Comments on: Congratulations Utah!: LJP National Champions http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/2009/01/07/utah-ljp-national-champions/ paglia's thoughts: "one to negative one" and some noise in between Tue, 26 Apr 2011 21:53:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Personal Dialog 1 - Social Media 0 | correlate http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/2009/01/07/utah-ljp-national-champions/comment-page-1/#comment-483 Personal Dialog 1 - Social Media 0 | correlate Tue, 13 Jan 2009 02:42:59 +0000 http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/?p=195#comment-483 [...] This test is, of course, a small sample size and obviously not one where any conclusions can be drawn.  Perhaps it was this particular question and 9 out of 10 times, I would receive a response in a flash.  Perhaps it was the way in which I asked.  Perhaps no one knew the answer (or watched the bowl game because there is no playoff system). [...] [...] This test is, of course, a small sample size and obviously not one where any conclusions can be drawn.  Perhaps it was this particular question and 9 out of 10 times, I would receive a response in a flash.  Perhaps it was the way in which I asked.  Perhaps no one knew the answer (or watched the bowl game because there is no playoff system). [...]

]]> By: loupaglia http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/2009/01/07/utah-ljp-national-champions/comment-page-1/#comment-678 loupaglia Sat, 10 Jan 2009 03:06:35 +0000 http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/?p=195#comment-678 Happy New Year to you! Well, early in the game, I thought your prediction was going to be more right than wrong. I like your idea about eliminating the meaningless non-conference as having clear conference champions early as possible would help. But not sure that is going to get us to where we need to be simply because no matter the number of games, there will always be a question. Who had home field advantage? The classic who lost earlier in the season? The power ranking of who lost to which school nevermind when they lost to them. There are too many inconsistencies to list out.<br><br>My view is even if there is one team with one loss and five teams with two losses, you still need a playoff to get those teams on the field together. The decision should be made on the field with a clear line of sight to the championship. Happy New Year to you! Well, early in the game, I thought your prediction was going to be more right than wrong. I like your idea about eliminating the meaningless non-conference as having clear conference champions early as possible would help. But not sure that is going to get us to where we need to be simply because no matter the number of games, there will always be a question. Who had home field advantage? The classic who lost earlier in the season? The power ranking of who lost to which school nevermind when they lost to them. There are too many inconsistencies to list out.

My view is even if there is one team with one loss and five teams with two losses, you still need a playoff to get those teams on the field together. The decision should be made on the field with a clear line of sight to the championship.

]]> By: loupaglia http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/2009/01/07/utah-ljp-national-champions/comment-page-1/#comment-630 loupaglia Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:06:35 +0000 http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/?p=195#comment-630 Happy New Year to you! Well, early in the game, I thought your prediction was going to be more right than wrong. I like your idea about eliminating the meaningless non-conference as having clear conference champions early as possible would help. But not sure that is going to get us to where we need to be simply because no matter the number of games, there will always be a question. Who had home field advantage? The classic who lost earlier in the season? The power ranking of who lost to which school nevermind when they lost to them. There are too many inconsistencies to list out.<br><br>My view is even if there is one team with one loss and five teams with two losses, you still need a playoff to get those teams on the field together. The decision should be made on the field with a clear line of sight to the championship. Happy New Year to you! Well, early in the game, I thought your prediction was going to be more right than wrong. I like your idea about eliminating the meaningless non-conference as having clear conference champions early as possible would help. But not sure that is going to get us to where we need to be simply because no matter the number of games, there will always be a question. Who had home field advantage? The classic who lost earlier in the season? The power ranking of who lost to which school nevermind when they lost to them. There are too many inconsistencies to list out.

My view is even if there is one team with one loss and five teams with two losses, you still need a playoff to get those teams on the field together. The decision should be made on the field with a clear line of sight to the championship.

]]> By: loupaglia http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/2009/01/07/utah-ljp-national-champions/comment-page-1/#comment-480 loupaglia Fri, 09 Jan 2009 19:06:35 +0000 http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/?p=195#comment-480 Happy New Year to you! Well, early in the game, I thought your prediction was going to be more right than wrong. I like your idea about eliminating the meaningless non-conference as having clear conference champions early as possible would help. But not sure that is going to get us to where we need to be simply because no matter the number of games, there will always be a question. Who had home field advantage? The classic who lost earlier in the season? The power ranking of who lost to which school nevermind when they lost to them. There are too many inconsistencies to list out.<br><br>My view is even if there is one team with one loss and five teams with two losses, you still need a playoff to get those teams on the field together. The decision should be made on the field with a clear line of sight to the championship. Happy New Year to you! Well, early in the game, I thought your prediction was going to be more right than wrong. I like your idea about eliminating the meaningless non-conference as having clear conference champions early as possible would help. But not sure that is going to get us to where we need to be simply because no matter the number of games, there will always be a question. Who had home field advantage? The classic who lost earlier in the season? The power ranking of who lost to which school nevermind when they lost to them. There are too many inconsistencies to list out.

My view is even if there is one team with one loss and five teams with two losses, you still need a playoff to get those teams on the field together. The decision should be made on the field with a clear line of sight to the championship.

]]> By: jeffbaer http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/2009/01/07/utah-ljp-national-champions/comment-page-1/#comment-478 jeffbaer Thu, 08 Jan 2009 20:56:56 +0000 http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/?p=195#comment-478 Lou--I couldn't agree more with your 16 team bracket system...NCAA football is screaming for this. The only alternative might be to eliminate the non-conference games at the beginning of each season (why does Northwestern start each year with 2 games like Rice, Duke, UNLV, Air Force???). Then each conference would likely have a clear champion by December.<br><br>Happy 2009, buddy! <br><br>I hope both FL and OK lose tonight. 0 - 0, with negative yards rushing and like 27 sacks. Lou–I couldn't agree more with your 16 team bracket system…NCAA football is screaming for this. The only alternative might be to eliminate the non-conference games at the beginning of each season (why does Northwestern start each year with 2 games like Rice, Duke, UNLV, Air Force???). Then each conference would likely have a clear champion by December.

Happy 2009, buddy!

I hope both FL and OK lose tonight. 0 – 0, with negative yards rushing and like 27 sacks.

]]>