Replies: 44
| visibility 302
|
110%er [5513]
TigerPulse: 73%
38
|
Ole Miss in the Top 4 just exposed the playoffs
Oct 28, 2014, 8:11 PM
|
|
They just lost to a 2 loss team yet dont fall in the rankings for their LOSS! With other teams like Mich state that got beat by freakin oregon?! Playoff = fail.
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
54
Posts: 44815
Joined: 2010
|
How would they have been able to fall in the ranking...
Oct 28, 2014, 8:12 PM
|
|
considering this was the first ranking released?
|
|
|
|
|
Addict [417]
TigerPulse: 86%
17
|
omg why are you defending them
Oct 28, 2014, 8:13 PM
|
|
You're a brilliant poster, but why Prod...
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
54
Posts: 44815
Joined: 2010
|
I don't see what's so ridiculous about the ranking.
Oct 28, 2014, 8:16 PM
|
|
I would have probably put Oregon ahead of Ole Miss, but if you strip all conference affiliations away, those are the teams with the best resumes, no doubt. The only reason people are upset is that three of the teams happen to be from the same conference. They are the ones letting conferences influence their thinking, not the committee.
|
|
|
|
|
Addict [417]
TigerPulse: 86%
17
|
Ole's jump through the rankings was crazy
Oct 28, 2014, 8:19 PM
|
|
and not in a good way...
I'm just thinking back to pre-season. Rebs were junk.
three weeks later they were a 'top 15 team'. lol no.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
54
Posts: 44815
Joined: 2010
|
I don't know about "jumping", because I don't pay attention
Oct 28, 2014, 8:21 PM
|
|
to pre-season rankings.
If you forget about where they started, or how they've moved through the polls, and just look at their resume, it's outstanding. They've beaten a 7-1 team, a 6-2 team, a 5-3 team, two 4-3 teams...and lost a close one on the road to a 7-2 team.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
54
Posts: 44815
Joined: 2010
|
Very, very similar to Oregon's resume, except
Oct 28, 2014, 8:24 PM
|
|
Oregon has a softer "bottom," with wins over an FCS team, a 2-6 team, and 3-5 team.
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [362]
TigerPulse: 69%
16
|
Re: Very, very similar to Oregon's resume, except
Oct 28, 2014, 8:50 PM
|
|
Really...ole miss has one quality win alabama. Boise, ull, vandy, tenn, exposed a&m, and memphis. Espn actually played up the rivalry with MEMPHIS.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
54
Posts: 44815
Joined: 2010
|
That depends on how you define "quality win"
Oct 28, 2014, 9:00 PM
|
|
Collectively, I think Ole Miss's opponents have been a little tougher than Oregon's.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2122]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
|
|
|
|
Addict [417]
TigerPulse: 86%
17
|
'If you forget where they started'
Oct 28, 2014, 8:25 PM
[ in reply to I don't know about "jumping", because I don't pay attention ] |
|
Stopped reading.
rest is invalid Prod.
They were UNRANKED to begin with - they LEAPED to #11 by week 3 or 4 by beating NOBODY.
They are untested. IDGAF about their 'Bama' win, honestly....
Due respect- just replying.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
54
Posts: 44815
Joined: 2010
|
And South Carolina was ranked #10 to start the season.
Oct 28, 2014, 8:26 PM
|
|
What a joke that was! Why should it matter what says a poll that was released before any team played a single game?
|
|
|
|
|
Addict [417]
TigerPulse: 86%
17
|
Mind blown, I guess..
Oct 28, 2014, 8:28 PM
|
|
So the fact that Ole' wasn't ranked pre-season comes into play?
Not following.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
54
Posts: 44815
Joined: 2010
|
I thought you were saying it matters.
Oct 28, 2014, 8:29 PM
|
|
I was saying it doesn't matter, not one shred.
|
|
|
|
|
Addict [417]
TigerPulse: 86%
17
|
Don't like you
Oct 28, 2014, 8:42 PM
|
|
But respect you.
Gamecawk.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
54
Posts: 44815
Joined: 2010
|
LOL...no problem. Thanks.***
Oct 28, 2014, 8:43 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1125]
TigerPulse: 70%
26
|
Re: I thought you were saying it matters.
Oct 28, 2014, 11:03 PM
[ in reply to I thought you were saying it matters. ] |
|
Polls do matter to public influence and strength of schedule.
