Originally Posted by Facelift
That is completely false as you just previously admitted. Chalk in the CFP playoffs was the top 4 ranked teams winning out. Chalk in the bball tourney is the top 4 seeds winning out, and picking the whole tourney "chalk" means picking the higher seeded team every game. That is how the term is used and is commonly understood. Its not a betting term. You're wrong.
The opening lines:
Alabama -1 over Clemson
Oklahoma -3 over Georgia
This would never be the basis of using the word "chalk." In the NCAA tournament, is chalk the seeding or the AP Top 25?
The funny thing is that you are arguing just to argue, but yet you know you fucked up and are wrong.
Pathetic.
Nobody other than you, just right now, has ever used the term "chalk" to refer to the pre-playoff CFP rankings on teams playing in their conference championship games.
They matter NOW, for the games ahead, because they are the seeding of the 4-team tournament.
I'm sick of Clemson and Alabama. I'll be rooting for the winner of Georgia vs Oklahoma to win the title game.
Show us the post where you said before the B10 champ game "if Ohio St wins a close game, they will be kept out of the CFP". You said it was a 50/50 call. It wasn't. The head of the CFP said it wasn't. If it was, the conf champ game would have mattered. It didn't unless Wisconsin won.
Last edited by DocProgger; 12-03-2017 at 02:29 PM.
It was used dozens of times over the last week re the CFP top 4 ranked teams. LMFAO. The only person I have heard at ALL talking about the CFP playoff and rankings etc in betting terms is you. Betting lines change daily, sometimes hourly. And only people who are really into betting these games with real money care.
Its guys like you that lost their shirts in games like Super Bowl 3 where the Colts were 18 point favorites. Like I said, hope you stay away from the bookies, you wouldn't do well with your "chalk" bets.
Early lines have been volatile.
Now seeing Oklahoma -2 and Alabama -1.5
Miami - Wisconsin aside, some of these games turned out to be good. UCF/Auburn is great. Ohio St. vs. USC is a top matchup, too.
UCF played Memphis.
Penn state vs Washington should be good too
They played in the Pinball Machine Bowl, didn't they?
UCF is undefeated I think.
They used to crap on Penn State when they would go undefeated as well.
UCF is undefeated I think.
NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF STUPID PEOPLE IN LARGE GROUPS!
Almost to the mile.
I don't think the issue of them getting in is simply because they're OSU but because they won the B1G conference. And had they been chosen I don't think it would have been charity. Afterall, they did beat three ranked teams, two of which were ranked #4 at the time. Still, I agree they don't deserve to be in the playoffs if only because of the drubbing they took in Iowa.
But did Bama earn it? Their two wins against ranked opponents were LSU (#17) and Miss St (#23). They were ranked 51st in SOS (OSU was ranked 6th). They also lost to Auburn. So, how does Bama get in ahead of Auburn?
And before anyone says, "well, OSU got in ahead of PSU last year even tho they'd lost to PSU earlier, so Bama should get in ahead of Auburn," there's a difference: OSU was already ranked in the top four prior to the conference championship games whereas Bama wasn't. And just because Auburn lost to GA doesn't mean they should drop below Bama. Furthermore, while Auburn lost to GA in the SEC championship game, they'd beaten them earlier in the season, in addition to Bama.
I do think history has played a part in their decision. Choosing OSU last year, which was like a legacy choice, hurt them this year, especially after that ass kicking by Clemson. But I also think choosing Bama this year was for the same reason.
Ultimately, I think the Committee fucked up. Altho, I suppose to be fair, it's been a fucked up season.
“From thirty feet away she looked like a lot of class. From ten feet away she looked like something made up to be seen from thirty feet away.” – Philip Marlowe
That was back when Penn St's schedule was akin to UCFs.
That wasn't their fault. You go undefeated you should be National Champ.That was back when Penn St's schedule was akin to UCFs.
NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF STUPID PEOPLE IN LARGE GROUPS!
It's not that simple. If you're talking about some of the teams Paterno had when Penn St was an independent, first of all, some of those years had multiple unbeaten teams. Then you have to look at the schedules.
When Penn St was independent, like ND, Pitt, Miami, they had complete control over who they scheduled. They weren't wedded to a specific conference schedule. Penn St's schedules in the 60s and 70s were largely made up of eastern teams that weren't exactly national powers. So they weren't voted # 1 in some of those years because of weak schedules compared to other teams who played stronger schedules.
add--just checked something because I was curious. In the 1969 season, the one where Nixon stupidly declared "Texas is No 1" after the Texas vs Arkansas year end No 1 vs No 2 matchup, it turns out that Penn St declined an invitation to play the winner of that game in the Cotton Bowl where it would have set up another #1 vs #2 matchup, Texas vs Penn St. Instead Penn St CHOSE to go to the Orange Bowl and play a lower ranked Missouri team. So #1 undefeated Texas slipped by #9 Notre Dame (a game ND was leading 17-14 with a few minutes left), and #2 Penn St beat Missouri. Texas stayed #1 in the final poll of the year, the AP poll. Penn St could have played Texas for the national title and chose not to. Don't know if that had something to do with Nixon's 'meddling', but that is no fault of anyone but Penn St.
Last edited by DocProgger; 12-03-2017 at 06:59 PM.
NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF STUPID PEOPLE IN LARGE GROUPS!
Nope.
"Undefeated" is still just a resume of wins. If they aren't impressive enough, then a 1, 2 or even 3-loss team might be a more deserving champion.
So you give a guy who hits 30 home runs the title over a guy who hit 50 because he played in tougher stadiums and faced tougher pitching. It doesn'r work that way. You see how well it worked when the person with lesser votes was made president.
NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF STUPID PEOPLE IN LARGE GROUPS!
You just used two examples that have nothing to do with college football.
College football (and basketball) has long operated on the principle that all wins aren't created equal. The difficulty of schedules has been weighed (sometimes effectively and, before computers, often ineffectively) for quite some time now as an evaluation tool. There is nothing magic about not losing a game in a season. 12 wins is 12 wins. The wins don't get extra bonus points if, at the end of the season, there isn't a number in the loss column. Each win has to be evaluated on its own merit. A team that runs the table with an easy schedule is probably not as good as a team that played a hard schedule and lost a game or two.
I know you are being humorous Ed, can you imagine how many cupcakes Alabama would schedule if that was the system? Here's a clue, every non-conference game.
Ian
Host of the Post-Avant Jazzcore Happy Hour on progrock.com
https://podcasts.progrock.com/post-a...re-happy-hour/
Gordon Haskell - "You've got to keep the groove in your head and play a load of bollocks instead"
I blame Wynton, what was the question?
There are only 10 types of people in the World, those who understand binary and those that don't.
Speaking of schedules, I'm of the opinion that teams should get absolutely NO credit for beating up on an FCS cupcake blood donor game. Every team in the SEC plays one of these silly cupcake games, usually in November. They try to justify it with "but our conference is such a tough schedule" etc. This year (and for a few years running), the SEC East except for Georgia has been laughably bad. Other than Bama, LSU and Auburn, most of the SEC West is nothing that exceptional either. So teams that say they are 11-1 or 10-2 who beat up a DII school to me are really 10-1 and 9-2. You should only get credit for Div 1 wins in calculating the CFP playoff rankings. I would be curious as to what weight if any the CFP Comm. gives those games. There are a few schools in FBS that have never played a FCS school in their entire history (ND, USC for example).
Latest point spreads for the semifinals:
Georgia -1.5 over Oklahoma
Alabama -3 over Clemson
The money coming in has been heavy on Georgia and Alabama.
Newsflash! Rabid SEC Guy betting "heavily" on SEC teams! Wow!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks