BCS Metrics

LagrangeJacket said:
And there’s something to be said for that, eh?
Click to expand...

Sure. And the public algorithm ranks Alabama ahead of both undefeated FSU as well as the team Alabama lost to head to head. So it not only confirms the committee's decision to put Bama in, it says they didn't rank Bama high enough.

Somehow I doubt people would be any happier with those being the rankings. They'd probably complain about how ridiculous it is that a computer chooses the rankings and say something needs to change. I know because that's how we got the CFP committee in the first place.
 
After thinking about it more, I think the mistake the committee made was taking Texas. If the Committee was so hung up on the SEC take Bama and ignore Texas.
It was also very likely that ESPN was involved.
 
midatlantech said:
After thinking about it more, I think the mistake the committee made was taking Texas. If the Committee was so hung up on the SEC take Bama and ignore Texas.
It was also very likely that ESPN was involved.
Click to expand...

That's the mistake? I would advise to think more, because head to head match up is only meaningful in every other sport, and even conference championships but not at the national level?
 
andrew said:
Sure. And the public algorithm ranks Alabama ahead of both undefeated FSU as well as the team Alabama lost to head to head. So it not only confirms the committee's decision to put Bama in, it says they didn't rank Bama high enough.

Somehow I doubt people would be any happier with those being the rankings. They'd probably complain about how ridiculous it is that a computer chooses the rankings and say something needs to change. I know because that's how we got the CFP committee in the first place.
Click to expand...
I’d be fine with it. I’ve said that there should have been zero discretion to exclude an undefeated P5 champion when there weren’t too many of those to fill the spots. The discretion should have been between Alabama and Texas, and I’d have been fine with either. But you can’t pick both of those and exclude an undefeated P5 champ.
 
andrew said:
Sure. And the public algorithm ranks Alabama ahead of both undefeated FSU as well as the team Alabama lost to head to head. So it not only confirms the committee's decision to put Bama in, it says they didn't rank Bama high enough.

Somehow I doubt people would be any happier with those being the rankings. They'd probably complain about how ridiculous it is that a computer chooses the rankings and say something needs to change. I know because that's how we got the CFP committee in the first place.
Click to expand...
As a Mets fan, I'd think you'd be in favor of results on the field. '69 Mets were not very good but AMAZING on the field when it counted the most. They wouldn't have passed this comittee's "smell test"

They should have selected the 3 undefeated conference champs, next 3 teams you'd select 1 in head to head records:

Tx: 1-0 & beat another conference chap
Bama: 1-1 or 0-1 against conference champs
mutt: 0-1 & not a conference champ

No BS algorithm required, just results on the field.

We all know this was about the money and power brokers getting their boys hooked up. Only question is were there perks handed out before/after or is the compensation given for another year of being paid to vote as you are told good enough.
 
"Projected best four teams" is just fundamentally the wrong criterion. It's contrary to the spirit of sports to not have the championship contenders be the teams most deserving. Teams should be rewarded for how they did, not how people think they'll do.

This system is the death of underdogs. Would you keep the Mighty Ducks out of the playoffs because they didn't seem like they'd fare the best??
 
juraitwaluzka said:
That's the mistake? I would advise to think more, because head to head match up is only meaningful in every other sport, and even conference championships but not at the national level?
Click to expand...
I’m just saying I think the Committee trapped themselves by taking Texas, obviously third. As another said here, it should have been take all undefeated conference champs, then choose the 4th team.
 
midatlantech said:
I’m just saying I think the Committee trapped themselves by taking Texas, obviously third. As another said here, it should have been take all undefeated conference champs, then choose the 4th team.
Click to expand...

In that case, wouldn't it be true that the only way they trapped themselves is not because they took Texas but because they took Bama? They could've taken the 3 undefeated teams then chosen between Texas / Bama where they have an objective measure to choose - head to head. I mean seriously, other than SEC whiners, was anyone really going to have a legit complaint if they took the 3 undefeated conference winners and then seeded the final slot based on a head to head matchup? No, this whole thing would not be any controversy at all, just the normal hand wringing and crying. The only thing that saves them in all this is that it expands next season and it will be impossible for the #13 team to have any credible case like FSU does. This is the worst of these types of decisions that has ever been made and its not even close.

This whole thing starts and ends with SEC. I believe they never gave any serious consideration to not taking Bama. And if Bama had lost to Auburn but still beat uga, then uga would have the slot and Texas would likely be out (Texas is only in because Bama is in). SEC being in was a given and everything had to work backwards from there. Once they took Bama, they had to take Texas to avoid the head to head controversy. FSU, Michigan, Washington would all be on the chopping block if it came down to it vs not taking Bama/SEC. FSU was the easiest target with an easy excuse so that's how it played out. If FSU didn't lose their QB but Washington did, Washington would be left out.
 
Yes this is the worst of these kinds of decisions…. It is very telling. IMO it is so bad that we should be checking the NIL numbers of the Committee Members.
 
midatlantech said:
Yes this is the worst of these kinds of decisions…. It is very telling. IMO it is so bad that we should be checking the NIL numbers of the Committee Members.
Click to expand...
I hope everyone remembers that the SEC was built by cheating. Now they have everything and everything is in their control. It’s very sad.
 
midatlantech said:
Yes this is the worst of these kinds of decisions…. It is very telling. IMO it is so bad that we should be checking the NIL numbers of the Committee Members.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't surprise me at all if there was that level of collusion but I think it can be simply explained as simple human nature running its course as a result of ingrained SEC bias which is 100% a thing. They are incapable of truly being objective, and reading through their "reasoning" made that incredibly obvious.
 
andrew said:
The BCS algorithm was public and a third party continues to produce simulated BCS rankings. It had Bama 3, FSU 4, texas 5.



Calculation detail: https://bcsknowhow.wordpress.com/bcs-formula/
Click to expand...

Basically GT’s performance out of conference and then in conference killed the ACC.

0-3 in FBS OOC, and 5-3 in conference. Pretty damning for the ACC when it comes to computer rankings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top