For example, TA&M beat a counterfeit S.Car team and jumped up big in the rankings. Then later, Ole Miss, who'd previously beaten a bunch of nobodys, beats Alabama and TA&M and jumps huge in the rankings, while everyone forgets that TA&M is a fraud, effectively replacing S.Car's top 10 ranking with Ole Miss.
Then, even when they lose, they make a case for them, not based on conference affiliation, but on their "strength" of schedule, when basically they've beaten 1 good team (Alabama) and lost to the only other decent team they played (LSU).
Pre-season polls matter and while not having a direct impact on the playoff ranking, all polls have a severe indirect impact. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves. If the polls don't matter and we don't use them to determine the playoff teams, why do we still have them?
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3433]
TigerPulse: 91%
34
|
Re: 'If you forget where they started'
Oct 28, 2014, 10:28 PM
[ in reply to 'If you forget where they started' ] |
|
Ole Miss started the year 17/18 in the polls and moved up as a result of teams in front of them losing and then jumped after beating Bama, which is understandable. Then they just lost by 3 to a pretty good team on a road night game, which explains the small drop. I don't think they're as good as their record and believe they'll eventually get exposed but there's nothing wrong with the ranking.
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [239]
TigerPulse: 100%
13
|
Re: 'If you forget where they started'
Oct 28, 2014, 11:03 PM
|
|
We lost to the number 1 team in the nation on the road...at night...and held them to the lowest total thus far this season...and dropped out of the top 25.
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3433]
TigerPulse: 91%
34
|
Re: 'If you forget where they started'
Oct 29, 2014, 7:45 AM
|
|
We were ranked #24 at the time, and dropped to like #28 among voters. FSU was also missing their starting QB.
Since then, we've lost Watson for a majority of the season and without him, have had to inch by the likes of Boston College and Syracuse. We don't have an argument.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3573]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
Ole Miss was around 15 to start. Miss St wasn't ranked
Oct 28, 2014, 8:48 PM
[ in reply to Ole's jump through the rankings was crazy ] |
|
Ole Miss was ranked on potential and not any actual result. I think they were 7-5 last year.
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [99534]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 29671
Joined: 2005
|
|
|
|
|
Addict [417]
TigerPulse: 86%
17
|
Have to agree on this one
Oct 28, 2014, 8:12 PM
|
|
Ole' is garbage.
One good receiver. One schizo QB. Great defense.
= not champ material.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1125]
TigerPulse: 70%
26
|
Re: Have to agree on this one
Oct 28, 2014, 11:06 PM
|
|
yeah, "great" SEC defense that gave up 264 yards rushing...
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12666]
TigerPulse: 86%
47
Posts: 12291
Joined: 2011
|
Mich State, Oregon and Arizona are all better than
Oct 28, 2014, 8:16 PM
|
|
Ole Miss and Auburn.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5513]
TigerPulse: 73%
38
|
and how does the committee not see that?!
Oct 28, 2014, 8:18 PM
|
|
This has to be a joke.
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2663]
TigerPulse: 100%
33
|
Re: Ole Miss in the Top 4 just exposed the playoffs
Oct 28, 2014, 8:28 PM
|
|
I'm guessing they'll release a statement tomorrow saying they haven't met this week, to decide how to weigh that LSU loss and that those are last weeks rankings.
|
|
|
|
|
All-Time Great [97823]
TigerPulse: 100%
63
Posts: 97350
Joined: 2009
|
Pretty sad.***
Oct 28, 2014, 9:04 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2565]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Yeah, but the regular rankings have Bama at #3
Oct 28, 2014, 9:06 PM
|
|
Who has Bama beaten? WVU and.....and? I'll let you answer that. And were they set up at #3 to give invincible leverage to whoever beat them---or themselves, if they beat someone else. I actually like these rankings, because if you look at it numerically, it is not a scam number system set up to protect SEC teams from taking each other out.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5151]
TigerPulse: 42%
38
Posts: 17128
Joined: 2005
|
This first poll has to be heartbreaking for a lot of people
Oct 28, 2014, 9:23 PM
|
|
on here who spent the last 8 months trying to argue the playoff committee was going to make sure only 1 SEC team made the playoff.
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [759]
TigerPulse: 66%
22
|
And another victory for your school.
