LSU/SEC homers

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, the SEC and LSU are both definitely overrated. LSU is somewhere around the 10th best team I'd say.

[/ QUOTE ]

I said the same thing and people told me I was nuts. Thank goodness someone else will look at numbers too. Ignoring margin of victory is insane. Even people who care about it usually don't care enough or in the right way.

You so smart JoA.

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
Let's not forget about that fourth down miracle in a game in which they were completely dominated at Arizona State.



[/ QUOTE ]
let's not forget the circumstances bud.

aside from katrina they had to play a very dangerous ASU team with a new coach and a completely new look when they were supposed to play i think UNT? once again its not the margain of victory that counts. i [censored] hate it when people talk about miracles at the end, its like talking about a bad beat on the river...its useless, end result=lsu won.

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Let's not forget about that fourth down miracle in a game in which they were completely dominated at Arizona State.



[/ QUOTE ]
let's not forget the circumstances bud.

aside from katrina they had to play a very dangerous ASU team with a new coach and a completely new look when they were supposed to play i think UNT? once again its not the margain of victory that counts. i [censored] hate it when people talk about miracles at the end, its like talking about a bad beat on the river...its useless, end result=lsu won.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously, LSU is a great team. If they ever come close to losing to a bad team, its because the other team REALLY is good. Tennesee should get a BCS bid btw.

GO SEC!

[tdarko]

i didn't see you chiming in calling USC's 4th and long against ND a miracle, and then the whole 4th and goal a miracle. i mean if you are going to go so far as to say LSU won on a miracle then we need to start calling a spade a spade.

but b/c its leinart and USC and not the "overated" SEC you don't say anything huh? well i agree it wasn't a miracle, it was a gutsy play and showed that USC not only has the ability to blow out teams but win close games against tough teams like ND on the road (those kind of games show me a hell of a lot more than those blowouts of AK).

the thing is is that the LSU game against ASU showed me the same thing...i actually had picked ASU to win but LSU with a new coach, new look, away from home (where they were supposed to be b/c of katrina) go into tempe and played a very good sundevil team.

oh and ASU was held in check for most of the game by LSU's defense. ASU has the 3rd best passing attack in the country and a top 10 scoring team in the country too.

[Jack of Arcades]

No, I think Texas is better than USC, too.

You really need to take into account margin of victory.

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
No, I think Texas is better than USC, too.


[/ QUOTE ]
haha really?
[ QUOTE ]
You really need to take into account margin of victory.

[/ QUOTE ]
margin of victory against baylor and every other soft team in our conference. the only other team that is "considered" good is tech and they IMO are the softest ranked team in the country (should have lost last week to OU, officials screwed that one up...and got really lucky that nebraska mucked up at the end).

texas has 1 quality win. name another? and if you dare say a&m at kyle field i will laugh, yes they were outplayed yesterday but they had to play 1000X better than UT to win and they only played 500X (you like my exaggeration [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]).

nobody is even close to UT in that conference so you can't make the comment that you made, we saw what happened in columbus and what if they have to play games like that every week? b/c in the big 10 its a dogfight every week, no easy games. if they show up like they did against OSU or A&M against any team in the big 10 they lose. so you are better than that margin of victory comment.

i have to go throw i will be back.

[lastchance]

ND is an excellent team, top 10 in most people's book right now. Arkansas is somewhere in the 50's.. ASU is in the 20's, but that win wasn't a bad one, considering it was after Katrina, and a win over the 20's is quality.

And Texas destroyeed A&M, Oklahoma, and Colorado, all top 30 teams, and none of those games came close. 20+ points to Texas in every game but against OSU and A&M. If that doesn't show dominance, I don't know what does.

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
you are better than that margin of victory comment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, is your position that margin of victory doesn't matter? Because that's obviously wrong, and that should be obvious to a poker player who understands probability and expectation.

Texas and USC have both killed most teams on their schedules. When they've played excellent teams, they've both struggled. I think Texas is better, but it's close.

I am a huge MOV guy, but I will concede that MOV needs to be handled a bit carefully in blowouts. The difference in a 49-point win and a 35-point win is less than the difference in a 17-point win and a 3-point win.

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
Wait, is your position that margin of victory doesn't matter? Because that's obviously wrong,

[/ QUOTE ]
so by your reasoning then Texas Tech should be the best 9-2 team in the country, waaaay better than Notre Dame right? b/c they beat the snot out of anemic teams like fla int., sam houston st. and indiana st., teams that give scholarships to kids that are catatonic and partial scholarships to kids that have down syndrome. i mean you can't be serious, they frickin' schedule stat padders for there first few games to see if they can hit the century mark and that should mean that they are better than Notre Dame and Auburn and teams that actual play real teams, teams with some substance. if tech is in any other conference they are at the bottom.

margin of victory doesn't really matter b/c if you haven't played anybody good what does it matter? the big12 is horrendous, the north division is a mess and the south has one bright light so tell me why texas pounding on a bunch of [censored] teams means anything?

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wait, is your position that margin of victory doesn't matter? Because that's obviously wrong,

[/ QUOTE ]
so by your reasoning then Texas Tech should be the best 9-2 team in the country, waaaay better than Notre Dame right?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, of course not. Margin of victory applies to losses as well, and you also obviously need to take into account opponent quality. For example, Notre Dame gets a lot of credit for their three-point loss to USC. That is a GREAT loss, and adds evidence to the case that they're excellent.

Notre Dame is substantially better than Texas Tech. Auburn is about even.

I'm not just a total geek who doesn't watch games. But honestly, just using numbers is a pretty good guide to evaluating teams, because public perception is often way off. Just look at how many NFL commentators pick some BSP team against the Vegas line. And that's their job!

The fact that Texas keeps pounding everyone matters because only excellent teams are that dominant. Even very good teams usually play some close games against bad teams, and most of them even lose to one at some point.

When two teams play a close game, that supports the idea that they are about even, no matter who wins. Honestly, is USC any better because Leinart gets in as opposed to being stopped short? That game was essentially even either way. And if one team is MUCH better than another, they are likely to win by a lot rather than a little. This is a significant part of why LSU is overrated, because they play close with decent teams, which means they're not all that much better than those decent teams they're playing.

I [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Sagarin predictor.