Bama's schedule is pretty bad but..

[4down20]

You were wrong and are trying desperately to backtrack. You tried using SOS at first, even. You were wrong and are too cowardly to admit it.

You quoted a stupid shit stat. The one that actually matters is SoS, not ESPN's shit stat.

 

[7Samurai13]

Nice try.

We've signed a home/home with Texas AND with Notre Dame.

Nice try, who knows if there will be “uncertainty with the SEC scheduling” in the future forcing you to cancel those games.

 

[Across The Field]

You quoted a stupid shit stat. The one that actually matters is SoS, not ESPN's shit stat.

What a load of horseshit. You were flat out wrong and are too big of a Sally to admit it.

 

[Eco]

Nice try, who knows if there will be “uncertainty with the SEC scheduling” in the future forcing you to cancel those games.

Okay....so let me get understand your point of view.

You bash on Bama for a weak schedule, and than bash when we try to schedule home/homes.

No offense, I'm sure there is more to us cancelling our home/home than what the public knows, but don't you think you'll being a bit over board here? You don't give us credit for starting off the season with Clemson, WVU, USC, Michigan, FSU, and you don't give us any credit for scheduling Texas and ND to home/home.

From where I sit, it just seems like you want to complain about Alabama.

 

[4down20]

Agreed, very few teams can hang with Bama, but if I were to tell you that team X will only play 2 ranked opponents all year long and have a SoS in the 60’s, you wouldn’t be telling us about how they are a great team playing an awesome schedule and no one can possibly call them out about playing a weak schedule.

Bama has a pathetically weak schedule for any top 10 and if it was an undefeated UCF with that SoS you would not be talking about how they deserve to be in a playoff.

Actually I have been dealing with a lot of personal shit the last few weeks so I haven’t been able to watch any games.

This is false because a SoS in the 60's in itself doesn't say shit. Sorry but I'm not as simple as many of you seem to be. SoS is relative to what other teams do. So if at the end of the year, if there were 5 teams because looked at and you have 4 teams with SoS in the 30's and 1 team in the 60's - then obvious the team in the 60's doesn't belong. However, when you have only a few teams and most of them are in the 60's or worse, then in the 60's isn't so bad.

UCF has the #127th SoS. Read the above and see if you can struggle out a thought and figure out the process and why such a schedule might get knocked.

 

[4down20]

What a load of horseshit. You were flat out wrong and are too big of a Sally to admit it.

Ok, Ohio St is #1 in ESPN's SoR stat.

Happy?

Now, let me tell you how much that stat means and how accurate it is for describing anything of value:

 

[7Samurai13]

Okay....so let me get understand your point of view.

You bash on Bama for a weak schedule, and than bash when we try to schedule home/homes.

No offense, I'm sure there is more to us cancelling our home/home than what the public knows, but don't you think you'll being a bit over board here? You don't give us credit for starting off the season with Clemson, WVU, USC, Michigan, FSU, and you don't give us any credit for scheduling Texas and ND to home/home.

From where I sit, it just seems like you want to complain about Alabama.

So you want everyone to pretend that Bama didn’t cancel their last scheduled home/home due to “uncertainty with the SEC scheduling” after a 13-1 vote against a 9 game conference schedule?

 

[4down20]

So you want everyone to pretend that Bama didn’t cancel their last scheduled home/home due to “uncertainty with the SEC scheduling” after a 13-1 vote against a 9 game conference schedule?

Are you going to pretend our schedule strength didn't end up extremely better as a result?

Let's see, it was play 3-9 Michigan St that year, or "#3 USC"

 

[7Samurai13]

This is false because a SoS in the 60's in itself doesn't say shit. Sorry but I'm not as simple as many of you seem to be. SoS is relative to what other teams do. So if at the end of the year, if there were 5 teams because looked at and you have 4 teams with SoS in the 30's and 1 team in the 60's - then obvious the team in the 60's doesn't belong. However, when you have only a few teams and most of them are in the 60's or worse, then in the 60's isn't so bad.

UCF has the #127th SoS. Read the above and see if you can struggle out a thought and figure out the process and why such a schedule might get knocked.

What part of IF an undefeated UCF has a SoS in the 60’s you would not be talking about how they deserve to be in the playoffs, is tough for you to comprehend?

 

[7Samurai13]

Are you going to pretend our schedule strength didn't end up extremely better as a result?

