SEC Logic

Home ▸ Archive ▸ College Sports ▸ SEC Logic
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Dec 6, 2011 10:59 AM
lhslep134;1004083 wrote:I don't say anything on this thread and you still find a way to cry about my post. Get over yourself dude. You sound like a jealous little bitch.
HOLY SHIT A lhslep POST THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE WORST OBJECTIVE, SUBJECTIVE, OR IGNORANT!!!! ITS A GOD DAMN MIRACLE!!!!
Dec 6, 2011 10:59am
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Dec 6, 2011 11:03 AM
SportsAndLady;1004121 wrote:HOLY **** A lhslep POST THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE WORST OBJECTIVE, SUBJECTIVE, OR IGNORANT!!!! ITS A GOD DAMN MIRACLE!!!!
Did I bang your mom or something? You sound like a jilted lover. Again, get over yourself.
Dec 6, 2011 11:03am
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Dec 6, 2011 11:05 AM
lhslep134;1004130 wrote:Did I bang your mom or something? You sound like a jilted lover. Again, get over yourself.
No my mom has a weight limit, so unless it happened in the last like 6 months (cool mirror picture by the way)..

Anyone who says "jilted lover" is a *** and deserves to be tar and feathered
Dec 6, 2011 11:05am
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Dec 6, 2011 11:14 AM
lhs is slowing coming over from the Dark Side. Logic is winning here, its unfortunate logic is not winning in the BCS.
Dec 6, 2011 11:14am
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Dec 6, 2011 11:18 AM
sleeper;1004154 wrote:lhs is slowing coming over from the Dark Side. Logic is winning here, its unfortunate logic is not winning in the BCS.
Haha, I mean you have to separate logic from opinion. My opinion is Alabama is the 2nd best team in the country, but logic dictates they don't deserve a shot.

S&L, I still have no idea why you're on this anti-lhslep campaign but it's really funny, so keep it up, because I definitely care what someone on an interwebz message board thinks about me. :rolleyes:
Dec 6, 2011 11:18am
DeyDurkie5's avatar

DeyDurkie5

Senior Member

11,324 posts
Dec 6, 2011 11:45 AM
lhslep134;1004160 wrote:S&L, I still have no idea why you're on this anti-lhslep campaign but it's really funny, so keep it up, because I definitely care what someone on an interwebz message board thinks about me. :rolleyes:
yet, you post a picture of yourself in a mirror topless to prove a point to someone on said interwebz? thanks for playing!
Dec 6, 2011 11:45am
C

Con_Alma

Senior Member

12,198 posts
Dec 6, 2011 11:46 AM
sleeper;1003933 wrote:Con Alma didn't answer the question. The thread went over his head, I'll wait on the opinions of the others before I admit defeat on this one.
Huh? I thought I did answer. I'll try again.

"...Given this, if OKST ends up beating ISU, does Alabama still get to go to the NCG? ..."

Yes, but only if they remain #2 in the BCS poll.

If OK St ends up beating ISU and it moves them to #2 in the BCS poll then no, Alabama doesn't get to go to the NCG.
Dec 6, 2011 11:46am
DeyDurkie5's avatar

DeyDurkie5

Senior Member

11,324 posts
Dec 6, 2011 11:49 AM
Con_Alma;1004207 wrote:Huh? I thought I did answer. I'll try again.

"...Given this, if OKST ends up beating ISU, does Alabama still get to go to the NCG? ..."

Yes, but only if they remain #2 in the BCS poll.

If OK St ends up beating ISU and it moves them to #2 in the BCS poll then no, Alabama doesn't get to go to the NCG.
con alma laughs at you sleeper
Dec 6, 2011 11:49am
C

Con_Alma

Senior Member

12,198 posts
Dec 6, 2011 11:52 AM
sleeper;1004091 wrote:Con Alma did not follow my logic. In reality, he probably gets it but decided to go all Jesus on me and post some gibberish babble.

All I did was directly answer the question you asked me. I'm not trying to read into your logic, support your position or even negate your position....just answered your question.

That's all.
Dec 6, 2011 11:52am
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Dec 6, 2011 12:15 PM
DeyDurkie5;1004205 wrote:yet, you post a picture of yourself in a mirror topless to prove a point to someone on said interwebz? thanks for playing!
Keep playing the jilted lover card, bringing up irrelevant stuff to make you feel better about yourself. :laugh:
Dec 6, 2011 12:15pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Dec 6, 2011 12:28 PM
DeyDurkie5;1004205 wrote:yet, you post a picture of yourself in a mirror topless to prove a point to someone on said interwebz? thanks for playing!

