UT Football.Is it plausible to believe we can win it all?

#276
#276
jakez4ut said:
no, you've just done a poor job of making your point. you have rambled on about deserving and best for all this time, yet have made no clear or decisive point that allows me to understand what you are talking about.

again, you have been dealing with intangibles, "would have" this, "could have" that. this team deserves this or that.

but i have yet to see anything that allows me to say "good point".
Click to expand...

I laid it out plain and simple about 10 times. If you still don't get it, that's your problem.
 
#277
#277
tvolsfan said:
There hasn't been one championship finalist with more than 1 loss. I would say one loss is outstanding.
Click to expand...
one loss is a qualifier. ok.

what if there are 5 one loss teams? 3 one loss teams? 10?

how do you distinguish which one loss team is better than the other?

polls, opinion, and computer.

what if everyone finished with 1+ losses...??

not to throw out every what if scenario, but the point is, there are a million what if scenarios, and something as general as 1 loss, doesn't cut it imo.
 
#278
#278
I have used this example before, and I will use it again.

Say there was a tourney in 2004 and one team was left. Who should get it, 10-1 Texas who lost only to OU who was unbeaten through the regular season, or Pitt who won their conference?
 
#279
#279
jakez4ut said:
one loss is a qualifier. ok.

what if there are 5 one loss teams? 3 one loss teams? 10?

how do you distinguish which one loss team is better than the other?

polls, opinion, and computer.

what if everyone finished with 1+ losses...??

not to throw out every what if scenario, but the point is, there are a million what if scenarios, and something as general as 1 loss, doesn't cut it imo.
Click to expand...

Not something as general as one loss, but it is better than throwing a 2 loss champion in there.
 
#282
#282
tvolsfan said:
I have used this example before, and I will use it again.

Say there was a tourney in 2004 and one team was left. Who should get it, 10-1 Texas who lost only to OU who was unbeaten through the regular season, or Pitt who won their conference?
Click to expand...
depends on the tourney.....in my version, that would only include conf. champions, Pitt would get in.

in just about every other playoff scenario that talks about top 6 or 8, TX does.

the reality is, if you had an 8 team playoff, just for the sake of argument, and TX was the last team in, honestly, i dont' know that i'd have a problem with it. the winner of this ficticious tourney would have had to beat some good teams to win the NT.

what i am opposed to whole heartidly is the devaluing of the regular season and conf. championships.

and based on these last however many pages of this thread, the one determination i can make is that there are some that simply don't think conf. championships are all that important. poll position is.

i'm against that. to me, winning the SEC still means something. and to have that devalued just so long as you "make the playoffs" would suck.
 
#283
#283
kptvol said:
The conference title is important. It HELPS determine who should play in the BCS games. It shouldn't be the sole determining factor.

Here are the issues I am arguing. I said LSU wasn't the best SEC team in 2001. You said the scoreboard doesn't lie. I directed you to the scoreboard of the LSU-UF matchup. Now, why does a 3 loss team deserve something more than a 1 loss team that beat said 3 loss team?

2001 UF-LSU score: 44-15, Gators. How does that grab you for ridiculous?
Click to expand...

Pretty plain and simple.
 
#285
#285
kptvol said:
Me and anyone with the reading comprehension skills of a sixth-grader.
Click to expand...
wow. just wow.

why don't you lay it out for me again and let me take another look then? tell me how to determine who the "best" is and who is most "deserving"?

and then tell me again why LSU wasn't the best team in the SEC in 01 and why FL was the most deserving team in 01 to play for a NT?

i can tell you this much, it won't have anything to do with who won what.
 
#286
#286
Looking for logic in all the wrong places....:whistling: (to the tune of Looking for Love)
 
#287
#287
kptvol said:
Pretty plain and simple.
Click to expand...
yes, i remember, this is where you tried to explain why LSU wasn't the best team, even though they won the conf, and that FL was the best team even though they didn't win their division.

all of this despite what actually happened........yes, i'm the one with the comprehension problem.....:eek:lol:

it's posts like this that make me wish we had a "beginners" forum where they rightfully belong.
 
