OFFICIAL CAFE Top 25 - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to College Football

OFFICIAL CAFE Top 25

Moderator: Football Moderators

Re: OFFICIAL CAFE Top 25

Postby CC » Sun Oct 21, 2007 10:59 pm

statsman88 wrote:
CC wrote:
statsman88 wrote:
thats exactly what I did with mine. I have Auburn at 4. I have Ohio St. at 11


There is being true to your opinions and there is being stupid, Auburn has already lost 3 games including one to Miss St. who are 1-3 in the SEC and while OSU has yet to beat anyone of note, they have looked pretty good in their victories.


And if LSU doesn't make a diving catch with no time left Auburn would have won 5 in a row and have beaten the Best 2 teams in the nation on the road. Auburn got off to a rough start because Cox was horrible in those first few games. But he's got it back together, and they are a top team. Auburn would beat OSU and that's how I'm ranking the teams. And I've watched pretty much every Big 10 game this season. The conference is a joke. OSU's biggest competition is Michigan. Put Appalachian St. in the Big 10 and that's OSU's biggest competition this year.


I don't even want to get into how there still would have been time on the clock had the pass been incomplete being as the timekeeper like about 3 seconds tick off the clock when Byrd was on the ground.

I thought these were rankings of the best teams in the country, not hypothetical scenarios where Auburn has basically beaten the nations top two teams (obviously Florida is not one of the top 2 teams). I would be willing to bet money I do not have that USF is not ranked in your top 10 despite them beating Auburn in their own house. Rankings are meant to show who are the best teams in the country this year, not who is playing well at this very moment. Auburn has lost 3 games, just because they lost to two good teams (and one bad one) doesn't take away the fact that they are losses. I think Auburn is a good team, but ranking them in the top 5 on the strength of good losses is a joke in my opinion.

Also, just watching the Big 10 doesn't make you an expert as that Appalachian St. comment shows (I assume it was a thinly veiled insult). It App St. has lost to both Wofford and Georgia Southern this year and if you think that they would beat Michigan again if they played 10 more times you would be dead wrong.
Image
I ain't no suit-wearin' businessman like you... you know I'm just a gangsta I suppose... - Avon Barksdale
CC
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeSweet 16 SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 11079
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: The Big House.

Re: OFFICIAL CAFE Top 25

Postby statsman88 » Sun Oct 21, 2007 11:22 pm

I have USF ranked 7

And I also have Florida ranked second, because I believe that they are the 2nd best team in football. I know you can't get to into hypothetical situations but Auburn winning at Florida, then winning at Arkansas, then nearly pulling one out against most likely the best team in football on the road is pretty impressive. I really believe that they have greatly improved since those 2 early losses, I'm not basing it on them having 2 "quality loses". But why would I have Auburn ranked at #4 and USF at 7 when Auburn lost to them? Again, I just think that Auburn has greatly improved and is now a better team. You used the same judgement when you said that Michigan would now beat Appalachian St and thats fine.

And the time on the clock woulda been close, I realize that, maybe there's a tick left and a fairly long pressure field goal woulda been attempted. I was upset with Tuperville's use of his timeouts but thats another story. Still, a great game by 2 elite teams
Image
statsman88
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant

User avatar

Posts: 407
Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: OFFICIAL CAFE Top 25

Postby CC » Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:24 am

statsman88 wrote:I have USF ranked 7

And I also have Florida ranked second, because I believe that they are the 2nd best team in football. I know you can't get to into hypothetical situations but Auburn winning at Florida, then winning at Arkansas, then nearly pulling one out against most likely the best team in football on the road is pretty impressive. I really believe that they have greatly improved since those 2 early losses, I'm not basing it on them having 2 "quality loses". But why would I have Auburn ranked at #4 and USF at 7 when Auburn lost to them? Again, I just think that Auburn has greatly improved and is now a better team. You used the same judgement when you said that Michigan would now beat Appalachian St and thats fine.

And the time on the clock woulda been close, I realize that, maybe there's a tick left and a fairly long pressure field goal woulda been attempted. I was upset with Tuperville's use of his timeouts but thats another story. Still, a great game by 2 elite teams


I understand where you are coming from, I really do, but I just think it is very strange to put a 3 loss team at #4. They may have improved now, but rankings are based on the flow of the season, not a singular snapshot in time. Maybe Auburn would beat USF right now, but we can't know that, all we can know is that they already lost to them this season.
Image
I ain't no suit-wearin' businessman like you... you know I'm just a gangsta I suppose... - Avon Barksdale
CC
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeSweet 16 SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 11079
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: The Big House.