I find proving people wrong fun. That's why I'm in law school.
Dec 6, 2011 12:28pm
jhay78's avatar

jhay78

Senior Member

1,917 posts
Dec 6, 2011 12:32 PM
fan_from_texas;1004073 wrote:Yes, a tentative stamp. I mean, if the point of the national championship game is to get the two "best" teams (not the two most deserving), then Alabama could be there even if they went 0-12, as long as they were actually the second best and just had some really nasty breaks.
sleeper;1004086 wrote:Then we agree. If the goal is to get the two best teams, it does not matter what OK ST or Alabama did during the regular season. The reality is, you are suppose to place the two most deserving teams in the NCG.

I'm also amazed that one of the people I called out for a stamp of approval understands and follows the logic that I have laid out.
You're both on to something. "Best" is a hypothetical, theoretical, on paper type of argument. "Deserving" is what took place during the 12 game season. If "best" is the only argument, then as sleeper said, it doesn't matter if OkSt went undefeated or lost one game, or if Alabama lost 2 or 3 games- it's been predetermined that Bama is the 2nd best team.

It would also mean USC should've played in another 2 or three NC games in the past decade. Obviously they didn't because they lost a few games they shouldn't have, but even then they got hosed a few times (2003, 2008).

The voters should consider the most deserving first, then if all other things are equal, you go to the theoretical, on-paper, "best" argument to break the tie. OkSt should be in because of the most deserving argument.
Dec 6, 2011 12:32pm
DeyDurkie5's avatar

DeyDurkie5

Senior Member

11,324 posts
Dec 6, 2011 12:59 PM
lhslep134;1004245 wrote:I find proving people wrong fun. That's why I'm in law school.
well i proved you wrong. maybe i should become a lawyer and boast about it on here?
Dec 6, 2011 12:59pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Dec 6, 2011 1:06 PM
lhslep134;1004160 wrote:S&L, I still have no idea why you're on this anti-lhslep campaign but it's really funny, so keep it up, because I definitely care what someone on an interwebz message board thinks about me. :rolleyes:
Youre fun to make fun of because youre arrogant...thats all really
Dec 6, 2011 1:06pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Dec 6, 2011 1:24 PM
DeyDurkie5;1004275 wrote:well i proved you wrong. maybe i should become a lawyer and boast about it on here?
What have I boasted about?
Dec 6, 2011 1:24pm
E

enigmaax

Senior Member

4,511 posts
Dec 6, 2011 2:49 PM
jhay78;1004251 wrote:The voters should consider the most deserving first, then if all other things are equal, you go to the theoretical, on-paper, "best" argument to break the tie. OkSt should be in because of the most deserving argument.
I agree with this to an extent, but what do you consider to differentiate between "deserving" and "best". Oklahoma State's opponent's records were a little higher overall, but that isn't necessarily the end of the conversation either. There are plenty of things to consider as to how those games played out that give Alabama more of a case than some are giving them credit for.

As an example, one could consider Alabama's top win (+24 over 10-2 Arkansas) better than Oklahoma State's top win (+7 over 10-2 Kansas State). Nobody else on Alabama's schedule came within 2 TDs of them, while Oklahoma State (in addition to losing to one 6-6 team) struggled with 6-6 TAM (one point win), and also let Texas hang around (12 point win).

Also, Alabama held every single opponent at least 9 points below their season scoring average, including the top two teams on its schedule (#1 LSU) to 23 and 30 below their season averages. Oklahoma State on the other hand, gave up more points than what the teams usually score in 4 games (and two other ones were with 1-2 points).

Everyone talks about how crappy Bama's offense is and how high-powered Ok State's is, but Oklahoma State scored about the average allowed by/against Arizona, Texas A&M, and Iowa State (all 1-2 pts above average, all teams without a winning record). Alabama scored no less than 11 points above an opponent's defensive average with the execption of LSU, but even that was only 5 points below their defensive average (#1 team in the country - and remember what the defense did).
Dec 6, 2011 2:49pm
W

WebFire

Go Bucks!

14,779 posts
Dec 6, 2011 2:51 PM
How is best not deserving?
Dec 6, 2011 2:51pm
E

enigmaax

Senior Member

4,511 posts
Dec 6, 2011 2:57 PM
WebFire;1004462 wrote:How is best not deserving?
I think what they are saying is that you can look at Alabama's line up on paper and talk about this star player, that star player, and then come to the conclusion that they are the best team because they have the best players without setting foot on the field. And if you stop there, it is indeed a lazy way to evaluate teams.