#289
#289
jakez4ut said:
wow. just wow.

why don't you lay it out for me again and let me take another look then? tell me how to determine who the "best" is and who is most "deserving"?

and then tell me again why LSU wasn't the best team in the SEC in 01 and why FL was the most deserving team in 01 to play for a NT?

i can tell you this much, it won't have anything to do with who won what.
Click to expand...

I've done that about 10 times. Florida beat LSU by 4 scores. Who won what? Florida lost 1 game by 2 points to a top 5 team. LSU lost three games. 1 was to UT, the other of course to Florida, and finally they lost to Ole Miss. Taking all that into account, Florida would deserve a shot at the National Championship moreso than SEC Champs LSU.

It's a smilar situation as to what tvolsfan presented in his Texas-Pittsburgh argument. The only difference in my example is that the two teams are in the same conference, played each other, and the non-champ won decisively.
 
#290
#290
jakez4ut said:
yes, i remember, this is where you tried to explain why LSU wasn't the best team, even though they won the conf, and that FL was the best team even though they didn't win their division.

all of this despite what actually happened........yes, i'm the one with the comprehension problem.....:eek:lol:

it's posts like this that make me wish we had a "beginners" forum where they rightfully belong.
Click to expand...

Florida beat LSU 44-15. To quote you, "The scoreboard doesn't lie." Can you comprehend that?
 
#291
#291
I really don't want to rehash an hr long debate, but no conference champ should equal no shot at NC , IMO.
 
#292
#292
kptvol said:
I've done that about 10 times. Florida beat LSU by 4 scores. Who won what? Florida lost 1 game by 2 points to a top 5 team. LSU lost three games. 1 was to UT, the other of course to Florida, and finally they lost to Ole Miss. Taking all that into account, Florida would deserve a shot at the National Championship moreso than SEC Champs LSU.

It's a smilar situation as to what tvolsfan presented in his Texas-Pittsburgh argument. The only difference in my example is that the two teams are in the same conference, played each other, and the non-champ won decisively.
Click to expand...
awh, poor florida. my advice, play harder.

this is not a charity sport. it has winners and losers. generally when you don't win, when it counts, a la, TN/FL 2001, you don't have the opportunity to accomplish your goal, a la, win the SEC and maybe play for a NT.

they had their chance. they blew it. tough. deal with it. whatever you have to do to understand that THEY CEASED BEING DESERVING when they lost to us in that game.

you don't get a do over. that is unless you are running things, and then it's fine that you lost, we know you're not that bad, why, not really sure, call it a "feeling".

you have basically said that winning or losing the TN/FL game should have no bearing on who should play for the SEC or an eventual national title game? and i still don't know what that's based on.......
 
#293
#293
kptvol said:
Florida beat LSU 44-15. To quote you, "The scoreboard doesn't lie." Can you comprehend that?
Click to expand...
sure can. and for that , i say nice job fl.

they should have beaten us if they wanted to do anything with it.

they didn't we did, and the rest is as they say, history. and that's true, you can look it up even.
 
#295
#295
jakez4ut said:
awh, poor florida. my advice, play harder.

this is not a charity sport. it has winners and losers. generally when you don't win, when it counts, a la, TN/FL 2001, you don't have the opportunity to accomplish your goal, a la, win the SEC and maybe play for a NT.

they had their chance. they blew it. tough. deal with it. whatever you have to do to understand that THEY CEASED BEING DESERVING when they lost to us in that game.

you don't get a do over. that is unless you are running things, and then it's fine that you lost, we know you're not that bad, why, not really sure, call it a "feeling".

you have basically said that winning or losing the TN/FL game should have no bearing on who should play for the SEC or an eventual national title game? and i still don't know what that's based on.......
Click to expand...

