BCS Metrics

[juraitwaluzka]

We get it. Anyone who discusses relative strengths of teams is gay in your mind. No one agrees with you. Go talk to yourself.

No, relative strength discussions are fine for hypotheticals (which are fine discussions to have). It's the part where that should be in any way used for deciding who plays for championships is where I take issue. And yeah, I'm totally sure that I am the only person on earth that thinks that. But even if that were the case, ironically I feel the same way about that as I do about using the opinions of others to decide championships - the opinions are meaningless. Thanks for proving my point though. Type B - party at the Peach Pit! And it has nothing to do with gays, there are almost certainly gays with enough testosterone to not be so dependent on the opinions of others.

 

[interchange]

No, relative strength discussions are fine for hypotheticals (which are fine discussions to have). It's the part where that should be in any way used for deciding who plays for championships is where I take issue. And yeah, I'm totally sure that I am the only person on earth that thinks that. But even if that were the case, ironically I feel the same way about that as I do about using the opinions of others to decide championships - the opinions are meaningless. Thanks for proving my point though. Type B - party at the Peach Pit! And it has nothing to do with gays, there are almost certainly gays with enough testosterone to not be so dependent on the opinions of others.

So how the hell would you do it in NCAA Football? Not have a champion? Cause otherwise you have a way to decide which teams are playing.

 

[juraitwaluzka]

So how the hell would you do it in NCAA Football? Not have a champion? Cause otherwise you have a way to decide which teams are playing.

After how it has played out over all the years, and I made this exact comment in another thread, I actually do think I would enjoy it more if we just didn't crown a champion, like back in @coit's grandfather's day because I don't think it's a thing that can really be done in an objective manner without a major reconstruction that just isn't going to happen. The best that can probably be done is where it's currently headed and that is to have enough teams in the playoffs so that it's very unlikely that the teams left out due to subjectivity had a non trivial chance of winning the whole thing. But even with that you don't get things like NC State winning the national championship in basketball for example.

Don't get me wrong there are plenty of problems to overcome with what we're getting next, but it should reduce subjectivity compared to now which is a net positive. The FCS champion has a far more legit claim as a true champion.

Also note that winning the championship doesn't necessarily equate to being the best team. think about it from a team goal perspective, do you set out to be the best, or do you set out to win a championship, I hope it's the latter, which can of course be accomplished by doing the former, but it's not an objective measure. Winning a game is the most objective thing possible. if you focus on who's the best team then if a number 8 seed upsets a number 1 seed, then why not advance the number 1 seed because they are clearly the better team but they had a bad day. this is absurd of course, and is why I draw the distinction between best team and champion, they are completely different things that we have conflated into this monstrosity of stupidity.

In fact I think the whole notion of a best team is a fallacious concept that can't even be properly defined much less determined. It's like who's the best guitar player. for anyone you list I can name another player who can do something that that player couldn't. It's all subjective, which has no place in sports.

 

[GTCrew4b]

No, relative strength discussions are fine for hypotheticals (which are fine discussions to have). It's the part where that should be in any way used for deciding who plays for championships is where I take issue. And yeah, I'm totally sure that I am the only person on earth that thinks that. But even if that were the case, ironically I feel the same way about that as I do about using the opinions of others to decide championships - the opinions are meaningless. Thanks for proving my point though. Type B - party at the Peach Pit! And it has nothing to do with gays, there are almost certainly gays with enough testosterone to not be so dependent on the opinions of others.

So masculine to not stand up or be angry for wronged individuals like the players and coaches at Florida State. Just like what a real testosterone driven person would do. FWIW your “non-opinion” desiring novel is longer than anything anyone has posted on the topic, you non-commital bitch. Since you seem so willing to throw around masculinity taunts it shouldn’t bother you to be revealed to be a sit on his dick coward and do nothing pussy.

FWIW my position has always been all conference champions in a playoff and a few at larges to simply fill out the field.

 

[interchange]

After how it has played out over all the years, and I made this exact comment in another thread, I actually do think I would enjoy it more if we just didn't crown a champion, like back in @coit's grandfather's day because I don't think it's a thing that can really be done in an objective manner without a major reconstruction that just isn't going to happen. The best that can probably be done is where it's currently headed and that is to have enough teams in the playoffs so that it's very unlikely that the teams left out due to subjectivity had a non trivial chance of winning the whole thing. But even with that you don't get things like NC State winning the national championship in basketball for example.

Don't get me wrong there are plenty of problems to overcome with what we're getting next, but it should reduce subjectivity compared to now which is a net positive. The FCS champion has a far more legit claim as a true champion.

