Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OU is the #1 ranked football team of all time

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • gh
    replied
    Being right or wrong has nothing to do with it.... it has to do with being a rude and dismissive megalomaniac who rewrites the same thread(s) over and over and over, providing an organic alternative to Ambien.

    You also alienate people, plain and simple. My best advice is that you should simply be ignored, since unlike your alter ego Brutal at least you've tuned it down enough to avoid an outright banning.

    Leave a comment:


  • Texas
    replied
    Originally posted by bambam
    Originally posted by Texas
    Originally posted by gh
    I'll be sure to ask the next time I'm having trouble falling asleep
    Why the attitude? Do I bother you and if so..why?
    You bother everybody, Texas, no real reason to wonder why. You always seem to know more about everything than everybody on every topic. Time to go look in the mirror. Hahaha .. or is it, hmm in this circumstance?
    Am I wrong about the things I talk about?

    Leave a comment:


  • bambam
    replied
    Originally posted by Texas
    Originally posted by gh
    I'll be sure to ask the next time I'm having trouble falling asleep
    Why the attitude? Do I bother you and if so..why?
    You bother everybody, Texas, no real reason to wonder why. You always seem to know more about everything than everybody on every topic. Time to go look in the mirror. Hahaha .. or is it, hmm in this circumstance?

    Leave a comment:


  • Texas
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    I'll be sure to ask the next time I'm having trouble falling asleep
    Why the attitude? Do I bother you and if so..why?

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    I'll be sure to ask the next time I'm having trouble falling asleep

    Leave a comment:


  • Texas
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    Originally posted by Texas
    ... I have kept up with USC over the years since without them west coast football sucks :cry:
    You're right... I must have imagined it when the Pac-10 went 5-0 (the best of any BCS conference) in this year's bowl games.
    Did I not mention..."over the years"...? Do you really want me to break down Pac10 football since..hmm...1996? Let's take USC out of it and see what we got. Wanna do that?

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Originally posted by Texas
    ... I have kept up with USC over the years since without them west coast football sucks :cry:
    You're right... I must have imagined it when the Pac-10 went 5-0 (the best of any BCS conference) in this year's bowl games.

    Leave a comment:


  • mcgato
    replied
    That looks like a seriously flawed points system to me. Which would, of course, be consistent with college football.

    Let's look at a typical team that wins the national championship and the points that they receive:
    25 for national championship
    10 for major bowl berth
    10 for major bowl win
    10 for best conference win/loss
    10?? for AP top 5 ranking (I'm not sure they get this as well as national championship)
    3 for bowl appearance
    3 for bowl win
    2 for 10 win season

    73 points total. Florida would have received the 73 points this year, but Oklahoma would have only received 35 points from that list. I don't think Florida's season should represent twice the points of Oklahoma's. And I'm a Gator alum.

    Other flaws include Virginia Tech beating Cincinnati in a "major" Orange Bowl this year, when neither was a top 10 team. Also half of Div I gets to a bowl in this day and age.

    I think focusing on the final rankings would be a better way to do things, since it is basically a composite of most of the things that they include. Then find a way to add some bonus points for the Heisman, #1 draft picks, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dietmar239
    replied
    Originally posted by Texas
    Originally posted by Dietmar239
    I initially included championships that they actually went in and won the bowl, as I mentioned. However, they are recognized for 16. I believe that was in the Title Years by Polling line that I included above. Notre Dame has more than anyone. How would you rank them?
    Well when you consider how college football has changed since the days of Knute Rockne, The Four Horsemen and win one for the Gipper I can't get too excited in that really old stuff other than it's cool "old stuff". Where's Army at today? Once upon a time....

    I'd have to start in the 60's when will started seeing a lot of change in athlectics. I confess however that I'd have to do my homework to come up with anything meaningful there. I have kept up with USC over the years since without them west coast football sucks :cry:
    I'm not doubting you and this discussion has been more enlightening than argumentative, IMO. They both are quality teams nonetheless. The game I'm actually looking forward to next year is the OU vs. TX rivalry matchup. It should be an all out war.