So if you picked Alabama over Oklahoma State simply because you think they are more talented overall, or have "better" players, or whatever without actually considering how that translated to the field, it isn't really doing justice to your role as a voter. Hence the, "it wouldn't matter if they went 0-12 if you already think they are the best." I agree with this thought. What I tried to show above is that there are certainly ways that you could support an argument that "best" or not, Alabama deserved it because they played better against their opponents' level than Oklahoma State did against theirs.
Dec 6, 2011 2:57pm
F

fan_from_texas

Senior Member

2,693 posts
Dec 6, 2011 2:57 PM
WebFire;1004462 wrote:How is best not deserving?
Between two teams, I'd define the "best" team as the one that is more likely to win on a neutral field. That doesn't mean they win every time, nor does it mean that they have a better record. There's an awful lot of variability in sports, especially football, so the better team can and does lose. That doesn't mean they wouldn't be favored in a rematch: it means that they got unlucky when they actually squared off.

It's easier to see this with the Ohio HS football playoffs. My recollection is that a 4-win Walsh Jesuit team from the early 2000s made some noise in the playoffs. Clearly, they were "better" than many of the 10-0 teams they played. But are they more deserving to be in the playoffs? Those two things aren't the same.

The trick is applying the theory to the facts, and I don't know how to do that with Oklahoma State and Alabama. From a theoretical standpoint, though, I agree with sleeper that if the goal is to put the two best teams into the national championship game, then the records aren't determinative.
Dec 6, 2011 2:57pm
F

fan_from_texas

Senior Member

2,693 posts
Dec 6, 2011 3:00 PM
lhslep134;1004245 wrote:I find proving people wrong fun. That's why I'm in law school.
Then you're in the wrong profession. We lawyers don't prove people wrong: we respond to e-mails at three in the morning over a holiday weekend and then get in the office to bill six-minute increments while poring over boxes of contracts from the 1980s that were typed, then faxed, then scanned, the printed, so you can't really make out what they say.
Dec 6, 2011 3:00pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Dec 6, 2011 3:05 PM
fan_from_texas;1004480 wrote:Then you're in the wrong profession. We lawyers don't prove people wrong: we respond to e-mails at three in the morning over a holiday weekend and then get in the office to bill six-minute increments while poring over boxes of contracts from the 1980s that were typed, then faxed, then scanned, the printed, so you can't really make out what they say.
Haha exactly :thumbup:
Dec 6, 2011 3:05pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Dec 6, 2011 3:06 PM
fan_from_texas;1004471 wrote: The trick is applying the theory to the facts, and I don't know how to do that with Oklahoma State and Alabama. From a theoretical standpoint, though, I agree with sleeper that if the goal is to put the two best teams into the national championship game, then the records aren't determinative.
This was the entire point of the thread summed into a beautiful statement. Reps and thank you good sir.
Dec 6, 2011 3:06pm
W

WebFire

Go Bucks!

14,779 posts
Dec 6, 2011 3:06 PM
enigmaax;1004472 wrote:I think what they are saying is that you can look at Alabama's line up on paper and talk about this star player, that star player, and then come to the conclusion that they are the best team because they have the best players without setting foot on the field. And if you stop there, it is indeed a lazy way to evaluate teams.

So if you picked Alabama over Oklahoma State simply because you think they are more talented overall, or have "better" players, or whatever without actually considering how that translated to the field, it isn't really doing justice to your role as a voter. Hence the, "it wouldn't matter if they went 0-12 if you already think they are the best." I agree with this thought. What I tried to show above is that there are certainly ways that you could support an argument that "best" or not, Alabama deserved it because they played better against their opponents' level than Oklahoma State did against theirs.
This is a stretch. First, I don't believe anyone really picks who they think is better for the NCG by comparing rosters. They compare what's been done on the field. Second, no one would ever think an 0-12 team is the best team.
Dec 6, 2011 3:06pm
W

WebFire

Go Bucks!

14,779 posts
Dec 6, 2011 3:09 PM
sleeper;1004486 wrote:This was the entire point of the thread summed into a beautiful statement. Reps and thank you good sir.
But the records are determined by the play on the field. How can they not be part of the equation in determining who is best?

You could use the Philly Eagles this year. If you looked at the roster, many thought they were the best team this year? But their play on the field, and hence their record, says they are not the best. How many people would send Philly to the Super Bowl?
Dec 6, 2011 3:09pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Dec 6, 2011 3:12 PM
WebFire;1004491 wrote:But the records are determined by the play on the field. How can they not be part of the equation in determining who is best?

You could use the Philly Eagles this year. If you looked at the roster, many thought they were the best team this year? But their play on the field, and hence their record, says they are not the best. How many people would send Philly to the Super Bowl?
Probably about the same amount of people who voted Alabama #2.
Dec 6, 2011 3:12pm