Also note that winning the championship doesn't necessarily equate to being the best team. think about it from a team goal perspective, do you set out to be the best, or do you set out to win a championship, I hope it's the latter, which can of course be accomplished by doing the former, but it's not an objective measure. Winning a game is the most objective thing possible. if you focus on who's the best team then if a number 8 seed upsets a number 1 seed, then why not advance the number 1 seed because they are clearly the better team but they had a bad day. this is absurd of course, and is why I draw the distinction between best team and champion, they are completely different things that we have conflated into this monstrosity of stupidity.

In fact I think the whole notion of a best team is a fallacious concept that can't even be properly defined much less determined. It's like who's the best guitar player. for anyone you list I can name another player who can do something that that player couldn't. It's all subjective, which has no place in sports.

Maybe in some fantasy world that works. In this world getting rid of that just leaves us with the poll-based mess that was even worse.

I agree that finding the best team isn't the goal.

 

[andrew]

You know someone's opinion is correct when he uses testicles and testosterone levels to make his argument.

"lol ur a girl": a tried and true argument ever since first grade.

 

[clapper]

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.

I think you're wrong here. Everyone will still be chasing CFP dollars. A #13 team that gets jumped by a #12 because of an eye test is still losing out on extra money for their conference and themselves.

 

[andrew]

I think you're wrong here. Everyone will still be chasing CFP dollars. A #13 team that gets jumped by a #12 because of an eye test is still losing out on extra money for their conference and themselves.

People will care a lot less in my opinion. The reason people are so upset now is that FSU did literally everything they could and still got screwed over in favor of a team that didn't do everything they could have.

There will still be bias, yes. But it will be much more tolerable. As evidence, look at March Madness: sure people grumble about snubs a little, but in the grand scheme of things no one really cares.

 

[clapper]

Alabama currently ranked wins:
6 Georgia
11 Ole Miss
13 LSU
21 Tennessee

This is a bullshit argument though. It's the same SEC argument Georgia uses.

Ole Miss' only ranked win was LSU. LSU's only ranked win was Missouri. Tennessee's had no ranked wins and Missouri's only ranked win was Tennessee. Yet every single one of them was ranked.

 

[gtleviathan]

After how it has played out over all the years, and I made this exact comment in another thread, I actually do think I would enjoy it more if we just didn't crown a champion, like back in @coit's grandfather's day because I don't think it's a thing that can really be done in an objective manner without a major reconstruction that just isn't going to happen. The best that can probably be done is where it's currently headed and that is to have enough teams in the playoffs so that it's very unlikely that the teams left out due to subjectivity had a non trivial chance of winning the whole thing. But even with that you don't get things like NC State winning the national championship in basketball for example.

Don't get me wrong there are plenty of problems to overcome with what we're getting next, but it should reduce subjectivity compared to now which is a net positive. The FCS champion has a far more legit claim as a true champion.

Also note that winning the championship doesn't necessarily equate to being the best team. think about it from a team goal perspective, do you set out to be the best, or do you set out to win a championship, I hope it's the latter, which can of course be accomplished by doing the former, but it's not an objective measure. Winning a game is the most objective thing possible. if you focus on who's the best team then if a number 8 seed upsets a number 1 seed, then why not advance the number 1 seed because they are clearly the better team but they had a bad day. this is absurd of course, and is why I draw the distinction between best team and champion, they are completely different things that we have conflated into this monstrosity of stupidity.

In fact I think the whole notion of a best team is a fallacious concept that can't even be properly defined much less determined. It's like who's the best guitar player. for anyone you list I can name another player who can do something that that player couldn't. It's all subjective, which has no place in sports.

Soccer gets around this problem by awarding multiple trophies. In MLS, the team with the most regular season points gets the Supporters Shield. The team that wins the playoffs gets MLS Cup. Most fans consider the Supporters Shield winner the "best team" but covet the MLS Cup more since it means their team won a specific game at the end of the season with everything on the line.

In a similar vein, I think it'd make sense to go back to AP/Coaches poll champions but also add a (separate) CFP trophy for whoever wins the championship game. I know folks will reflexively say "soccer is gay, why would we copy them" but, if you think about it, this way is actually more in line with the history of how college football champions were crowned.

 

[GTCrew4b]

This is a bullshit argument though. It's the same SEC argument Georgia uses.

Ole Miss' only ranked win was LSU. LSU's only ranked win was Missouri. Tennessee's had no ranked wins and Missouri's only ranked win was Tennessee. Yet every single one of them was ranked.

