Banned Users

[IrishBryan77]

It's only 4 inches long. But Paul Finebaum went on espn this morning swearing it's at least 12 if not more. And you're just whining if you say it isn't.

Paul Finebaum sucks.

Not very original but it still sounds good.

 

[IrishBryan77]

Lmfao😂😂😂😂

This shit is great. Lmfao

 

[Me2SouthBend]

A bet is a bet, I know the second the season ended and if Burress was in the top 6 I would have been instantly nuked.

ALTHOUGH - I think he has done better at looking up really simple items before posting in a thread, and genuinely likes/understands the program. I'll take 2008 saying ND should have 14 WR's than dolt's saying ND should join the AAC so that they can play in a conference championship or just spamming doom and gloom stuff.

I’ll take it one further. I’d rather deal with his posts than someone constantly shitting on a player. IKYK.

 

[ulukinatme]

I think most of my fellow Bama fans were surprised by the decision to put us in over ND. I've seen little celebrating, but lots of surprise and even disagreement with it. Personally, I'd have put ND in and preferred my guys just play in a bowl with a chance to end the season with a win.

I think Alabama was deserving to get in. They had some close ones down the stretch, but they were also a better team just like we were after some August/September losses. They beat Georgia once.

The whole G5 thing needs to be reevaluated I think. I think James Madison OR Tulane deserved to get in, not both. I don't see either competing, but G5 at least needs a representative that has a chance to compete. I also think Oklahoma is over ranked, that offense is not very good and will struggle.

 

[MrNimbus]

I’ll take it one further. I’d rather deal with his posts than someone constantly shitting on a player. IKYK.

I'm guessing you're referring to the Christian Gray comments? Yeah, that shit was ridiculous. Even if he was having some mental issues and eventually got some help. There would be absolutely zero shame in that. He plays big in big moments. That whole conversation hit close to home and really pissed me off.

 

[FU BK]

"It just means more" to him.

Head to head matters.....or tip to tip

 

[ulukinatme]

Love ya,… but,… This is the most insane rambling you’ve ever had on this board bud,… if we aren’t mad at the sec and bama then there’s not much to be mad at imo. It starts and ends with them, their conflict of interest with ESECpn, and bama being the actual media darling all sec fans constantly scream Notre dame is,… if those dynamics didn’t exist we are rightfully back on another title chance run.., regardless of the ACC bullshit.

Likewise. Alabama just played the games though. ESPN and the committee were the ones that pulled the strings (Along with some strong provocation from the ACC). The AP voters and Coaches both had us ahead of Miami and Alabama.

 

[Bishop2b5]

I think Alabama was deserving to get in. They had some close ones down the stretch, but they were also a better team just like we were after some August/September losses. They beat Georgia once.

The whole G5 thing needs to be reevaluated I think. I think James Madison OR Tulane deserved to get in, not both. I don't see either competing, but G5 at least needs a representative that has a chance to compete. I also think Oklahoma is over ranked, that offense is not very good and will struggle.

I strongly agree with the bolded. The top ranked G5 team is one thing, but two G5 teams is nonsense. None of them have a shot, but at least they can't say they aren't given one.

 

[Bishop2b5]

"I can fit 5 in my mouth. But I deserve at least 7."

I thought I was in the Wives and the Stupid **** They Say/Do thread for a second there.

 

[Bane]

I strongly agree with the bolded. The top ranked G5 team is one thing, but two G5 teams is nonsense. None of them have a shot, but at least they can't say they aren't given one.

The problem is, they can't legally make a distinction between "P4" and "G5" or risk getting hit with an antitrust lawsuit. The autobid system was schemed up when there were 5 more or less relatively balanced semi-regional conferences so it made sense. They were in effect boxing out the G5, but not officially. Then the Pac12 died and the conferences ballooned and you had shit like a rematch in the SECCG while half the conference didn't play each other, and the ACC vomiting forth an 8-5 conference champion.

We either need to do away with the autobids or expand to 16, but the system we have now is the worst of all worlds. We also have to address the idea of having a committee. It's an utterly insane concept.

 

[ACamp1900]

It's only 4 inches long. But Paul Finebaum went on espn this morning swearing it's at least 12 if not more. And you're just whining if you say it isn't.

