|
Replies: 60
| visibility 3,664
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23420
Joined: 8/16/03
|
This man voted UGA ahead of us in the latest ESPN poll.
Sep 30, 2013, 12:17 PM
|
|
Kevin Gemmell, Pac-12 blogger
http://search.espn.go.com/kevin-gemmell/
I sent him an e-mail. Here is what I sent him.
In your latest contribution to the ESPN power ranking, you actually have Georgia ranked ahead of Clemson. First of all, was this simply a mistake? If not, are you aware that Clemson defeated Georgia only about a month ago? Are you aware that Clemson also has a better record? Are you aware that Clemson had the game in hand several minutes before its end, leading by double digits and playing prevent defense on Georgia's last desperation drive? Are you aware Georgia had to convert two fourth downs (including a fake punt) and benefited from a muffed punt turnover just to keep it as close as they did?
Of course, you are the only one in the entire group of ESPN pollsters to make such an odd decision, but I would like to understand it. Please explain your odd rationale is for ranking Georgia above a Clemson team that defeated them and remains undefeated. Surely, you must have some wisdom that 99% of people lack, since you are quite alone in your conclusions.
|
|
|
|
 |
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23420
Joined: 8/16/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
What if the game was at Georgia?***
Sep 30, 2013, 12:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6224]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9276
Joined: 8/14/03
|
But it wasn't.
Sep 30, 2013, 12:31 PM
|
|
we will see that NEXT year so its irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Is it irrelevant? What is this voter's task, do you think?***
Sep 30, 2013, 12:33 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Honestly
Sep 30, 2013, 12:39 PM
|
|
His task is simply to be part of ESPN's quest for conversation fodder.
But I don't think that precludes the discussion of his opinion here (not that I think that is what you're saying).
To answer your question, we don't know what would happen if we played at UGA this year. But we DO know, in pure undeniable fact, what happened when we played this year. And I do find it odd to rank teams based more on the "what-ifs" than the "what actually happened".
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I'm not really trying to play "what-if" scenarios.
Sep 30, 2013, 12:42 PM
|
|
My point is really that Clemson beating UGA does not NECESSARILY convince everybody that they are better than UGA, mainly because of the close margin, and that it was in Clemson.
My point is not that Georgia is better than Clemson. But is it really that unreasonable to say that is so?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2432]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 3108
Joined: 6/21/11
|
dumb a$$- GA won two games at home***
Sep 30, 2013, 12:44 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
UGA actually won three games at home. You'll have to
Sep 30, 2013, 12:45 PM
|
|
clarify what makes you think that I am what you called me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2432]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 3108
Joined: 6/21/11
|
point is if our good win is because we are home
Sep 30, 2013, 12:51 PM
|
|
then GA had two good wins at home. So for him not to see our win against Ga, then it is the reporter fault. For him to see it and to think we beat GA, because we were at home, then GA beat two good teams at home (and actually struggled on third home game).So what if GA played at LSU or South Carolina? See where I am going with this. Under no scenario, GA should have been ahead of us period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Isn't this all kind of subjective, though?
Sep 30, 2013, 12:54 PM
|
|
I mean, objectively, Clemson scored more points when the two teams played each other. But that's really the only objective thing you can say about the two teams. Who is "better" is ultimately a matter of opinion. You can take this to extremes. Clemson beat Wake Forest objectively. Is Wake Forest subjectively better? I don't think you could draw much support for that. But UGA being subjectively better? Not as unreasonable, really. Obviously it isn't something a lot of people agree with, but it doesn't mean the guy's a nut or he's got some kind of bias.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19202]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16712
Joined: 9/2/08
|
So, Vandy was better than we thought but lost because they
Sep 30, 2013, 12:58 PM
|
|
played you in Cooterville rather than Nashville? Hmm . . .
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
One could say that. Not sure I would agree.***
Sep 30, 2013, 1:08 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23420
Joined: 8/16/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Definitely agree with that.***
Sep 30, 2013, 1:15 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [255]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 692
Joined: 7/2/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19202]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16712
Joined: 9/2/08
|
Doing some wrong thinking like that will lead to thinking
Sep 30, 2013, 12:48 PM
[ in reply to I'm not really trying to play "what-if" scenarios. ] |
|
that USuC is better than UGA even though you lost to them. Or Central Florida is better than USuC for that matter.
No. Matchups and wins and loses do matter. USuC is better than UCF because you won. Clemson is better than UGA because Clemson won.
There you go.
