8% Chance for CFP

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Jul 25, 2018
3,946
1,076
243
49
Boulder, CO
#81
You are right, the ND game is next week. This will put the the ACC’s Covid policy to the test. His eligibility could literally come down to hours, depending on when he took the test. Or is the quarantine 10 days? In which case he’d miss the ND game. What a cluster.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He should be back for ND if he doesn't test positive again. With the 10 day window, it's becoming clear that catching a positive on a Sunday or Monday is beneficial. Catch a positive case on Wednesday or Thursday tests & the player's missing 2 games instead of 1.
 
Feb 15, 2017
1,171
561
243
65
Texas
#82
He should be back for ND if he doesn't test positive again. With the 10 day window, it's becoming clear that catching a positive on a Sunday or Monday is beneficial. Catch a positive case on Wednesday or Thursday tests & the player's missing 2 games instead of 1.
So you just contradicted yourself. Said TL will be back for ND but yet he tested positive on his Wednesday test and a Wednesday test means out 2 games . . .. . .

Not sure if anyone has posted for sure the ACC rules. Out 10 days after receiving test results or 10 days after the sample was taken ? That could be the difference between Friday and Saturday
 
Nov 21, 2018
272
96
78
45
Amelia Island, FL
#83
He should be back for ND if he doesn't test positive again. With the 10 day window, it's becoming clear that catching a positive on a Sunday or Monday is beneficial. Catch a positive case on Wednesday or Thursday tests & the player's missing 2 games instead of 1.
So you just contradicted yourself. Said TL will be back for ND but yet he tested positive on his Wednesday test and a Wednesday test means out 2 games . . .. . .

Not sure if anyone has posted for sure the ACC rules. Out 10 days after receiving test results or 10 days after the sample was taken ? That could be the difference between Friday and Saturday
Exactly, this is where I think there is an opportunity for a team/conference to change their “rules”. The NCAA missed the opportunity for a standard policy here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Apr 14, 2008
1,088
645
1,743
Texas
#84
Exactly, this is where I think there is an opportunity for a team/conference to change their “rules”. The NCAA missed the opportunity for a standard policy here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd be shocked if ACC ruled TL inelligible for ND game due to original test result. I'm sure there is some back room negotiating here on how ACC doesn't want to risk a loss to 'temp ACC school' in ND and have a shot at another Nat'l Champ slip away.

If he tests + again, then all bets are off...he'll be out for ND.

If Clemson loses to ND, that is no bueno for us b/c Clemson isn't dropping far after a loss to ND w/out TL.
 
Jul 25, 2018
3,946
1,076
243
49
Boulder, CO
#85
So you just contradicted yourself. Said TL will be back for ND but yet he tested positive on his Wednesday test and a Wednesday test means out 2 games . . .. . .

Not sure if anyone has posted for sure the ACC rules. Out 10 days after receiving test results or 10 days after the sample was taken ? That could be the difference between Friday and Saturday
Should have said Thursday.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...t-makes-availability-for-notre-dame-possible/

It is unconfirmed at this time when those symptoms began for Lawrence. Coupled with ACC isolation protocols, it appears possible that he could be cleared to play against Notre Dame on Saturday, Nov. 7.

What first must be determined is when symptoms began for Lawrence. If that date preceded his positive test on Wednesday, it would lead to an earlier start for his isolation clock.
If Lawrence's clock began Wednesday, it would expire next Friday as long as he is symptom free for at least 24 hours and tests negative for COVID-19. Lawrence will also have to undergo and pass numerous cardiac tests in order to see the field.
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
6,856
3,388
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
#86
In 2011,
6 coaches ranked us lower than 3. Their intent was to get Alabama in the "Championship" game.

Troy Calhoun from Air Force ranked us at 5.
Saban dropped us to 4.
Gary Pinkel from Missouri had us 4.

This alone didn't keep us out of it. The Harris poll played a big roll in that too. Which is another opinion poll.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles...-coaches-who-screwed-teams-over-for-bcs-bowls
Too lazy to look it up but there were 9 statistic polls all in one poll. Sounds nuts. But one of those 9 statistic polls was out of Oklahoma and for some funny reason, it gave a slight edge to UO every time at years end. Couldn’t figure it out either.

