We are in the midst of the stretch run of the college football season. For the Buckeyes, that means the biggest games are at hand and the stakes are as high as can be. We are also in the stretch run of BP's Pick'em contest on Yahoo and for some the stakes are also very high.
There won't be any funny, cutesy cat stories this week. Just cold hard facts. @cincibuck has been clamoring for updated standings, so that's what this week's post will be about.
First of all, I went back and tabulated the results from the featured picks for each week all the way back to the beginning of the season. I'm happy to report that I'm not losing to Poobert. When I started this thing I was fully prepared to make a complete ass of myself and get beat by him regularly. Through eleven weeks though, having featured picks for 99 games each in this column, I have managed to pick 54.5 correctly while he has only been correct for 44. The half-correct represents a push - there have been a few of those throughout the season so far.
On one hand, it's kind of depressing to think that I've only managed to be one pick better per week (on average) than a housecat. On the other hand, 10.5 is a pretty significant margin for this point in the season, and I'd have to commit an all-timer of a choke job to relinquish my advantage.
The other angle that we can look at this from is the overall standings from the Pick'em group. In that group, I currently sit at 5th while Poobert is 22nd out of 47. That's a little misleading though. Yahoo's standings are a simply gross points total - they don't give a way to sort by number of correct picks per week, so participants who forget to submit or run into some other kind of snafu really get punished with no way to make up for it. Once you take out the participants below Poobert in the standings who posted a score of zero in at least one week, we can effectively say that Poobert is placed 22nd out of 26.
That begs the question, who are the unlucky four who are losing to Poobert? Who are the ones whose college football knowledge is so dubious that they are losing to a slightly dimwitted cat? What are their names? They must be known, so we can call them out and shame them!
@Bestbuck36, @LostLassie, @brodybuck21 & @WoodyWorshiper... come on down!
There is time yet remaining for things to turn around, but we're getting down to crunch time. The question is: will you all play for pride, or will you commit pick'em seppuku and skip a week? Time will tell. The eyes of the internet are upon you.
This week's picks:
There won't be any funny, cutesy cat stories this week. Just cold hard facts. @cincibuck has been clamoring for updated standings, so that's what this week's post will be about.
First of all, I went back and tabulated the results from the featured picks for each week all the way back to the beginning of the season. I'm happy to report that I'm not losing to Poobert. When I started this thing I was fully prepared to make a complete ass of myself and get beat by him regularly. Through eleven weeks though, having featured picks for 99 games each in this column, I have managed to pick 54.5 correctly while he has only been correct for 44. The half-correct represents a push - there have been a few of those throughout the season so far.
On one hand, it's kind of depressing to think that I've only managed to be one pick better per week (on average) than a housecat. On the other hand, 10.5 is a pretty significant margin for this point in the season, and I'd have to commit an all-timer of a choke job to relinquish my advantage.
The other angle that we can look at this from is the overall standings from the Pick'em group. In that group, I currently sit at 5th while Poobert is 22nd out of 47. That's a little misleading though. Yahoo's standings are a simply gross points total - they don't give a way to sort by number of correct picks per week, so participants who forget to submit or run into some other kind of snafu really get punished with no way to make up for it. Once you take out the participants below Poobert in the standings who posted a score of zero in at least one week, we can effectively say that Poobert is placed 22nd out of 26.
That begs the question, who are the unlucky four who are losing to Poobert? Who are the ones whose college football knowledge is so dubious that they are losing to a slightly dimwitted cat? What are their names? They must be known, so we can call them out and shame them!
@Bestbuck36, @LostLassie, @brodybuck21 & @WoodyWorshiper... come on down!
There is time yet remaining for things to turn around, but we're getting down to crunch time. The question is: will you all play for pride, or will you commit pick'em seppuku and skip a week? Time will tell. The eyes of the internet are upon you.
This week's picks:
| Game | jlb1705 | Poobert |
|---|---|---|
| Memphis (-1.5) at Temple |
|
|
| M*ch*g*n (-4.0) at Penn State | 
|
|
| Northwestern (+10.0) at Wisconsin | 
| 
|
| USC (+4.5) at Oregon | 
|
|
| LSU (+4.0) at Mississippi | 
| 
|
| UCLA (+2.0) at Utah | 
|
|
| Baylor (pk) at Oklahoma State | 
| 
|
| TCU (pk) at Oklahoma | 
| 
|
| California (+11.0) at Stanford | 
|
|
| M*ch*g*n State (+13.0) at Ohio State | 
|
|
