You might do better than to call the people who disagree with you crazy homers. I've engaged you fairly, despite what I take to be less than good faith approaches from you at times.

There is a feeling of objectivity that comes from resisting something, but it is only an imperfect heuristic for objectivity. An objective analysis of a P5 record, for example, would include travel factors and notice a repeated bad matchup in the data pool. A treatment of revenue evidence would acknowledge the strengths of the program that make it appealing to TV partners when trying to estimate the value (there are a variety of estimates, you'd also do well to include other estimates, not just the low end one you chose). So if it's objectivity you want, you'd do well to not define it in opposition to your interlocutor, but in relation to a fair appraisal of evidence (a broader concept than data). And if it's conflict with BYU fans you'd like, maybe you'd be more upfront than you have claimed. Have a good day, my friend. Cheers.