Missouri did beat K St.

and U of A switching QB’s from earlier in the year helped Miss State’s strength of record a lot. It wouldn’t get picked up in computer ratings either. That OT + 5 TO win combined with Miss State doing horrible in the SEC is propping them up.

 

[juraitwaluzka]

Maybe in some fantasy world that works. In this world getting rid of that just leaves us with the poll-based mess that was even worse.

I agree that finding the best team isn't the goal.

Yeah, that's the thing, I don't think there is an ideal solution without fantasy world. The only thing that can be done is to minimize the subjectivity as much as possible. Even in the fantasy world it wouldn't be perfect, there would still be some teams that play tougher schedules etc..., you see that in the NFL sometimes. However at some point I think you have to accept that is part of life, nothing will be 100% consistent and fair across the board. As long as you can take care of business on the field and be thusly rewarded that is the best you can do. Never though should it be outsiders subjectively deciding who is best or who gets in. Everyone should know exactly what the outcome will be ahead of times based on the games that are played and clearly spelled out conditions, like every other league.

This whole thing got started, at least as I understand it, because back in the day there wasn't a national champion per se. Individual magazines, papers or whatever started crowning champs, then it became official which is just a bastardized official version of what was initially intended to be a just for fun thing. Like power rankings or whatever we have today, which are fine as long as they aren't used for anything official.

 

[interchange]

This is a bullshit argument though. It's the same SEC argument Georgia uses.

Ole Miss' only ranked win was LSU. LSU's only ranked win was Missouri. Tennessee's had no ranked wins and Missouri's only ranked win was Tennessee. Yet every single one of them was ranked.

Not counting Notre Dame because they don't really have a conference, there are only 9 OOC wins over currently ranked teams total.

The SEC is a bunch of pussies in their scheduling, I'm sick of the media slobbering on their knob, Sankey can eat a dick for his comments, and THWG.

But if you're going to argue that their teams suck at football, pick a way that makes sense.

 

[GTCrew4b]

Not counting Notre Dame because they don't really have a conference, there are only 9 OOC wins over currently ranked teams total.

The SEC is a bunch of pussies in their scheduling, I'm sick of the media slobbering on their knob, Sankey can eat a dick for his comments, and THWG.

But if you're going to argue that their teams suck at football, pick a way that makes sense.

OK:

The SEC had the 2nd worst inter conference P5 record of the bunch (Big Ten was worse). The ACC had the second best after the Pac XII. The ACC’s undefeated conference champion was left out.

Every SEC West team outside of MS lost an OOC game.

The SEC’s best win is likely Miss State over Arizona which occurred when AZ was using a different QB than the one that went 7-2 with 3OT loss to SouthernCal and close loss to Washington. That OOC win combined with Arizona’s PAC success and Miss State’s SEC terribleness props up the entire conference. By contrast VPI and GT’s terrible OOC record and good conference record drags down the ACC hard. We don’t have a team that did really well OOC in P5 land but bad in conference. The closest Is Clemson but ND plays mostly ACC teams. The computers are all bamboozled. ESPN’s FPI and strength of record is largely a computer rating. The U of A shenanigans are pretty hidden and ND is actually penalizing us as an OOC rival because it doesn’t expand the ACC’s common opponent comparison too much. Maybe if ND had beaten Ohio State and Duke had beaten ND it would’ve been much different in that regard.

 

[stech81]

An alternative scenario is:
Team A beats team B
Team B beats team C
team C beats team A

Which team is best?

Damn another test after I have been drinking all afternoon.

Thinking about it the Team that is from the SEC would be the best, according to ESPN.

 

[juraitwaluzka]

So masculine to not stand up or be angry for wronged individuals like the players and coaches at Florida State. Just like what a real testosterone driven person would do. FWIW your “non-opinion” desiring novel is longer than anything anyone has posted on the topic, you non-commital bitch. Since you seem so willing to throw around masculinity taunts it shouldn’t bother you to be revealed to be a sit on his dick coward and do nothing pussy.

FWIW my position has always been all conference champions in a playoff and a few at larges to simply fill out the field.

I'm not sure how you got your wires crossed there, I've stated several times that FSU got completely hosed, the current result is the worst that has ever happened, and it is a travesty to the players and staff that sacrificed all season just to get the shaft. And the reason they got hosed is because it came down to the subjective opinions of others vs going with what happened on the field (Bama lost to Texas, Bama should not be in, end of story, you lose your conference title game, you are out, end of story, I don't care what your record is). Arguing about which team is best and should/should not have made it in because of n-levels deep into some stats is indicative of the problem, not the solution. The whole best team criteria is unverifiable. Hell, no one can even define what the concrete metrics are for determining the best team, you always end up with the transitive property college football. If you can't even agree on the metrics, then how is that supposed to be used as an objective criteria to get a tournament invitation? If it worked that way the NFL and everyone else would be doing it. College football is the outlier here.