Let's see, it was play 3-9 Michigan St that year, or "#3 USC"

So Bama knew that Michigan State was going to be 3-9 and they knew they were going to play USC when they have absolutely no control over who they play in neutral site games? So Bama can see the future?

 

[4down20]

Nope. Especially not when you ran away from playing them the next two years.

Oh yeah, that big bad 3-9 Michigan St team.



We offered you a game, you turned it down. Good thing too, it would have been even longer we didn't get to play a decent OOC team.

 

[Across The Field]

Ok, Ohio St is #1 in ESPN's SoR stat.

Happy?

Now, let me tell you how much that stat means and how accurate it is for describing anything of value:

What a bitch you are. A simple "my bad, didn't read what you typed" would've sufficed. Instead you backtrack like the little puke that you are.

And I'm sure the FPI is just completely arbitrary and OSU just happened to be the one they randomly selected to be #1 and it has nothing at all to do with them being unbeaten and having the best win in the nation so far.

 

[7Samurai13]

Oh yeah, that big bad 3-9 Michigan St team.



We offered you a game, you turned it down. Good thing too, it would have been even longer we didn't get to play a decent OOC team.

How can you offer a neutral site game? I thought you had to be invited and you can’t control that?

 

[4down20]

What part of IF an undefeated UCF has a SoS in the 60’s you would not be talking about how they deserve to be in the playoffs, is tough for you to comprehend?

If UCF had a SoS that was comparable to Alabama's, how the fuck could I say anything?



Dumbass.

 

[Eco]

So you want everyone to pretend that Bama didn’t cancel their last scheduled home/home due to “uncertainty with the SEC scheduling” after a 13-1 vote against a 9 game conference schedule?

Where did I said anything about pretending? What I said was, it's most likely that there was more to it then we know. Do I like that it was cancelled? Absolutely not.

What I'm saying is, that after 2 seasons of starting off with weak opponents in UL and Duke, you seem quick to forget that we have played a major opponent in most of the Saban years to begin the year, and are moving towards doing so in a home/home fashion.

 

[trojanfan12]

Whatever makes you feel better....as we once again talk about Alabama!

You realize this thread was started by a Bammer, right?

 

[Eco]

So Bama knew that Michigan State was going to be 3-9 and they knew they were going to play USC when they have absolutely no control over who they play in neutral site games? So Bama can see the future?

I think, however I could be wrong, that there have been a few of the neutral site games, where both teams have agreed to play with the hosts. I think Bama/USC was one, and Bama/UM was the other.

Again I could be wrong, but I know I've heard that somewhere.

 

[7Samurai13]

Where did I said anything about pretending? What I said was, it's most likely that there was more to it then we know. Do I like that it was cancelled? Absolutely not.

What I'm saying is, that after 2 seasons of starting off with weak opponents in UL and Duke, you seem quick to forget that we have played a major opponent in most of the Saban years to begin the year, and are moving towards doing so in a home/home fashion.

You got your ass all chapped because I made fun of the fact that Bama ran and hid from playing a home and home and said that those games aren’t guaranteed since Bama has shown a propensity to bail on road games.

 

[7Samurai13]

I think, however I could be wrong, that there have been a few of the neutral site games, where both teams have agreed to play with the hosts. I think Bama/USC was one, and Bama/UM was the other.

Again I could be wrong, but I know I've heard that somewhere.

You can’t have it both ways though. You can’t cry about how it’s not your fault you got Louisville and Duke, but thump your chests about how tough you are for scheduling USC and Michigan. Either you have some control or you don’t have any at all.

 

[4down20]

What a bitch you are. A simple "my bad, didn't read what you typed" would've sufficed. Instead you backtrack like the little puke that you are.

And I'm sure the FPI is just completely arbitrary and OSU just happened to be the one they randomly selected to be #1 and it has nothing at all to do with them being unbeaten and having the best win in the nation so far.

FPI is adjusted by ESPN to meet what ESPN wants to put out.

Go look at the formula for yourself. It's passed off as being a computer formula, but it states plain as day that the power rankings and everything they do is influenced by humans. AKA - if ESPN thinks a team is #1, they will add in bias to the results to make it happen.

And that is why you never see me talk about FPI and why I don't use it for anything.

I've also never seen you mention it either, and the only reason you mention it now is because Ohio St is #1 in it, not because you actually understand anything about the stat.

But please, continue acting like you just put out a stat I quote often and put a lot of meaning into and suddenly don't.