    Leave a comment:


  • Texas
    replied
    Originally posted by Dietmar239
    I initially included championships that they actually went in and won the bowl, as I mentioned. However, they are recognized for 16. I believe that was in the Title Years by Polling line that I included above. Notre Dame has more than anyone. How would you rank them?
    Well when you consider how college football has changed since the days of Knute Rockne, The Four Horsemen and win one for the Gipper I can't get too excited in that really old stuff other than it's cool "old stuff". Where's Army at today? Once upon a time....

    I'd have to start in the 60's when will started seeing a lot of change in athlectics. I confess however that I'd have to do my homework to come up with anything meaningful there. I have kept up with USC over the years since without them west coast football sucks :cry:

    Leave a comment:


  • Dietmar239
    replied
    I initially included championships that they actually went in and won the bowl, as I mentioned. However, they are recognized for 16. I believe that was in the Title Years by Polling line that I included above. Notre Dame has more than anyone. How would you rank them?

    Leave a comment:


  • Texas
    replied
    Originally posted by Dietmar239
    Originally posted by Texas
    Originally posted by Dietmar239
    I thought the bottom line was national championships (16 vs 11)? You are too much!! :lol:
    Being too much is when you list 7 as being the number of Oklahoma National title's then saying 16. Well which is it?

    USC has had more great players, more Heisman winners and have beaten up on the Sooners when they have played. I think I'll go with that.
    So that means you have changed your "bottom line". That awfully convenient, I might add. Here's a quote from the Sooners website:

    The NCAA does not conduct a national championship in Division I-A football and is not involved in the selection process.

    Since 1998, the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) operated jointly by the ACC, Southeastern, Big 12, Big East, Big Ten and Pacific-10 Conferences has used a ranking system to determine the number one and number two teams at the end of the season.

    Various organizations have named National Champions in college football since 1869. Utilizing the selectors as recognized by the NCAA, Oklahoma has been recognized for 16 different seasons: 2003, 2000, 1986, 1985, 1980, 1978, 1975, 1974, 1973, 1967, 1956, 1955, 1953, 1950 and 1949.
    Well if you would have started off with 16 instead of 7. I knew USC had more than that. Helps to have the facts.

    USC beats Oklahoma when they meet they have also had the better players. You can also make a case that they play a tougher schedule and have for a long time.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dietmar239
    replied
    Originally posted by Texas
    Originally posted by Dietmar239
    I thought the bottom line was national championships (16 vs 11)? You are too much!! :lol:
    Being too much is when you list 7 as being the number of Oklahoma National title's then saying 16. Well which is it?

    USC has had more great players, more Heisman winners and have beaten up on the Sooners when they have played. I think I'll go with that.
    So that means you have changed your "bottom line". That awfully convenient, I might add. Here's a quote from the Sooners website:

    The NCAA does not conduct a national championship in Division I-A football and is not involved in the selection process.

    Since 1998, the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) operated jointly by the ACC, Southeastern, Big 12, Big East, Big Ten and Pacific-10 Conferences has used a ranking system to determine the number one and number two teams at the end of the season.

    Various organizations have named National Champions in college football since 1869. Utilizing the selectors as recognized by the NCAA, Oklahoma has been recognized for 16 different seasons: 2003, 2000, 1986, 1985, 1980, 1978, 1975, 1974, 1973, 1967, 1956, 1955, 1953, 1950 and 1949.

    Leave a comment:


  • Texas
    replied
    Originally posted by Dietmar239
    I thought the bottom line was national championships (16 vs 11)? You are too much!! :lol:
    Being too much is when you list 7 as being the number of Oklahoma National title's then saying 16. Well which is it?

    USC has had more great players, more Heisman winners and have beaten up on the Sooners when they have played. I think I'll go with that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dietmar239
    replied
    I thought the bottom line was national championships (16 vs 11)? You are too much!! :lol:

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X