Re: OFFICIAL CAFE Top 25

Postby HskrPwr13 » Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:28 am

statsman88 wrote:I have USF ranked 7

And I also have Florida ranked second, because I believe that they are the 2nd best team in football. I know you can't get to into hypothetical situations but Auburn winning at Florida, then winning at Arkansas, then nearly pulling one out against most likely the best team in football on the road is pretty impressive. I really believe that they have greatly improved since those 2 early losses, I'm not basing it on them having 2 "quality loses". But why would I have Auburn ranked at #4 and USF at 7 when Auburn lost to them? Again, I just think that Auburn has greatly improved and is now a better team. You used the same judgement when you said that Michigan would now beat Appalachian St and thats fine.

And the time on the clock woulda been close, I realize that, maybe there's a tick left and a fairly long pressure field goal woulda been attempted. I was upset with Tuperville's use of his timeouts but thats another story. Still, a great game by 2 elite teams


How many losses would it take for you to feel that Auburn is no longer the 4th best team in the country? Your logic seems to dictate that you think they are the 4th best team (based on talent?) and no on-the-field results are going to change your mind.
HskrPwr13
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3936
Joined: 8 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Re: OFFICIAL CAFE Top 25

Postby knapplc » Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:30 am

Hey guys, I'm back now and I'll be happy to help with the rankings from now on.

One question - have we identified a "universe" of teams from which to choose, or are we all winging it? Just like with player rankings, if you don't have a defined set of players to choose from you always end up with Sinorice Moss on someone's rankings and not on everyone else's, so you have trouble with the rankings towards the bottom.

Any thoughts on limiting this to certain teams? Or teams with with a certain number of losses?
Image
How 'bout them Huskers!
knapplc
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerGolden Eagle EyeCafe MusketeerCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 18961
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: It's an L, not an I

Re: OFFICIAL CAFE Top 25

Postby HskrPwr13 » Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:34 am

knapplc wrote:Hey guys, I'm back now and I'll be happy to help with the rankings from now on.

One question - have we identified a "universe" of teams from which to choose, or are we all winging it? Just like with player rankings, if you don't have a defined set of players to choose from you always end up with Sinorice Moss on someone's rankings and not on everyone else's, so you have trouble with the rankings towards the bottom.

Any thoughts on limiting this to certain teams? Or teams with with a certain number of losses?


I havent seen any rules posted. If you think Duke is the no.1 team then I would think you'd be well within your rights to rank them as such.
HskrPwr13
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3936
Joined: 8 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Re: OFFICIAL CAFE Top 25

Postby deerayfan072 » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:41 am

Hey guys,

Just got back from being out of town for two days. I hev received rankings and will get them done later on tonight, I have some school things to do first

Knapp-

Its basically like you are a voter. You can have anyone where ever you feel they should be based on past performance or future performance
Image
deerayfan072
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb SupporterCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 18976
Joined: 15 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: On an Island

Re: OFFICIAL CAFE Top 25

Postby ShoelessJoe » Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:12 am

CC wrote:They may have improved now, but rankings are based on the flow of the season, not a singular snapshot in time.


I tend to disagree with this slightly. What we went for with these rankings (and I think everyone's, even your first week's rankings reflect this) is the flexibility to do with the rankings what you determine. Just like the real rankings as voters you are not given a set of rules to abide by. You are not told it is based on past performance, future expectations, or a singular snapshot. It is 100% subjective to say "If team X and Y play tomorrow, I think team X wins." And to be honest, that is the way that I'm doing my rankings. That is why I have Michigan ahead of USF. Because I'm fairly confident that if Michigan played USF tomorrow at a neutral site Michigan would win. I also have a two-loss Kentucky team ranked ahead of an undefeated Kansas team. Because I finally got to see Kansas play last week and they were atrocious. As opposed to Kentucky who I felt played a pretty good game against what I think is a good Florida team.

The reason I thought we were doing these rankings was because we essentially can have balls and can do what we want with them. We don't have to worry about our vote being taken away, we don't have to worry about fans yelling at us, we can do what we want with our rankings and not worry about repercussions. It may be a cop out to simply say... if team X and Y play team X will win because there is no real way to argue that with substantive evidence, but in all honesty that is how I think the rankings should be done and for that reason I will continue to vote that way.
Go Gators
ShoelessJoe
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1621
Joined: 1 Oct 2002
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Gainesville, FL

Re: OFFICIAL CAFE Top 25

Postby HskrPwr13 » Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:54 am

ShoelessJoe wrote:
CC wrote:They may have improved now, but rankings are based on the flow of the season, not a singular snapshot in time.


