Alright, droski, I'm only doing this once. I don't expect you to "get it" or want to "get it."
Final scores are permanent records of achievement. In fact, final scores = Ws and Ls which are the SOLE measuring stick of ACHIEVEMENT.
However, final scores don't always accurately record the performance. Performance in college football is best measured by total yards and first downs. See, last season Tennessee outgained their SEC foes by almost 50 yards yet achieved little - what happened in 2006? We improved a ton!
See, as I've said a million times on this board - people think they know more than they do about sports. Or, put more nicely - eyes lie. In my experience, only a handful out of 100 people can truly evaluate performance by watching the games. I know a few on this board, for instance.
Also, while I haven't bought into this next point yet, I think it may have some value: Let's say Cal averages 350 yards of offense per game and allows 290 per game. Then, let's say Arizona averages 300 yards per game of offense and allows 300. If Cal gains 320 and allows 310, Arizona was outperformed on the pure number, but outperformed what Cal usually does. That sounds murky, thus I haven't bought into it.
In the end, you'll argue about achievement vs. performance, total yards/FDs, and more things. But before you do, remember that I spend more time on these theories than anyone you may have ever met.
