or is it just when they play BE teams they are bad like when Auburn lost to S.Florida? Maybe they're only good because: A: They play horrible teams out of conference B: Play all out of conference games at home I don't deny that it's a solid conference, but it's not the best. No one has stood out to be that or proven to be that. Out of curiosity, which conference do you deem to be the best this season, Cuse? Are you saying that you are unwilling to make such a judgment? I agree, no conference is head and shoulders above the rest, but being non-commital is an awfully safe road to take. No, Misssissippi State isn't great, and they are likely a bottom tier SEC team this year. I'd probably take Mississippi State over other conferences' bottom tier teams if I was forced to make a wager. No, LSU has proven nothing this year, and they've definitely not proven anything against top 10 ranked out of conference teams. I believe the SEC has more depth than the PAC 10 this year, and that was the spirit of my original post. Truly, I don't expect you to believe the SEC is the strongest conference from top to bottom this year, Cuse...You seem to have a distaste for them for whatever reason, and you bashed them even after bowl season last year. For what it's worth, the Pac 10, Big 12, and Big Ten all are strong football conferences this year, and I've never stated otherwise. The ACC and Big East both have strong teams as well. The bashing comes with the fact that they are judged the best out of hand with no doubts and this imo without a breakdown of what they have done. It annoys me that a one loss SEC team gets a chance to play for the title but a 1 loss BE team is knocked out of contention. It annoys me that the BE has done very well against the SEC but for some reason that doesn't count. 6 out of 8 BE teams can also beat any team in the country and not only that, go into the stadiums of non BCS schools and play them there. This illusion of the SEC as the best is because they set up their schedules that make it play that way. Florida has a loss last year and they of course get to go to the BCS Champ game. Were they deserving, yes like many other one loss teams. But like always, they got the chance. Louisville and WV didn't get a whiff and they each had one loss. The BE last place team last year won 4 games and was deep. Now go to this year. LSU has a loss. Oregon is better imo but LSU is ahead of them. Florida has 3 losses and is ranked 15th while playing no one out of conference but of course, those tough SEC teams. Just tell me who have the SEC beat out of conference that makes them better? What makes them deeper? Playing small schools at home 3 to 4 times? Rutgers does this and their schedule sucks. An SEC team does this and it's because the SEC is so tough. I don't don't get the logic of it. Syracuse could go 5-0 or 4-1 by playing little schools out of schedule too but it doesn't as they play 3 to 4 BCS schools a home and away every year. Would this make the BE better if they did the SEC thing and scheduled 4 to 5 home games out of conference because that is what the SEC does. WV blows out Miss St and then they win against Kentucky and Alabama. How does that make the SEC deep? Because they lost to another team in their conference that hasn't beaten anyone? I apologize if this comes out as bashing because it's not meant to be that. I just want to be shown why the SEC is better or deeper than the rest of the conferences in college football. I use the BE because that's the conference I'm most familiar with and I could plug in the Big 12, PAC 10, ACC or Big 10 as well.

Wow...TT, are you joking or drunk? The SEC has 11 bowl eligible teams this year...11. I think we'd played this game last year, and your SEC hatred is again clouding your judgment a bit, IMO. The SEC's weak teams consist of Ole Miss and Ole Miss alone this year. That's funny because 3 weeks ago you said Mississippi St was bad after they got blown out by West Virginia but then they beat Kentucky and Alabama and now they're good? Or is it just when they play BE teams they are bad like when Auburn lost to S.Florida? Maybe they're only good because: A: They play horrible teams out of conference B: Play all out of conference games at home I don't deny that it's a solid conference, but it's not the best. No one has stood out to be that or proven to be that. I don't think it's ever possible to "prove" a conference is better. When I look at the SEC, to me it's clearly the best. I honestly think if a team like Oregon had to go through that SEC schedule, they'd put up at least 2 conference losses. Same goes for any of the other top teams in any other conference. Name your team. They'd lose at least 2 in the SEC. Tell me why you think it's the best.

Wow...TT, are you joking or drunk? The SEC has 11 bowl eligible teams this year...11. I think we'd played this game last year, and your SEC hatred is again clouding your judgment a bit, IMO. The SEC's weak teams consist of Ole Miss and Ole Miss alone this year. That's funny because 3 weeks ago you said Mississippi St was bad after they got blown out by West Virginia but then they beat Kentucky and Alabama and now they're good? Or is it just when they play BE teams they are bad like when Auburn lost to S.Florida? Maybe they're only good because: A: They play horrible teams out of conference B: Play all out of conference games at home I don't deny that it's a solid conference, but it's not the best. No one has stood out to be that or proven to be that.

Alex Rodriguez, with runners in scoring position, this year: .329 .443 .719 1.162 3 year splits: .308 .434 .554 .988 Any other misinformation? I wonder what Jeter's numbers are?

Are you guys relying on 3's again this year?

