Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Sports Containment Thread: Sponsored by G.I. Joe Pavelski, Real American Superhero (ELIte) Sports Containment Thread: Sponsored by G.I. Joe Pavelski, Real American Superhero (ELIte)

10-14-2011 , 07:28 PM
But they beat so Idaho and Wyoming so handily.
10-14-2011 , 07:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkgojackets
there is a massive difference between a win at home and winning both games in a home and home, dominating the one at your place
And you're throwing out last year why? Preferably an answer besides "defending your pride" would be good.
10-14-2011 , 07:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diskoteque
the 2-0 is worth mentioning; the 43-2 isnt
I think its already been established that you don't know anything about the subject. LKJ does but is just a hater because he lives in the same region.
10-14-2011 , 07:31 PM
lived*

But I think you can see that I'm trying to make honest arguments at least.
10-14-2011 , 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LKJ
And you're throwing out last year why? Preferably an answer besides "defending your pride" would be good.
where did I say I threw out last year?

sagarin predictor

2011 oregon 7 boise st 3
2010 oregon 2 boise st 4
2009 oregon 9 boise st 11
2008 oregon 14 boise st 13

to act like its oregon ainec is lol
10-14-2011 , 07:33 PM
And aside from my biases, which I don't deny, it does seem like your bias is nearly as strong. I understand you didn't begin liking Boise to begin with due to any bias, but now pride has taken a foothold and dammit you want to be right. Also this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by dkgojackets
Honestly imo the bcs is a joke and corrupt cartel and I like anything that they don't like.
I'm not the only one with an emotional investment here. Yours is just of another variety.
10-14-2011 , 07:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkgojackets
to act like its oregon ainec is lol
This appears to be the strongest thing I said in comparing the two:

Quote:
(Also, yes. Oregon beats them out for that "honor.")
Gus laughed at you. I just said Oregon beats them. Never said anything about "AINEC" or anything even to that effect.

You seem to lump me in with whoever argues alongside me, and you should probably not do that.

Last edited by LKJ; 10-14-2011 at 07:36 PM. Reason: Okay, Michael Jordan laughed at you...whatever.
10-14-2011 , 07:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LKJ
But they beat so Idaho and Wyoming so handily.
lololol
10-14-2011 , 07:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LKJ
This appears to be the strongest thing I said in comparing the two:



Gus laughed at you. I just said Oregon beats them. Never said anything about "AINEC" or anything even to that effect.

You seem to lump me in with whoever argues alongside me, and you should probably not do that.
it is an unfortunate quality of poster who is on your side

at the end of the day the two teams have put together nearly indentical ranked seasons with boise beating them twice recently so I'm comfortable putting them ahead.

this season I dont think we are even arguing about anything, maybe a couple ranking spots within the top ten that could change with more games
10-14-2011 , 07:43 PM
Thing is, I can disagree with disko about some things as I think he has a tendency toward overstatement, but objecting to your citation of 43-2 is correct. Yes that's a nice number, but you know how padded it is by tomato cans and you know that it wouldn't be 43-2 if you adjusted for playing in a real conference. Throwing a gross number out there without any context and trying to utilize it as a strong point is like throwing out Alex Rodriguez's salary vs. Babe Ruth's without any context in a "who's better all-time?" debate.
10-14-2011 , 07:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkgojackets
it is an unfortunate quality of poster who is on your side
Even if so, I think you know better than to think this disqualifies the argument being made. You think that people who are of the exact same college football accumen as those two don't champion Boise State too? I'm sure you know better than to think that there aren't. We're not on a site where you should let ad hominem logic or small sample sizes indicate anything to you.
10-14-2011 , 08:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LKJ
Thing is, I can disagree with disko about some things as I think he has a tendency toward overstatement, but objecting to your citation of 43-2 is correct. Yes that's a nice number, but you know how padded it is by tomato cans and you know that it wouldn't be 43-2 if you adjusted for playing in a real conference. Throwing a gross number out there without any context and trying to utilize it as a strong point is like throwing out Alex Rodriguez's salary vs. Babe Ruth's without any context in a "who's better all-time?" debate.
over the past 4 years boise is 7-2 (5-2 on the road/neutral) against teams who finished in sagarins top 30 and oregon is 11-8 (6-7 on the road/neutral).

just to throw out some facts. if they could get some home games their top 30 record would be better than anyone. people underestimate how difficult road games are in cfb
10-14-2011 , 08:07 PM
The Sagarin comparison is noted.

