PDA

View Full Version : Who Do You Think Deserves to be the Number 1 ranked Team in NCAA College Football?



DisplacedKnick
01-09-2009, 04:35 PM
What the heck - let's see what folks think about this. I'm leaving it private in case someone's embarassed or something. I think from the College Football Thread everyone can figure out how I voted. I'm including the 4 teams with 1 or zero losses, so long as they won their Bowl Game (sorry Boise St).

Shade
01-09-2009, 04:41 PM
Utah, until proven otherwise.

Moses
01-09-2009, 04:41 PM
Has to be Florida. Utah looked great against an injury ravaged Alabama team but I think Florida would demolish them.

travmil
01-09-2009, 04:43 PM
I voted for Utah. To me an arbitrary computer formula does nothing to prove that Florida could beat them ont he field. I'd have to see it done with my own eyes to think that any of the teams above could beat them on a neutral field.

Shade
01-09-2009, 04:45 PM
Has to be Florida. Utah looked great against an injury ravaged Alabama team but I think Florida would demolish them.

Therein lies the problem with the BCS.

grace
01-09-2009, 05:04 PM
I don't really care. I'm just glad it's not Alabama.

Slick Pinkham
01-09-2009, 05:04 PM
I think that Florida has he most quality wins by a good margin, so I think that they have earned it. Their one loss looked bad at the time until the team that beat them routed Texas Tech in their bowl. I would like to see a playoff, though, and I was thrilled by watching Utah.

If the question were instead, "who do you think would win a NCAA CFB playoff", I would probably say USC. But their weaker schedule and loss to Oregon St. lowers then in my eyes based upon their body of work.

Texas couldn't stop Ohio State a bit, and the Buckeyes could have beaten then with better play-calling to avoid settling for field goals. Utah impressed me a lot. I really hate to see them not get their due. 4th in the coach's poll? no way...

Shade
01-09-2009, 05:09 PM
I think that Florida has he most quality wins by a good margin, so I think that they have earned it. Their one loss looked bad at the time until the team that beat them routed Texas Tech in their bowl. I would like to see a playoff, though, and I was thrilled by watching Utah.

If the question were instead, "who do you think would win a NCAA CFB playoff", I would probably say USC. But their weaker schedule and loss to Oregon St. lowers then in my eyes based upon their body of work.

Texas couldn't stop Ohio State a bit, and the Buckeyes could have beaten then with better play-calling to avoid settling for field goals. Utah impressed me a lot. I really hate to see them not get their due. 4th in the coach's poll? no way...

There it is again.

Wouldn't it be nice to just have a definitive champion, like, well, pretty much every other sporting structure on the planet?

Trader Joe
01-09-2009, 05:10 PM
Utah. Unbeaten, again. And nothing to show for it. BCS is such a joke.

Slick Pinkham
01-09-2009, 06:08 PM
There it is again.

Wouldn't it be nice to just have a definitive champion, like, well, pretty much every other sporting structure on the planet?

:confused:

Nobody is debating that. I imagine that there is near unanimous agreement among us that a playoff of sometime is preferable to polls and computers deciding it.

NCAA Division III football started their 32 team tournament the week before Thanksgiving and 4 weeks later had their national champion crowned, in time for eveyone to finish finals and go home for Christmas. There ought to be a way to do an 8-teamer in the NCAA Div I, but $$$$$$$$s rule and the bowls are afraid of becoming irrelevant.

The question was who deserves it given the crappy system we have now. Florida played about 8 very good teams and beat 7 of them, Utah played about 4 very good teams and beat them all. Now is there any way that more than 4 very good teams would even want to schedule Utah home-and-home? Probably not, and that's another problem.

I would love to see Utah-Florida next week.

I'd love to see Obama invite both Florida and utah to the White House for the traditional champions visit. Maybe he will do it, since he hates the BCS!

