Season proficiency ratings title contenders

OldDevilDawg said:
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.
Click to expand...
Assuming you are interested, I'm not trying to change anything other than maybe a person's ill sighted opinion about how a team might otherwise choose to participate.
It was never meant to turn over the apple cart. That's why I'm perplexed as to why people are so incensed about it. Is it something I said? Clearly I'm not the one running the show. Never claimed to be, either. I said I know a protocol that assesses admittance. Honestly that isn't a bad thing.
It ought to make a committee's job much simpler. I don't choose the admittants. I thought I remember saying that's not my job.
I think you asked me what I learned in school. Quite honestly I haven't learned much beyond fairly simple mathematical methods. Others have done far better.
I know how to take F.P.I. (Football Power Index) and rearrange it to better suit the condition from which a championship follows. It isn't exactly rocket science. I did study engineering in college, however.
Whether or not a person chooses to follow my lead is entirely up to them. But I've tried very hard to make it simple as well as fair.
I'm confused as to why it's so confrontational. Quite honestly I'm trying my best to be civil. It isn't like I'm taking anything away. That's the mystery. I'm taking what's already in place and refining it.
Anyway. It works as expected. That's a victory on my end. Not that it matters much.
 
RTR...USN (ret) said:
My patience with him is gone. Done.
Click to expand...
Why is that? If you were offended simply because I have a grievance with how Alabama addressed a championship I had zero authority over why is that a problem? You think someone is going to take it away?
If they do it would require evidence. I simply was disappointed with the result. Just as I was with the result of Brigham Young losing to Texas. Making a blemish on an otherwise spotless resume. Texas beat Brigham Young. I guess we can all be grateful it didn't extend beyond one game. Alabama defeated Brigham Young in 1998. I have no objections. The better team won that game.
Why is everything including Alabama so personal anyway? Nobody likes to lose. You think it would be a better world if your team never lost? That would make a better place? Why didn't Alabama play Brigham Young? In 1996 they skipped out. That was strange.
My argument is Alabama isn't playing everyone. Only teams they know they can beat. That's the problem I'm having here.
 
CollegeFBFan2021 said:
Why is that? If you were offended simply because I have a grievance with how Alabama addressed a championship I had zero authority over why is that a problem? You think someone is going to take it away?
If they do it would require evidence. I simply was disappointed with the result. Just as I was with the result of Brigham Young losing to Texas. Making a blemish on an otherwise spotless resume. Texas beat Brigham Young. I guess we can all be grateful it didn't extend beyond one game. Alabama defeated Brigham Young in 1998. I have no objections. The better team won that game.
Why is everything including Alabama so personal anyway? Nobody likes to lose. You think it would be a better world if your team never lost? That would make a better place? Why didn't Alabama play Brigham Young? In 1996 they skipped out. That was strange.
My argument is Alabama isn't playing everyone. Only teams they know they can beat. That's the problem I'm having here.
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with Alabama, or any other team for that matter. I happen to be a lifelong Bama fan, but that doesn’t influence me one bit. You are welcome to your own opinion and ideas as to how things could work, or could be better. You have the right to your own opinion, but you do not have the right to force your opinion on others. Post your thoughts and opinions all you want, but do not be confrontational with everyone when they don’t agree with you. One last thing for you to consider... FACTS never change, the truth never changes, opinions do. Multiple posters have responded to you with FACTS, and when they do you go on a personal attack because you don’t agree. Don’t be that guy.
 
RTR...USN (ret) said:
This has nothing to do with Alabama, or any other team for that matter. I happen to be a lifelong Bama fan, but that doesn’t influence me one bit. You are welcome to your own opinion and ideas as to how things could work, or could be better. You have the right to your own opinion, but you do not have the right to force your opinion on others. Post your thoughts and opinions all you want, but do not be confrontational with everyone when they don’t agree with you. One last thing for you to consider... FACTS never change, the truth never changes, opinions do. Multiple posters have responded to you with FACTS, and when they do you go on a personal attack because you don’t agree. Don’t be that guy.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure about that. In fact I'm mostly confused again as to what the symptom is that you are describing to me. It isn't a fact that the football was fumbled. That's open to interpretation. I'm aware what the ruling was. I was there when it happened. (Well I was an eyewitness anyway). There isn't anything so concrete it isn't open to debate. You are suggesting the ruling was fair. I'm of the opinion another possibility existed. By using my perspective isn't evidence of collusion. Somehow negating the result? Show me where I said anything remotely close to that. I didn't. I said I want it to be called fairly. Fairness to me means not taking things to the extreme. Sure, if we assassinate the quarterback there's a fair chance we might win. But that isn't a fair way to select a champion. Whether or not you agree with me is irrelevant. I probably would have ejected Alabama players. I wouldn't have liked doing it. But I'd have done it because I don't like people who cheat. Yes I think it's cheating to forcibly remove a quarterback. I think that's unfair.
Brigham Young did it. Against Oklahoma.
2009 as I recall. Forcibly removed a quarterback. It affects the outcome. Instead of winning Oklahoma was short-handed and lost with a reserve quarterback.
To me that's cheating. Brigham Young didn't claim a championship that season, however. I think that's the fundamental difference. But it's cheating to put a quarterback out of commission. And Oklahoma was winning with Sam Bradford. Landry Jones was back-up. At the very least it's a tainted win for Brigham Young and no I'm not supporting it.
 
