PonyFans.com

Obviously this is a spinoff of a previous thread, but I want to make sure we're clear on this by giving an example.

In 2011, a 6-6 Pitt team met us in the Compass Bowl. Had they beaten us, they'd be a winning team at 7-6 that season and we'd get the statistical hit of having lost to a winning team. By beating them, we still take a statistical hit, this time by beating a losing team.

Point is, you cannot have it both ways and all these stats we're throwing around about losing to winning teams is meaningless without a whole lot more context. It seems to me if you're looking for the truth about a team you just look to Sagarin, which takes into account the whole picture better than any other method I'm aware of.

ponyboy wrote:Obviously this is a spinoff of a previous thread, but I want to make sure we're clear on this by giving an example.

In 2011, a 6-6 Pitt team met us in the Compass Bowl. Had they beaten us, they'd be a winning team at 7-6 that season and we'd get the statistical hit of having lost to a winning team. By beating them, we still take a statistical hit, this time by beating a losing team.

Point is, you cannot have it both ways and all these stats we're throwing around about losing to winning teams is meaningless without a whole lot more context. It seems to me if you're looking for the truth about a team you just look to Sagarin, which takes into account the whole picture better than any other method I'm aware of.

I think they just refer to teams with (.500) records as "winning teams".

6-6 teams in bowls are meaningless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think so. You gotta be above .500. But let's assume you're right. So do we get credit for beating a winning team in the 2011 Pitt Panthers? They ended the season at 6-7.

35straight wrote:6-6 teams in bowls are meaningless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's changing the subject.

6-6 is not a winning team. I know you are giving it everything you have to spin it June's way but bottom line is he hasn't done well against winning teams. And didn't Pitt only have like 4 regular coaches on the team.

ponyboy wrote:I don't think so. You gotta be above .500. But let's assume you're right. So do we get credit for beating a winning team in the 2011 Pitt Panthers? They ended the season at 6-7.

That's the problem with that definition. Winning is winning, and I don't care if it's against a 10-1 or 1-10 team, winning is winning.

I'll take a 12-0 SMU Mustangs team with 4 FCS schools as the OOC and hammering everyone in the field every day! See TCU for more info

Rebel10 wrote:6-6 is not a winning team. I know you are giving it everything you have to spin it June way but bottom line is he hasn't done well. And didn't Pitt only have like 4 regular coaches on the team.

That's an attempt to change the subject too. Answer the question.

ponyboy wrote:

Rebel10 wrote:6-6 is not a winning team. I know you are giving it everything you have to spin it June way but bottom line is he hasn't done well. And didn't Pitt only have like 4 regular coaches on the team.

That's an attempt to change the subject too. Answer the question.

Not changing the subject, just adding the proper context as you would say.

If a team is 6-6, that means they are not a winning team. If you beat a team that is 6-6, you have not beat a winning team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It seems to me that a team with a winning season is one that ends up over .500 on the year. I don't think it would be hard to go out there and find an overwhelming number of references to back that up. Anyone disagree with the definition?

We need to beat teams that finish 7-5. That way if they lose their bowl game they are 7-6. 7-6= winning record.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But the again you sometimes have to look and see what the meaning of "is" is.

ponyboy wrote:It seems to me that a team with a winning season is one that ends up over .500 at the end of the regular season.

That's my definition anyway. 6-6 after a 12-game regular season is not a winning season in my mind regardless of whether you make a bowl and/or win it. Just MHO.

I don't believe that's how the 6-31 number was derived, i.e. it didn't take into account only what the final regular season record was.

But regardless, does throwing out stats that "so and so is only x wins and x losses against teams with winning records" carry a little less weight? And what if team A is scheduling Florida State every year and team B is scheduling a ten win but Division III Carl's Carburetor College? Both FSU and Carl's end up with winning seasons every year, but winning over one COUNTS MORE than winning against another.

Look to Sagarin alone, which takes into account true strength of opponent and schedule, and don't allow people to throw non-contextual stats at you.