ALL THESE WHAT IF'S...

[Spence]

I thought that as well, but wouldn't you track overall records as in indirect wins and losses. There were no losses. That isn't possible.

[WoVeU]

I thought that as well, but wouldn't you track overall records as in indirect wins and losses. There were no losses. That isn't possible.

No. I said that is a logical conflict (I think). If I beat you, I can more readily declare that I can beat the guys you beat. But you can't say, I beat you therefore I would lose to the teams you lost to.

See the conflict?

[Spence]

Yes, I get that as well. But it isn't logical to say I can beat the teams that you beat. Football is a game of match ups. A good match up or a bad match up will make a difference in score and also win/loss.

[Spence]

Ohio State beat Miami up and down the field, but Miami scored twice on punt returns. That made the game look closer then it ended up being. Illinois was a close game to, but they were capable of beating Ohio State. The scores were close, but only Illinois had a real shot to win.

[WoVeU]

Yes, I get that as well. But it isn't logical to say I can beat the teams that you beat. Football is a game of match ups. A good match up or a bad match up will make a difference in score and also win/loss.

Yes...it is based on a fallacy of argument. But, while it may seem strange, it counters that fallacy (or error) by repeating it.

Think of it something like the Miami and Illinois cases you stated. But think of them being a bit closer in how tight the games were. Say Ohio State could have lost that game to Miami and shouldn't have., and yet they beat Illinois and shouldn't have. Things like this work themselves out for a respectable part, losing games you should or winning games you should lose. This logic gives everyone the same allowance. Where as when people take games case by case, in deciding "they should have...lost or won" what you get is heaps of room for bias! If this process has a good or bad bias (and I think it has both) it does at least gives the bias...without bias!

If you give enough birthing space to check the logic, say we take 20 guys and everyone says that team A is 10 points better than team B...then I'll bet you (especially by week that team A would have many more wins in this system than team B. So what it then tells you is the cases where you look and see team C (3 ranks lower by the polls) has a higher win count...well then, that is because the "people" are wrong...biases have caused the error.

[Spence]

I understand the logic. I'm just not sure I by it as the method for ranking. I could see it as a tool. I prefer to take a close look at a team. If you pay real attention to games. See the same teams play different people and you could see the real strengths and weaknesses of a team. You can see why some games will be close and some shouldn't be close.

That said, I didn't see Illinois being that close a game for Ohio State so I can't say I am that good at breaking down teams. I do see Wisconsin as being the kind of team that will cause Ohio State problems. They are the best team Ohio State has faced so far. They have an experienced QB with an experienced line. They have big backs that run down hill.

I hope Bielema screws the game plan up.

[WoVeU]

Good merit as a tool...but, I'd agree...can't fly solo!

But it would go well with my formula for scheduling. Schedule all OOC games against the best teams (you can beat.)

[Spence]

Good merit as a tool...but, I'd agree...can't fly solo!

But it would go well with my formula for scheduling. Schedule all OOC games against the best teams (you can beat.)

It would be almost fool proof in my system of playing all OOC games with your peers based on the last years final positions.

[billybud]

Spence...I watched and really analyzed the Ohio State-Miami game.

You left some things out...

Miami was running for more yards per carry than the Bucks, had a third down conversion rate of 7 for 15, and put up enough yards to win...BUT..THE CANES HAD FOUR TURNOVERS COMPARED TO NONE FOR THE BUCKEYES.

It was Miami's loosey goosyness with the ball that coast them the game. Of Miami's nine non scoring drives...4 ended in interceptions and two by missed field goals. Miami only punted twice.

[Spence]

Spence...I watched and really analyzed the Ohio State-Miami game.

You left some things out...

Miami was running for more yards per carry than the Bucks, had a third down conversion rate of 7 for 15, and put up enough yards to win...BUT..THE CANES HAD FOUR TURNOVERS COMPARED TO NONE FOR THE BUCKEYES.

It was Miami's loosey goosyness with the ball that coast them the game. Of Miami's nine non scoring drives...4 ended in interceptions and two by missed field goals. Miami only punted twice.

The miami running back did break a couple runs - made the yards per carry go up. Two of the Miami interceptions were takeaways and two of them were gifts. At no time did that game ever seem out of hand. Also the fact that Ohio State can't run the ball - except Pryor - is the reason I am down on Ohio State this year. That and the special teams suck - really suck. It isn't a secret that Ohio State can't run the ball.

I'm not saying Ohio State is great. They aren't. Miami isn't good either. Wisconsin is better, Iowa is better.

[Vileborg]

For indirect and direct to have any kind of validity you would need to assign a modifier for strength of those direct and indirect wins/losses to give them weight. If Army scheduled all the major high school programs from around the country and beat them all. Army would be 12-0, and then the only lost their opponents would have would be to Army. They would have a theoretical perfect win/loss direct/indirect record but not have proved anything.

I'm a firm believer that you can formulate out all "X" factors, but not with a simple formula. If you do enough research and spend every waking second studying college football I truly believe you could predict at an extremely high rate, but there will always be "X" factors you can not get until too late to make a prediction. Even if you managed to cover a large number of "X" factors it would be so complex that only you would be able to interpret and understand all the information.

In the end all we care about is what you think not what some indirect statistic tells you. Your more than welcome to interpret the data and sum it for us if you wish, but many of us are simply overwhelmed by the amount of statistics being tossed at us and all I care about is what you think.

[WoVeU]

I wouldn't really look at FCS directly. I'd look at CCR, Sagarin, and pick 2 more polls. Since this a logical function I'd use a Venn Diagram. Say Top 96, and teams that fell in the top 96 of all 4 would be my ranked set. This may only be 80+ teams. This basis because there is some logical agreement. (You have included one more piece of judgment but it is rather broad, when, I think, the Top 50 to 64 teams (or however many teams go to a Bowl) are what you are really looking for. If you wanted Top 70 I'd take the Top 106, 50% over the desired set for Venn Audit.

[Cane from the Bend]

The miami running back did break a couple runs - made the yards per carry go up. Two of the Miami interceptions were takeaways and two of them were gifts. At no time did that game ever seem out of hand. Also the fact that Ohio State can't run the ball - except Pryor - is the reason I am down on Ohio State this year. That and the special teams suck - really suck. It isn't a secret that Ohio State can't run the ball.

I'm not saying Ohio State is great. They aren't. Miami isn't good either. Wisconsin is better, Iowa is better

Miami is good, just not above good... better than average, not better than good.

Special teams is our biggest downfall this season.

The Defense plays solid, though you can't exactly expect them to keep opponents from scoring, when the average starting field position is around the 50.

Nearly every punt, as well as kickoff, the opponents' return team takes it out to near midfield... even against Pitt we struggled there... just, Pitt's offense was too deficient to capitalize on those presents we kept giving them.

Ohio St & Florida State made the most of `em.

On top of that, our field goal unit is not producing... too many special teams blunders for the `Canes has cost us way too often... 2 games too often... and now all we can do is hope to finish without dropping another game, to rematch with the`Noles in the ACC Championship... and pray that when they beat us this time, it won't be by as many points.

<>

But I feel ya Spence; if the Bucks and `Canes had better special teams, who knows how good they "could" be.

and there is my big "IF"

.

.

.