Good luck in the pro's Chris, from one Longhorn fan.

Major:

But that's not the problem. Adjusting for poor coaching should be synonymous with the total performance of the team.

What Herbstreit evidently does... according to his own words... is look at how well UT has played... and then adjust them downward, because they should have done better.

Rank a team based on how they played. Fine. That includes cowardly offensive play calling. But don't penalize a team because you think they lost games they should have won. They didn't... and they should be penalized for losing. But not for more because you think they're underachievers.

You really wouldn't agree?

 

What got me was when WSU jumped UT by beating Oregon while UT beat Baylor 49-0. What more did UT need to do to hold it's place? I guess the voters who had OU #2 gave alot of their votes to WSU.

 

What got me was when WSU jumped UT by beating Oregon while UT beat Baylor 49-0.
You mean 41-0?

 

But that's not the problem. Adjusting for poor coaching should be synonymous with the total performance of the team.

What Herbstreit evidently does... according to his own words... is look at how well UT has played... and then adjust them downward, because they should have done better.



If he really was doing that, I'd agree with you, but I think you're misinterpreting his statement. I think he simply means he thinks UT underperforms for their talent, which I think we certainly do. Of all the ESPN guys, I think Herbstreet is the least biased of the bunch.

What got me was when WSU jumped UT by beating Oregon while UT beat Baylor 49-0. What more did UT need to do to hold it's place? I guess the voters who had OU #2 gave alot of their votes to WSU.

I don't see the problem here. Week in and week out, they were more dominant than us. They had been gaining votes on us each week and finally passed us that week. They beat a ranked team and we beat a scrub - of course they'll gain votes from that. OU gained ground on and finally passed Miami when they beat us and Colorado and Iowa State because Miami was just beating bad teams. When Miami then beat a good team again, they gained their spot back.

 

I just don't see the logic of jumping a team when we defeated a team the way we were supposed to. Miami allowed the crappy teams to stay in the game. They didn't play well that week. UT, while not dynamite, did what it had to do to hold it's spot. That jump was ridiculous, imo.


the only thing I'm sure of for tomorrow is that UT should jump Notre Dame.

 

Yeah. The polls have never worked that way.

 

I just don't see the logic of jumping a team when we defeated a team the way we were supposed to. Miami allowed the crappy teams to stay in the game. They didn't play well that week. UT, while not dynamite, did what it had to do to hold it's spot. That jump was ridiculous, imo.


Except it's not that the pollsters coordinate their votes - it's just a sum of individual ballots. Let's say you have the extreme of just two ballots:

Before OU Lost:

Ballot #1:

OU
TX
WSU

Ballot #2:

OU
WSU
TX

After OU loses:

Ballot #1:

TX
WSU
OU

Ballot #2:

WSU
OU
TX

Texas didn't move down on either ballot (and went up in one of the two), but the sum of the points moved WSU up. WSU didn't jump Texas on either ballot either. The key to understanding the polls is that they are just a sum of individual ballots. A jump in the overall vote is not indicative of jumps on individual ballots - it could just be narrowing or widening of gaps.

All WSU had to do to pass us overall is jump Iowa or Georgia or Notre Dame on a few ballots here and there. They didn't necessarily jump us in a single ballot.

 

I respect you alot and I think you're very intelligent. But, right now, I think you're just changing your argument.


I stated that the voters in the AP jumped wsu over Ut based on basically the same level of victory. WSU struggled with UO (a .500 team now) and UT did as they should have, they blew out Baylor. My argument is nobody should be jumped when they beat a team like they should. UT covered the spread, fwiw. I think you're just arguing semantics. WSU gained votes, here and there. They may have gained votes from people who had OU ahead of them, etc. The anomaly is that UT actually increased their gap in the coaches poll between UT and WSU. And, the AP jumped WSU ahead of UT at the same time. You see what I'm saying? The coaches (or the sid directors) rewarded UT for doing what they should have; just win baby. The ap voters, imo, were subjective and a couple of voters wanted to shake things up or basically said "no, UT lost to OU, fock them." That being said, it is there vote and as long as they don't have to justify it, then more power to them. I'm gonna have to agree with Haven in that we know it's subjective, but it is also biased, imo.

 

no way.

Chris Simms is not a big game clutch quarterback and will disappear in the NFL. Hes overrated and any talk of him succeeding in the future is assinine.