Boy howdy. You missed the point again. Of course the UT/UF game has significance as to who gets the call. UT won. Let's say UT beats LSU in the SEC championship. That means UT and UF both have one SEC loss. UT wins the head-to-head, so they deserve to go to the dance.

In reality, LSU won. So, now the Tigers have 3 SEC losses, and they lost the head-to-head with Florida. Florida still has one SEC loss and they absolutely destroyed the Tigers.
 
#296
#296
volmanjr said:
I really don't want to rehash an hr long debate, but no conference champ should equal no shot at NC , IMO.
Click to expand...
I get the sentiment here and hate to side with KPT on anything, but why institute a rule like champs only when we're trying to identify the best football team via playoff processs.
 
#297
#297
kptvol said:
I've done that about 10 times. Florida beat LSU by 4 scores. Who won what? Florida lost 1 game by 2 points to a top 5 team. LSU lost three games. 1 was to UT, the other of course to Florida, and finally they lost to Ole Miss. Taking all that into account, Florida would deserve a shot at the National Championship moreso than SEC Champs LSU.

It's a smilar situation as to what tvolsfan presented in his Texas-Pittsburgh argument. The only difference in my example is that the two teams are in the same conference, played each other, and the non-champ won decisively.
Click to expand...

Wow. I was unaware that LSU played for the National Championship in 2001. I guess that is because THEY DIDN'T! Neither LSU nor Florida were worthy of playing for the National Championship in 2001. LSU wasn't worthy because they had 3 losses. Florida wasn't worthy because they weren't the champions of their conference. It's settled. Let's move on.
 
#298
#298
jakez4ut said:
sure can. and for that , i say nice job fl.

they should have beaten us if they wanted to do anything with it.

they didn't we did, and the rest is as they say, history. and that's true, you can look it up even.
Click to expand...

You act like I'm angry with the way history worked out. I understand how these games happened. I watched every UT game and several Florida games in 2001. I was on the field when the Vols trotted off in sad defeat and LSU celebrated the win. It sucked pretty badly. The Tigers won that day and with that game they got their SEC championship. Florida didn't get it.

None of that is relevant to how I feel about 2001 Florida. If you're looking for an SEC contender to take on Miami that year, you look at the Gators. LSU didn't do enough during the regular season -not nearly enough.
 
#299
#299
kptvol said:
Boy howdy. You missed the point again. Of course the UT/UF game has significance as to who gets the call. UT won. Let's say UT beats LSU in the SEC championship. That means UT and UF both have one SEC loss. UT wins the head-to-head, so they deserve to go to the dance.

In reality, LSU won. So, now the Tigers have 3 SEC losses, and they lost the head-to-head with Florida. Florida still has one SEC loss and they absolutely destroyed the Tigers.
Click to expand...
thanks for sort of agreeing with me, i guess. but they don't have to go back and look at tie breakers AFTER the SEC title game. they sort of do that prior to the SEC title game, you know, to make sure they have the right two teams in there in the first place. so, unfortunately for you, by the time the SEC title game is over, all the decision process is taken out because (drum roll), there is a final score that tells us this informatin.

ah yes, reality. thanks for coming. IN reality, LSU won the west and FL is in the East. FL should have beaten TN. so like i said, if FL wants to hang up an SECW banner and get rings, fine with me. until then, nice win over LSU, hope you enjoyed your trip to "whatever bowl" in FL on Jan 1, 2002.
 
#300
#300
Vol423 said:
Wow. I was unaware that LSU played for the National Championship in 2001. I guess that is because THEY DIDN'T! Neither LSU nor Florida were worthy of playing for the National Championship in 2001. LSU wasn't worthy because they had 3 losses. Florida wasn't worthy because they weren't the champions of their conference. It's settled. Let's move on.
Click to expand...

It's a hypothetical situation. I made sure to point that out when I brought it up. I'm using it to argue a point about the way the BCS works.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top