Anyone run the numbers?

[mpfunk]

Out of curiosity how does 1984 stack up too. I tend to agree with Indy (which is rare) that BYU fans complaining about other teams riding crappy schedules is kind of stupid. I say the same thing about Ute fans. Ute fans have serious Boise St envy and constantly bitch about Boise St's crappy schedule. Well the Utes rode a pretty mediocre to bad schedule in 2004 to a great season. Hawaii may be a really good team, no one really knows right now. But for MWC fans to levy the same criticisms on Hawaii that the BcS throw at MWC teams is stupid.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by mpfunk

Out of curiosity how does 1984 stack up too. I tend to agree with Indy (which is rare) that BYU fans complaining about other teams riding crappy schedules is kind of stupid. I say the same thing about Ute fans. Ute fans have serious Boise St envy and constantly bitch about Boise St's crappy schedule. Well the Utes rode a pretty mediocre to bad schedule in 2004 to a great season. Hawaii may be a really good team, no one really knows right now. But for MWC fans to levy the same criticisms on Hawaii that the BcS throw at MWC teams is stupid.

Pelagius weighed in on this, I think. I believe based on how the current BCS standings is done, BYU would have played for the national championship.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by mpfunk

Out of curiosity how does 1984 stack up too. I tend to agree with Indy (which is rare) that BYU fans complaining about other teams riding crappy schedules is kind of stupid. I say the same thing about Ute fans. Ute fans have serious Boise St envy and constantly bitch about Boise St's crappy schedule. Well the Utes rode a pretty mediocre to bad schedule in 2004 to a great season. Hawaii may be a really good team, no one really knows right now. But for MWC fans to levy the same criticisms on Hawaii that the BcS throw at MWC teams is stupid.

That's kinda my contention with the question as well. But I wanted to see if the numbers backed me up (and too lazy to run them myself).

[pelagius]

Originally Posted by jay santos

Pelagius weighed in on this, I think. I believe based on how the current BCS standings is done, BYU would have played for the national championship.

Yep we discuss it here:

http://cougarguard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5352

If you take the numbers a given (and assume the BCS system itself wouldn't affect the way people vote for teams like BYU), then BYU would have probably played for the national championship. Its not so much that BYU played a fantastic schedule in 1984 (although it was much better than Hawaii's is this year; the 84 schedule was pretty close to the same difficulty as this year's BYU schedule), but that most of the top teams either did not play particularly difficult schedules or lost a lot of games. Washington, for example, only has a slightly better schedule rank in 84 than BYU.

[pelagius]

Originally Posted by Tex

That's kinda my contention with the question as well. But I wanted to see if the numbers backed me up (and too lazy to run them myself).

I am not sure what you mean by back you up. I can almost say with certainty the the difference between SOS for Hawaii this year and BYU in 84 and Hawaii this year and the Utah in 04 is massively statistically significant. It's also unfair for to Utah to say their SOS was bad (mpfunk). Mediocre yes, bad, no. Hawaii's is bad (actually its awful).

Note; this is not to say the Hawaii doesn't deserve a shot. However, their SOS of schedule is simply awful by any decent measure and significantly worse both practically and statistically relative to BYU in 84 and Utah in 04.

2001 is a close comparison. But in my view BYU deserved the same sort of reservations in 2001. The SOS schedule was simply awful.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by pelagius

I am not sure what you mean by back you up. I can almost say with certainty the the difference between SOS for Hawaii this year and BYU in 84 and Hawaii this year and the Utah in 04 is massively statistically significant. It's also unfair for to Utah to say their SOS was bad (mpfunk). Mediocre yes, bad, no. Hawaii's is bad (actually its awful).

Note; this is not to say the Hawaii doesn't deserve a shot. However, their SOS of schedule is simply awful by any decent measure and significantly worse both practically and statistically relative to BYU in 84 and Utah in 04.

2001 is a close comparison. But in my view BYU deserved the same sort of reservations in 2001. The SOS schedule was simply awful.

Sorry, should've made clear I was speaking of 2001. It's a little hypocritical for BYU fans to get hot and bothered about Hawaii 2007 when many of them were chanting "BCS!" after the Utah game in 2001.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Tex

Sorry, should've made clear I was speaking of 2001. It's a little hypocritical for BYU fans to get hot and bothered about Hawaii 2007 when many of them were chanting "BCS!" after the Utah game in 2001.

Probably a little hypocritical, but we were higher in both the human polls and the computer ranking. And since we got screwed, some want Hawaii to get screwed too. I don't know why, but I'm hoping they lose to Washington.

[Indy Coug]

My wanting Hawaii to lose has nothing to do with their crappy SOS and everything to do with a long-standing hatred of that school dating back to the early 80s.

[realtall]

I really want Hawai'i to get to a BCS bowl. I don't have any great love for the school, I just like the idea of throwing a monkey wrench into the BCS works.


"But Hawai'i can't go to a BCS bowl!"

"Why not?"

"It just can't!"