UT is the most overrated football team to have ever played football ever.

Burnt orange looks like vomit.

How that for an intelligent, respectful, well thought-out argument?
and im an X UT student..

i love you all

 

no offense, but don't you guys get tired of arguing the same thing every weekend?

 

The ap voters, imo, were subjective and a couple of voters wanted to shake things up or basically said "no, UT lost to OU, fock them."

I'm saying that this didn't even necessarily happen. Not a single voter had to jump WSU over UT to create that change. We were only ahead by like 25 votes in the first place, and ended up behind by 2. OU lost, so every voter had to drop them. Georgia didn't play that week, so some voters may have flipped WSU / Georgia.

When you have 74 writers, that's basically 1 in 3 writers making a tiny ballot change that moves WSU one spot closer to UT, which is totally normal given the OU loss & Georgia-bye, along with WSU beating a ranked team. I think people are way overreacting to a shift of 30 votes.

That said, if a writer did shift WSU above UT, I have no problem with that. I don't care if UT beat Baylor by 100 - beating a ranked team by 1 is more impressive to me than blowing out one of the worst teams in college football. If voters were simply waiting for a big WSU win to give them their due, then perhaps that was the win they were waiting for.

 

Major:

It's a minor issue, and sort of silly to argue about since neither of us is a mindreader... but I really think you're wrong about Herbstreit's comments.

There's just no reason to include the "less with more" comment when talking about his ranking unless that was a direct factor. Maybe he could talk about it elsewhere... but when asked about ranking Texas... he mentioned that. It's totally irrelevant, since underachieving is taken into account by on-the-field performance. Either he was just mentioning it as an irrelevant throw-in... or he seriously considers it in ranking teams.

Grrr... new rankings just came out. K-state is #6. Oh well, unless they're in the top 4... no way they go to a BCS bowl ahead of us. Sucks to have no national following and little prestige.. oh wait, that's Notre Dame logic. That's right, I think UT should go over K-state because they're actually better.

 

I personally think if a team takes care of business, you shouldn't get jumped. I don't think anyone dropped UT from the rankings, but they flipped OU with WSU.

It's not UT's fault that they played Baylor. You have to just play the games in front of you. I think coaches (or whoever votes for them) realize that.

And, I would not be impressed if #1 Miami beats #23 Maryland by 1. I, if I were an ap voter, may be inclined to drop them. But, I think I would keep them where they were because a win is a win.

 

And, I would not be impressed if #1 Miami beats #23 Maryland by 1. I, if I were an ap voter, may be inclined to drop them. But, I think I would keep them where they were because a win is a win.

I wouldn't be impressed with that either. However, I would be <I>more</I> impressed by that than Miami beating Baylor by 100.

I personally think if a team takes care of business, you shouldn't get jumped. I don't think anyone dropped UT from the rankings, but they flipped OU with WSU.


I doubt anyone flipped OU and WSU. In fact, I doubt any team jumped UT in any of the individual ballots. My whole point is that, because of the OU loss (and maybe the Georgia-bye) a shift in the overall rankings could and likely would occur without any writer shifting the order of WSU & UT.

 

I'm out of this thread, and all Chris Simms discussions. I will stick to hornfans.com in the future... you guys are some of the most hateful and ignorant fans that I have ever come across. When Chris Simms is a star NFL quarterback in the NFL in a few years, remember who told you so.

Oh, and Texas will win the national championship this year, led by the best quarterback in the country. Yes, I'm serious-- if you'd like to bet on it, please send me an email (not money, but anything on the BBS, etc.).

http://bbs.clutchcity.net/php3/showthread.php?s=&threadid=42885&perpage=30&highlight=Simms%20NFL&pagenumber=4

 

Those would obviously be my opinions, and not me saying he's a sure thing. I know, I know it was a joke, but just wanted to say that before anyone else jumped on me about those quotes.

 

So Simms is the best quarterback in the country and a future NFL star but he's not a sure thing? That's nifty.

 

In my opinion, I think he will be a future NFL star. I do acknowledge there is always a risk, but I think he will be a very good player. There's a world of difference between me stating an opinion and me saying someone is a sure thing. No one's a sure thing, in any sport.

 

Oooooh, so if you said someone was a sure thing that wouldn't be your opinion? In your opinion Simms will be an NFL star yet in your opinion he's not a sure thing which means in your opinion you could be full of it. Nyuk nyuk nyuk...