From: zcjm0f@wwnv45.uucp (CJohn Mace)
Subject: Re: All AP & CNN/USA pollsters, read this
Keywords: n
Organization: Amoco Production
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 20:54:26 GMT


>>Bullshit! Who has FSU played that was any good, Vinny? GaTech? 5-5.
>>And FSU was seriously in the hole against them! Clemson? maybe a 
>>loosing season? Tulane? Can you say run the damn score up? Maryland? 
>>another patsy. The only real team that they've played so far is Miami, 
>>and they LOST. Once again they had more than sufficient opportunity to 
>>write their own destiny, but couldn't put it in the endzone. Miami
>>made the most of all their opportunities.
>
>>I used to think Miami was the scum of college football. Maybe they
>>used to be. But they're well behaved under Erikson, and now FSU is
>>starting to lose respect. My hat's off to Erikson and his team.
>
>>James
>
>
>Who has FSU played that was any good????  You don't get around much do you?
>FSU won the ACC by beating 8 teams, 6 of which have been in the top 25 at
>some point during the season.  Ga. Tech?  They were a legitimate top 25
>team until they lost Shawn Jones and other key players to injuries.  Yes
>FSU was in the hole against them, but they came back and won it.  Miami was
>in the hole to FSU 19-3 in 1987 and came back and won.  Does that mean Miami
>sucked that year?  The fact that FSU was 14 down to then #15 Ga Tech and
>came back to win says something.  Clemson has also had injury problems and
>when FSU played them in Clemson they were much tougher.  I notice you "forgot"
>to mention NC State, #13 NC State, who we beat in Raleigh.  How about #22 UNC?
>And of course Miami.  You're right we lost.  But I wouldn't exactly say Miami
>"made the most of all their opportunities".  How about when FSU gave Miami
>the ball at their 5 yard line and the "powerful" Canes couldn't even manage
>a field goal.  Also you might want to check the punting statistics and I
>think you will find that Miami's punter had a busy day just like FSU's.
>
>It doesn't concern me in the least whether FSU has your respect.  They're a
>damn good football team and most other sane people in the country know it.
>
>D. Head


Boy, you bit on that one... What he is trying to point out is your double
standard.  Team A comes back and beats Team B, Team C and Team D.  Team
A is a great team, because I like them.   Team G comes back and beats Team
H, Team I and Team J.  Team G sucks, because they are undefeated and having
to come from behind to win.  Double standard.  I don't believe in the 
strength of the schedule until the dust settles after the bowls.  Remember
that some teams get preferential treatment...  ie, Florida and Clemson
both being ranked with losing records early on...  One wound up having
a right to be there, the other didn't...  What's the point?  Well, see
how many on your schedule are ranked after the bowls...

Yes, there are a lot of good football teams...  Miami, Washington, FSU,
Michigan, Arizona and believe it or not, A&M..   

I think the MNC needs to be decided on the field, not in your head.  If
Miami comes to the Cotton Bowl and beats us...  that's ok...  If Texas
gets excited and beats us, that's ok...  But I am not going to bow to
the diarrhea coming east of the Mississippi denoting who is a good team
and who is not.

The computer power polls are the worst case of bias'ness...  The SWC 
has probably the worst reputation in non-conference games, yet it is
currently 16-13-1.  Not too bad considering we have teams like SMU and
TCU and (most of the time) Rice.  Take a different conference, say the
ACC... ok, since it starts with a better reputation, its teams are 
ranked higher...  So barring a disastrous season of non-conference games,
its teams will remain higher because their schedules are automatically
consider "tougher."  It is kind of self serving...  Roughly 1/4 of the
games can actually affect the conference standings, the rest is just an
exchange of niceties.  It is kind of a catch 22 situation.  Or maybe
its more like the old cliche, "The rich get richer, the poor get poorer."

At any rate...  I prefer to see what happens on the field.  A&M is not
a high scoring team..  so what...  They have held their opponents to 
fewer points than they have scored in every contest.  I don't think 
that anyone is just going to come in and walk all over them.  

cmuck

ps- about the conference record... bear in mind that the SWC was 1-7 
    in one week...  15-6-1 for the rest of the season..  Any conference
    that does better than .500 is doing ok, ie my conference's best
    teams schedule your conference's patsies, and your conference's 
    best teams schedule my conference's patsies...  thus it should
    turn out right around .500.