Selection Process Flaw

77GTFan

77GTFan

Dodd-Like
Joined
Nov 21, 2004
Messages
9,817
Watching a very good Wisconsin team finish 13-1 caused me to question why they were not in the conversation for the playoffs. Why is losing one game in the conference championship worse than losing one game in the regular season? Clemson, Georgia and Oklahoma were “no brainers” for selection as conference champs. So, why is it better to lose to Syracuse in the regular season than to lose to Ohio State in the championship? So, did Bama got it right by losing to Auburn and avoiding a loss in the championship?

This approach to selection means that Wisconsin should have declined to play for the Big Ten title. Let Iowa go in their place and sit out the game and take your 12-0 to the playoffs. Judging a loss in a conference championship game more severely than a loss in the regular season is an unfair penalty to those playing the extra game for their conference title.
 
Winning at the end is more important than winning during the season.

That’s an important point that will ensure that teams don’t shy away from playing the early season big non-conference games. Wisky is not that strong of a team. Their QB had an out-of-his-mind game and Miami is not a good team. We should’ve beaten them at their place for öööö sake.
 
77GTFan said:
Watching a very good Wisconsin team finish 13-1 caused me to question why they were not in the conversation for the playoffs. Why is losing one game in the conference championship worse than losing one game in the regular season? Clemson, Georgia and Oklahoma were “no brainers” for selection as conference champs. So, why is it better to lose to Syracuse in the regular season than to lose to Ohio State in the championship? So, did Bama got it right by losing to Auburn and avoiding a loss in the championship?

This approach to selection means that Wisconsin should have declined to play for the Big Ten title. Let Iowa go in their place and sit out the game and take your 12-0 to the playoffs. Judging a loss in a conference championship game more severely than a loss in the regular season is an unfair penalty to those playing the extra game for their conference title.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't be able to lose your conference championship game and get into the playoffs. Unless you're Alabama.
 
Regardless of what we think about them, the system is flawed if UCF didn’t make it. Conference championship should be a prerequisite and you select the best 4 conference champions.
 
coit said:
Winning at the end is more important than winning during the season.

That’s an important point that will ensure that teams don’t shy away from playing the early season big non-conference games. Wisky is not that strong of a team. Their QB had an out-of-his-mind game and Miami is not a good team. We should’ve beaten them at their place for öööö sake.
Click to expand...

Agreed - Miami was exposed as the overrated pretenders they were. Hell, the fact that we almost beat them proves they weren't very good.

Wisky's schedule was a joke - they didn't deserve to be in the CFP conversation.
 
BainbridgeJacket said:
Regardless of what we think about them, the system is flawed if UCF didn’t make it. Conference championship should be a prerequisite and you select the best 4 conference champions.
Click to expand...

I would be more sympathetic to this argument if they hadn't pussied out of our game. If you're a non-power five team, you can't needlessly cancel a game against a power five team and then complain when people say you don't have enough quality wins to merit consideration.
 
I just want to see consistency in selection. Either reward conference champions by selecting the four best for the playoff. That puts UCF or Ohio State in over Bama. Or, consider the whole body of work and pick the four best teams over the course of the season. If that is what you are doing, losing a conference championship game should be valued above losing a regular season game.
 
77GTFan said:
I just want to see consistency in selection. Either reward conference champions by selecting the four best for the playoff. That puts UCF or Ohio State in over Bama. Or, consider the whole body of work and pick the four best teams over the course of the season. If that is what you are doing, losing a conference championship game should be valued above losing a regular season game.
Click to expand...

They are not rewarding conference champions over what they view to be the 4 best teams.

They view Alabama to be one of the 4 best teams. They do not view Auburn as being one of the 4 best, despite having beaten two of the 4 playoff teams and narrowly losing to a 3rd.

Wisconsin played a weak schedule. Ohio State deserved to be in over Wisconsin but they didn’t make it either, for the same reasons that they did make it last season. Alabama is in this year for the same reason that OSU made it in last season.

The committee seems to be fairly consistent in its logic, even if you don’t agree with it.
 
coit said:
Winning at the end is more important than winning during the season.

That’s an important point that will ensure that teams don’t shy away from playing the early season big non-conference games. Wisky is not that strong of a team. Their QB had an out-of-his-mind game and Miami is not a good team. We should’ve beaten them at their place for öööö sake.
Click to expand...
Bama lost late in the season.
 
Who do you trust most to beat UGA out of this list: Wisconsin, Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma, Ohio State? That's all that matters right now. We are facing armageddon

Sorry but the closeness of the Miami game proves Wisconsin wasn't up to the task
 
BainbridgeJacket said:
Regardless of what we think about them, the system is flawed if UCF didn’t make it. Conference championship should be a prerequisite and you select the best 4 conference champions.
Click to expand...
Glad we did not have to play them. Salute Stansbury for declining to reschedule
 
andrew said:
I would be more sympathetic to this argument if they hadn't pussied out of our game. If you're a non-power five team, you can't needlessly cancel a game against a power five team and then complain when people say you don't have enough quality wins to merit consideration.
Click to expand...
They made the only responsible decision anyone could make given the threat of the hurricane. I don't fault them for it.
 
If you can’t win your conference you don’t deserve to be in the conversation for the National Championship.

Saying Bama was “better” so they deserve it is the same moronic argument that gave a share of our championship to Colorado.
 
Yukonwreck said:
They made the only responsible decision anyone could make given the threat of the hurricane. I don't fault them for it.
Click to expand...

Threat of the hurricane? The hurricane was already over by the time they canceled the game. They did it because they said they wanted to let the national guard use the stadium to help with the relief effort.

I was initially like you, but from everything I've read and seen since (and confirmed by a buddy who was there), the national guard did absolutely nothing while they were there. And pretty much every other Florida team managed to play their games.
 
This was the year to give a non-power 5 team a shot. UCF was undefeated and played in the sixth ranked conference. My problem with Alabama is that at the end of the regular season they lost their final game and were rated below undefeated Wisconsin. The next week Wisconsin loses to Ohio State. Alabama does not play. They go ahead of the Badgers. This is an unfair penalty for having to play for a championship. UCF was the right choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top