The Citadel destroyer,…

 

[ACamp1900]

Likewise. Alabama just played the games though. ESPN and the committee were the ones that pulled the strings (Along with some strong provocation from the ACC). The AP voters and Coaches both had us ahead of Miami and Alabama.

Each of these are the exact same fucking thing at this point,…

 

[Bishop2b5]

The problem is, they can't legally make a distinction between "P4" and "G5" or risk getting hit with an antitrust lawsuit. The autobid system was schemed up when there were 5 more or less relatively balanced semi-regional conferences so it made sense. They were in effect boxing out the G5, but not officially. Then the Pac12 died and the conferences ballooned and you had shit like a rematch in the SECCG while half the conference didn't play each other, and the ACC vomiting forth an 8-5 conference champion.

We either need to do away with the autobids or expand to 16, but the system we have now is the worst of all worlds. We also have to address the idea of having a committee. It's an utterly insane concept.

I agree that the current system is pretty bad in several ways. I know a lot of people would like to go to an unbiased computer model that takes away the committee and personal bias. The problem with that is that the computers are just as biased, since their criteria for selection are simply those chosen and weighted by their programmers. I'm not sure what the solution is, and I'm not opposed to using computers, but they're not the perfect fix to the problem.

 

[PolishDomer]

I’ll bet the SEC dildo is better…

 

[Plankton]

That's one ugly looking dildo.

 

[Bane]

I agree that the current system is pretty bad in several ways. I know a lot of people would like to go to an unbiased computer model that takes away the committee and personal bias. The problem with that is that the computers are just as biased, since their criteria for selection are simply those chosen and weighted by their programmers. I'm not sure what the solution is, and I'm not opposed to using computers, but they're not the perfect fix to the problem.

Sure, computers can be biased too, but at least their biases are programmed well ahead of time and sometimes that can backfire on the intent of the programmers. Weighting heavily for "eye test" metrics for example might have been intended to assist SEC or B1G programs but that would have helped us big time this year. So they can try to game the system, but the season will play out however it does, and that's it until the offseason.

What we saw over the last five weeks was a real time changing of the criteria to fit the narrative and desired outcome of the committee as it was influenced by outside voices.

I agree that nothing is truly neutral, but if you at least know the criteria and the baked in biases going in you can plan around it. You can't plan around a system that is designed just to enrich ESPN and it's conference investments.

 

[aubeirish]

I agree that the current system is pretty bad in several ways. I know a lot of people would like to go to an unbiased computer model that takes away the committee and personal bias. The problem with that is that the computers are just as biased, since their criteria for selection are simply those chosen and weighted by their programmers. I'm not sure what the solution is, and I'm not opposed to using computers, but they're not the perfect fix to the problem.

There are ways to ensure the integrity of the code. If I were a school, I’d require access to the full source code and run it locally so we could verify its integrity on a weekly basis or something...

 

[IrishBryan77]

All these poor innocent dildos being compared to Paul Finebaum. So sad. Dildos have feelings too.

Hey I wonder if.....yeah I'm pretty sure someone has identified as a dildo.

Somewhere.....

Right? 🤔

 

[StPaul_Irish]

There are ways to ensure the integrity of the code. If I were a school, I’d require access to the full source code and run it locally so we could verify its integrity on a weekly basis or something...

Could you not manipulate the data then? If you know the code?

 

[Bishop2b5]

Could you not manipulate the data then? If you know the code?

That's exactly what would happen. Teams would run up the score or pad stats or other such stuff to boost their scores on certain computer ratings.

 

[NumbersGuy0520]

That's exactly what would happen. Teams would run up the score or pad stats or other such stuff to boost their scores on certain computer ratings.

It’s possible to define when games are “analytically final”, i.e anything that happens later gets omitted from the evaluation.

 

[Wild Bill]

Sure, computers can be biased too, but at least their biases are programmed well ahead of time and sometimes that can backfire on the intent of the programmers. Weighting heavily for "eye test" metrics for example might have been intended to assist SEC or B1G programs but that would have helped us big time this year. So they can try to game the system, but the season will play out however it does, and that's it until the offseason.

