CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

billybud wrote:I don't get your 2008 Oklahoma opponents...

They don't match mine....ahhh...you are looking at 2009 and I am counting wins from 2008 schedule

Yeah, that's what Steele is attempting.

billybud wrote:Huh?

BYU?

Oklahoma starts their season with BYU:

http://www.soonersports.com/sports/m-fo ... sched.html

You don't mean Oklahoma State, do you? You lose me with the 107 wins because no team has opponent that calculate to 107 wins.

Maybe it'll help you to look at the big picture like I am. 2009 opponents with combined 2008 records: http://www.cfbtrivia.com/cfbt_records.php?fry=2009&thy=2009&sortby=OWP&oppview=1&allop=1 Totals with just I-AA teams excluded: http://www.cfbtrivia.com/cfbt_records.php?fry=2009&...

billybud wrote:lOL...I can't even get close with South Carolina...don't know what he has done.

I've been down this road before enough to know the answer. He botched it, plain and simple.

billybud wrote:All of Oklahoma's FBS opponents accounted for 107 wins (of which 9 were non IA).

For Oklahoma, the IA win count would be 97.

I don't get that. Oklahoma's opponents:

BYU 10
ISU 1
Tulsa 11
Miami 7
Baylor 4
Texas 12
Kanasas 8
KSU 5
Nebraska 9
A&M 4
TTU 11
OSU 9

That's 91 total, not 107.

I count 9 non IA wins by Oklahoma IA opponents. If you remove 9 wins from the 107 "wins"...you get 98. I guess that's well and good, but where do you get 107 and why is 98 a number you feel should be obtained? Remove I-AA teams from OSU's opponents, you get 79-54, not even in the neighbor...

I'm mean, this is VERY easy info to calculate. There's other stuff that can be brutal and mistakes are expected, not this. As for not knowing the NCAA method, the NCAA never really makes it clear what they use, however, if you're good (and Steele is), you can replicate it easily enough and figure it...

Hmmmm...he even uses the term NCAA Ranking on his column header...and seems to give the impression in his explanation that he is duplicating NCAA. You would think that he would know their methodology..wouldn't you? Actually, I would. I expect garbage from columnists (ESPN, CBS, Sporting New, etc). ...

Yeah...I saw that...I thought i was on the rifgth track with Oklahoma...than got to Grambling and did my "edit" I've already done all this checking. Since that's the way (unknown to Steele) the NCAA calculates, I checked that right off, but the differences in removing I-AA are more than 2...

billybud wrote:One game was Tennessee-Chattanooga...Non IA

Remove all non-IA teams and you get a WHOLE lot less than 97. This is the Big 12 you're talking about.

billybud wrote:I think that you must be counting FCS..he is obviously not.


Edit...Nope, I might be wrong...I do not know what he is doing. I'll have to look at this...

Yes, he's counting FCS. Otherwise you drop 11 wins off Grambling, which leaves OSU at 88 wins.

Oklahoma won 11 (FBS)... Oklahoma won 12: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/standings Think about it, they played 12 regular season games, a CCG and a bowl. Only two teams beat them. That's 12-2. And yes, Steele does believe it based on what he said in the header you linked to. New Mexico and NMSU have...

Wow, he's got some serious problems there. He's got South Carolina at 98-58 when their opponents were 92-63. Perhaps that's why he feels South Carolina has the toughest schedule?

Link to Steele's NCAA "suurrogate" list for 2009 SOS>>> http://www.philsteele.com/fbsinfo/09WINLOSSOPP.html Well, I guess he does believe it. Neither is his chart correct. Just from the top down I see he has Oklahoma State's opponents at 97-55. Oklahoma State's 2009 opponents with 2008 wi...

Ktffan...Steele is talking about the NCAA releasing a preseason rating of each teams's schedule based on their opponents win-loss record the previous year...He says "it is a good method but does have obvious flaws". Besides the simplicity of counting straight wins and losses, Steele also ...