I tend to disagree with this slightly. What we went for with these rankings (and I think everyone's, even your first week's rankings reflect this) is the flexibility to do with the rankings what you determine. Just like the real rankings as voters you are not given a set of rules to abide by. You are not told it is based on past performance, future expectations, or a singular snapshot. It is 100% subjective to say "If team X and Y play tomorrow, I think team X wins." And to be honest, that is the way that I'm doing my rankings. That is why I have Michigan ahead of USF. Because I'm fairly confident that if Michigan played USF tomorrow at a neutral site Michigan would win. I also have a two-loss Kentucky team ranked ahead of an undefeated Kansas team. Because I finally got to see Kansas play last week and they were atrocious. As opposed to Kentucky who I felt played a pretty good game against what I think is a good Florida team.


I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, Shoeless, or anyone else for that matter that has shown the proprensity to vote with this type of logic, but this line of thinking truly "concerns" me. By the logic I'm reading above, hypothetically you're saying that if USF looks the same as they do now at the end of the season (I guess that would mean they lose one more somewhere along the way), and Michigan lost Mallett/Henne/Hart, whatever, on their way to losing 3 in a row, then they all got healthy and blew out Ohio State 50-10, you would then go ahead and put Michigan above USF because at that point you might "feel" that Mich would beat USF on a neutral field? Please explain how this logic isnt flawed! I can buy the neutral field argument when all things are equal, but things arent equal in this scenario. USF has clearly been more impressive, based on the year's results, than Mich has this year, regardless of which team you actually think would win in a hypothetical head-to-head matchup. Hek, I think Rutgers, when they bring they're "A" game, could beat anyone, but that doenst mean I should give them the benefit of the doubt and honor them with a ranking that they clearly havent earned.

Michigan = Have beaten a decent Illinois team and no one else (dont try to kid me with Purdue). Have been beaten by a good 1-AA team at home. Have been destroyed at home by a top Oregon team. Have looked better lately than the way they started the season.

South Florida = Have beaten a top WVU and a very good Auburn. Have been beaten by a decent Rutgers team.
HskrPwr13
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3936
Joined: 8 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Re: OFFICIAL CAFE Top 25

Postby ShoelessJoe » Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:38 pm

HskrPwr13 wrote:
I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, Shoeless, or anyone else for that matter that has shown the proprensity to vote with this type of logic, but this line of thinking truly "concerns" me. By the logic I'm reading above, hypothetically you're saying that if USF looks the same as they do now at the end of the season (I guess that would mean they lose one more somewhere along the way), and Michigan lost Mallett/Henne/Hart, whatever, on their way to losing 3 in a row, then they all got healthy and blew out Ohio State 50-10, you would then go ahead and put Michigan above USF because at that point you might "feel" that Mich would beat USF on a neutral field? Please explain how this logic isnt flawed! I can buy the neutral field argument when all things are equal, but things arent equal in this scenario. USF has clearly been more impressive, based on the year's results, than Mich has this year, regardless of which team you actually think would win in a hypothetical head-to-head matchup. Hek, I think Rutgers, when they bring they're "A" game, could beat anyone, but that doenst mean I should give them the benefit of the doubt and honor them with a ranking that they clearly havent earned.

Michigan = Have beaten a decent Illinois team and no one else (dont try to kid me with Purdue). Have been beaten by a good 1-AA team at home. Have been destroyed at home by a top Oregon team. Have looked better lately than the way they started the season.

South Florida = Have beaten a top WVU and a very good Auburn. Have been beaten by a decent Rutgers team.


I see your point and I may be coming around on it a bit. Maybe it should be a mix between the two. A sort of 50/50 between past performance and current quality. (Good example with the injuries)

I also think it's important though when you look at wins/losses that you examine when the game was played. USF beat Auburn before their defense really picked it up and before they had Brad Lester back. Also, Brandon Cox started playing much better after the Miss St game. The more I do this the more I realize how much work this really takes if you do it right. To truly know this stuff about Auburn, you really have to follow them closely and there's no way I could follow 40-50 teams that closely.

Going back to the injuries point though. If somebody is injured and it causes your team a loss (see Cal two weeks ago, they probably would've won that game with Longshore in there) how do you weigh that into the ranking? Is it a negative? Is it a positive? Is it a negative but not as bad b/c they had a key player injured?
Go Gators
ShoelessJoe
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1621
Joined: 1 Oct 2002
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Gainesville, FL

PreviousNext

Return to College Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron
Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 15:40 hours
(and 35 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact