Leave a Comment below!
HAHAHAHAHA!
In that wacked out situation, ND gets the bid for the title game. There are more ND fans than UCLA fans around the country, especially given the new Weis hype. Everyone would love to see a rematch.
Or assuming that UCLA gets the title bid, I still say ND gets the bid to play against them.
ND Rising 2L, the title-game participants (unlike the other bowl slots) are determined purely by the rankings. The #1 and #2 teams in the BCS go to the title game, end of story. The bowls don't get to pick and choose. Thus, how many fans each team has, or whatever everyone would "love to see," does not factor in, unless the poll voters (quite unethically) consider those things in their votes.
Taking fan support and public opinion out of the equation, I'd love to see a plausible argument for how a two-loss Notre Dame team should leapfrog a one-loss USC team in the polls, when one of ND's losses is to USC.
quite unethically
Why? Please enlighten us as our guide to football poll ethics, o righteous sage.
I think you are pretty unsure about what a poll is supposed to be anyway. You seem to prevaricate between the two theories:
1) The Strongest-on-top model: ranks all teams based on who would win the most games if all teams hypothetically met on a neutral field.
2) The Best-Resume model: ranks all teams based on the quality of wins and losses at the time during the season when they were played.
So, which is it, or is it something else, or some combination?
Regardless of whether I choose #1 or #2 from your list of options, it is obvious in either case that poll voters should not consider the fact that "there are more ND fans than UCLA fans around the country" or that "everyone would love to see a [USC-ND] rematch." You don't have to be a genius or a righteous sage to realize that considering such factors, despite their clear irrelevance to both of your proposed ranking "models," would be unethical (sort of like bumping Cal down several otherwise unjustified spots just because you want Texas to play in the Rose Bowl, or vice versa).
Not so unethical is bumping Cal down because they struggled against Southern Miss.
I just want the mass confusion that several one loss teams would bring to the table. I'd go with no loss teams, but that would put Penn State out of the mix. ;)
No undefeateds, several one loss teams. This would cause BCS chaos, which has been my plan all along.
Because we all know what would happen if you had to take the word "Championship" from that acronym . . . ;)
No, I don't see why it would be unjustifiable on the first model. If you think the strongest teams at that point in the season should be on top even if their W-L resume is not as impressive as another team, then that allows for the most exciting possible bowl matchups. I read Mack Brown's appeal as basically "Please vote according to model (1) as opposed to model (2)," and I think that as a result it produced a more exciting Rose Bowl.
Speaking of the Rose Bowl...
I have two VIP tickets for the Rose Bowl for sale.
The tickets are on the 40 yard line
also included two tickets to the "Presidents Gala" the night before
and two tickets to the Presidents Tail Gate Party before the game.
Interested parties should email me.
Plus you never answered the question. Which model should it be? You write astonished posts all the time to the tune of "How could they possibly have voted X above ?" or "Why in the world did Z drop so many spots?". But you never explain what you think the voters are voting on.
Plus you never answered the question. Which model should it be? You write astonished posts all the time to the tune of "How could they possibly have voted X above ?" or "Why in the world did Z drop so many spots?". But you never explain what you think the voters are voting on.
Brendan,
I'm appalled!
if UCLA (heaven forbid) beats USC on Dec. 3,
Where is your Trojan spirit? To even have a vague thought that FuCla will have a shot at defearing the mighty Trojans. It is beyond comprehension.
Toni.
What is your email address?
toni@recruitware.com
what is unethical is people ranking a two loss team above so many deserving 1 loss teams.
Notre Dame is the most overrated team in the country. And the computers agree.
Umm, David, that's not "unethical," that's just a difference of opinion.
I assume you didn't agree with the computers when they kept USC out of the Sugar Bowl two years ago? So don't pretend like they're the gospel truth now.
I respect your opinion that Notre Dame is overrated -- not saying I agree, just that I respect it -- but that doesn't mean the people who feel otherwise have nefarious intentions.
I just love all the "IF" UCLA will beat USC talk
Yeah and last week it was "IF UCLA will beat Stanford" and before that "IF UCLA will beat UW".
