Season proficiency ratings title contenders

OldDevilDawg said:
What in the everloving hell does a brand new rule about a wide receiver catching a pass have to do with a QB getting a ball dislodged 14 years ago?

I didn't ask for your sporadic and unintelligible interpretations of the rule book. I asked you to show me in the rulebook where it says that intent to run is required for it to be a fumble...by a quarterback...that just got his clock cleaned from a PERFECTLY legal blindside hit.
Click to expand...
It's the blindside part I have issue with. Watch the entire game to better know what I'm referencing. You can tackle a player with the football. You're right it's a legal hit. But it's frowned upon because he's sitting in the pocket and if you deck him AFTER he releases it that's a penalty. Which by the way actually HAPPENED. That's why most don't do it. It's not exactly square. I'm frankly tired of debating this point. I'm not the official. I'm simply telling you what I'd have done if I'd been involved. The part that pisses me off, giving the football to Texas in that circumstance isn't exactly foul play. I spot it AT the point of recovery (where the guy who decked Gilbert the previous possession and wasn't penalized, recovered it). That's not exactly giving the game away.
Second and thirty-two from the three isn't exactly icing anything. But, yeah its fair. I already explained why. I don't think it's a fumble if tge intention is to pass the football. He didn't drop it. It landed several yards away and I think the guy who recovered impeded with the recovery. #83 should have been given the chance to recover. Make of my mess of an explanation whatever you want to make of it. Gilbert didn't run. He was struck blindsided. Evidence exists to show he intially retained it until it was impeded with, in some fashion.
I might even say it was pass interference.
Because I think it's wrong to deck a guy who's in a vulnerable position in the pocket.
 
Big 8 Rules said:
I think you guys are being punk’d.
Click to expand...
No I was simply suggesting the better team lost. I guess my motives weren't transparent. But that was my position. And I think there is evidence to support that position. Otherwise I wouldn't have stated it. Brigham Young lost to Texas one time. They are 4-1 all time against the Longhorns. But I think the better team lost that time, too. If you follow my train of thought it lends itself to the opinion (admittedly round-about) but nevertheless sequentially that Brigham Young is the superior between Alabama and them. The proof is in the pudding. Even though admittedly Alabama holds the red card. 1-0 all-time against Brigham Young. F.W.I.W.
 
Big 8 Rules said:
Might I interject that there is one person in this somehow ongoing dialogue who is very clearly enjoying himself immensely by stringing this along.
Click to expand...
Not really enjoying it. I never camouflage my intentions. I'm out to prove that Brigham Young is as deserving as any titleist. I think at the very least I've demonstrated why. Losing to Alabama in 1998 doesn't really change my opinion much. Sure it prejudices it favorably to Alabama as it probably should. But I want to know why Brigham Young wasn't seriously considered a year ago for an at large bid to the Championship? Minimally, and I'll be the first to admit it's subjective, why wasn't Coastal Carolina given priority status? Why did we have to do settle for Notre Dame? They weren't eliminated? I mean that loss to Clemson wasn't definitive enough? I'm confused.
As far as Texas and Alabama I'm thinking Texas lost on a technicality. I don't really care that much which team brings home the bacon. I was o.k. with Alabama taking it. But it wasn't definitive. Boise St remained.
That's my argument. G-5 separate I guess from P-5. But the N.C.A.A doesn't configure it that way and it kind of (to paraphrase Nick Saban) pisses me off that we have to cater to one side of the ledger every year.
Who would it have hurt to admit C. Carolina? I told you a measure of the Belt, retroactively applied through Oklahoma, 2019 fell to Kansas St. Who lost to Navy. Who (following season) were annhilated by Brigham Young. I don't want to hear it's because Brigham Young lost to C. Carolina. That removes Brigham Young, only.
This is some pretentious bullshit IMO. I don't doubt Clemson would have decimated Coastal. That's not my point. Why should we Notre Dame advance to potentially play (assuming pairings were sensible) the same team s third time? Where's the sense in that? That's the point I'm making. It's stupid.
 