Perhaps overall we are in violent agreement, but I will give kudos to the emotionally driven response. However, perhaps reading the details of the novel would have been more productive than getting emotionally triggered and responding in such a way that both missed and made my points. Nice.

 

[GTCrew4b]

I'm not sure how you got your wires crossed there, I've stated several times that FSU got completely hosed, the current result is the worst that has ever happened, and it is a travesty to the players and staff that sacrificed all season just to get the shaft. And the reason they got hosed is because it came down to the subjective opinions of others vs going with what happened on the field (Bama lost to Texas, Bama should not be in, end of story, you lose your conference title game, you are out, end of story, I don't care what your record is). Arguing about which team is best and should/should not have made it in because of n-levels deep into some stats is indicative of the problem, not the solution. The whole best team criteria is unverifiable. Hell, no one can even define what the concrete metrics are for determining the best team, you always end up with the transitive property college football. If you can't even agree on the metrics, then how is that supposed to be used as an objective criteria to get a tournament invitation? If it worked that way the NFL and everyone else would be doing it. College football is the outlier here.

Perhaps overall we are in violent agreement, but I will give kudos to the emotionally driven response. However, perhaps reading the details of the novel would have been more productive than getting emotionally triggered and responding in such a way that both missed and made my points. Nice.

So red pilled. Such frame. Using insults was a way to attempt to speak a common language. You seemed desperate for a response since you made the same point 4 times about everyone talking being less masculine than you.

Being devoid of emotion isn’t inherently masculine. Anger is an emotion driven by testosterone. It is one that wins fights and wars and blesses men when used appropriately. Making decisions irrespective of emotion is definitely a masculine trait.

 

[juraitwaluzka]

I think you're wrong here. Everyone will still be chasing CFP dollars. A #13 team that gets jumped by a #12 because of an eye test is still losing out on extra money for their conference and themselves.

I think that is accurate. It's better than now in that a team is less likely to be robbed of a realistic opportunity to win a championship. But, stranger things have happened (NC State in basketball for example) and my preference would be for no committees or panels or whatever, the way in should be completely spelled out ahead of time. That wouldn't be perfect either, but at least you know for certain going in what has to happen - like the final week in the NFL or MLB etc. When the games are over, we know the outcome immediately, not subject to the whims of others that can be influenced by God knows what. Anything that takes that out of the equation is an improvement.

 

[juraitwaluzka]

So red pilled. Such frame. Using insults was a way to attempt to speak a common language. You seemed desperate for a response since you made the same point 4 times about everyone talking being less masculine than you.

Being devoid of emotion isn’t inherently masculine. Anger is an emotion driven by testosterone. It is one that wins fights and wars and blesses men when used appropriately. Making decisions irrespective of emotion is definitely a masculine trait.

It's not about being devoid of emotion, it's about not letting it control your actions and decision making when you do have those emotions. Testosterone vs estrogen was an analogy. You are right though, giving into your emotions whether it is a testosterone fueled rage or an estrogen driven meltdown are two sides of the same coin and both genders are capable of both, even at the same time. The worst decisions you will make in your life are the ones where you allow your emotions to drive them. If you disagree with that, fair enough, but good luck with that.

I realize you are hyper focused on the emotion thing, but did you not even bother to read the content? I think we actually agree on that, you know, if you can just take the emotion out of it. If you can do that, I would be interested to hear where you disagree if indeed you do.

 

[juraitwaluzka]

Soccer gets around this problem by awarding multiple trophies. In MLS, the team with the most regular season points gets the Supporters Shield. The team that wins the playoffs gets MLS Cup. Most fans consider the Supporters Shield winner the "best team" but covet the MLS Cup more since it means their team won a specific game at the end of the season with everything on the line.

In a similar vein, I think it'd make sense to go back to AP/Coaches poll champions but also add a (separate) CFP trophy for whoever wins the championship game. I know folks will reflexively say "soccer is gay, why would we copy them" but, if you think about it, this way is actually more in line with the history of how college football champions were crowned.

Interesting approach. I don't fully understand how it works or exactly which league(s) it is but I found it interesting how they do the play your way up and down through various leagues/divisions.

In the end, all playoffs, even NFL or whatever, it's a tournament. Once tournament championship winners were conflated with the need to say that means they are the best is the root of all this. They are separate things. One can be determined, the other cannot.