It was and is obvious, they spend a lot of time trying to get away from road games. They pull off neutral site games. So when it’s bowl time, they lack road experience. At least that’s my opinion. Yet, this yahoo from OK says they’re better at road wins. How could they know when Texas isn’t a road game? By the time the first bcs numbers came out, uo had zero to one road game. Anyway. They’ll just figure out another way.
 
Jul 25, 2018
3,946
1,076
243
49
Boulder, CO
#87
Too lazy to look it up but there were 9 statistic polls all in one poll. Sounds nuts. But one of those 9 statistic polls was out of Oklahoma and for some funny reason, it gave a slight edge to UO every time at years end. Couldn’t figure it out either.

It was and is obvious, they spend a lot of time trying to get away from road games. They pull off neutral site games. So when it’s bowl time, they lack road experience. At least that’s my opinion. Yet, this yahoo from OK says they’re better at road wins. How could they know when Texas isn’t a road game? By the time the first bcs numbers came out, uo had zero to one road game. Anyway. They’ll just figure out another way.
It's crazier than you described & even harder to believe it was ever acceptable to use 6 computer programs, developed by individuals, whose formulas were secret.

Richard Billingsley, from Hugo, was a diehard OU fan who developed one of the 6 programs used in the BCS.

Here's a great stroll down memory lane that'll make you thank god there's at least a committee now.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/17/sports/ncaafootball/17score.html

One of the computer rankers for the B.C.S. is Richard Billingsley, a stress-management expert from Hugo, Okla.
His knowledge of college football history is encyclopedic. His knowledge of mathematics, the foundation of any accurate computer-ranking system, is not.

I’m not a mathematician,” Billingsley said. “I’m not even a highly educated man, to tell you the truth. I don’t even have a degree. I have a high school education. I never had calculus. I don’t even remember much about algebra. I think everyone questions everything I do. Why is he doing that? Does he know what he’s doing, a crazy kook in Oklahoma?”

The short answer is no. Billingsley’s ranking system is vilified by professional mathematicians and a subculture of amateur computer rankers. His is not the only one. The stringent rules placed by the B.C.S. on the computers they must, for example, exclude margin of victory from their formulas, making 10-7 equivalent to 70-7 turned them into the laughingstock of the numbers community. Two of the computer analysts, Jeff Sagarin and Kenneth Massey, acknowledge that their rankings for the B.C.S. are not the most accurate they can produce.

Accordingly, the computers end up being the patsy more than any part of the B.C.S. system. Fans want to understand the math behind them. They cannot, not because of quantitative inability but because of lack of transparency; only Wes Colley, who runs the Colley Matrix system, makes his formula public.

Billingsley chooses not to. It is a simple formula, he said, because he is a simple man. He does, against all reason, use the previous season’s end rankings as the starting point for the current year’s. It matters not whether the team lost its coach or its quarterback. Billingsley thinks that to understand the present, one must understand the past, even if that past resembles the present in no demonstrable fashion.

So good news, Florida Gators fans: Tim Tebow is still your quarterback in at least one place.

“I don’t know that the powers that be even know what he’s doing,” Stern said.

They do not know. Three of the computer rankers said the B.C.S. did not verify the numbers they turned in. It supports the notion that the B.C.S., like a teenage-movie cliché, befriended the pocket-protector set only to cast it as the perfect red herring.


Which leaves college football with a problem it cannot solve: real mathematicians exposing the computers and the B.C.S. for the nonsense they are.
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
6,856
3,388
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
#88
It's crazier than you described & even harder to believe it was ever acceptable to use 6 computer programs, developed by individuals, whose formulas were secret.

Richard Billingsley, from Hugo, was a diehard OU fan who developed one of the 6 programs used in the BCS.

Here's a great stroll down memory lane that'll make you thank god there's at least a committee now.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/17/sports/ncaafootball/17score.html

One of the computer rankers for the B.C.S. is Richard Billingsley, a stress-management expert from Hugo, Okla.
His knowledge of college football history is encyclopedic. His knowledge of mathematics, the foundation of any accurate computer-ranking system, is not.

I’m not a mathematician,” Billingsley said. “I’m not even a highly educated man, to tell you the truth. I don’t even have a degree. I have a high school education. I never had calculus. I don’t even remember much about algebra. I think everyone questions everything I do. Why is he doing that? Does he know what he’s doing, a crazy kook in Oklahoma?”

