CFP committee calling for forfeits

NU_FTW said:
Enjoy your fake awards, figures where UCF got the idea.


regardless i have too much holiday to get ready for, trolling simple minds isnt on the agenda for today.

Have a Merry Christmas.
Click to expand...
That comment makes as much sense, as saying the games where either Nebraska or Michigan didn't play a team means more than common opponents each team played.

If UCF was the #1 team in the country, like Michigan in 1997, your comment would make sense. If UCF was a P5 program, your comment would make sense. But alas, you are grasping at straws, as UM dominated the common opponents they both faced and it kills your argument about how Nebraska was definitely the better team.

But enjoy 1997 -- i don't care if you want to say you were the only national champ -- i feel bad Nebraska fans, because they are generally quite nice, but refuse to believe what is staring them in the face -- which is Nebraska will never be a national power again. Not with recruiting being big business with school located in the middle of nowhere, with little in state talent. But their will always be the 90's, so keep bringing it up, i guess.
 
NewPhoneWhoDis said:
That is why OSU was favored when UM and OSU played. Here is the thing -- UM and OSU actually played, so we know the end result.

In 1997 -- Nebraska and Michigan didn't play. So the best information we have to compare the two teams is how they fared against common opponents, as it is the only games where each faced a team. Arguing how either team fared against teams, one or the other, didn't even face is nothing more than conjecture.
Click to expand...

If that's your argument...it's pretty fuckin' weak. No offense, but it's all conjecture. You want to use two data points for common opponents but ignore the other 10 games...I'm not going to say that's dumb, but if all the village idiots from around the country picked up and move to your town, you might still have a job.
 
Rolltide94 said:
If that's your argument...it's pretty fuckin' weak. No offense, but it's all conjecture. You want to use two data points for common opponents but ignore the other 10 games...I'm not going to say that's dumb, but if all the village idiots from around the country picked up and move to your town, you might still have a job.
Click to expand...
So games where each team played an opponent is "pretty fuckin' weak", but the performances in games where one or the other didn't play an opponent is your selling point? Makes perfect sense. :pound:

And the games where both UM and Nebraska played the same teams isn't conjecture -- you have the information right in front of you to see how each team performed. Using the "other games" as the argument for Nebraska or Michigan is what is "pretty fuckin' weak", as you have no clue how the other would do in those games, as they NEVER HAPPENED.

It'd be like saying -- Michigan would crush Alabama, because we beat OSU and didn't lose to an unranked team. That's essentially the argument being made for Nebraska, that they were better because of the games they played against teams UM didn't even face.
 
I’m disappointed in my husker brethren. Usually in these conversations one of them sends up a bat signal and 8 of them come in and defend their 90’s Husker crusade.
 
NewPhoneWhoDis said:
So games where each team played an opponent is "pretty fuckin' weak", but the performances in games where one or the other didn't play an opponent is your selling point? Makes perfect sense. :pound:

And the games where both UM and Nebraska played the same teams isn't conjecture -- you have the information right in front of you to see how each team performed. Using the "other games" as the argument for Nebraska or Michigan is what is "pretty fuckin' weak", as you have no clue how the other would do in those games, as they NEVER HAPPENED.

It'd be like saying -- Michigan would crush Alabama, because we beat OSU and didn't lose to an unranked team. That's essentially the argument being made for Nebraska, that they were better because of the games they played against teams UM didn't even face.
Click to expand...

What I was saying which you are clearly too dumb to comprehend is that common opponents is no better predictor of game outcome than uncommon opponents.

Allow me to illustrate:

Alabama 49 Mississippi State 9
Mississippi State 26 Texas A&M 22

Alabama 42 Arkansas 35
Georgia 37 Arkansas 0

Michigan 20 Rutgers 13
Ohio State 52 Rutgers 13

Ohio State 56 Michigan State 7
Michigan 42 Ohio State 27

See how that works...
 
Rolltide94 said:
What I was saying which you are clearly too dumb to comprehend is that common opponents is no better predictor of game outcome than uncommon opponents.

Allow me to illustrate:

Alabama 49 Mississippi State 9
Mississippi State 26 Texas A&M 22

Alabama 42 Arkansas 35
Georgia 37 Arkansas 0

Michigan 20 Rutgers 13
Ohio State 52 Rutgers 13

Ohio State 56 Michigan State 7
Michigan 42 Ohio State 27

See how that works...
Click to expand...

Step back and think how utterly ridiculous you sound. Uncommon opponents tells you very little, as you have nothing to compare it against, as you have no idea how the other team would do against the uncommon opponent.

Common opponents you get to see how each team fares. Is it the end all, be all? Of course not.

But your examples above is exactly why both UM and Alabama were 7 point underdogs in their CCG's and why they play the games.
 
Rolltide94 said:
What I was saying which you are clearly too dumb to comprehend is that common opponents is no better predictor of game outcome than uncommon opponents.

Allow me to illustrate:

Alabama 49 Mississippi State 9
Mississippi State 26 Texas A&M 22

Alabama 42 Arkansas 35
Georgia 37 Arkansas 0

Michigan 20 Rutgers 13
Ohio State 52 Rutgers 13

Ohio State 56 Michigan State 7
Michigan 42 Ohio State 27

See how that works...
Click to expand...
Quit arguing with this retarded skunk weasel she has no sense of anything beyond what she reads on rivals. Arguing with internet retards is like the special Olympics, even if you win you're all still retarded 😂😂😆
 
NewPhoneWhoDis said:
Step back and think how utterly ridiculous you sound. Uncommon opponents tells you very little, as you have nothing to compare it against, as you have no idea how the other team would do against the uncommon opponent.

Common opponents you get to see how each team fares. Is it the end all, be all? Of course not.

But your examples above is exactly why both UM and Alabama were 7 point underdogs in their CCG's and why they play the games.
Click to expand...

Okay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top