The door swings both ways on that =)
Whether or not ND is good or great or not....they are sure not getting any help by the results of the teams they are playing or will play. ND's only win over a team that still has a winning record is the Michigan game. The two other teams they have played with winning records they have lost to and ironically the teams with the best records they still have to play are Navy and Stanford. Even if they win out, they may not make it to #12 in the BCS.
ND is definately not overrated. I think they have a lot of talent that Weis has been able to extract from his players. ND will continue to move up on the ranking system and who knows what they might be able to recruit this upcoming year. Weis just signed his new contract--I think; talking lots of $$$ here. It feels as if ND is ready to spend the money and go the yards to up their 'overrated' status to one of glorious days to come. Their only problem will certainly be--The Trojans.
Computer polls mean nothing at this point. It will take a few more weeks before the computer polls mean squat. By the end of the year the computer polls will be similar to the human polls.
Sorry Brendan, but Notre Dame, like Miami, Nebraska, and a few other schools I could name, seem to get alot of preferential treatment. The fact that Notre Dame is ranked ahead of Georgia for example is just plain wrong. I am tired of the West Coast among others getting the shaft. Notre Dame deserves to be ranked, but they don't deserve to be ranked 8th and I think putting them that high is unethical because it gives preferential treatment to a team because of reputation and not actual performance.
I think a significant reason for the drop in the Georgia ranking is not just the loss....but the fact that their #1 quarterback is out...so many people believe they are no longer the team they were earlier this year. The same thing may happen to Oregon if they lose next week since they have also lost their #1 quarterback.
Oh, and Roger, I'd like to give you a little history lesson, something that might be good to keep in mind.
99-00
Jim Lambrights last year as head coach at the University of Washington. Huskies finish season 7 - 5. Lambright fired, Rick Neuheisel hired from Colorado.
00-01
Huskies go 11-1 under new Coach, ranked #2 in the nation.
01-02
Huskies go 9-4
02-03
Huskies go 7-6
03-04
Huskies go 6-6
Moral of the story? Just because a coach has one good season (with players he didn't even recruit) does not mean he can keep it up year after year. Now Weis is certainly leaps and bounds above Neuweasel in the ehtics department, but it remains to be seen whether he can continue his winning ways. Personally I think Notre Dame is jumping the gun a bit with their contract offer, but hey, its their money. Then again I seem to remember another ND coach having a pretty good start to his first year...
Ken, that is an interesting hypothesis, although if its true I think its also wrong. As yet they haven't lost more than once, and Georgia lost to a great team. Notre Dame lost to a great team and a mediocre team. Now if Georgia were to lose again certainly an argument could be made for placing them below Notre Dame, but I think its not right to have the Irish ranked as highly as they are with a number of 1 loss teams behind them. What about Oregon? Their ONLY loss was to USC. Its just not right.
Dude, don't get your dander up. Until you can explain what exactly is being ranked in a poll you have no basis to criticize. It seems you are criticizing based on the "resume" model. On the "strength" model Ken's points make perfect sense.
Even on the "resume" model, human polls, especially press polls, where the voters actually watch the games, take some of your objections into account. Among them is the fact that overtime is a "shootout" system and not based on regular play. They also ask: How much time was left on the clock when the game was decided? Did the winner lead throughout the game? Those factors play a role in establishing the quality factor behind the W-L.
Georgia didn't lose to a great team. Florida sucks.
Georgia also barely beat Arkansas and South Carolina by the way.
two teams in the same conference can't play each other in a bowl game. your scenario is impossible.
Moral of the story? Just because a coach has one good season (with players he didn't even recruit) does not mean he can keep it up year after year.
I understand your moral dilemma. As the story goes, I couldn't care less whether ND is ranked or not. On the ohter hand, you fail to give credit where it is due. I think ND has a lot of potential and Weis seems the right coach to make it happen. Not only does he bring out the talent out of his players, he is also able to motivate them and fuel in them a sense of pride and respect for the game. Let's wait and see if your comments live up to the game and you don't fumble with a big Foil on your historical thesis interception.
Thanks for the figures, though.