DisplacedKnick
01-09-2009, 06:37 PM
NCAA Division III football started their 32 team tournament the week before Thanksgiving and 4 weeks later had their national champion crowned, in time for eveyone to finish finals and go home for Christmas. There ought to be a way to do an 8-teamer in the NCAA Div I, but $$$$$$$$s rule and the bowls are afraid of becoming irrelevant.


This is what bugs me - you can still have every bowl. If you go with 8 teams you pick 7 bowls to be playoff bowls, rotate 'em around just like they do now with the BCS and keep all the other bowls for non-playoff teams. Limit teams to 11 regular-season games so the most anyone plays is 14. If you go one step further and have 16, then you have 15 playoff bowls.

I know what the issue is - $$$$. Nothing else.

As for Utah over Florida, Florida beat Alabama in a narrow victory in a game they trailed in with less than 10 minutes left at a neutral site - Atlanta.

Utah went ahead 21-0 and never took their foot off Alabama's throat in a game where they had to go to New Orleans - SEC territory.

I'm not sure how Alabama became injury-ravaged between the Florida & Alabama games but I know Utah dominated them - nearly outgaining them 2:1 - while they played Florida close to even-up.

Based on their game against a common opponent, I pick Utah.

Slick Pinkham
01-09-2009, 07:00 PM
based upon the one common oppoenent, sure.

But it gives no credit for UF beating LSU by 30, Georgia by 39, Kentucky by 58, Vanderbilt by 28, South Carolina by 50, Florida State by 30, Miami by 23, all without any hints of running up the score.

Utah won by 3 points or less vs. Michigan, Oregon State, New Mexico, and TCU.

The Utes were good. They were not dominating for much of the season.

Moses
01-09-2009, 07:24 PM
based upon the one common oppoenent, sure.

But it gives no credit for UF beating LSU by 30, Georgia by 39, Kentucky by 58, Vanderbilt by 28, South Carolina by 50, Florida State by 30, Miami by 23, all without any hints of running up the score.

Utah won by 3 points or less vs. Michigan, Oregon State, New Mexico, and TCU.

The Utes were good. They were not dominating for much of the season.
This about sums it up. That is also not mentioning Alabama had their worst game of the year against Utah. (Mainly due to injuries, but suspending their dominant tackle didn't help etiher.) As a Georgia fan, I really hate Florida and wish they weren't the best..but they just are.

Shade
01-09-2009, 07:34 PM
:confused:

My point is, tons of fans are making arguments (many of them legitimate) as to why they think a particular team deserves to be champ (or at least in the title game). But, as we sports fans should well know, games are won or lost on the field/court.

Let the teams play it out.

Shade
01-09-2009, 07:37 PM
based upon the one common oppoenent, sure.

But it gives no credit for UF beating LSU by 30, Georgia by 39, Kentucky by 58, Vanderbilt by 28, South Carolina by 50, Florida State by 30, Miami by 23, all without any hints of running up the score.

Utah won by 3 points or less vs. Michigan, Oregon State, New Mexico, and TCU.

The Utes were good. They were not dominating for much of the season.

How did that dominating regular season last year work out for the Pats again?

I am truly not picking on you Tom, and I would have responded to this post with the same point regardless of who posted it. You just happened to be the one to bring up the argument.

Slick Pinkham
01-09-2009, 10:10 PM
If the NFL had a BCS system in place and no playoffs, last year the Patriots likely would have beaten the Cowboys in the NFL BCS championship game.

How would this year's Tennessee-NY Giants BCS title game have turned out?

When a title is determined by pollsters, it's an inherently stupid system. If that's the system you have, however, I would hope the pollsters take into account who you played and how handily do did or did not beat them. Dominating anyone last week or last month or three months ago doesn't help you win anything today, as Belichick has always preached and how ironically the Patriots demonstrated last year. The polls should however reflect the "body of work" that is the whole season IMO.

Shade
01-09-2009, 10:18 PM
Which is why both the BCS and the polls should be scrapped. Both have had their time in the sun, and both have failed miserably.

