Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucla-cs.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ukma!psuvm.bitnet!psuvax1!burdvax!sdcrdcf!ucla-cs!lor
From: lor@ucla-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.sport.football
Subject: Re: College football playoffs
Message-ID: <8996@ucla-cs.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 15-Feb-86 15:07:35 EST
Article-I.D.: ucla-cs.8996
Posted: Sat Feb 15 15:07:35 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 19-Feb-86 03:33:04 EST
References: <366@drutx.UUCP> <8660@ucla-cs.ARPA> <486@gymble.UUCP> <8747@ucla-cs.ARPA> <492@gymble.UUCP> <8852@ucla-cs.ARPA> <495@gy
Reply-To: lor@ucla-cs.UUCP (Edward Lor)
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Lines: 60

In article <495@gymble.UUCP> dday@gymble.UUCP (Dennis Doubleday) writes:
>You're hopeless, Eddy!
        Am I? Let me remind you what you said:

In your article dated 2/7/86:
>
>But the point is, THE BEST TEAM DOESN'T ALWAYS WIN (the playoffs).
>Villanova is a proof of that.
> ....
> but I certainly don't believe a playoff would settle the "Who's #1" issue.
     
In your latest article, dated 2/12/86:
>
>I never said that a playoff CAN'T produce the best team,
>I simply said it won't settle the controversy.

        Anyway, congradualations! You are finally convinced that
a playoff among the few best teams CAN indeed produce the best
in the country.

        Now you want to divert my attention to another controversy:
the selection process.
Well, there are always teams left out in the playoffs, even in a 64-team
tournament, remember the outcrying from 20+ wins coaches every year?

>Teams left out of a playoff will always complain.  You say that
>Air Force wouldn't have
>deserved being in a playoff based on regular season records.  But their
>10-1 record was the same as Oklahoma's, Miami's, and Iowa's.
        If we have to choose 3 out of Oklahoma, Miami, Iowa
and Air Force (all of them lost only 1 game, no tie), who
should we drop? Remember, Air Force did not DEFEAT any top teams
in its regular season schedule.

>If you're going to bring strength of schedule into the argument,
>then you can't just pick the four teams with the best records.  Under that
>criterion, 11-0 Penn State didn't belong, 9-1-1 Michigan did.
        I am talking about using strength of schedule to determine
teams with more or less, the SAME record, otherwise Oklahoma did
not belong neither! Michigan was one and a half games behind Penn State!
Also, Notre Dame played a tougher schedule than Michigan. Should we
consider Notre Dame?

>CONTROVERSY WILL ENSUE.
        Of course, any comments discrediting Oklahoma's championship
are considered controversial by the sooners. Let me tell
you, had the Redskins (with Schroeder, not Theismann) been in the playoffs,
the Bears would not have had a chance. Well, in my opinion, the NFL
playoff tie-breaking rules are controversial too! Should I say
Chicago is a controversial Super bowl winner?
     
>And that is my final word on this matter.  Fire away.
        I hope so. I wish I don't have to dig out the contradictions
from your old articles again.

--
                                        Eddy Lor
                                        ...!(ihnp4,ucbvax)!ucla-cs!lor
                                        lor@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU
                                        Computer Science Department, UCLA