CollegeFBFan2021 said:
I'm not sure about that. In fact I'm mostly confused again as to what the symptom is that you are describing to me. It isn't a fact that the football was fumbled. That's open to interpretation. I'm aware what the ruling was. I was there when it happened. (Well I was an eyewitness anyway). There isn't anything so concrete it isn't open to debate. You are suggesting the ruling was fair. I'm of the opinion another possibility existed. By using my perspective isn't evidence of collusion. Somehow negating the result? Show me where I said anything remotely close to that. I didn't. I said I want it to be called fairly. Fairness to me means not taking things to the extreme. Sure, if we assassinate the quarterback there's a fair chance we might win. But that isn't a fair way to select a champion. Whether or not you agree with me is irrelevant. I probably would have ejected Alabama players. I wouldn't have liked doing it. But I'd have done it because I don't like people who cheat. Yes I think it's cheating to forcibly remove a quarterback. I think that's unfair.
Brigham Young did it. Against Oklahoma.
2009 as I recall. Forcibly removed a quarterback. It affects the outcome. Instead of winning Oklahoma was short-handed and lost with a reserve quarterback.
To me that's cheating. Brigham Young didn't claim a championship that season, however. I think that's the fundamental difference. But it's cheating to put a quarterback out of commission. And Oklahoma was winning with Sam Bradford. Landry Jones was back-up. At the very least it's a tainted win for Brigham Young and no I'm not supporting it.
Click to expand...
In order to be cheating, a rule has to be broken. No rule was broken, both of the plays you are questioning were entirely within the rules. No rule was violated or broken so therefore no cheating. Learn the rules.
 
RTR...USN (ret) said:
In order to be cheating, a rule has to be broken. No rule was broken, both of the plays you are questioning were entirely within the rules. No rule was violated or broken so therefore no cheating. Learn the rules.
Click to expand...
I'm asking you to put aside prejudice for a moment. Nobody wants to see a player injured. That's the crux of the argument I'm making. I read, somewhere, long enough ago it's hard to recall the context other than a bounty was in place. I think we as a society need to move beyond such things. Whether or not a rule was broken is beside the point. People justify it by saying it's a part of the game. Is it? In the NFL it's particularly troubling because of the paucity of players. While it may be true no such penalty exists (although it probably ought to) there is such thing as playing within the rules. When Bradford was injured it wasn't unlike the play Gilbert was blindsided in. Admittedly it was legal. I'll vouch for that being the case. But I think most people would argue it's a shitty way to gain an advantage.
Within the rules and fair as far as consequence apparently are two different things.
I'm on your side, truth be told. I'm far from a person without fault. In fact I've likely contributed to the problem, inadvertently. When I attended college there wasn't anything I wouldn't do to gain an advantage. I recently saw Hoosiers. It was like that. I cheated my way through college. I have nothing to fall back on. I lack integrity and it's plagued my life in ways I couldn't anticipate. I treat people terribly.
I'm not a patron saint. Bottom line it isn't fair to cheat. Simple as that. As far as whatever Alabama did that's an internal issue. I addressed that earlier. You or someone else inquired how I deal with internal strife and conflict. I don't. Meaning if Alabama chested to claim a national championship that's entirely on them. I frankly couldn't care less. I do care that the title is recognized appropriately.
I admitted (not because I necessarily wanted to) Brigham Young confessed to a touchdown against Pittsburgh no-call that wasn't counted when it should have.
I obviously have no dog in the hunt. BYU should be penalized for admitting it happened and apparently some guilt followed through the years. So, I'm counting it. It doesn't change the result as much as you might think. It alters it. In a good way I'd like to believe. Admittedly there is something to be gained by confession.
I'm thinking they couldn't go to their grave knowing an injustice was done. Blaine Fowler admitted it was a touchdown scored but not registered. I'm o.k. with counting it because it excluded an extra point attempt never attempted. I'm being fair to the condition surrounding it. Meaning Pittsburgh ties Brigham Young.
The crux is instead of claiming a fraudulent championship, Brigham Young must settle for claiming a co-championship. Together with Iowa. Or, if you prefer, Florida. But Florida was ineligible. Co-champions really doesn't apply but the title likely was shared between them. As it was in 1996. BYU won a measure of it.
Ultimately the championship was secured through fair play in either circumstance. That's all I'm doing. I'm not righting any wrong. I'm addressing inequity. No I don't think Alabama necessarily deserves a championship in 2009. But what I think is irrelevant. I'm simply asking them not to chest from this point forward. Fair?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top