DisplacedKnick
01-09-2009, 10:29 PM
based upon the one common oppoenent, sure.

But it gives no credit for UF beating LSU by 30, Georgia by 39, Kentucky by 58, Vanderbilt by 28, South Carolina by 50, Florida State by 30, Miami by 23, all without any hints of running up the score.

Utah won by 3 points or less vs. Michigan, Oregon State, New Mexico, and TCU.

The Utes were good. They were not dominating for much of the season.

That's all very nice. I'm comparing their records - Utah's was better - and their performance against a common opponent - Utah's was better.

Based on that, Utah was better. Unless Utah played LSU or Florida played TCU, etc., the rest is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned - you're comparing apples to oranges - or LSU's to TCU's in this case.

Slick Pinkham
01-09-2009, 11:00 PM
I am comparing the relative merits of beating winning teams who actually won bowl games after losing to Florida by over 4 touchdowns to the merits of barely beating losing teams like New Mexico and Michigan.

Florida often played well enough to make top 20 teams look like...well... Indiana football.

I know that comparing games against Georgia and New Mexico is like comparing apples and oranges. They are nothing alike. Georgia is good and talented. New Mexico is not. That's why one team routing Georgia by 39 gets some brownie points over another team squeaking by New Mexico by 3. The converse, beating New Mexico by 39 and Georgia by 3, would have been far less noteworthy. That's my perogative as a pretend pollster, and it's your perogative to use different criteria, illustrating why the whole sytem is goofy.

I dislike the Gators and SEC football in general, but when I watched them play I was amazed how the games were over by halftime most of the season, regardless of opponent or even location of game.

travmil
01-09-2009, 11:04 PM
I don't care, until Florida proves it on the field, you cannot convince me that they would definitely beat Utah. Any given....saturday. Right?

Slick Pinkham
01-09-2009, 11:18 PM
I am not saying Florida would beat Utah on the field, or USC, or Texas. We won't know and we will never know. I would certainly be cheering like crazy for Utah to beat Florida, like I was cheering for Utah to beat Alabama.

The alternative to knowing the outcome on the field is to crown one team based upon the totality of the season, by vague and even arbitrary criteria. The criteria I choose includes who you beat and how handily you beat them. Not all victories are created equally, and that even sometimes has predictive ability. Case in point the Colts 12-win season, with a great many eeked-out wins that objectively left even Colts fans thinking "Gee, that was fortunate and I hope we don't have to play them in the playoffs."

Robertmto
01-10-2009, 12:00 AM
Florida.

If any1 thinks Utah would beat them, you're off your rocker

Trader Joe
01-10-2009, 03:35 AM
Utah finished unbeaten and didn't even get a chance and to me that is wrong.

A better example would be, what if the Pats had gone 16-0 last year, but the NFL decided the Colts deserved the NFL BCS spot because the AFC South was the tougher division and we had to deal with both the Titans and Jags in our divsion? That to me is what happened to Utah this year, and it is stupid.

Robertmto
01-10-2009, 06:59 AM
Utah finished unbeaten and didn't even get a chance and to me that is wrong.

A better example would be, what if the Pats had gone 16-0 last year, but the NFL decided the Colts deserved the NFL BCS spot because the AFC South was the tougher division and we had to deal with both the Titans and Jags in our divsion? That to me is what happened to Utah this year, and it is stupid.

I agree 1000000000%

CFB needs a playoff.

But the Finals of that Playoff would be Florida vs. USC, and i beleive Florida would win that game too.

Utah would lose a final 4 game most likely (USC and FLA would eat their cookies for breakfast)

DisplacedKnick
01-10-2009, 08:56 AM
I'll go back to this - keep in mind the question is who DESERVES to be ranked number 1 - not who would beat who since nobody has a clue.

Utah ran the table and went undefeated. Florida didn't. The goal in any game is to win. Utah achieved this better than Florida. When the goal of a game is to establish a points differential I'll start considering that.