Oct 28, 2014, 9:59 PM
|
|
Congrats on your conference's rankings.
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [13596]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 10032
Joined: 2006
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1125]
TigerPulse: 70%
26
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3433]
TigerPulse: 91%
34
|
Re: Ole Miss in the Top 4 just exposed the playoffs
Oct 28, 2014, 10:46 PM
|
|
What a bunch of whining babies you guys are. I personally don't think Ole Miss is the fourth best team in the nation this year, but I think that'll work itself in the end. However up until this point, there's really no gripe about them being ranked the way they are.
Really? Them being in the Top 4 "exposed" the playoffs? The big ESPN conspiracy? What a joke.
Jeff Long - Arkansas AD. Obviously has an SEC connection. Barry Alvarez - Wisconsin AD. Long time coach of Wisconsin and is now their AD. Zero reason to unfairly vote in favor of the SEC. Lieutenant General Mike Gould - Former Superintendent of the USAFA and originally from Ohio, attended Kent State prior to joining the military. Zero reason to unfairly vote in favor of the SEC. Pat Haden - AD of Southern Cal. Zero reason to unfairly vote in favor of the SEC. Tom Jernstedt - Former NCAA Executive VP. Born & raised in Oregon, played football for the Ducks. Zero reason to unfairly vote in favor of the SEC. Oliver Luck - AD of WVU. Born in Ohio, played at WVU, law school at Texas, son was a star at Stanford. Zero reason to unfairly vote in favor of the SEC. Tom Osborne - No explanation needed. Dan Radakovich - Our friggin AD. Condi Rice - Born in Alabama, went to Denver U and later Notre Dame and then went on to be the provost of Stanford. Born in Bama but has strong connections all over. Any argument that she's "in bed" with the SEC would be pretty weak. Mike Tranghese - Former Big East commish. Zero reason to unfairly vote in favor of the SEC. Steve Wieberg - USA Today reporter for 30 years, graduated from Mizzou. Connection to the SEC, even if it has only been for 3 years. Tyrone Willingham - Born in NC, went to Michigan State, later coached for Stanford, Washington and Notre Dame. Currently a volunteer coach at Stanford.
Guys, there's no conspiracy. Constantly whining about this stuff makes you look like sniffling babies. Time to grow up and realize a lot of smart people just think they're very good right now. We'll see what happens moving forward but stop screaming conspiracy.
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [239]
TigerPulse: 100%
13
|
Re: Ole Miss in the Top 4 just exposed the playoffs
Oct 28, 2014, 11:14 PM
|
|
ESPN has stakes in 33 of 35 bowl games. They control the narrative of college sports as we know it right now. These people on the committee only watch what ESPN feed them because they are busy. It's simple in concept...notice how a random SEC team get put in the bottom of the ranking right before a match up to make it look like it's a Top 25 match up...it's not hard to see why they do that.
And you really think a 50 billion dollar business can't cut deals...yeah right...the networks has a vested interest in pushing the SEC and that's their whole talking point. Look at the Paul Finebaum show...they don't talk about anything other than the SEC...period...even most of the callers are all SEC...no agenda there.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4506]
TigerPulse: 100%
36
|
Excellent post.***
Oct 28, 2014, 11:40 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [238]
TigerPulse: 40%
13
|
Do you really believe what you type?
Oct 29, 2014, 8:22 AM
[ in reply to Re: Ole Miss in the Top 4 just exposed the playoffs ] |
|
ESPN does not rank the teams. Let me type that again for you-ESPN DOES NOT RANK THE TEAMS. They can't "put a team in the Top 25 just before a big matchup to make that matchup look like a bigger game."
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3433]
TigerPulse: 91%
34
|
Re: Ole Miss in the Top 4 just exposed the playoffs
Oct 29, 2014, 9:48 AM
[ in reply to Re: Ole Miss in the Top 4 just exposed the playoffs ] |
|
I get what you're saying, but your post is filled with assumptions, flawed logic, and bias.