GO TIGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Well, you did play the what-if card however
Sep 30, 2013, 12:48 PM
[ in reply to I'm not really trying to play "what-if" scenarios. ] |
|
I mean you did say precisely that 
Again, its just an opinion poll, and has no real effect and I'm far from upset over it.
I think, however, that as long as there are polls out there that do matter then discussion of how folks come to these opinions is interesting.
Games are played to be won. The goal is to have even a single point more than your opponent at the end of the game. I think to argue the team which lost is really a better team than the undefeated team who just beat them requires you to play the what-if game.
And that's fine, I just find it considerably less logical than basing it on direct on-the-field outcomes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23420
Joined: 8/16/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
On a neutral field, how certain would you be that Clemson
Sep 30, 2013, 12:49 PM
|
|
Would beat UGA?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [255]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 692
Joined: 7/2/04
|
Positive. And if you guys are lucky maybe we can prove it to
Sep 30, 2013, 12:51 PM
|
|
you in Pasadena
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Who is "you guys"?***
Sep 30, 2013, 12:51 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [255]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 692
Joined: 7/2/04
|
Your right. I called you a yankee***
Sep 30, 2013, 12:52 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Heck, if we played at home again
Sep 30, 2013, 12:52 PM
[ in reply to On a neutral field, how certain would you be that Clemson ] |
|
I'm not sure how "certain" anyone would be of anything.
But how "certain" could anyone be that LSU would lose to UGA at UGA again.
And thats the pure opinion part which, IMO, the guy is allowing to trump the actual outcome on the field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23420
Joined: 8/16/03
|
That has nothing to do with what has actually happened.
Sep 30, 2013, 12:53 PM
[ in reply to On a neutral field, how certain would you be that Clemson ] |
|
Nobody is certain of anything, except Clemson beat UGA less than a month ago.
If you think hypothetical guesswork should EVER be more significant than actual football games, then I think you are extremely misguided.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Is this guy ranking "what has happened on the field"
Sep 30, 2013, 12:56 PM
|
|
Or is he ranking "who is the best team".
I actually like rankings that reflect on-the-field results ("what the team did") as opposed to subjective superiority ("what the team is"). But different people have different views on how teams should be ranked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23420
Joined: 8/16/03
|
Re: Is this guy ranking "what has happened on the field"
Sep 30, 2013, 12:57 PM
|
|
"What has happened on the field is the only worthwhile metric we have to determine who the best team is. It should overcome all else by default.
Doing anything else is inferior.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
He's arguing who is the better team
Sep 30, 2013, 1:00 PM
[ in reply to Is this guy ranking "what has happened on the field" ] |
|
But to make his rankings hold to any real logic, it appears he is doing so based more on subjective criteria rather than what is actually a known fact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2420]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2471
Joined: 3/26/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
It's an opinion, and he's welcome to it in my book
Sep 30, 2013, 12:36 PM
[ in reply to What if the game was at Georgia?*** ] |
|
Especially since it's an opinion which doesn't have any real impact on us.
However to me it simply looks foolish to disregard a direct head-to-head matchup when ranking teams right next to each other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Did he disregard the head-to-head matchup?
Sep 30, 2013, 12:37 PM
|
|
Are you sure he did?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
He certainly placed more emphasis on some other criteria
Sep 30, 2013, 12:41 PM
|
|
Which I find laughable.
But, again, opinions don't have to conform to logic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Perhaps the head-to-head matchup was evidence to him
Sep 30, 2013, 12:43 PM
|
|
That Clemson and UGA were about equal, or even that UGA is slightly better than Clemson.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
How does losing imply a better team? Serious question***
Sep 30, 2013, 12:45 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
It doesn't necessarily.
Sep 30, 2013, 12:47 PM
|
|
I just think sometimes people jump into "attack" mode when people give opinions they don't agree with. Just because few people agree with an opinion doesn't mean the person with the opinion has no basis for it.
It is not totally unreasonable to say that Georgia losing by only three in a very hostile environment on opening day is actually a good result for them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
It is good for them, no doubt
Sep 30, 2013, 12:49 PM
|
|
I just can't justify being ranked ahead, unless, it's truly by a body of work. Then because UGA has 2 wins over top ranked teams, yes, I can see that.