So then we get to SOS factors. It's indisputable that Florida's strength of schedule ranking is stronger than Utah's. Part of that's the inherent BCS Conference bias that's been deliberately built into the computer rankings to justify Bowl matchups - see the following Bill James article for additional info: http://www.slate.com/id/2208108/pagenum/all/

But probably not all of it.

However, Utah beat 3 ranked teams this year - TCU, BYU and Alabama. Until the Alabama game, which I never thought they'd win, I hadn't even worried about Utah - it was Texas getting ripped off. So then we have the Alabama game. In the one game where we don't have to believe in a flawed, manipulated computer program where we can at least make some sort of direct comparison between two teams (rather than some nonexistent implied comparison), Florida won a narrow victory where they trailed in the 4th quarter while Utah completely dominated Alabama, sacked the opposing QB 8 times, held a top running team to 165 yards below their average and threw the ball at will.

That's the only legitimate point of comparison I have to go by - the only common opponent. Every other comparison is tainted by a combination of them not being common opponents and by a manipulated computer program the BCS has put together to justify an unjustifiable system.

I agree that if Utah played Florida, Florida probably wins - I disagree with anyone such as Robertmo who says there's no way Utah wins - look at the Alabama game - but that's not the question. The question is who deserves the number 1 ranking and I have no question in my mind who that is.

Moses
01-10-2009, 11:27 AM
Utah finished unbeaten and didn't even get a chance and to me that is wrong.

A better example would be, what if the Pats had gone 16-0 last year, but the NFL decided the Colts deserved the NFL BCS spot because the AFC South was the tougher division and we had to deal with both the Titans and Jags in our divsion? That to me is what happened to Utah this year, and it is stupid.
That is a terrible comparison. NFL teams all have NFL talent. The MWC vs the SEC is a completely different matter.

DK, did you have a problem during CFB season when there were 3-4 undefeated teams that were not in the top 5 because they played in extremely weak conferences? (Boise State, Ball State, etc) I think the best team should be #1 and the best team is #1. Florida was just unstoppable this year.

Jonathan
01-10-2009, 12:43 PM
The SEC was down a little this year but keep in mind teams in that conference play in huge stadiums that hold over 75,000 people. You go on the road and it is a grind. No way Utah goes undeafeted in the SEC.

Moses
01-10-2009, 12:55 PM
I'll go back to this - keep in mind the question is who DESERVES to be ranked number 1 - not who would beat who since nobody has a clue.

Utah ran the table and went undefeated. Florida didn't. The goal in any game is to win. Utah achieved this better than Florida. When the goal of a game is to establish a points differential I'll start considering that.

So then we get to SOS factors. It's indisputable that Florida's strength of schedule ranking is stronger than Utah's. Part of that's the inherent BCS Conference bias that's been deliberately built into the computer rankings to justify Bowl matchups - see the following Bill James article for additional info: http://www.slate.com/id/2208108/pagenum/all/

But probably not all of it.

However, Utah beat 3 ranked teams this year - TCU, BYU and Alabama. Until the Alabama game, which I never thought they'd win, I hadn't even worried about Utah - it was Texas getting ripped off. So then we have the Alabama game. In the one game where we don't have to believe in a flawed, manipulated computer program where we can at least make some sort of direct comparison between two teams (rather than some nonexistent implied comparison), Florida won a narrow victory where they trailed in the 4th quarter while Utah completely dominated Alabama, sacked the opposing QB 8 times, held a top running team to 165 yards below their average and threw the ball at will.

That's the only legitimate point of comparison I have to go by - the only common opponent. Every other comparison is tainted by a combination of them not being common opponents and by a manipulated computer program the BCS has put together to justify an unjustifiable system.

I agree that if Utah played Florida, Florida probably wins - I disagree with anyone such as Robertmo who says there's no way Utah wins - look at the Alabama game - but that's not the question. The question is who deserves the number 1 ranking and I have no question in my mind who that is.
You aren't acknowledging the fact that the Crimson Tide team that Utah played was completely different then the team that Florida played. Alabama had a slew of injuries and a suspension of their best player for their game against Utah. I don't think you can compare the two games.