The short answer is no. Billingsley’s ranking system is vilified by professional mathematicians and a subculture of amateur computer rankers. His is not the only one. The stringent rules placed by the B.C.S. on the computers they must, for example, exclude margin of victory from their formulas, making 10-7 equivalent to 70-7 turned them into the laughingstock of the numbers community. Two of the computer analysts, Jeff Sagarin and Kenneth Massey, acknowledge that their rankings for the B.C.S. are not the most accurate they can produce.

Accordingly, the computers end up being the patsy more than any part of the B.C.S. system. Fans want to understand the math behind them. They cannot, not because of quantitative inability but because of lack of transparency; only Wes Colley, who runs the Colley Matrix system, makes his formula public.

Billingsley chooses not to. It is a simple formula, he said, because he is a simple man. He does, against all reason, use the previous season’s end rankings as the starting point for the current year’s. It matters not whether the team lost its coach or its quarterback. Billingsley thinks that to understand the present, one must understand the past, even if that past resembles the present in no demonstrable fashion.

So good news, Florida Gators fans: Tim Tebow is still your quarterback in at least one place.

“I don’t know that the powers that be even know what he’s doing,” Stern said.

They do not know. Three of the computer rankers said the B.C.S. did not verify the numbers they turned in. It supports the notion that the B.C.S., like a teenage-movie cliché, befriended the pocket-protector set only to cast it as the perfect red herring.

Which leaves college football with a problem it cannot solve: real mathematicians exposing the computers and the B.C.S. for the nonsense they are.
Son of a ....I knew there was a sooner in there somewhere.
 
Sep 12, 2013
1,301
819
743
Broken Arrow, OK
#90
Should have said Thursday.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...t-makes-availability-for-notre-dame-possible/

It is unconfirmed at this time when those symptoms began for Lawrence. Coupled with ACC isolation protocols, it appears possible that he could be cleared to play against Notre Dame on Saturday, Nov. 7.

What first must be determined is when symptoms began for Lawrence. If that date preceded his positive test on Wednesday, it would lead to an earlier start for his isolation clock.
If Lawrence's clock began Wednesday, it would expire next Friday as long as he is symptom free for at least 24 hours and tests negative for COVID-19. Lawrence will also have to undergo and pass numerous cardiac tests in order to see the field.
So you're saying he definitely got sick on Tuesday.
 
Sep 29, 2011
1,808
408
713
61
Breckenridge, CO
#93
So you're saying he definitely got sick on Tuesday.
If it were me I would have "definitely" begun feeling the onset of symptoms Monday night.

See how easy that is?

No way he misses the Notre Dame game.
And since he practiced (now supposedly symptomatic) on Wednesday, someone is gonna call BS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nov 21, 2018
272
96
78
45
Amelia Island, FL
#94
This is ripe for a controversy.

How about Saban? Positive test, followed by 3 “negative” tests? I’m sure all those were administered in a hospital that sponsors the University. He physically looked like dog sh!t coaching that night too!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Jan 13, 2008
812
298
1,613
Corinth, TX
#95
So if Clemson continues to get trucked by Boston College, due they get the benefit of a doubt if they lose against Notre Dame too?

Clemson's back-up QB hasn't given up 21 first half points to BOSTON COLLEGE in CLEMSON, SOUTH CAROLINA!!! 28-10 Boston College
 
Nov 18, 2010
2,208
914
1,743
#96
So if Clemson continues to get trucked by Boston College, due they get the benefit of a doubt if they lose against Notre Dame too?

Clemson's back-up QB hasn't given up 21 first half points to BOSTON COLLEGE in CLEMSON, SOUTH CAROLINA!!! 28-10 Boston College
Two losses has to disqualify you from the playoff....assuming every other blue blood doesn't also have 2 losses. Teams lose their QB to injuries every year and those losses still count. It's part of game.
 
Nov 18, 2010
2,208
914
1,743
#98
This is ripe for a controversy.

How about Saban? Positive test, followed by 3 “negative” tests? I’m sure all those were administered in a hospital that sponsors the University. He physically looked like dog sh!t coaching that night too!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Saban looked like he always does. Slightly angry, slightly annoyed.
And it was 5 negative tests performed at two different official testing sites.

It's interesting how some people will accept a single positive test despite the player/coach having no symptoms. But if that same person has FIVE negative tests, they immediately start talking about conspiracy theories and controversy.