Big mistake :-s Is that a play off my name or something? LOL, no I meant no disrespect. Lord knows the last thing I need is another enemy here. I like the fact we have a Yanks fan on this site. Who's your favorite Little Rascal, Spanky? Welcome aboard! I love having fans form other teams on this site. But, you're going to have to be careful at times because of your allegiance to the Evil Empire.

They should hang onto the award and see if they can give it away next year. What happened to the Hawaii QB?

I like him the best of the 3 main publicity Freshman.

Kaz never could play short. Yes he could. He wasn't great there but he was more than adequate. He's better than Jeter there, not that that's saying much. How does he compare offensively and defensively with Theriot? Kaz just reminds me of a 260/310 hitter with little pop and I just don't see the advantage over what the Cubs already have. I'm not a big Theriot fan but tying up into a 3/14 type deal just doesn't make sense to me.

Alex Liddi (3b) 0/4 Alessandro Maestri: 1IP, 0H, 3BB, 2K, 0R Box score Wild Thing!

I put Rose at the top, then Mayo and then Beasley, but that's probably because I've always been a guard guy. Beasley is sort of the same deal as Mayo, as far as having incredible talent, but sometimes a lack of drive. He should be the top freshman in the Big XII and I wouldn't be shocked to see him make second team all-conference. I like Beasley, Mayo, Rose, then Gordon based on pure talent. I honestly think Gordon will be the best player this year and at the next level, based on what I have heard about his work ethic and basketball knowledge. Also, you shouldn't be shocked if Beasley is 2nd team all Big XII. It would probably be a big disappointment if he's NOT. He has as good a shot as any (except for Rush and Augustin) to be the 1st team. I like Rush's game a lot (I really wanted him at OU, and at one point it looked like we had him) but he won't be full speed form that knee injury until December or January, and you never know how those type of things will effect a slasher until they get out on the court. But you're probably right about him being on the first team. I like Arthur at Kansas and Jones at A&M, but neither have a smidgen of the talent that Beasley does. I'll be very interested to see how Arthur looks this year. I don't bother comparing him to guys like Rose, Mayo, Gordon, Beasley because he's a completely different type of player. He supposedly was dominating the US team before he fractured his foot, though. Rush will be interesting, too. If he is still significantly slower by March, I agree with Raw's call that we won't reach the FF. Illiniguy--I left Gordon off the list because A: I've never seen him play either. And B. I forgot bout him. All I I've seen is about 3 seconds of Beasley in Mcd AA game, so I'm not really qualified to rank any of them. No Donte Greene? He's going to be Kevin Garnett like. I like what I see form this young man and I haven't been this pleased with any freshman since Melo.

Participating in professional sports constitutes an assumption of risk which usually negates teams being held liable. Always looking for a future client, eh?

Rob Dibble lives down there, and I heard him on XM a while back saying that one of the things that could truly help the Devil Rays would be to build a stadium IN Tampa Bay, instead of out in St. Petersburg. if they built a stadium in Tampa Bay, everyone would be awfully wet. Fans would probably prefer Tampa Unless they went with O_O's tennis court on top of a building theme! Build a bridge and put the stadium right in the Bay.

But Y can be less than X. Wouldn't it be X+? :D

He's like 6'5 playing point guard and his offensive game is mostly oriented around getting to the basket, I think he'll be fine. I'm not a Mayo fan by any means, but he's going to be really good. I just don't see it. I think he'll be a good college player but I don't think he'll be any better than an average NBA player.

I wonder if HS's are going to do the same thing? I done a few dives avoiding the ball and I've been pretty lucky so far and I don't even remember a coach getting hit in a game ever during a game other than on a one hopper.

It's his hitting, not defense, that's the problem. Moving him to first would be nuts. That was my question, is it hitting when he has pain or throwing?

I think if Rolan can still swing a bat without it hurting his shoulder he would make a stellar firstbaseman. I understand it decreases his value but I think that's where he might have to go if these shoulder problems continue.

I know the softball pitchers wear a chestguard to protect themselves.

With his offensive production, who cares? I'm curious if ARod still wants to play SS. He seems to be pretty vain and I'm not sure if he wants to make that switch, has anyone heard him (ARod) mention this at all? What now? I'm just curious on what ARod thinks about this. Imo, it will be his decision and not the clubs that want him.

With his offensive production, who cares? I'm curious if ARod still wants to play SS. He seems to be pretty vain and I'm not sure if he wants to make that switch, has anyone heard him (ARod) mention this at all? If he is vain, wouldn't that mean he'd want to return to SS? When he went to the Yankees, he agreed willingly to switch to 3rd base. If he really wanted to be a Cub and the Cubs could pay him, I'm sure he'd play RF if asked. In fact I bet we'll here some statement to that effect in the near future if for no other reason than to keep the thought of the Cubs being in on the bidding alive. Not necessarily, he may not want to look foolish playing SS after not playing there for awhile.

Jones could be part of a nice package to the Fish for Cabrera.

I think writers are just saying the Cubs because they have spent money in the past. They seem to mention them with every free agent or trade of late.