From: mbs@zycor.lgc.com (Matt Shostak)
Subject: Re: Excessive Celebration Penalty
Organization: Landmark/Zycor   Austin, Texas
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 13:26:52 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.214932.12347@spss.com> nichols@spss.com (David Nichols) writes:
>In article <1992Nov20.182846.28343@lgc.com> mbs@zycor.lgc.com (Matt Shostak) writes:
>>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>On the polling aspect of it though, I can find some information more easily
>>>to show what I'm talking about. Notre Dame has had four undefeated, untied
>>>seasons since they began systematically picking national champions back in
>>>the late 1930s. They have been crowned national champions every time. In
>>>each of those years, except 1988, there were other teams/was another team
>>>also undefeated and untied. In EVERY case, Notre Dame was the national
>>>champion. EVERY time. Can you find me another school in which this is
>>>true? Notre Dame has also won partial or unanimous (as listed in the
>>>NCAA book) national championships twice with a tie and three times with
>>>a loss, all when there were teams with perfect records. Again, can you
>>>find another team for which this is true?
>>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Maybe there is another team for which this is true, maybe not.  One thing
>>you seem to not understand or conveniently forget is that football was
>>very different 50 years ago than it is today.  When were those undefeated 
>>championships?  Well, they won the MNC in 1946 with a tie, 1947, and 1949.
>>If you know anything about these teams you would know that they were 
>>absolutely amazing, and well-deserving of their titles.  In addition, the
>>1948 team was undefeated with a tie, but did NOT win the MNC.  One of
>>those teams in the 40s beat 4 teams in the top ten, something not 
>>accomplished again by anyone until ND did it again in 1988.  Face it,
>>50 years ago college football was very different.  Were there more ties
>>back then?  I would like to know.  There was certainly not the same kind
>>of media hype.   I think in the 50s ND was also undefeated but had a tie,
>>yet still didn't win the MNC.  I'm not complaining, mind you.  I'm just
>>letting you have some more data for your obviously unbiased analysis.
>
>The information I have (the NCAA book) doesn't give me all the teams ND
>or anyone played in each year, only national champions for early years,
>those and polls for later years, and undefeated, untied teams for each
>year. The point I was making was not that Notre Dame didn't deserve to
>win some (most?) of those, but that, when in doubt (at all), Notre Dame
>gets the benefit of the doubt over ANYONE. Same principle that applies
>to refereeing--not consciously, not deliberately, but consistently. 
    ^^^^^^^^^^

Not true.  Period.  But obviously, you are going to believe what you want.
Keep living in your fantasy land.


>
>Five of the MNC for Notre Dame came after 1960. They were the obvious
 ^^^^

Four.  1966, 1973, 1977, 1988.  All well deserved.

>choice in 1988, and I won't quarrel either with 1973, when they beat
>undefeated, number one Alabama in a bowl (though I thought Alabama was
>better and should have won, the winner of that game in my mind was the
>appropriate pick, despire Penn State going undefeated at 12-0).
>
>But in 1977, Notre Dame vaulted from 5th to 1st with an impressive 38-10
>win over undefeated Texas in the Cotton Bowl, while Alabama, the number
>2 team going into the bowls (same record as ND, 1 loss), clobbered Ohio
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

A very important point.  

>State 35-6 in the Sugar Bowl, saw the only team ahead of them lose, and
>stayed right where they were. Can you find another team that's had that
>happen to them? I doubt it. Can you find another team that's vaulted over
>several previously higher ranked bowl winners? I doubt it. Why? Because
>it was Notre Dame. If you reversed the roles of the teams, there's no
>way Alabama (or anyone else) would have vaulted over Notre Dame.
>
>In 1966, Ara played the famous tie, yet still got number one, despite
>Alabama being undefeated and untied. The rules are not the same for
>Notre Dame.

Notre Dame and Michigan State were probably the two best teams that year.
Sorry.

>
>In the 1949 season, you had Army and Oklahoma also undefeated. Those were

The 1949 ND team was a powerhouse and deserved the ranking.  That class
had never been beaten at ND in four years.

>some all time powerhouses as well. Doesn't matter who it is. If Notre
>Dame is up there with anyone, they get the nod.
>
>You noted a time (1948) that Notre Dame had lost none but tied one and
>not gotten the MNC. Someone else was undefeated and untied that year
>(I don't have the book here, and don't remember who it was, but I can
>check it). But the point still remains: Notre Dame has NEVER been denied
>the MNC by another team with the same record, and has on some occasions
>been given the nod over teams with better records. 
>
>--
> David Nichols        Senior Statistical Support Specialist         SPSS, Inc.
> Phone: (312) 329-3684     Internet:  nichols@spss.com     Fax: (312) 329-3657
>*******************************************************************************
> Any correlation between my views and those of SPSS is strictly due to chance.

I'm sorry you're so caught up in past history that you can't change.  You
obviously simply hate ND and are looking for anything to hold against them.


-- 
Matthew B. Shostak              Landmark/Zycor
mbs@zycor.lgc.com               (512) 292-2357
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here! This is the war room!"