CollegeFBFan2021 said:
Not really enjoying it. I never camouflage my intentions. I'm out to prove that Brigham Young is as deserving as any titleist. I think at the very least I've demonstrated why. Losing to Alabama in 1998 doesn't really change my opinion much. Sure it prejudices it favorably to Alabama as it probably should. But I want to know why Brigham Young wasn't seriously considered a year ago for an at large bid to the Championship? Minimally, and I'll be the first to admit it's subjective, why wasn't Coastal Carolina given priority status? Why did we have to do settle for Notre Dame? They weren't eliminated? I mean that loss to Clemson wasn't definitive enough? I'm confused.
As far as Texas and Alabama I'm thinking Texas lost on a technicality. I don't really care that much which team brings home the bacon. I was o.k. with Alabama taking it. But it wasn't definitive. Boise St remained.
That's my argument. G-5 separate I guess from P-5. But the N.C.A.A doesn't configure it that way and it kind of (to paraphrase Nick Saban) pisses me off that we have to cater to one side of the ledger every year.
Who would it have hurt to admit C. Carolina? I told you a measure of the Belt, retroactively applied through Oklahoma, 2019 fell to Kansas St. Who lost to Navy. Who (following season) were annhilated by Brigham Young. I don't want to hear it's because Brigham Young lost to C. Carolina. That removes Brigham Young, only.
This is some pretentious bullshit IMO. I don't doubt Clemson would have decimated Coastal. That's not my point. Why should we Notre Dame advance to potentially play (assuming pairings were sensible) the same team s third time? Where's the sense in that? That's the point I'm making. It's stupid.
Click to expand...
tenor (6) (25).gif
 
OldDevilDawg said:
Georgia Tech sucks. Fuck a Nerd.
Click to expand...
My methodology isn't meant to unfairly showcase a team or teams above another. Quite frankly, assuming I know what I'm doing, it ought to remove prejudice, entirely from the measure of what a championship ideally is. Or at least ought to be. If Georgia Tech measures favorably against the championship it isn't my doing. I might concede some teams might measure more favorably than others by this metric. It might include Brigham Young. But that's largely coincidental.
Keep in mind I am using another's (Sports Reference) SRS as the well. I simply take their data, which apparently has been given priority status as among the most reliable and making an adjustment that is necessary to make it reflect more closely my own methodology. It's much closer to being their metric than mine.
 
Big 8 Rules said:
Might I interject that there is one person in this somehow ongoing dialogue who is very clearly enjoying himself immensely by stringing this along.
Click to expand...
What I like is the give and take. Obviously what I have to say about a championship already decided is inconsequential. I have no dog in the hunt. But it would seem (at least to me, if to nobody else) we are inching closer to a consensus of thought. Even on controversial topics. At some point, some of you are going to have to put personal bias aside for the common good. And it won't make it harder to secure a championship. That's the lie you're buying into. That somehow if you admit I'm right about a few things automatically you will be tested. Not necessarily. If Coastal Carolina is admitted suddenly it's tougher to claim a championship? Hardly. Particularly if I get my way it isn't. I don't want ANY playoff of ANY kind. Alabama (my method) is paired against Ohio St. Preliminary to any post-season championship. Making it EASIER for Alabama.
But nobody here thinks I know what I'm doing. My head is securely positioned up my sphincter. My anal orifice. I should be suffocating for lack of oxygen. Really?
GMAFB. I was vociferously against moving away from the BCS. Let's see how many national titles that would have made Alabama ineligible for. 2017, 2019.
Two. Of those two which might have Alabama reasonably have won? Zero in my estimation, but since people bought into the playoff bullshit as a sensible alternative, then I'm forced to concede it might have cost them one national title.
See? I'm reasonable as well as fair in my appraisal of my own methodology. F.W.I.W.
 
TechRaiderRider said:
yep -
who knows,
had he not been blindsided
due to an illegal defensive forrnation,
the receiver was wide open,
and likely would have gotten to the end zone -
hole different ball game -
Click to expand...
Like I said pretty much exactly what happened with Brigham Young. Vs. Coastal Carolina. It wasn't counted. Illegal passing formation. Meaning it isn't necessarily about ME. But the objective is still to win the game. Ultimately that's the only statistic I care about. It's not about my opinion. Follow? Because I'm frankly tired of having to defend myself every time I turn around.
Here's preliminary ratings in the 2004-04 season. It's worth noting it puts the NC in the Sugar Bowl (where people wanted USC).
1. Oklahoma, 98.25.
2. Louisiana St. 92.4
3. S. California, 90.7
4. Miami, OH, 89.8
5. Boise St. 87 1
6. Florida St. 80.7
7. Michigan, 80.5
8. Miami, FL 76.5
9. Kansas St. 76.2
10. Tennessee, 74.0
11. Georgia, 72.6
12. Iowa 68.6
13. Mississippi, 68 1
14. Maryland, 67.6
T-16. Nebraska/Purdue: 66.7

