billybud wrote:Duke: I think that you may be right. On straight power, Fresno would be ranked behind teams it is ranked in front of...thus my contention that CCR ranks inordinately on win-loss without enough value to those wins and losses.
Mizzou lost in OT to a ranked team....Fresno's best win was a one point win over three loss Boise State. I tend to rank based on who I think is the better team. Is Mizzou better than Fresno? I think so..and I think that Vegas would bet that way. CCR does not rank the same way.
CCR has Mizzou with one close OT loss and an SOS of #23 ranked below Fresno with a squeaky win against Boise and an SOS of #123. Obviously SOS doesn't mean to much in the CCR ranking.
In the example above with Mizzou and Fresno, here are the facts (objective):
(1) Mizzou lost to S.C--all that objectively indicates is that on the week in question Mizzou was not as good as S.C.
(2) Fresno beat Boise -- meaning on the week in question Fresno was better than Boise.
The combination of these two objective facts says nothing about about how Mizzou compares to Fresno, other than that we generally interpret this to mean Mizzou is not as good as S.C. and that Fresno is better than Boise State. Even if we assume that S.C. is better than Boise, the above facts would still at least support the argument that Fresno is better than Mizzou (or even S.C.). Doesn't mean that position is likely, but illustrates the shortcoming of the argument you present.
Here are some other facts (subjective):
(1) CCR indicates that Mizzou is a better team than Fresno (based on power)
(2) You (and probably everyone else here) agrees with that assessment.
Despite the above, CCR thinks Fresno has EARNED a similar ranking based on performance. So, is there any offset at all that should favor Fresno in terms of ranking (not power) over Mizzou, given that Fresno is unbeaten and Mizzou has a loss? Any at all? Because it appears what you want is for teams to be ranked based on power alone--nothing else.
Even if that's not the case, even if you admit that having a better W/L record does carry some marginal weight for rankings (just not as much as CCR appears to give it), consider this:
Team power is just a subjective opinion of what some set of people believe an outcome is likely to be. But based on the link you posted the other day, it looks like about 30%-40% of all games played are upsets. What does that mean to you? Does it mean that the team that is clearly better still deserves a higher ranking, even if they lose? Because as I said before, I believe the team that wins deserves the trophy (whether it's the little brown jug or the crystal football), not the team everyone knows is better.
For example, suppose Mizzou and Fresno actually played a game. In fact, suppose they are scheduled for two games back-to-back. Most agree Mizzou will win both games, but it's possible that Fresno wins too. And if Fresno does win the first game, would you change your opinion of what will happen in the second game? I suspect not. And if not, what that means in terms of your argument is that even though Mizzou lost the first game to Fresno, Mizzou is still a better team, since most would think they will win the second game. And since they are the better team and will win the second game, they should be ranked higher--that's the crux of your argument.
So does it mean anything that Fresno actually did win the first game, even though it was an upset? Clearly it's a different question to ask will Mizzou still be favored in the second game than whether Fresno has EARNED a higher ranking. The same principles apply even if there is no head-to-head matchup. If team A wins, they've done something very significant in terms of getting the trophy that a losing team B has not done. And that applies irrespective of subjective opinion about team power or SoS.
In fact, what if, by some miracle Fresno got in the NCG against Florida St. I do not think there is any way possible to convince you (or anyone else for that matter) that Fresno is a better team than FSU. That said, even you have to admit that it is at least possible that Fresno does win. But even if that happens, NO ONE would believe that Fresno is actually a better team. But in your opinion, in that scenario, who should get the crystal football, and therefore a #1 ranking? In that case, it would not be the better team (FSU), it would be the team that WON and earned it. If you agree, then you must accept there's a problem with your argument. Otherwise, you must argue that FSU, even though losing the NCG should get the trophy over the team that beat them head-to-head, and if that's the case, there's no reason to even play the game.
The athletic team of my geographic region is superior to the team from your geographic region.
I do think it would be a fun game, I just think the final score would suck. I don't think Ohio State could beat any of the top three. Our defense won't be really tested the rest of the year. Michigan has some offensive fire power, but their offensive line play is terrible and that plays into our strength. Anyway, when the first big test for the defense will be the bowl game, it usually doesn't work out well. I'm hoping to play Stanford and hopefully be able to use them as a springboard next year. I like how we matchup with Stanford.