Point Made on Relative Reporting: Evidence Ivan Maisel ESPN
The Biscuit
DTK, a UM Fan (may God have mercy on him), had some things to say about my post below on how the media and the Pollsters view ND’s performances. In particular, I have taken offense at how they always point back to our whupping by the Wolverines (and yes, I admit it was a whupping) as to why we should be lower in the polls. And my argument isn’t that it was not a whupping, but that we get penalized for such a whupping more than other teams have.
Ivan Maisel, in his ESPN.com column today, does it again. Compare the two lines below. They describe two top 11 teams that had close wins this weekend:
Team A: Team A needed a turnover. Corner Player 1 produced it. A novice kicker prevailed in terrible weather conditions. That pretty much defines “knowing how to win.”
Team B: Great comeback by Team B. Great spirit, great desire, great execution. But what was Team B doing trailing Team C?
Now those two situations are very similar if you eliminate the team’s names. Both were tight games against relatively lowly opponents, with a win pulled out in the last seconds. Team A is Texas, and Team B is ND. (If you can’t figure out Team C, you should spend some time looking in the mirror.) It really comes down to how things are described, written about and spread. One team “knows how to win” while the other shouldn’t be behind in the first place? Why was Texas behind? Were they SUPPOSED to be behind? Didn’t ND show that it knew how to win by, ummm, WINNING?
Well, you say, that’s a fair analysis. I’d say yeah, fair on both accounts. Sure. No I wouldn’t!
Texas is ranked #5 in his Power Ranking and ND #14, with ND DROPPING and Texas staying right up there at the top. Now why is that? Is it bc ND’s earlier loss was to a worse team? Well, only by one spot (#2 instead of #1). Was it because the Irish got beat at home, in a more dominant win? Nope, Texas got handled just as easily, and at home.
And regardless of the absolute positions in the polls, why are the Irish DROPPING after such a comeback while other teams move UP or at the least stay the same?
That is my point. And I say it stinks like my boys Ivan and Maisel here:
Somewhat related posts...
Loading ...
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
5 Comments
Ivan forgets that it was less Texas knowing how to win, and Nebraska having no clue.
Kinda like UCLA. And I don’t mind if someone says that for both games. But it’s gotta be BOTH. Sl-ores.
I don’t agree with that view on UCLA. UCLA played things “by the book.” Had they managed to run for a 1st down against a defense that, frankly, hadn’t shown they could stop the run very effectively thru the rest of the season, we’d be having a much different conversation.
Nebraska, on the other hand, fumbled the ball away.
But they did go into ’safe’ mode, which is playing to not lose rather than to win, yes?
Did they say they went into safe mode?
I suppose it’ll all come down to “Those who dare, win.”
However, did you see how many stupid, stupid ways Nebraska played that game?
UCLA may have been overly safe, but that’s certainly more competitive than overly stupid.
Leave a Reply