Who's your pick for the Football National championship?

[Turbine]

Tracking a team's potential by comparing who they played to who the opponents played, to who those opponents played, to who those opponents played, is literally the worst way to assess how good a team is. It always leads to contradictions.

Always.

However absent a floating 24-game regular season it is often the only viable metric.

[JAB]

Always.

However absent a floating 24-game regular season it is often the only viable metric.

It is not the only viable metric. It's hardly a viable metric at all. Under that method, we would say that Texas lost to Oklahoma, and Oklahoma lost to Kansas; therefore, Kansas is better than Texas.

The best way to assess a team's talent is to consider a wide array of factors together.

[CajunVic]

Always.

However absent a floating 24-game regular season it is often the only viable metric.

Maybe you can say only method but that does not make it a viable one. The test that JAB and I use is more akin to what Vegas would use in setting a line for those games were they to occur. We will get a better opportunity to see how that would have played out next year with a 12 team playoff. Until then, we each have our own beliefs on the subject without any real way to resolve the differences. We should do like good little brothers and good little sisters at this time and just agree to disagree until next year.

[JAB]

Still better than arbitrarily thinking an SEC team is better just by virtue of being in the SEC.

No one thinks this.

[Turbine]

It is not the only viable metric. It's hardly a viable metric at all. Under that method, we would say that Texas lost to Oklahoma, and Oklahoma lost to Kansas; therefore, Kansas is better than Texas.

The best way to assess a team's talent is to consider a wide array of factors together.

Then you would be ignoring the many other metrics at play with Kansas.

Washington lost to one team.

[CajunVic]

Then you would be ignoring the many other metrics at play with Kansas.

Washington lost to one team.

Washington did not play any of the three SEC teams mentioned.

[JAB]

Then you would be ignoring the many other metrics at play with Kansas.

Washington lost to one team.

Exactly, I'm saying that if I use the exact logic used by other people in here, it would lead to the conclusion that Kansas is better than Texas, which is obviously wrong. My point: that form of reasoning is bad.

If you want to say that Washington deserved to be in the CFP (which I don't disagree with, btw), make the point for other reasons. Say that they have a good QB and RB. Say that they were undefeated. Say that they beat Oregon twice. Etc.

[Turbine]

Exactly, I'm saying that if I use the exact logic used by other people in here, it would lead to the conclusion that Kansas is better than Texas, which is obviously wrong. My point: that form of reasoning is bad.

If you want to say that Washington deserved to be in the CFP (which I don't disagree with, btw), make the point for other reasons. Say that they have a good QB and RB. Say that they were undefeated. Say that they beat Oregon twice. Etc.

Season to season production is a far better metic than simply relying on the conference of origin and it's past laurels .

[Turbine]

Washington did not play any of the three SEC teams mentioned.

I already showed what games those teams could have dropped to play Washington.

[CajunVic]

I already showed what games those teams could have dropped to play Washington.

Washington would never have even considered playing such a schedule so all of your points are moot.

[Turbine]

Maybe you can say only method but that does not make it a viable one. The test that JAB and I use is more akin to what Vegas would use in setting a line for those games were they to occur. We will get a better opportunity to see how that would have played out next year with a 12 team playoff. Until then, we each have our own beliefs on the subject without any real way to resolve the differences. We should do like good little brothers and good little sisters at this time and just agree to disagree until next year.

The "line" is based on public opinion which is swayed by history.

[CharlieK]

No one thinks this.

You are joking, right? Lots of people think this.