It would seem the national championship was effectively and correctly settled. F.W.I.W. it means a playoff was UNNECESSARY. Completely unnecessary.
The following year people at Auburn complained about not being admitted.
1. S. California: 104.0.
2. Oklahoma: 101.1
3. Utah: 98.4
4. Boise St. 94.8
5. Auburn: 94.7
6. Louisville; 94.0
7. Texas 88.4
8. Virginia Tech: 79.3
It would seem, yet again the BCS got the championship game correct in protocol. But Reggie Bush was ruled ineligible. Utah vs. Boise St might have been a better Fiesta Bowl pairing it would appear. But Boise St lost to Louisville. Liberty Bowl.
2005 proficiency ratings:
1. Texas, 112.6
2. S. California, 108.02
3. Pennsylvania St. 88.8
4.. Virginia Tech, 82.1
T-7.Ohio St./W. Virginia/Oregon: 81.3
8. Texas Christian, 79.7
9. Louisville, 78.1
10. Notre Dame, 77.2
11. Miami, FL, 76.6
12. Georgia, 76.1
13. Auburn, 76.0
14. Louisiana St. 73.5
15. Fresno St 61.8
16. Michigan: 61.0
Should be fairly self-evident the BCS predicted the national championship.
Texas vs. S. California. Rose Bowl.
In case anyone is wondering these aren't my proficiency ratings. They are Predictive Ratings from TeamRankings.com. F.W.I.W.
2006 Predictive Ratings
1. Ohio State: 101.5
2. Boise St. 92.0
3. Louisville: 90.1
4. Michigan: 85.0
5. Florida: 84.4
6. Brigham Young: 81.7
7. Louisiana St. 79.8
8. Wisconsin: 79.7
9. S. California: 79.6
10. Oklahoma: 78.0
11. W. Virginia: 77.7
12. Texas Christian: 75.1
143. Rutgers: 74 8
14. Virginia Tech: 74.1
T-16. Auburn/Hawaii 71.7
17. Nevada: 68.2
18 California: 67.8
19. Clemson: 62.8
20. Nebraska: 54 4
This is unexpected. Florida isn't ranked disproportionately high against the mean. Not sure what to make of it quite frankly.
 
Last edited:
285exp said:
That saying about not wrestling with pigs comes to mind.
Click to expand...
I'm simply trying to enlighten people. Assuming I know what I'm doing there is a way to select a deserving national champion. That's the crux of my argument.
I might not know what the fuck' I'm doing. You are learning at the same pace I am. Assuming I do, then already a mistake was made. Apparently Boise St merited selection in the 2006 national championship. But obviously I'm not the final judge, jury and executioner. And Auburn benefitted by a deflected forward pass attempt by Chris Leak, without which Florida might not lose. Unadjusted for the loss to Auburn puts them at 90.63. Sufficient to admit Florida to the NC. Meaning it's critical in those circumstances to get a proper ruling on the play. Apparently someone was willing to overlook the loss to Auburn. F.W.I.W.
 
CollegeFBFan2021 said:
I'm simply trying to enlighten people. Assuming I know what I'm doing there is a way to select a deserving national champion. That's the crux of my argument.
I might not know what the fuck' I'm doing. You are learning at the same pace I am. Assuming I do, then already a mistake was made. Apparently Boise St merited selection in the 2006 national championship. But obviously I'm not the final judge, jury and executioner. And Auburn benefitted by a deflected forward pass attempt by Chris Leak, without which Florida might not lose. Unadjusted for the loss to Auburn puts them at 90.63. Sufficient to admit Florida to the NC. Meaning it's critical in those circumstances to get a proper ruling on the play. Apparently someone was willing to overlook the loss to Auburn. F.W.I.W.
Click to expand...
Oink
 
CollegeFBFan2021 said:
I'm simply trying to enlighten people. Assuming I know what I'm doing there is a way to select a deserving national champion. That's the crux of my argument.
I might not know what the fuck' I'm doing. You are learning at the same pace I am. Assuming I do, then already a mistake was made. Apparently Boise St merited selection in the 2006 national championship. But obviously I'm not the final judge, jury and executioner. And Auburn benefitted by a deflected forward pass attempt by Chris Leak, without which Florida might not lose. Unadjusted for the loss to Auburn puts them at 90.63. Sufficient to admit Florida to the NC. Meaning it's critical in those circumstances to get a proper ruling on the play. Apparently someone was willing to overlook the loss to Auburn. F.W.I.W.
Click to expand...

