From: tamu@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Henderson)
Subject: Re: AP make FSU #3
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 20:44:36 GMT

ash@ulysses.mr.ams.com (Alan Harder) writes:

>In article <1992Nov16.165753.13098@hou.amoco.com> zcjm0f@wwnv45.uucp (CJohn Mace) writes:

>   >Apparently, your skull is pretty thick, and you don't understand all 
>   >of the ramifications of the above.  
>   >1) NO ONE knows if a team is underrated or overrated vs another team, 
>	>until they meet on the field.

>I agree wholeheartedly.

>   >2) The way it USED to work is that undefeated teams moved up the polls
>	>until they lost, or (if by some mere chance they were overrated)
>	>they get to get crushed on NYD.

>The way it used to work was wrong.  Being undefeated (against crappy
>teams) should not be the only consideration in ranking a team.

At least in the past once a team had been beaten, people recognized there
were/are teams better than them.  Until Miami, Bama, and A&M are beaten, NO ONE
can justify being higher ranked.

The only way to absolutely prove than one team does not deserve to be in the
top spot is for them to lose.  Until that happens, no one knows how the
teams will match up.  You can look at it on paper all you want, but that
little ball with the pointed ends doesn't know how to look at the paper.
I think there are many examples of this from this year.


>   >With FSU going by A&M in the polls, a major precedent is being said
>   >  by the pollsters:

>   >They have taken it upon themselves to choose who is the better team, and
>   >it could turn into a major travesty.  How you ask?  Ok, Alabama loses a
>   >game, and FSU goes to #2 and A&M goes to #3.  Miami and FSU decide on
>   >the rematch in the Fiesta Bowl.  A&M goes on to win the Cotton Bowl.
>   >Instant controversy over the polling system..  not that this hasn't been
>   >true in the past...

>The pollsters have ALWAYS taken it upon themselves to choose who is
>best.  That's what the polls are all about!

Usually, they understand that once a team has been beaten, they no longer
deserve to be with the unbeatens.  As I said above, you don't know how a
fsu-A&M/fsu-Bama/... game would turn out until it happens, but we DO
know how a fsu-Miami game turned out.


Todd

>   >If A&M is not going to win the MNC, I would prefer to lose it on the 
>                                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>   >playing field, not some pollster who looks at final scores only.  Besides,
>    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Don't worry, you will.

>   >FSU BLEW THEIR CHANCE TO BEAT THE CANES, AGAIN. GIVE SOMEONE ELSE A 
>   >CHANCE!

>   >Remember everyone saying Nebraska and Michigan were better teams, not
>   >10 days ago...  Why?  Because they were blowing ppl out...  I will take
>   >consistency over that stuff anyday.

>Unless it's consistent mediocrity against lousy teams.  Point well
>taken about Michigan and Nebraska, though.  At one point or another
>during the season I thought they were untouchable.  It looks like
>nobody is truly untouchable this year.

>   >Lets pitch the polls and get a real playoff... Maybe invite everyone 
>   >with 8 wins over Div IA teams, and make the brackets according to how
>   >many teams get 8 wins.

>   >cmuck

>The argument would then shift to which teams get in the playoffs,
>because invariably someone would get the shaft.  That's why the NCAA
>bball tourney keeps expanding.  So I guess we'd still have something to
>argue about here in r.s.f.c.  "If team x had gotten into the playoffs,
>like they deserved, they would've gone all the way.".


>-Alan Harder
> 
>These opinions are mine.  You can't have them.  Stop, thief!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college