|
|
Post by PJ520 on Oct 18, 2004 21:51:50 GMT -5
I say tigerbait's formula  |
|
|
|
Post by tigerbait99 on Oct 18, 2004 21:52:40 GMT -5
I say tigerbait's formula can't argue with that!!! |
|
|
|
Post by huskersrule01 on Oct 18, 2004 21:53:27 GMT -5
I say tigerbait's formula Of course you would say that since it has Wisconsin 2nd.  |
|
|
|
Post by tigerbait99 on Oct 18, 2004 21:58:51 GMT -5
AND THAT IS WHERE THEY SHOULD BE!!!!!! THEY HAVE THE BEST DEFENSE IN THE NATION!!!!!! my formula is perfect  |
|
|
|
Post by huskersrule01 on Oct 18, 2004 22:09:53 GMT -5
AND THAT IS WHERE THEY SHOULD BE!!!!!! THEY HAVE THE BEST DEFENSE IN THE NATION!!!!!! my formula is perfect Just because they have the best defense doesnt mean they should be #2. Even after that very impressive defensive showing and beating Purdue they are still not the #2 team, you cant have team jump that many spots especailly in the top of the rankings with all the other good teams up there. |
|
|
|
Post by PJ520 on Oct 18, 2004 22:12:00 GMT -5
Just because they have the best defense doesnt mean they should be #2. Even after that very impressive defensive showing and beating Purdue they are still not the #2 team, you cant have team jump that many spots especailly in the top of the rankings with all the other good teams up there. It's not Wisconsin's fault they fall victim to a low preseason ranking. The voters should have known UW returned almost everyone. |
|
|
|
Post by huskersrule01 on Oct 18, 2004 22:15:11 GMT -5
Thats is why there shoudn't be preseason rankings or rankings the first few weeks in the season.
|
|
|
|
Post by tigerbait99 on Oct 18, 2004 22:42:38 GMT -5
Just because they have the best defense doesnt mean they should be #2. Even after that very impressive defensive showing and beating Purdue they are still not the #2 team, you cant have team jump that many spots especailly in the top of the rankings with all the other good teams up there. My rankings are based on a mathematical equation. I had nothing to do with putting UW at #2, that is just where they ended up. |
|
|
|
Post by YbrikTCU on Oct 19, 2004 0:52:16 GMT -5
Playoffs is ideal, but Tigerbait's system is a hell of a lot better than the BCS.
Tigerbait, didn't you say that your personal impression was at least a small part of your formula?
|
|
|
|
Post by tigerbait99 on Oct 19, 2004 6:02:27 GMT -5
Playoffs is ideal, but Tigerbait's system is a hell of a lot better than the BCS. Tigerbait, didn't you say that your personal impression was at least a small part of your formula? Yes. A VERY SMALL PART. Since obviously I am bias I tried to limit my input into it, however I felt that it was also neccesary to have a little human input, rather than an entirely computer ranking. My rankings only make up 8% or so of the overall score. |
|
|
|
Post by soonerfan07 on Oct 19, 2004 8:03:00 GMT -5
playoff, i really dont think the Head of NCAA football is gonna find Tigers formula and use it
|
|
|
|
Post by qcomdrj on Oct 19, 2004 11:09:22 GMT -5
playoff, i really dont think the Head of NCAA football is gonna find Tigers formula and use it Maybe we can email the head of the BCS and have them include it for next year. I would still want a playoff though. |
|
|
|
Post by JaxHawk06 on Oct 19, 2004 15:18:06 GMT -5
I hate both the BCS and the playoff system. I say use either the AP Poll or ESPN/USA Today Poll
|
|
|
|
Post by qcomdrj on Oct 19, 2004 15:26:23 GMT -5
How do you hate the playoffs?
|
|
|
|
Post by JaxHawk06 on Oct 19, 2004 16:52:29 GMT -5
I just don't like the idea in college football
|
|