You seem to be suggesting that the committee members aren't watching any college football and are simply relying on ESPN analysts to formulate an opinion. Why do you believe these people aren't watching the games? You couldn't possibly be saying they're watching the games, but since they're probably watching many games on ABC/ESPN, the SEC bias is leaking through to them...could you? I also love the fact that you, and all of the other message board conspiracy theorists, are able to see through the façade of the great "E$ECPN" conspiracy, but a former Secretary of State who ran Stanford, and a bunch of ADs who have risen to the pinnacle of their fields, are totally oblivious. That's just special. If you're suggesting that they themselves are corrupt, then I expect you'll be leading the charge for Clemson to fire Radakovich later today, correct? After all, if he's in bed with the SEC & ESPN then obviously he's going to do whatever he can to tank our football program so our future games against South Carolina, Auburn, and Texas A&M will fall in their favor...right?
Which random SEC team are you referring to? LSU? What's so random about them getting into the ranking? They lost to two very good teams and had a pretty good win against Wisconsin. What other team does that sound like...there's another team out there with two losses, who had lost both of their matchups with ranked teams, but were getting the benefit of the doubt because people thought they were still good...oh yea, us. Clemson lost to two very good ranked teams and had a win against a solid Louisville squad. Obviously since then, we haven't looked great due to the dumpster fire that is our offensive situation, but we're still not dropping because people appear to respect our defense and know we'll be improved once Watson's back. Why was it fair for us to be ranked, or Oklahoma (two losses, one quality win), or Southern Cal (two losses before last week, one quality win), or West Virginia (two losses, one very good win)...but when LSU is ranked, it's a part of some great conspiracy? The main bias here is coming from your end.
The Paul Finebaum Show has always been about the SEC. He works for the SEC Network, so obviously he's pushing the conference. I 100% agree that a lot of the talking heads show bias when talking about the SEC--some obviously more than others. I think guys like Schlabagh & Finebaum are bums who really have no interest in talking about other conferences, but others like Herbstreit are shooting straight. The problem with many of the non-SEC fans is that now whenever anyone on ESPN praises an SEC team, everyone screams SEC bias. Let's face it: the SEC is still the best conference in the nation, and probably by a pretty decent margin.
This final part is where you're so far off, I don't even know where to begin: ESPN has a vested interest in pushing the SEC. In case you haven't noticed, ESPN has a vested interest in pushing every conference. When we watch big ACC games, what do we see at the beginning? "It's the ACC on ESPN!" The B1G, Big XII, PAC 12, ACC and SEC are all under contract with ESPN. Do you understand how these contracts work? ESPN doesn't profit more if an SEC team wins the national championship. That's not the deal. ESPN profits from advertising revenue. As Chris Fowler said this past Saturday, it's in their best interest to have teams from all over the country in the playoff, not just the SEC. And he's 100% right. The only time there was an SEC vs SEC national championship, it was the worst-rated game ever and ESPN probably had a pretty solid economic loss because of it.
You know what ESPN's dream national championship is? Alabama, Southern Cal, Notre Dame/Ohio State/Michigan, and Texas. If the playoffs are Florida State, Ole Miss, Mississippi State and Alabama, then the West and Northeast will tune out. Why, pray tell, would ESPN do everything in their power to lock down eyes in the poorest region in the country (the Southeast), while pushing away the wealthiest regions (Northeast & West)? The Northeast and West are the ones that need to be appeased in this conspiracy scenario since the Southeast will watch the game no matter what. The conspiracy theory is so flawed that it's laughable.
So please take a deep breath, think about what you're actually suggesting, and realize that despite how annoying it is to hear some of the talking heads blabber on about how Kentucky is actually a solid team, there's no conspiracy. Annoyance & bias from commentators/analysts? Yes. Conspiracy? No.
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [238]
TigerPulse: 40%
13
|
Thank you. This guy loves his tinfoil hat.***
Oct 29, 2014, 9:53 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3433]
TigerPulse: 91%
34
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1846]
TigerPulse: 59%
31
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3433]
TigerPulse: 91%
34
|
Re: Yes, they control ALL the Coaches in the USA Today Poll
Oct 29, 2014, 12:50 PM
|
|
Come on man, don't you know this already? This conspiracy goes all the way to the top. Coaches are voting against themselves in order to prop up the paper tiger SEC.
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [992]
TigerPulse: 100%
24
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [982]
TigerPulse: 93%
24
|
#SECBias***
Oct 29, 2014, 8:25 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4903]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
I don't have as much of a problem with them as I do Auburn
Oct 29, 2014, 8:36 AM
|
|
Clearly the committee has not watched any of their games
|
|
|
|
Replies: 44
| visibility 302
|
|
|