Please explain the logic to me

OSU FootballJust so that I understand, here: As a college football fan, I’m expected to look down on Ohio State because its victories this year have all been against soft competition.

On the other hand, we have to look up to teams like USC, Cal, LSU, Oklahoma, etc. because they’ve had harder schedules — even though they all have a loss to soft competition.

Isn’t that sort of circular? Maybe a tad strawman-ish?

The teams that beat those powerhouses are Stanford, Oregon State, Kentucky, and Colorado. The nation’s “elite” didn’t lose to the tough teams on their schedule… they lost to three very poor and two fair-to-middlin’ teams; representing the weakest opponents on their schedules.

Again: OSU’s victories over weak competition are bad, and other teams’ losses to weak competition are good, only because the pundits say so.

And this seems logical to everyone? I must be missing something.

I know, I know, you say “Kentucky has a really good team this year. Find another example.” But compare KY’s game against Kent State to OSU’s game against that same team, and tell me that OSU’s victory wasn’t more impressive.

(The comparison is even stronger when you consider the fact that KY’s starters played the entire game against the Golden Flashes, while OSU did not play a single starter during the second half of its game.)

And if you can use such examples to prove that OSU is significantly better than Kentucky… and Kentucky just beat the “invincible #1 LSU Tigers zOMG-best-defense-EVAH”… well, then, you’ve used logic to **END CARRIER**

**TRANSMISSION STOPPED

**BY ORDER OF THE SEC AND ESPN

**OHIO STATE HAS ALWAYS BEEN AT WAR WITH EURASIA

**601

Comments

  1. I wouldn’t say you’re exactly expected to look down on OSU. They’re number one in every poll not run by our computer overlords, suggesting that a majority of the people who matter (the pollsters) either believe the Buckeyes are the best team in the country, or are willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. I’ll listen to arguments about keeping LSU highly ranked, because they’ve beaten multiple ranked teams, and I don’t think an overtime loss on the road at night to Kentucky is anything to be ashamed of (we’ll have to agree to disagree on UK’s quality).

    Anyone who tries to tell you that Oklahoma, USC, or Cal should be ranked ahead of OSU is someone whose opinions should be ignored. I haven’t heard anyone make that argument, but maybe it’s happening on ESPN. I more or less ignore their pundits, precisely because they’ve said things that made me decide their opinions are worthless.

  2. sean – Thanks, good points. I know the voters are giving OSU the #1 ranking – I really wasn’t complaining about the voters or rankings, but rather the pundits who are calling for “anyone else” to be ranked #1.

    For instance, one voter in this week’s blogpoll made a public case that LSU should be #1, mostly on the basis that “ohio state hasn’t played anyone,” and that LSU’s loss was more impressive than OSU’s victories. Other pundits in the sports blogging community (and even some on ESPN) are saying similar things.

    My point was just to prove that such arguments are egregiously illogical. Especially since LSU lost to a team that (as of week 7) was clearly and unquestionably inferior to Ohio State.

  3. Scarlet & Grey Matters says

    All I have to say is, true maybe Ohio State has not played anybody, but at least they have not lost to a nobody!

  4. The arguement is logical- it is called “Brent Musburger-ism.”

    The “Brent Musburger-ism” arguement is when a team like OSU pounds their opponent you cannot complement their performance, instead you focus on something positive on the other team or other schools. Boeckman throw for two TD’s and completes 13/16 for 184 in one half, but lets not focus on that lets talk about Kent state and how impressive their punter looks today or how Michigan St could beat OSU and how they are going down against Penn St. Or better yet, lets talk about the defense, yeah it is a good defense but they gave up 3 points, maybe if so & so defensive player didn’t miss that tackle four plays ago Kent state wouldn’t have scored 3 points.

    This is of course is an example and not real commentary but I have heard it before.

Leave a Reply to Zach Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: