The CardBoard
#6 in the BCS - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: #6 in the BCS (/thread-2145.html)


#6 in the BCS - fullmetal - 10-23-2011

Really?  Sigh.  We're the lowest-ranked undefeated.  Oregon is the highest-ranked one-loss team.  And Clemson, ugh.

Kirk Herbstreit obviously didn't think UW was good enough competition.

Re: #6 in the BCS - wyattp - 10-23-2011

Yea its crap....what more do they want....

Re: #6 in the BCS - washingtonismoney - 10-23-2011

Blame the computers. Specifically blame the asinine requirement that they not consider margin of victory. Sagarin's ELO measure has us at #22 while the one he takes seriously has us at #6.

Re: #6 in the BCS - fullmetal - 10-23-2011

Question is whether OU can pick themselves back up and take care of business against Oklahoma State.  Maybe the weather delay took the edge off of the Sooner defense.  I think OU beats Oklahoma State.  Clemson I'm not sold on...GA Tech and South Carolina loom large, and the ACC champ game against perhaps VA Tech may be big games for them to lose.

One of the pundits just proclaimed Stanford #3 in his personal poll, bless his heart.

Re: #6 in the BCS - fullmetal - 10-23-2011

Kirk on Stanford: "We just don't know."

"We just don't know how great they are."

Kirk's really high on USC if he thinks USC is a great test.

Re: #6 in the BCS - wyattp - 10-23-2011

What I don't understand is how they have Boise State at #4.....they barely beat an unranked Air Force where we whooped up on a #22 Washington...

Re: #6 in the BCS - Griffins78 - 10-23-2011

The computers and the people that run them are really stupid. Our society in general has come to rely way too much on stupid computerized analysis. We suspend human judgment for computerized analytics that continue to fail. We Sell computers as being objective but they are anything but objective. They are designed with bias.

Human judgment, as imperfect as it is is much better than computers.

Re: #6 in the BCS - Griffins78 - 10-23-2011

(10-23-2011, 05:34 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:Kirk on Stanford: "We just don't know."

"We just don't know how great they are."

Kirk's really high on the University of South Central if he thinks the University of South Central is a great test.
He must be trying to hype this Sat.'s Game since Game Day will be there and I assume Herbie and Musberger will be there. They want to create drama.

Re: #6 in the BCS - Griffins78 - 10-23-2011

(10-23-2011, 05:38 PM)snkp360 link Wrote:What I don't understand is how they have Boise State at #4.....they barely beat an unranked Air Force where we whooped up on a #22 Washington...
Exactly! That's what I don't get about the argument that our "weak" schedule hurting us when there are several other teams with weak schedules too that don't seem to be impacted. Boise St has beaten only one good team in Georgia, ranked 22 even though Georgia has lost both games against ranked opponents and hasn't beaten anyone of note.

Re: #6 in the BCS - wyattp - 10-23-2011

This page says it all.....  http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcs

We have a 14 and 21 rank in there....as one of the talking heads said "The BCS just doesn't like the Pac-12"

Re: #6 in the BCS - Farm93 - 10-23-2011

In Miller I trust.  :D

His Pac-12 Bowl Projections sound mighty good to me.  BCS #6 at this point is fine.  As long as Stanford keeps winning, Stanford will easily pass Boise State and Clemson with wins down the stretch.  Those teams just can't match Stanford's schedule(SC, Oregon, C.a.l, Notre Dame and ASU).  Really the Big12 winner is the only thing to worry about.  An undefeated Big12 winner will trump Stanford, so it is important that Oklahoma shred the other conference teams without losses now.

First things first.  Stanford must keep winning.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/28275/pac-12-bowl-projections-week-8

Re: #6 in the BCS - OutsiderFan - 10-23-2011

I know it sucks to be #6, but Stanford has to win its next three games before you can really get all bent out of shape about it. Win those next three and Stanford could very well be #3 or #2, keeping in mind the LSU-Alabama loser will drop.

It looks like Stanford may have to wage a serious PR battle against Oklahoma State.

Re: #6 in the BCS - bulldogbigred - 10-23-2011

Total BS. But that what fans do, speculate and worry about the polls, its just natural. I don't understand at all how Boise State has a stronger schedule than Stanford, they played a mediocre Georgia team.

I know our team is not paying any attention whatsoever about these polls and have their full focus at the game at hand.

Re: #6 in the BCS - oman - 10-23-2011

I was hoping for five but six is fine.


Re: #6 in the BCS - davidpost - 10-23-2011

If more people on the east coast over here would make an effort to watch Stanford,  they might see what I see  8). A very, very good team. Offensive scheme and skill is very high. Speed on D, underrated. A legit #3 if I had a vote, and not out of the question that the Cardinal could beat LSU or Alabama. Fact is, you guys are good, if people would care to take notice. 

Re: #6 in the BCS - bazza97 - 10-24-2011

I agree with everything Farm93 said - just win baby!

I'd also rather the team felt a little disrespected going into each of our next games.  If we take care of business, I can't see how we won't be playing in the national championship game.  But we gotta win each one first!

I still can't believe we can realistically talk about Stanford being in the national championship game!  I have to remind myself to enjoy this, but I can't help getting nervous thinking about the next few weeks.

Re: #6 in the BCS - fullmetal - 10-25-2011

davidpost-- You're definitely preaching to the choir here.  Every game counts...(and hey, maybe two College Gamedays will be enough).

If Stanford beats Oregon in a more impressive manner than how LSU beat Oregon, heads will definitely turn.