Do weak schedule proponents forfeit right to complain about polls?

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Any conference that lacks the clout or prestige to be included in a cartel of conferences that hoard all the money, recruits, and success.

is BYU a conference?

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

is BYU a conference?

the mwc is a mid major.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

the mwc is a mid major.

OK, so you won't define it, whatever.

You are having a difficult time convincing Cougar fans that we belong to a conference that is below the top conferences in terms of money and success? Who are these Cougar fans having such a hard time acknowledging this?

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

I agree with this. 2004 Utes are another good example of case-by-case exceptions to the general rule.

But the general rule is, to me, a fairly reasonable one. You say 3-4 good teams, but do MWC teams really play 4 good teams a year on average? I would think that MWC teams play maybe 2 good teams a year (if we are meaning "good" to be what BCS teams are also playing....Georgia is "good." UNLV is having a "good year," but they are not "good" in the same sense as Georgia.

Again, I still submit that it is not a big deal to think that BYU is a mid-major.

How many good teams will USC play this year? Ohio State without Beanie is not good so I am thinking the likely answer, by your definition, is zero. Should SC be ranked as high as they are and should a 1 loss SC team get an invite to the NC game over a one loss SEC team? Don't get me wrong, SC tried to schedule good teams with a roadie to UVA, Ohio State and Notre Dame. However, they will play nobody that is good and are you consistent in the application of your rule of requiring a team to have beaten a good team or two or three or four before you call them good?

This leads to the problem with mid major and our way of thinking is certain esteem and categorization of good is given based upon affiliation and the past moreso than reality. You like to use reality of the past to categorize BYU but I am fairly certain that you are more than willing to let SC fly on an unearned perception.

Saying that the perception of the past concerning BYU is what is fueling its present top 10 ranking.

I don't have an issue with recognizing where BYU stands in the college football landscape as long as the logic used to come to the conclusion is fairly applicated.

Fight on, Dickhead!

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

the mwc is a mid major.

Given its dominance of the Pac-10 your rules would exclude any Pac-10 champ from a BCS bowl this year, correct?

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by jay santos

Possible, so you agree no one has the right to complain about polls unless you are against the weak scheduling strategy?

Red herring. The problem isn't/wasn't the schedule it was how we played taking the schedule into account.

20 point win against USU = 10 point loss to Oregon State

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Red herring. The problem isn't/wasn't the schedule it was how we played taking the schedule into account.

20 point win against USU = 10 point loss to Oregon State

I don't think that's how most people look at it. 20 points is good enough. The issue is who we're playing.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

the mwc is a mid major.

yes it is as it pertains to college football.

On a side note not ment to hijack this thread but "Mid Major" was first a basketball term used to denote a conference that only gets one bid in the NCAA tourney. The MWC and its predecessor WAC have never been a Mid Major according to its original definition. The BCS honks have adopted this terminology for football and it is spilling over into basketball which is annoying to me.

In some years BYU plays 1-4 good teams while some of the "BCS" conferences play 6-8 good teams. I stress "some years" because sometimes even BCS conferences are garbage. What is funny though is that in the Big East, ACC, Big Ten and the Pac 10 have many crappy teams this year and are hardly worthy of their BCS title. Playing a conference schedule in 2008 is not that impressive for these conferences. BYU gets included in the discussion for national championships and BCS games because so much of the BCS is down this year and BYU and the MWC are relatively good.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

Given its dominance of the Pac-10 your rules would exclude any Pac-10 champ from a BCS bowl this year, correct?

We have already agreed that there are exceptions. This past 5 weeks, the MWC has done well against the Pac 10. No problem with that.

Indy already provided us the historic data. The MWC has fared poorly against BCS conferences. It was actually worse than I had imagined.

So if you are using the past 2 months as your sample size, then I suppose you are correct. The MWC is on par with the BCS conferences.

The reason mid-majors are the way they are is a variety of things...lack of depth, being one of them. So yes, SC would benefit from a weak Pac 10 this year. But their depth is what affords them their high ranking. The mids generally have no such depth.

Sanchez gets injured....oh, well put in Mitch Mustain...threw a pick but also threw a TD. Emmanuel Moody transfers to Florida? No problem, give the ball to Joe McKnight, Stafon Johnson, or whomever you choose.

It is a night and day comparison.

Also, Ohio State being "not good..." you would pick BYU over Ohio State this year? Doubt it.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Also, Ohio State being "not good..." you would pick BYU over Ohio State this year? Doubt it.

On a neutral field or at home I take BYU