WEST VIRGINIA

Say it all here
Forum rules
NOTICE: Please be sure to check the CFP Message Board Rules and Regulations and the Read Me page before posting.
THISSITE...

WEST VIRGINIA

Postby THISSITE... » Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:08 pm

Why would anyone even visit this site anymore. They predicted West Virginia to go 2-10. These writers don't know their head from their elbows.

[Admin Notice: Actually it picked them to go 2-9. However, the gameday picks went 7-5 (including a miss in the Sugar Bowl).]

User avatar
Yeofoot
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1971
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:57 am
Location: Bentonville, Arkansas
Contact:

Postby Yeofoot » Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:12 pm

Man, this guy's well spoken, I hope he joins.

User avatar
Eric
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:51 am

Postby Eric » Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:12 pm

I was stunned when I figured out about that. I picked West Virginia to win the Big East until I was told that was an idiot move so I switched to Pitt to sound sensible!

A lot of West Virginia fans were complaining about that on the old Big East message board. I wouldn't say they suck, so what, they missed it on a big suprise team. Can't really blame them there. But, you do have to wonder about putting the Mountaineers behind Cincinnati, a team that was returning 6 starters from a 6-5 C-USA team. I didn't understand that prediction at all, but hey, we've all been dead wrong more times than once right?
Running bowl/MSU/OSU record '05-present: 11-32

User avatar
Yeofoot
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1971
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:57 am
Location: Bentonville, Arkansas
Contact:

Postby Yeofoot » Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:14 pm

I will say, this is the only board that predicted Texas to win in a close game. Even though the burnt orange in me kept saying we were going to win by A LOT.

User avatar
Yeofoot
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1971
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:57 am
Location: Bentonville, Arkansas
Contact:

Postby Yeofoot » Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:17 pm

Yeah! or we'll make sad attempts at being witty and some of us will agree, and others will disagree.

mountainman

Postby mountainman » Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:26 pm

Sounds like maybe the guys that were advertising for us regulars to take a look at their site when we over on the old board might be back.

By the way, the Mountaineers were picked to go 2-9 by CFP last season not 2-10.

User avatar
CFP Admin
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 9:08 pm
Contact:

Postby CFP Admin » Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:58 pm

LubbockHasNoTrees wrote...
don't be bitter that they outdid expectations of a computer... be grateful they did as well as they did. Until then... stay off our message board.


Thanks guys. Some people take predictions a little too personally. There is no correct response to have other than relief that the team did a lot better than the computer predicted. First, instead of worst - :D be happy, not sad.

West Virginia entered the season with a very young team and no major returning offensive weapons. They also played in a conference that had three new teams coming in and one leaving - a major overhaul of that conference's members. That was bound to create some larger room for error. The miss would be more glaringly stupid had those factors not existed. It was wrong, but it wasn't like it failed to make ANY sense at all.

It should also be noted that WVU has outperformed the computer's preseason forecasts in every year of Rich Rodriguez' tenure, except for his very first season. That indicates that Rodriguez gets the most from his players. His predecessor (Don Nehlen), though revered by many in Morgantown, usually underformed the computers expectations.

Imagine how Purdue fans felt -picked to go unbeaten and wound up 5-6. I'm sure WVU fans would rather have their situation than Purdue's.

If every pick was correct - or even close to correct - we'd be making millions and you'd be buying shares of the stock. Teams could just forget playing the games because all of the results would be known beforehand.

It would be nice if everyone could take two minutes to consider all of the results and weigh the "hits" against the "misses", but that would just leave them embarrassed :oops: by their negativity.

LubbockHasNoTrees also wrote...
He obviously doesn't know much about CFP, cause it's a computer ranking


True. No writers picked anyone to do anything on this site. They merely presented and commented on the computer's picks. Regarding that, the writer said, "Rich Rodriguez has to replace over half of his starters in Morgantown. However, Rodriguez' teams have outperformed the computer's expectations every year. A last-place finish seems preposterous.."

After the season, the editors added, "We'd like to remove this page or hide it, but that would be too dishonest. At least, the Rutgers pick was solid. We'll use the excuse that three new teams screwed things up, not us."

Eric wrote...
But, you do have to wonder about putting the Mountaineers behind Cincinnati, a team that was returning 6 starters from a 6-5 C-USA team


True. But WVU had the higher opening power-rating. As the game was played at Cincy, it altered the forecasted result due to homefield advantage (+3). The preseason pick was a WVa loss by 1. The game-day pick was a Mountaineer win by 8.
Last edited by CFP Admin on Wed Jan 18, 2006 1:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Spence
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 20970
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:52 pm
Location: Chillicothe, Ohio (Ohio's First Capital)
Contact:

Postby Spence » Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:10 pm

If every pick was correct - or even close to correct - we'd be making millions and you'd be buying shares of the stock. Teams could just forget playing the games because all of the results would be known beforehand.


If every pick was correct I wouldn't need to by the stock. I would just have to make a couple of well placed calls to Las Vegas. :lol:

No matter what criteria anyone uses for predicting games and/or scores no one can correctly predict the future. No one should be expected to predict the future and be 100% correct. Our little picks game proved that. The year I kept the tally no one predicted better then 60% for the season and we were picking straight up.
"History doesn't always repeat itself but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain

User avatar
CFP Admin
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 9:08 pm
Contact:

Postby CFP Admin » Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:16 pm

Spence wrote...

If every pick was correct I wouldn't need to by the stock. I would just have to make a couple of well placed calls to Las Vegas. :lol:


You win. That would be a much better choice.

User avatar
..fanatic
Coordinator
Coordinator
Posts: 957
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 9:55 pm
Location: Rockledge, FL

Postby ..fanatic » Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:21 pm

What was it? 1994 when Northwestern was picked by everyone to finish last in the Big 10 and they went to the Rose Bowl. Last year, my team was picked to finish 7th in the ACC by the conference's sportswriters and coaches - and they WON the conference.

Yes, you can find wrong picks on the site in practically every conference. But look at how many they got right. Especially if you go to http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/commentary.html which just happens to be the top story on the front page right now.
"Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it."

User avatar
Yeofoot
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1971
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:57 am
Location: Bentonville, Arkansas
Contact:

Postby Yeofoot » Wed Jan 18, 2006 10:10 am

wow, you'd think this guy said something about our mom on here, we all stuck up for the site right away, I guess that makes sense, one thing we all have in common is loyalty: to our college football team, and apparently to our college football message board.

User avatar
..fanatic
Coordinator
Coordinator
Posts: 957
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 9:55 pm
Location: Rockledge, FL

Postby ..fanatic » Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:08 pm

For me, it's just that I have little patience for people who want to chop down the whole tree because one orange was sour. Pardon the metaphor. (That was a metaphor, wasn't it?).

By the way, I wonder where HIS (the complainer's) preseason picks are of all the conferences so we can rag on those.
Last edited by ..fanatic on Thu Jan 19, 2006 12:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it."

Larry

Postby Larry » Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Polls are just that....polls. Look at the Hawkeyes - should have been, but were'nt. Close games and terrible officiating made the difference that nobody on this planet could predict (except the Vegas mob). (NCAA is currently investigating, but I doubt they will get very far).

mountainman

Postby mountainman » Wed Jan 18, 2006 9:52 pm

Figurative language I suspect.

The mike linebacker was a monster on the field today ..... metaphor-one likened to another.

It has been a while since language arts so don't take that as gospel. :wink:


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guests