Roger, you miss my point. I'm not saying I think Notre Dame and Weiss will end up in the same situation, I am saying its absurd how the Domers have idolized Weiss (and demonized Ty) when there hasn't even been a full season yet, let alone 3 or 4. If Weis can keep on doing well at ND, great for him and great for the school and the players and the fans (even the obnoxious ones), but one good season does not, a great coach, make.
two teams in the same conference can't play each other in a bowl game. your scenario is impossible.
Is that true, even for the national championship game? I was under the impression that the national championship game is ALWAYS #1 vs. #2, no matter what. Can you show me the rule that says otherwise? I am open-minded but skeptical.
I pondered this exact scenario (USC-UCLA rematch) a few weeks ago on my blog here:
http://www.xanga.com/private/hom...697&
direction=n
Awesome, but that link goes to a sign-in page...
I, as a Florida Gator, have two things to say:
1) Brendan, I LOVE your scenario. It puts us in the BCS AND has us winning against FSU, which is always a beautiful thing. (Better still, I'll be there to see it.)
2) A deservedly #16 team that Florida is right now, I wouldn't say that David (Mr. Florida is a great team) or Domer (Mr. Florida sucks) are correct. Georgia lost to a good team without their star player. What that means in the end, history will tell.
Ben, the point is history hasn't been written yet. Georgia may fall flat and then they deserve to be ranked below ND, but based on both teams to this point can anyone outside of Domer nation put forth an argument as to why I two loss ND deserves to be ranked higher than Georgia?
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Notre Dame is ranked as highly as they are by the humans because they are Notre Dame. If it had been Boise State who had a close loss to USC and another loss to Michigan State I guarentee you that they would not be ranked so highly.
It doesn't even have to be a minor conference team, Oregons only loss is to USC and they are ranked below Notre Dame. Or how about Penn State? A close loss to Michigan and thats it. West Virigina's only loss is to #3 Virginia Tech, why is ND above them?
And what happens if ND loses to Tennesee on Saturday? How far do you drop them? Georgia droped about 7 spots. so now Notre Dame is ranked 15th, a 3 loss team at 15th? Or do you drop them further? 20th? It just doesn't make sense to have them ranked so highly. Maybe if their only losses were close ones to two highly ranked teams, but they lost to Michigan State. They just don't deserve to be in the top 10 (or 15)
For an interesting and I think valid perspective on Weis-ND-Willingham read this.
While Weis has done relatively well this year, I think it is entirely premature to determine his long term worth to the ND program....but hey, its not my money that ND is spending.
For the record, David, I agree with you about ND. I was just saying Florida isn't great. Despite what every crazed member of the Gator nation thinks, snagging the offensive wizard we got most likely isn't going to get us a conference championship, and they shouldn't have expected it to after only a year. We're one win away from matching last year's record, and frankly, we should win AT LEAST two more, but it's still not going to get us to a BCS bowl. (Unless Auburn rules more than we all expect them to, and Georgia doesn't know how to play Kentucky.) How can these people honestly expect such instant gratification out of a mere mortal, when even the Ole Ball Coach couldn't give them that?!
Sorry Brendan. I'm soiling your blog with all this ranting. USC is great, though I wouldn't mind seeing them lose just once. ND is overrated, but decent. Weis got more than he earned (whether it was race-related or not, I'm not one to say). I have NO idea who should be in the title game, and I think the BCS should seriously go shove itself. Go Gators, and may South Carolina not do to US what they did to Tennessee...
No need to apologize, rantings of all stripes are welcome here. :)
Ken, a rebuttal to that article, from the persective of an ND-hating Michigan fan, here:
http://mgoblog.blogspot.com/2005/11/uncle-jasons-
column.html
(as posted by thebeef in another thread)
Personally, I think it's true that Weis is arguably getting too much credit, too fast. But the racial argument is complete crap.
It just doesn't make any sense.
You can't give credit to Weis for doing well and blame Ty for having recruited poorly and at the same time claim that Ty's failures came from his recruiting and the only reason he won was the players Davie brought in.
Commenting by HaloScan.com
