Sports Containment Thread: Sponsored by G.I. Joe Pavelski, Real American Superhero (ELIte)

[LKJ]

And that post was basically a synopsis of why that was basically the most tragic thing to ever happen in college football. Suddenly it was hands across America for Boise State because the casual fan loves an underdog and they can't ever be bothered to discern between a likable underdog and a POS underdog like the smurfs. It really is gross.

I didn't like Oklahoma before that game, but now I completely ****ing hate them because of what they allowed to happen. Now people who back Boise are still pretty irrational about the whole thing because they liked that damn game so much. Just a travesty.

[dkgojackets]

Originally Posted by LKJ

When Boise lost to Nevada last year, it put them at the same one-loss record. Naturally the voters kept Boise in a higher spot in the polls than Nevada at that point. Why? Because the American public really enjoyed the trick plays they ran against Oklahoma three years earlier. (At least that's my theory.)

LKJ you don't really know what you are talking about here. It is possible for the team that lost on the road by a missed field goal to still be better. They also had beaten better teams and the same teams by more points. What's funny about all this is that when florida loses to ole miss or whoever its "just another tough game in the sec and proof you can never take a week off" but when usc loses to oregon st or boise loses to nevada they suck all of a sudden.

The fact that gus and disko are the ones on your side should make you rethink your position. Boise topped vegas and computer power rankings for most of last year. That isn't just casualfan liking some trick plays.

[tonymark01]

Yesterday was a mostly fulfilling opening day of NCAAF and I celebrated it religiously (as I will for the next ~11 Saturdays)

I'm interested in another topic of discussion. NFL Survivor pool strategy. I remember such a thread in SE fantasy sports in past years but don't see one now. You posted in said threads right dkgo?

What should my strategy be early in the season? Picking the team with the largest % chance of winning each week (largest moneyline)? At what point do I need to start looking at schedules towards the end of seasons?

[dkgojackets]

Yeah I was going to start the thread when I get home. I've made it really deep the past five years (at least week 10), my strategy is to never ever take a road team and to not look far in advance since you just don't know where teams will be a couple weeks down the road. Ill post more on it later

[LKJ]

Originally Posted by dkgojackets

LKJ you don't really know what you are talking about here. It is possible for the team that lost on the road by a missed field goal to still be better. They also had beaten better teams and the same teams by more points. What's funny about all this is that when florida loses to ole miss or whoever its "just another tough game in the sec and proof you can never take a week off" but when usc loses to oregon st or boise loses to nevada they suck all of a sudden.

Oh, SEC fans are pretty ****ing blind in thinking that they're the only school that plays a truly brutal conference schedule. I'm drawing that as an implication from your post, but if I'm drawing it correctly then I agree with you.

But there's a pretty significant difference between the examples of USC losing to Oregon State and Boise losing to Nevada. USC is truly in a position where they truly only have one or two cupcakes to deal with in conference play in a given year...sadly WSU has been one of them, though I'll still suggest that when Jeff Tuel's collarbone heals they won't be one anymore. In any case, when a top team in the Pac plays any one of about 8 or 9 teams in the conference, I have to say that the underdog at least brings about a 4-5% chance to the table of pulling the upset outright. I'm pulling the number out of my ass, but tell me if you think that it's an unreasonable one. Meanwhile I can't possibly see how anyone could think that Boise would face even that much of a possibility of upset against most of its crappy conference opponents.

Basically Boise was on notice that, in conference play, Nevada was one of the rare weeks that they had to prepare for. Naturally their coaches can just start game planning for it from day one, because hell if Boise is going to somehow lose to Idaho or New Mexico State even if they have a down week. In light of that, while clearly the fact that dropping that game isn't a sign that they suck, it's certainly a sign that they aren't that great. When you only have 2-3 games per year to really prepare for, know exactly which ones they are, and don't get the job done...you just aren't that great of a team. I'm not at any point saying that Boise isn't good or that they suck or whatever. Blowing out 11 out of 12 opponents you play pretty much dispels that, even in a pathetically easy schedule.

The fact that gus and disko are the ones on your side should make you rethink your position.

I mean, this part isn't ideal, I'll grant you that. But this ad hominem business doesn't truly discredit an argument.

I will invoke Ed Harris from A Beautiful Mind: "McCarthy is an idiot. Unfortunately that doesn't make him wrong."

