OU and Whorn are #38

[SteelClip49]

more ESPN too much time on their hands stuff.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=bcsstats/080905

[the_ouskull]

I love that they included Notre Dame's percentage at the bottom of the page. Of COURSE they play a higher percentage of BCS foes out of conference than any major college teams do. THEY DON'T HAVE A CONFERENCE! As much as I'd love to watch Notre Dame / Vandy (especially lately) or Notre Dame / Boone State every season... it's not happening. Notre Dame plays BCS foes out of conference because they have to. BCS conference schools don't play other BCS conference schools OOC just because they'd make good games for fans to watch. They're thinking money first, rankings and the football side of things second, and the fans roughly fif.

Also, not that it's THAT important, but the best conferences in football right now, in my humble opinion, are the SEC and the Big 12, and you have to go all the way down to 18, and 19, respectively, on this miserable list, to find a school from either of those conferences. (The Big East, rounding out the Top 3, has Syracuse parked at number 9.)

Yes, a team like Florida State IS going to have a good record on something like this. It has a lot to do with the fact of, have you SEEN the football they play in the ACC? It's like the anti-hoops. It's Bizarro Basketball. When the best team in your conference is the 20th ranked Demon Deacons, you may not have a pot to p*ss in, or a window to throw it out of, so it's best in the future if ESPN stay out of talking football. Their agenda obviously differs from that of just conversation. Oh, and Clemson's ranked 22nd in one poll.

*sshats.

the_ouskull

[SoFla Sooner]

Totally agree with your point about ND. This is one aspect of how tough your schedule is but it doesn't tell the whole picture obviously. The only thing that really matters is SOS rating at the end of the year. Cumulative SOS over ten years would be very interesting to see.

[DrZaius]

I can not believe that I just read that article. I mean WTF is that suppose to mean anyways? I am sitting in the woods right now staking out my pool for vandals that we are trying to catch and I just wanted to hang myself from the tree I am leaning against. Did someone pay that tard to crunch those numbers? Why do I feel like I am beating up a retard even talking about the guy who wrote that.

[cheezyq]

Notice how they DON'T specify whether the BCS foe was someone like Baylor/Vanderbilt or whether it was OU/Florida, etc. It's easy to say that "we faced more BCS foes, so we're better". That's a traditional SEC trick. Problem is, they don't specify that they faced the bottom 2 teams of each conference.

Just another case of tailoring the numbers to fit the preconceived notion, rather than using the numbers to build the correct argument.

[cheezyq]

....it's best in the future if ESPN stay out of talking football. Their agenda obviously differs from that of just conversation.

Exactly. I've been saying this since before the start of the season, and thinking it since 2000. ESPN is so irrelevant when it comes to football, nothing they say can be taken with any level of seriousness. The only subject that ESPN is qualified to comment on is BoSox/Yankees baseball. And who gives a **** about that?