From: billms@eecs.umich.edu (William Mangione-Smith)
Subject: Re: Remaining Schedules AP Top 10
Organization: University of Michigan
	<1d9bvrINNpeh@gap.caltech.edu> <ASH.92Nov5093949@ulysses.mr.ams.com>
	<1992Nov5.171240.5088@sol.ctr.columbia.edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 17:37:58 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.171240.5088@sol.ctr.columbia.edu> Mitch Blake <blake@l42al.jsc.nasa.gov> writes:

   ><blake@l42al.jsc.nasa.gov> writes:
   >
   >   >Well, it is a valid argument, but perhaps now the hypocrisy
   exhibited by
   >   >some (especially some very outspoken Mich. fans) will be visible to
   all.
   >
   >Most Michigan fan postings I have read acknowlege Michigan's weak
   >schedule.  Exactly what hypocrisy have you seen?  Excerpts are
   >acceptable proof.

   Example:

   >vanepps@engin.umich.edu (Daniel Van Epps) writes:
   >>In article <wexjRmS00iUyE6AJJM@andrew.cmu.edu>, William Karamo Motley
   >><wm1o+@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
   >>> 
   >>> BAMA BAMA BAMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
   >>
   >>get real, play somebody.  when you've had as many injuries as us
   >>& still go undefeated please let us know. or do we have to meet you
   >>in another bowl game like last time?

   ...etc.  Most comments like this have appeared in the Bama better than

That would one, from a fairly new (and low volume) poster.  So I'd argue that
you haven't even found one example of an outspoken michigan fan who was being
hypocritical.  Furthermore, you said fans.  Thats plural.  Any other
examples.  And your post suggested, pretty strongly, that there was a strong
hypocritical michigan position being presented frequently.  

   Mich./Mich. better than Bama thread.  I must agree that since the first
   few postings in this "You're schedule sucks so I'm better than you"
   argument, I have read many postings from various & sundry sources (Mich.
   fans included) that Bama & Mich. & A&M for that matter all have weak
   schedules & shouldn't be using it for ammo in arguments as to why they
   should be ranked higher/lower.

So does this mean you retract your blanket suggestion that most michigan
posts here are hypocritical?

   At this point in the season, I don't think that schedule strength should
   matter in the rankings anyway.  If a mediocre team makes it all the way
   through the season with an unblemished record simply because of its poor
   competition, it will still be invited to a major bowl to play another
   team with a great record.  The great equalizer occurs on New Years Day
   when the overrated teams get pasted in the bowl games by the truly good
   teams (It's not quite that simple, but until the bowls the only thing we
   have to go on is record, a few key matchups during the season, and a lot
   of biased opinion on a teams performance).

Thats exactly the problem.  Assume that mich and alabama are really the two
best teams, but don't assume you know which is #1.  On NYD they both win by a
bunch over the ranked #1 and #2.  Which one should be ranked #1?  Its mostly
likely going to be the one that was ranked #3 (though not always, especially
if #4 beats #1).  Two weeks ago, that would have put michigan with the MNC,
this week it looks like that scenario would give it to alabama, but the
assumption is we don't really know which team is better.  So the rankings
*now*, which you seem to think don't matter, really can make all the
difference. 

   A good plug for a playoff is that biased opinion still plays a big part
   in the rankings even after the bowls, especially if #1 doesn't play #2
   etc. ......

You don't have to be biased to hit this problem.  Given that, I still don't
like the playoff idea.

Bill
--
-------------------------------
	Bill Mangione-Smith
	billms@eecs.umich.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college