Shade
01-10-2009, 01:09 PM
That is a terrible comparison. NFL teams all have NFL talent. The MWC vs the SEC is a completely different matter.

DK, did you have a problem during CFB season when there were 3-4 undefeated teams that were not in the top 5 because they played in extremely weak conferences? (Boise State, Ball State, etc) I think the best team should be #1 and the best team is #1. Florida was just unstoppable this year.

Tell that to the '08 Lions. :devil:

Shade
01-10-2009, 01:10 PM
The fact that this discussion is taking place, and the opinions are almost split down the middle (with legit arguments from both sides), is just a further example of why a playoff system is needed.

No system is perfect, but a playoff seems to work pretty damn well for every other sport out there. And there's no way it could be anywhere near as bad as the system that is currently in place.

Trader Joe
01-10-2009, 01:17 PM
That is a terrible comparison. NFL teams all have NFL talent. The MWC vs the SEC is a completely different matter.

DK, did you have a problem during CFB season when there were 3-4 undefeated teams that were not in the top 5 because they played in extremely weak conferences? (Boise State, Ball State, etc) I think the best team should be #1 and the best team is #1. Florida was just unstoppable this year.

I wasn't arguing the talent level of the NFL vs. college football.

travmil
01-10-2009, 01:53 PM
That is a terrible comparison. NFL teams all have NFL talent. The MWC vs the SEC is a completely different matter.

DK, did you have a problem during CFB season when there were 3-4 undefeated teams that were not in the top 5 because they played in extremely weak conferences? (Boise State, Ball State, etc) I think the best team should be #1 and the best team is #1. Florida was just unstoppable this year.

Well, no...no Florida was not unstoppable. Now Utah....they were unstoppable, as evidenced by the fact that nobody stopped them from winning.

Slick Pinkham
01-10-2009, 03:56 PM
The Alabama team that showed up for the Sugar Bowl looked collectively like they didn't want to be there. In their last game they had lost their chance to win a national title and lost their #1 ranking, losing by 11 to a Gator team playing WITHOUT two of its three best players (Harvin & Raines). I say lay that on their coach-- they were not ready to play whereas Utah was psyched for the game of their lives.

It was great to see.

A 14 point win over a flat Alabama team is supposedly miles better than a shorthanded 11-point win over a sharp and well-prepared Alabama team? I'm not seeing it. Enough to make up for a vast difference in quality wins by amazing margins? I don't think so.

It's very interesting when you look at the Sagarin ratings, in that he calculates his rankings two ways. In one model called "elo chess", it only matters that you win. A one point win helps you as much as a 50 point win. In that method, Utah finished #1 anf Florida #2. The BCS uses this method as one component. In the "pure points" model which Jeff Sagarin argues is more accurate and a better predictor but less politically correct, you get credit for easy victories though there is a "diminishing returns" factor that minimizes the benefit of trying to run up the score (e.g a 20-point win isn't much different than a 40 point win, but is way better than a 1 point win).

In that model, the Utes finish #10. Florida and USC finish 1-2.

I'm not a big fan of polls, but he seems to always work on his formula and after 23 years has it down pretty good. Again I'd much rather see it played out and his formula must reward power schools a bit too much to have the Utes #10, but at least it's a analysis untainted by team biases or sportswriter's whims.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt08.htm

DisplacedKnick
01-10-2009, 04:15 PM
You aren't acknowledging the fact that the Crimson Tide team that Utah played was completely different then the team that Florida played. Alabama had a slew of injuries and a suspension of their best player for their game against Utah. I don't think you can compare the two games.

The games were consecutive - did someone come after Alabama players at practice with a machine gun or something?

DisplacedKnick
01-10-2009, 04:16 PM
Florida was just unstoppable this year.

The unstoppable team in NCAA Division 1 Football was Utah - nobody stopped them.

Florida was stopped.

