The whole "weak schedule" thing

[Shock Top]

The sad part for about KU's argument is they are ADMITTING, if they had a weaker schedule that their record would be better.

If you are truly that "good" you should win all those games anyway.

------

Another thing, what if WSU had KU's schedule and results, and vice versa. How would the argument go then?

My guess is KU fans would clammer to their perfect record.

-----

End of the day, WSU is undefeated and KU isn't. If KU looks at themselves in the mirror, instead of looking towards "little brother" they would realize they probably should have a better record then they should.

Good teams win close games. Something KU has struggled with this season.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

The sad part for about KU's argument is they are ADMITTING, if they had a weaker schedule that their record would be better.

If you are truly that "good" you should win all those games anyway

I think you are looking at it in the wrong way. Anyone who says a really good team "should" be undefeated with WSU's schedule doesn't know what they are talking about. A simple look at history shows that even with WSU's "weak schedule", a generic "top notch team" would likely have lost 1 game by now. Lost in all this conversation about WSU having played "easy" games is the fact that they have exceeded expectations in those games, even the expectations of a top 5 type of team.

Think of it this way. If the #1 team in the country beats #100, not much is proved. However, if they beat #100 100 times in a row, it is impressive because history tells us that the upset occurs in that situation atleast a handful of times over that many games played. Trash talkers, national talking heads, and even most sane casual fans usually gloss over this fact and forget that if you avoid the 5% chance of upset long enough, you can actually have exceeded expectations without playing a "tough" game all year.

This is the argument I would use against a Gotlieb, *******, KU fan, etc.

(Note: I'm not claiming WSU hasn't played a few good teams. They have, which makes the undefeated run even more impressive)

Check out this thread for the numbers I ran on this topic.

http://shockernet.net/forum/showthread.php?17205-How-often-do-good-teams-lose-to-bad-teams

[Slalomshocker]

As was finally mentioned, nobody knows just how good WSU really is. We as fans know this team is good, but even we don't know how good. WSU is the best team in the MVC, as will be shown by winning the conference championship. But beyond that, nobody knows. Its not that Gottlieb, *******, etc have a bad argument, the MVC is bad this year and our marquee wins aren't living up to the hype, its more the way they present it. Question the SOS all you like, it's a valid point, but you cannot automatically assume WSU would win or lose any of the "better" games.

[choida]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh8mRjO1nhg

[Cdizzle]

As was finally mentioned, nobody knows just how good WSU really is. We as fans know this team is good, but even we don't know how good. WSU is the best team in the MVC, as will be shown by winning the conference championship. But beyond that, nobody knows. Its not that Gottlieb, *******, etc have a bad argument, the MVC is bad this year and our marquee wins aren't living up to the hype, its more the way they present it. Question the SOS all you like, it's a valid point, but you cannot automatically assume WSU would win or lose any of the "better" games.

I can assume WSU would go undefeated against the Top 25 if I would like. The data available supports it.

I can assume KU would go .500 against the Top 25 if I would like. The data available supports that too.

[Slalomshocker]

My point is merely that the talking heads are automatically assuming WSU would lose those games. If those games were @ Syracuse, @ KU, @ Arizona and @ Mich St. sure, WSU would likely lose a game or two or possibly all 4. But if the games were at home to Pitt, UVA, UMass and Memphis WSU could just as easily win all 4. The talking heads want to bash WSU for a lack of schedule, which is a valid point. Our schedule is not great, not of our own doing, but it is what it is. What they fail to address is where they actually see WSU stacking up. If the WSU resume included wins over Iowa & OU to go along with SLU...is that enough to "deserve" to be in the top 5 in their minds? Or would it take beating 'Cuse at the dome? As I said originally, its not the argument, its how they are presenting it. If you prefer to think WSU would go on the road to the above mentioned places and run the table...go for it. I will cheer like hell right along with you. I wont expect to win them all though. Unfortunately all we have is speculation to base our opinions.