Are you really saying that road games at New Mexico State, Idaho, Wyoming, etc. are underestimated by any noticeable extent? Not that I can quote facts to oppose you, but I just don't buy that.
10-14-2011 , 08:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkgojackets
over the past 4 years boise is 7-2 (5-2 on the road/neutral) against teams who finished in sagarins top 30 and oregon is 11-8 (6-7 on the road/neutral).

just to throw out some facts. if they could get some home games their top 30 record would be better than anyone. people underestimate how difficult road games are in cfb
how many of those games did boise have all year (or offseason) to gameplan for and play at 100% health?

Last edited by diskoteque; 10-14-2011 at 08:13 PM.
10-14-2011 , 08:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LKJ
The Sagarin comparison is noted.

Are you really saying that road games at New Mexico State, Idaho, Wyoming, etc. are underestimated by any noticeable extent? Not that I can quote facts to oppose you, but I just don't buy that.
not really, thats why I just posted the very impressive 5-2 record against top 30 teams not at home which most people dont know about.
10-14-2011 , 08:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diskoteque
how many of those games did boise have all year (of offseason) to gameplan for and play at 100% health?
Why does it matter since the other team had all offseason to prepare and get healthy for as well?
10-14-2011 , 08:10 PM
The health thing is very real too. You play tomato cans and your starters take way fewer hits, both because of being dominant in the trenches and because of the ability to pull your starters early many weeks.

That's a factor that's extremely real that the stats don't gauge. Meanwhile Oregon is down an offensive star this weekend against ASU because they don't have that luxury.
10-14-2011 , 08:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkgojackets
Why does it matter since the other team had all offseason to prepare and get healthy for as well?
This counter-argument is merited for week one games (such as Boise State v. Georgia). The health thing comes into play in a significant way when talking about dealing with a full real schedule rather than playing 9 joke teams vs. playing 2 or 3.
10-14-2011 , 08:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LKJ
This appears to be the strongest thing I said in comparing the two:



Gus laughed at you. I just said Oregon beats them. Never said anything about "AINEC" or anything even to that effect.

You seem to lump me in with whoever argues alongside me, and you should probably not do that.

Actually it INEC. Oregon is clearly the better team. On that factor, INEC. I'm not saying Boise is a terrible team or remotely bad, but I am saying that it is obvious that Oregon is the better team.
10-14-2011 , 08:14 PM
meant to say *or* offseason... but lkj hit the points i wanted to hit anyway
10-14-2011 , 08:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LKJ
That's a factor that's extremely real that the stats don't gauge. Meanwhile Oregon is down an offensive star this weekend against ASU because they don't have that luxury.
yes, they really needed James to play when they were winning 36-15 in the fourth quarter
10-14-2011 , 08:14 PM
I was simply countering the fact that he, who is mostly engaging me, tried to project your argument onto me without justification.

Last edited by LKJ; 10-14-2011 at 08:14 PM. Reason: @Gus
10-14-2011 , 08:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkgojackets
Winning doesnt matter as much as how you do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkgojackets
yes, they really needed James to play when they were winning 36-15 in the fourth quarter
I realize that "how you do it" isn't purely told by the final score, but it's all that way too many pollsters take into account. We both know that. And Oregon is having to try to make their case as a one-loss team, so yes there's plenty of reason to go big in trying to run up the score on Cal at that point.

Last edited by LKJ; 10-14-2011 at 08:18 PM. Reason: If you wanted to take the opposite side, then BSU could pull their stars at halftime many weeks. They don't for good reason.
10-14-2011 , 08:22 PM
dko: honest answer.

what's boise's record in the SEC (assuming no travel issues)? BIG10? PAC12?
10-14-2011 , 08:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LKJ
I realize that "how you do it" isn't purely told by the final score, but it's all that way too many pollsters take into account. We both know that. And Oregon is having to try to make their case as a one-loss team, so yes there's plenty of reason to go big in trying to run up the score on Cal at that point.
I can see why a team wants to win by as much as possible and wish GT would do that instead of sitting on 3 TD leads, but its a bit misleading to say they had to just because it was against a pretty bad Cal and that they would have rested starters against anyone else.

      
m