Boise topped vegas and computer power rankings for most of last year. That isn't just casualfan liking some trick plays.

The computer rankings do include the human polls. That has sway here. And let's face it, the human polls (especially the coaches polls) are filled out by a lot of people who didn't truly pay that great of attention to the entire football landscape. Brand names win the day much of the time...and unfortunately the Boise brand name has risen.

[LKJ]

Originally Posted by tonymark01

Yesterday was a mostly fulfilling opening day of NCAAF and I celebrated it religiously (as I will for the next ~11 Saturdays)

Yeah, I lacked your fulfillment in opening day, between my team getting decimated (while winning by 43 points, ironically enough) and seeing most results I was rooting for go south...but after passing out in a beer-and-depression-fueled haze for a couple of hours, I was right back to loving watching (even a game like Colorado-Hawaii that I have little investment in). College football is awesome.

[dkgojackets]

I assure you vegas power rankings and sagarin predictor do not factor in human polls, which are generally crap like you said. The bcs combines bad computer rankings that can't use margin of victory with flawed human polls. Can address the rest later when I'm not on my phone but in general I think the public underestimates an underdogs chance of winning across all conferences, especially a home dog.

[diskoteque]

well, good thing dkgo didn't take me up on my bet!

i was ****faced last night so that sorta took away the sting of the georgia loss.

[LKJ]

I just think that there's a pretty significant difference in upset opportunities by BCS conference teams vs. teams from lower conferences. It was shocking yesterday that Utah St. really should have beaten Auburn (although I'm not sure how good Auburn is...God knows that the Tigers were really only ranked based on the fact that voters felt weird about not ranking the defending champions, and most expected a significant decline). The thing is, when you see the upset start to fall apart for a low-rung team like that, you generally see the whole thing implode rather quickly. Teams in their position are mentally defeated and just don't know how to finish the job. They don't go in expecting to win, and then when the tough part of the game kicks in then panic really clearly and visibly sets in as well. Teams from BCS conferences mostly don't have that kind of culture. You occasionally find perpetual doormats, but mostly you find programs that have been in a position of high success before and don't just see their school as one that isn't ever supposed to beat the big boys.

Unlike the NFL, where no single upset can be all that shocking (the "any given Sunday" thing is entirely true), there are matchups in college ball that truly should go only one way at least 99% of the time. There's just such a staggered distribution of talent that you can't expect certain teams to keep up with others basically almost ever.

[diskoteque]

Originally Posted by LKJ

at least 99% of the time.

uh oh

[LKJ]

I didn't put up a ridiculous number. I didn't go 99.9999% to run the entire table or whatever. Giving a team with a huge talent shortage no better than a 1 in 100 chance to pull an upset in a given game isn't crazy.

[diskoteque]

afaik, the natl championship game is supposed to feature the two best teams based on what we saw during the season.

boise can be the greatest team in the history of the universe and i still wouldn't want them in the natl championship because its impossible for them to convince me that they are one of the best two teams when they don't beat anyone worthwhile. you HAVE to give people a reason to think that you're the best team. boise simply doesn't give people a reason to NOT think they are the best team.

the problem is that the voters don't understand their jobs. instead of ranking the teams properly (#1 would beat #2 more often than #2 would beat #1, #2 would beat #3 more often than #3 would beat #2, etc) they robotically shuffle teams based on what happened the day before, regardless of what's happened throughout the entire season. this basically turns it into "survivor" which helps boise a ton but doesn't do a whole lot to ensure that the two best teams are playing for the title.

[LKJ]

The voter bias toward a team that lost early rather than late in the season is so ****ing sickening.

I guess this goes hand-in-hand with the thing where a team who comes out sucking in the first quarter and does enough to come back and win in the 4th "just put on a valiant and brave comeback, blah blah blah," whereas a team that starts fast and then barely holds on in the 4th after turning the ball over a couple of times "just got lucky to escape with a win." Heavy human bias toward the last thing a person saw makes me want to beat the **** out of something.

[Karak]

The only thing more tilting than lkjs opinions on sports is the d in the thread title. Mods fix it!

[LKJ]

I'm sorry, Karak. I'll adopt some sports-based superstitions so that I can properly dumb down my posts for you and your kind.