But when we beat FSU, it should switch
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
Why rank a team lower if they won against a higher
Sep 30, 2013, 12:42 PM
[ in reply to Did he disregard the head-to-head matchup? ] |
|
when they were only 3 spots away? Why rank "Well, it could've been different". Lots of things could have been differet. Why not rank TAMU as #1 since they were on their way to beating Bama?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Where did TAMU play Bama?***
Sep 30, 2013, 12:42 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10400]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5714
Joined: 9/29/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Is it possible to watch Clemson beat UGA by three at home
Sep 30, 2013, 12:40 PM
|
|
And not necessarily come to the conclusion that Clemson has a better football team in 2013 than UGA?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Sure it is
Sep 30, 2013, 12:43 PM
|
|
But once you go down that line of thinking, then what happens on the field simply doesn't matter. Why isn't LSU a better team than UGA? And why does it matter where the game is played, and what the score is, I mean if you're gonna go by who you think is better without placing any sort of real weight on the actual outcome of the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [255]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 692
Joined: 7/2/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Who is "you guys"?***
Sep 30, 2013, 12:50 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23420
Joined: 8/16/03
|
Then why play football games? Just to adjust opinions on
Sep 30, 2013, 12:51 PM
[ in reply to Is it possible to watch Clemson beat UGA by three at home ] |
|
hypotheticals? Is that not obviously dumb?
Should we be automatically penalized in people's minds for having a home game?
Is a win only legitimate when it happens away from home?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
You're not penalized. It's a single vote in ESPN.com's
Sep 30, 2013, 1:00 PM
|
|
"power rankings". You'll notice they don't decide the ACC Atlantic on criteria like this. And this probably doesn't reflect the direction of the polls used in the BCS, since this guy's the only one who voted this way.
I disagree with the guy. I think Clemson is better than UGA. I just think it interesting that people get so bent out of shape over people's opinions. People write letters, call people names, etc. I think 99% of the time, these folks have logical reasons for how they do it. I don't think they would get to the position they are in without some capabilities and expertise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23420
Joined: 8/16/03
|
I'm bent out of shape? That's an arbitrary assumption.***
Sep 30, 2013, 1:03 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I was not saying you were bent out of shape.
Sep 30, 2013, 1:04 PM
|
|
I was speaking in generalities. Take a look at any post on this board at various times containing some poll result or what some media person said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23420
Joined: 8/16/03
|
You're right. My bad.***
Sep 30, 2013, 1:35 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2432]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 3108
Joined: 6/21/11
|
Did GA not beat up two SEC teams at their home -
Sep 30, 2013, 12:43 PM
[ in reply to What if the game was at Georgia?*** ] |
|
What if they had to play usuck at home and ULOSE at home?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Then they may have lost those games.***
Sep 30, 2013, 12:48 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23420
Joined: 8/16/03
|
So then hypotheticals are worthless.***
Sep 30, 2013, 12:52 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23420
Joined: 8/16/03
|
Are you suggesting that a completely unknowable variable
Sep 30, 2013, 12:48 PM
[ in reply to What if the game was at Georgia?*** ] |
|
should matter more than an actual football game?
Why have playoffs then? Why don't we just let dumb@sses pick the winners.
There is a reason that preseason polls are worthless, because they don't involve actual football games, they involve the ideas of journalists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14921]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12314
Joined: 3/28/06
|
We should've won that game by 10 points
Sep 30, 2013, 12:53 PM
[ in reply to What if the game was at Georgia?*** ] |
|
Prevent defense = quick score at the end that we could afford to give up.
Don't be so quick to assume we'd lose at UGAy or on a neutral field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I don't assume that at all.***
Sep 30, 2013, 1:00 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4896]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5278
Joined: 8/24/11
|
His logic that he will never admit to is keep Clemson as far
Sep 30, 2013, 12:36 PM
|
|
away from Oregon as possible in the polls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24784]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42518
Joined: 7/31/10
|
WINNER!!! +1.***
Sep 30, 2013, 1:07 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3788]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9880
Joined: 11/2/08
|
I'm sure he'll get back to you ASAP***
Sep 30, 2013, 12:40 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5287]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6929
Joined: 11/5/12
|
One flaw
Sep 30, 2013, 12:54 PM
|
|
"and benefited from a muffed punt turnover just to keep it as close as they did?"
Shouldn't have said that part, since it's completely false....
Sammy muffed the punt, but then Corey Crawford intercepted Murray the very next play, so they never capitalized on it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23420
Joined: 8/16/03
|
Not a flaw at all. Here is why...
Sep 30, 2013, 12:56 PM
|
|
Just because they did not capitalize, they most certainly benefited. They benefited by having an opportunity in our territory to score even after we stopped the three and out. If anything, it reinforces my point that we intercepted them despite the break we handed them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14233]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13983
Joined: 2/8/11
|
Good letter
Sep 30, 2013, 1:21 PM
|
|
It's writers like this schmuck who turn college football into some sort of figure skating competition instead of looking at actual games played and judging based on wins and losses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 60
| visibility 3,664
|
|
|
50