What we saw over the last five weeks was a real time changing of the criteria to fit the narrative and desired outcome of the committee as it was influenced by outside voices.

I agree that nothing is truly neutral, but if you at least know the criteria and the baked in biases going in you can plan around it. You can't plan around a system that is designed just to enrich ESPN and it's conference investments.

That's the problem with computers - it takes away this feature in the current system.

 

[Bane]

That's exactly what would happen. Teams would run up the score or pad stats or other such stuff to boost their scores on certain computer ratings.

Yeah but that happened this year with Miami. They scored something like 45 points with 3 minutes or less left in games that were multiple score margins, with all but 7 of those points occurring under the 2 minute mark. Even though the committee's criteria explicitly stated it discouraged running up the score, it clearly worked for Miami. A large part of their pitch (other than hammering head to head) was the greater margin of victory in several of our common opponents.

Again, I go back to the fact that once you have a political body, the criteria can shift and change week to week as the committee starts with the conclusions they want and crafts ad hoc justifications to match that. We watched that happen 2 weeks ago as Alabama jumped ND and the only explanation given was a "gutsy 4th down call" after blowing a 17 point lead.

The real reason your Tide were moved to 9, which the committee obviously can't ever say out loud, was to lock them into the playoffs. It served the dual purpose of removing any gap between us and Miami other than BYU, a situation that had a built in solution: either BYU won and both us and Miami were eliminated, or BYU won and they could put Miami in as the ACC's insurance de facto autobid if UVA lost.

With a computer you can manipulate the criteria some, but at least everyone knows what the criteria is and it can't just be arbitrarily changed week to week to fit predetermined narratives.

 

[Irish#1]

How did we turn the banned user thread into another thread talking about the playoffs?

 

[GrangerIrish24]

How did we turn the banned user thread into another thread talking about the playoffs?

Because we just essentially got banned from the playoffs.

 

[aubeirish]

That's exactly what would happen. Teams would run up the score or pad stats or other such stuff to boost their scores on certain computer ratings.

Teams already do that to try to sway the committee anyways.

The human factor within the game is where the program would perhaps struggle a bit/fall short. The ND vs A&M game is a prime example of this in my opinion. Blatant holding no-call which completely changes the outcome of the game.

Now this is where an impartial committee would shine. Unfortunately, as we have seen, humans are bias/self-serving and cannot be trusted.

 

[Pete]

Yeah but that happened this year with Miami. They scored something like 45 points with 3 minutes or less left in games that were multiple score margins, with all but 7 of those points occurring under the 2 minute mark. Even though the committee's criteria explicitly stated it discouraged running up the score, it clearly worked for Miami. A large part of their pitch (other than hammering head to head) was the greater margin of victory in several of our common opponents.

Again, I go back to the fact that once you have a political body, the criteria can shift and change week to week as the committee starts with the conclusions they want and crafts ad hoc justifications to match that. We watched that happen 2 weeks ago as Alabama jumped ND and the only explanation given was a "gutsy 4th down call" after blowing a 17 point lead.

The real reason your Tide were moved to 9, which the committee obviously can't ever say out loud, was to lock them into the playoffs. It served the dual purpose of removing any gap between us and Miami other than BYU, a situation that had a built in solution: either BYU won and both us and Miami were eliminated, or BYU won and they could put Miami in as the ACC's insurance de facto autobid if UVA lost.

With a computer you can manipulate the criteria some, but at least everyone knows what the criteria is and it can't just be arbitrarily changed week to week to fit predetermined narratives.

Shit, Pitt called a timeout so Miami could score on them again for fucks sake.

 

[ab2cmiller]

Shit, Pitt called a timeout so Miami could score on them again for fucks sake.

Are you saying Pitt called a timeout with the sole intention of trying to give Miami more time to score on them?

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

How did we turn the banned user thread into another thread talking about the playoffs?

Because you're a spineless moderator

 

[Pete]

Are you saying Pitt called a timeout with the sole intention of trying to give Miami more time to score on them?

Yes, yes i am. Pitt called a timeout when Miami had the ball with just under 2 minutes left in the game. They were down 31-7 at the time. Miami threw a 33 yard TD pass a few plays later.