Re: Kansas is #1
- From: stephenj <sjek@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:00:47 -0600
Seapig wrote:
On Jan 10, 8:32 am, stephenj <s...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Seapig wrote:
On Jan 9, 8:52 am, mianderson <clay...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 9, 11:39 am, Seapig <sea...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Getting back to games that were actually played, Kansas' only loss was
to #4, and they beat #9. For you to say that they would be a .500
team against a bunch of lower-ranked teams than that, is to ignore
reality
they were 1-1 against the only two ranked opponents they played.
"Ranked opponents" isn't a homogeneous group, as much as you'd like it
to be that way. Kansas was clearly playing a higher grade of ranked
opponent than LSU did. The team that beat Kansas is ranked higher
than anybody LSU played.
yes, but in this regard mizzou got lucky in that they didn't play in a
BCS bowl, and thus didn't face a real top-calibre team in their bowl
game. if they did, their chance of losing would have been higher, and
their final ranking lower (in contrast, it's unlikely that even by
winning a BCS game, they'd have finished higher than #4).
You and Anderson like to judge teams on games they didn't play.
Yeah, i judged hawaii on that as well (didn't play any tough teams, so i wasn't impressed with their 12-0 record). a record is meaningless without evaluating who the wins came against.
They're number five (and probably too low at that), based on what
actually happened on the field.
it's not really a basis for ranking, but it bears noting that all the other teams in the top 5 got there by playing BCS bowl games. thus, mizzou's ranking isn't quite as solid, reliable.
it also bears noting that while LSU won their division (and thus were rewarded by playing an additional tough game vs. tennessee) and their conference (and thus were rewarded by playing the #1 ranked team, tOSU), Kansas LOST their division, and thus didn't have to face a tough team, Oklahoma.
Also, Mizzou's rank is boosted because they BEAT kansas, which then
paradoxically redounds to kansas's benefit in your analysis of the
quality of kansas's losses.
overall, kansas beat #9 and lost to #4.
lsu lost to two unranked teams, but beat #15, #13, #12, #9, and #5.
Considering that those teams all have those ranks DESPITE LOSING to LSU,
we can see that LSU played a far tougher schedule.
The voters obviously like LSU more than Kansas, so they should punish
a loss to Kansas more, and reward a win over LSU more. So, this
factor you're introducing helps LSU more than Kansas.
it's not just voters. across 86 computers, 77 have LSU ranked ahead of Kansas, compared to 9 that have Kansas over LSU:
http://www.mratings.com/cf/compare.htm
Not to mention
that Kansas only gave one of their opponents a boost by losing to
them; LSU gave two of them boosts (all the way into the "also
receiving votes" category).
kentucky won a bowl game, and arkansas got tagged with a loss in theirs because they faced a much higher-finishing opponent (not talking about subjective rank, but how arkansas and mizzou objectively finished in their conference standings).
IMO, more than enough of an SOS gap to negate 1 less loss.
LSU played a tougher schedule, but look at it this way:
Let's say somebody holds a gun to your head and says "Your team is
either going to play Kansas's schedule or LSU's schedule (bowl
opponents included). If you play Kansas's schedule, I'm pulling the
trigger after one loss. If you play LSU's schedule, I'm pulling the
trigger after three losses." Which one would you choose?
er, this isn't registering ..
--
"when i visited Aden before collectivization,
all the markets were full of fish product. After
collectivization, the fish immediately disappeared."
- Aleksandr Vassiliev, Soviet KGB official
.
- References:
- Kansas is #1
- From: btpage0630
- Re: Kansas is #1
- From: mianderson
- Re: Kansas is #1
- From: mianderson
- Re: Kansas is #1
- From: mianderson
- Re: Kansas is #1
- From: stephenj
- Kansas is #1
- Prev by Date: Re: Kansas is #1
- Next by Date: Re: Kansas is #1
- Previous by thread: Re: Kansas is #1
- Next by thread: Re: Kansas is #1
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|