DisplacedKnick
01-10-2009, 04:19 PM
DK, did you have a problem during CFB season when there were 3-4 undefeated teams that were not in the top 5 because they played in extremely weak conferences? (Boise State, Ball State, etc) I think the best team should be #1 and the best team is #1. Florida was just unstoppable this year.

I thought I explained my thought process EXTREMELY clearly in the last long post I put together. If my thought process was unclear where I specifically talked about the Alabama victory being a key factor, please let me know why.

Trader Joe
01-10-2009, 05:17 PM
The unstoppable team in NCAA Division 1 Football was Utah - nobody stopped them.

Florida was stopped.

At home no less against a middle of the road Ole Miss team. So for all of their beat downs they handed out Florida still crapped the bed in an easy game at home.

Moses
01-10-2009, 06:15 PM
I wasn't arguing the talent level of the NFL vs. college football.
Neither was I. I think you misunderstood what I said. I meant that comparing divisions within the NFL vs comparing the SEC to the MWC is laughable. As I said before, all NFL teams have NFL talent but not all conferences in football have the talent level of the SEC. That isn't a knock on the MWC, but it really just doesn't have the overall talent the SEC has.


The games were consecutive - did someone come after Alabama players at practice with a machine gun or something?
No, they lost their best player (Andre Smith) to suspension and lost 3 more of their starters to injury by halftime. That is also not mentioning that Florida was missing its best offensive player in Percy Harvin when Bama played them.

Maybe you are right that Utah should be the #1 ranked team because they didn't lose a game, but they are not the best overall team.


At home no less against a middle of the road Ole Miss team. So for all of their beat downs they handed out Florida still crapped the bed in an easy game at home.
Ole Miss is not a bad team. Houston Nutt is an outstanding head coach and they have great talent. Don't be surprised if they become a top 10 team in the nation next year.

Slick Pinkham
01-10-2009, 08:27 PM
At home no less against a middle of the road Ole Miss team. So for all of their beat downs they handed out Florida still crapped the bed in an easy game at home.

Texas Tech disagrees with you. Also, according to the Sagarin rankings I linked above, had Utah played Ole Miss, they would have been their third toughest game of their entire season after Alabama and TCU. Tougher than every one of their many 2 and 3 point victories.

I guess if there was no NCAA tournament in basketball and decided it by polls, some year Butler would run the table in the Horizon League and go 28-0 and be far more deserving of the mythical national title than, say, a 27-1 North Carolina, Kansas, or UCLA.

Losses are important. Quality victories are important too Utah smoked Florida in avoiding the loss but got smoked in the quality victories category.

I wished they played and would root for the Utes like crazy, but as the system stands now I think they luckily got it right.

Slick Pinkham
01-11-2009, 11:59 AM
DK, wouldn't application of your common opponent principle also lead us to the clear conclusion that Harvard's basketball team is better than North Carolina's?

They only have one common opponent, Boston College. On consecutive games last week, Boston College travelled to North Carolina to beat them, and then returned home and lost to Harvard. (Of course, thankfully, college b'ball doesn't rely on a silly BCS system).

DisplacedKnick
01-11-2009, 02:34 PM
Didn't know Harvard was undefeated - congrats to them.

Will Galen
01-11-2009, 07:52 PM
Florida is the champion of the 65 team BCS. Utah is national champion.

SycamoreKen
01-12-2009, 11:02 PM
I don't really care since I have no dog in the fight, but when does FOX lose these games? The lack of replay on certain big plays that may have been in question bothered me in the Texas & FLA game. Pryor's td looked like he pushed off and the break up on 4th down on OKLA. last play both deserved another look even though it would not have changed anything. Still don't know why pas interference isn''t reviewable, but that's another thread. I enjoyed all the games i watched.

grace
01-12-2009, 11:33 PM
When I saw that SycamoreKen had posted I thought for sure his answer would be "I don't know who the best is, but I do know who the worst is." Exactly when did Indiana State win a football game? I think it's been at least two years.