Yeah see, you think you're trying to "enlighten" everyone. Suggesting the off the charts arrogance that you know things that no one else on the planet understands. That's a bit narcissistic, don't you think?

How about everyone here has tried time and time again to explain why you're wrong on numerous specifics, yet you deflect and continue to "try to enlighten". Maybe you need to shut the fuck up long enough to listen sometimes. I don't doubt that you know everything you know, but your problem is that you don't know what you don't know. We really are trying to teach you.

Dude, you went to CSU for a degree in statistics. Did you learn from your professors or just argue with them all the fucking time?
 
OldDevilDawg said:
Yeah see, you think you're trying to "enlighten" everyone. Suggesting the off the charts arrogance that you know things that no one else on the planet understands. That's a bit narcissistic, don't you think?

How about everyone here has tried time and time again to explain why you're wrong on numerous specifics, yet you deflect and continue to "try to enlighten". Maybe you need to shut the fuck up long enough to listen sometimes. I don't doubt that you know everything you know, but your problem is that you don't know what you don't know. We really are trying to teach you.

Dude, you went to CSU for a degree in statistics. Did you learn from your professors or just argue with them all the fucking time?
Click to expand...
I attended University of Colorado actually prior to my relatively short tenure at Colorado St. I've been mostly civil with you. I think maybe it's time I let you know I'm far from impressed with your vast and deep understanding. I just mentioned an event not entirely unlike the one that determined the national championship. Chris Leaks fumble. Was a deflected forward pass. Sound familiar? It SHOULD. That's what they ruled Garrett Gilbert's pass as. A fumble. Maybe someone ought to compare the two but notwithstanding it didn't ruin Florida's bid to the championship. When it obviously impacted my proficiency rating
That's called eating crow. Boise St obviously didn't belong. Neither did Louisville although had things worked out differently, they do.
You know what I think I'll trust my better judgement from now on since it would appear your vast knowledge leaves me high and dry. And not only that you're an imbecile. STFU. I don't care what you know. It's relevant only in your ridiculous world of lies. Apparently an alternate reality exists.
 
CollegeFBFan2021 said:
I attended University of Colorado actually prior to my relatively short tenure at Colorado St. I've been mostly civil with you. I think maybe it's time I let you know I'm far from impressed with your vast and deep understanding. I just mentioned an event not entirely unlike the one that determined the national championship. Chris Leaks fumble. Was a deflected forward pass. Sound familiar? It SHOULD. That's what they ruled Garrett Gilbert's pass as. A fumble. Maybe someone ought to compare the two but notwithstanding it didn't ruin Florida's bid to the championship. When it obviously impacted my proficiency rating
That's called eating crow. Boise St obviously didn't belong. Neither did Louisville although had things worked out differently, they do.
You know what I think I'll trust my better judgement from now on since it would appear your vast knowledge leaves me high and dry. And not only that you're an imbecile. STFU. I don't care what you know. It's relevant only in your ridiculous world of lies. Apparently an alternate reality exists.
Click to expand...
This one did it. Take a week off.
 
CollegeFBFan2021 said:
I attended University of Colorado actually prior to my relatively short tenure at Colorado St. I've been mostly civil with you. I think maybe it's time I let you know I'm far from impressed with your vast and deep understanding. I just mentioned an event not entirely unlike the one that determined the national championship. Chris Leaks fumble. Was a deflected forward pass. Sound familiar? It SHOULD. That's what they ruled Garrett Gilbert's pass as. A fumble. Maybe someone ought to compare the two but notwithstanding it didn't ruin Florida's bid to the championship. When it obviously impacted my proficiency rating
That's called eating crow. Boise St obviously didn't belong. Neither did Louisville although had things worked out differently, they do.
You know what I think I'll trust my better judgement from now on since it would appear your vast knowledge leaves me high and dry. And not only that you're an imbecile. STFU. I don't care what you know. It's relevant only in your ridiculous world of lies. Apparently an alternate reality exists.
Click to expand...
And just like that you proved every word I typed was true. You never answer questions directly, you respond with an incoherent wall of text that, at best, deflects, then continue with your tunnel visioned opinions. I get it. You don't need my fucking help. You don't need anyone's fucking help. You already understand everything way better than us imbecilic peons could ever understand anything.

My bad, Mr. Einstein. I was just trying to help. It won't happen again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top