Who's In?

Who's In?

  • Total voters
    122
  • Poll closed .
G776T said:
I think if that were still the case today you would get

Rose - Washington v Penn St
Orange - Clemson v Oklahoma
Sugar - Alabama v Ohio St

Some pretty good matchups, but the Alabama/Ohio St game would have been a defacto championship game, dont think you would see any co-championships.
Click to expand...


i think in this scenario, if Alabama wins, they are the champ, but if Ohio State wins, then a Penn State win over Washington could get them the title
 
2000 (head to head UM over FSU meant nothing) and 2011 (Bama not winning conference) were two of the dumbest years of the BCS. Congrats CFP, in year 3, you have a chance to make make both happen in the same year.
 
What is valued more...

1. Winning a conference championship and winning head-to-head,
-Penn St beat Ohio St

or

2. Playing tough out-of-conference teams and winning?
-Ohio St beat Oklahoma, Penn St lost to Pitt

The conference champion should go over a team that didn't play in its conference championship.
 
The committee has actually been pretty clear an consistent with their criteria. They come out every week and explain their reasoning. The problem most have is that they can't get the old polling system out of their heads. For 100 years the polls worked the same, they take last week's poll and if you lose you go down you win you go up.

The committee has been steadfast in saying that last weeks poll has zero impact on the next weeks, and they can only rank teams based on the information they have. So last week they felt Ohio State had the second best resume and ranked them 2nd. They couldn't factor in conference championships at that point because no one was a conference champion yet, and it didn't matter that Ohio St. couldn't win a championship because there wasn't a team that had one that could be ahead of them.

This week will be completely different because they can take conference championships into account, and its written into their protocol.

Under the current construct, polls (although well-intended) have not expressed these values; particularly at the margins where teams that have won head-to-head competition and championships are sometimes ranked behind non-champions and teams that have lost in head-to-head competition. Nuanced mathematical formulas ignore some teams who “deserve” to be selected.
Click to expand...

When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered:
 Championships won
 Strength of schedule
 Head-to-head competition (if it occurred)
 Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)
Click to expand...

I also believe that they makeup of the selection committee will mean that the members care more about being consistent and the integrity of the process than the potential ratings ESPN may get, I will be shocked if it is anything but the following:

1. Alabama
2. Clemson
3. Washington
4. Penn State

If its not and Ohio St is at 4, while most will be happy, the process and the members of the committee will have lost all credibility to me.
 
the problem is that its unclear what the "championship" measures

is it 'best team at the end of the year'? if so, then thats the ONLY reason to have any playoff at all. if thats the case then PSU over OSU all day long, they beat them and have won 9 straight, including the conference title, and are therefor the better team RIGHT NOW

or is it 'best performance all year'? in which case OSU has a case, because head to head and recency of wins are not as important, but it also invalidates the WHOLE IDEA of a playoff. just have bowls and vote as we used to

this is why i never liked the idea of the BCS or of a playoff in the first place. its totally illogical for the sake of corporate interests and big money influence in college football.
 
G776T said:
The committee has actually been pretty clear an consistent with their criteria. They come out every week and explain their reasoning. The problem most have is that they can't get the old polling system out of their heads. For 100 years the polls worked the same, they take last week's poll and if you lose you go down you win you go up.

The committee has been steadfast in saying that last weeks poll has zero impact on the next weeks, and they can only rank teams based on the information they have. So last week they felt Ohio State had the second best resume and ranked them 2nd. They couldn't factor in conference championships at that point because no one was a conference champion yet, and it didn't matter that Ohio St. couldn't win a championship because there wasn't a team that had one that could be ahead of them.

This week will be completely different because they can take conference championships into account, and its written into their protocol.





I also believe that they makeup of the selection committee will mean that the members care more about being consistent and the integrity of the process than the potential ratings ESPN may get, I will be shocked if it is anything but the following:

1. Alabama
2. Clemson
3. Washington
4. Penn State

If its not and Ohio St is at 4, while most will be happy, the process and the members of the committee will have lost all credibility to me.
Click to expand...

The big issue is that if that's the case, there is absolutely no reason for them to release a poll prior to today. All it does is toy with the expectations of players, coaches, and fans.
 
BuzzCzar said:
the problem is that its unclear what the "championship" measures

is it 'best team at the end of the year'? if so, then thats the ONLY reason to have any playoff at all. if thats the case then PSU over OSU all day long, they beat them and have won 9 straight, including the conference title, and are therefor the better team RIGHT NOW

or is it 'best performance all year'? in which case OSU has a case, because head to head and recency of wins are not as important, but it also invalidates the WHOLE IDEA of a playoff. just have bowls and vote as we used to

this is why i never liked the idea of the BCS or of a playoff in the first place. its totally illogical for the sake of corporate interests and big money influence in college football.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I also agree that I liked the old system (pre - BCS, Bowl coalition, bowl alliance). New Year's day used to be my favorite day of the year, there were so many games and all of them had a potential impact on the final results (subjective as though they may be). It was what made college football unique to all other sports, and what, imo, made it the most popular amateur sport. The debates and the arguing over "championships" only added to the intrigue and popularity, it didnt detract from the sport like so many have said.
 
gtfan088 said:
The big issue is that if that's the case, there is absolutely no reason for them to release a poll prior to today. All it does is toy with the expectations of players, coaches, and fans.
Click to expand...

I agree it doesn't make sense to do that, that is simply a ratings grab.
 
G776T said:
I agree, and I also agree that I liked the old system (pre - BCS, Bowl coalition, bowl alliance). New Year's day used to be my favorite day of the year, there were so many games and all of them had a potential impact on the final results (subjective as though they may be). It was what made college football unique to all other sports, and what, imo, made it the most popular amateur sport. The debates and the arguing over "championships" only added to the intrigue and popularity, it didnt detract from the sport like so many have said.
Click to expand...

exactly. why not have more than one fanbase happy and thinking they are the champs? its good for football, and with 120-something teams, it adds to it not distracts
 
So ESPN is tipping their hand on the selection show.

They're acting like they know OSU is in while not supposed to know.

Pathetic.
 
ESPN still doesnt get it, they have reporters at Michigan/Washington/Penn St believing its between those 3 for the final spot.
 
you and i agree :bigthumbup:

BuzzCzar said:
i liked it best before the BCS to begin with

you have 120-something teams and there is no way with football to have enough conference cross-over games to be able to establish any meaningful metric in terms of Strength of Schedule or relative conference strength

i liked the way you had "regional" champions. everyone down here knows that Georgia Tech was the National Champion in 1990. we were by far the better team. we didnt need a 5th down or an imaginary clip to win our games...

... meanwhile in Colorado and in the PAC12 they can all cite the reasons why Colorado is the Champ...

imo, thats good for college football, not bad. the only reason for a playoff or a BCS is for TV ratings which only long-term ruins the game and allows for corruption and big$ to creep in even more

it doesnt ever barely "work" anyway, i say get rid of the stupid "playoff"
its just a ratings & money scheme by the establishment
time to make College Football Great Again!
Click to expand...
 
Dirty Jacket said:
Keep it 4. Adds to drama. That said, this is gonna cost GT a playoff bid in a year or two.
Click to expand...
DJ, you are a stupid öööö even for a STer. Get ready for 2015 again next year and the next year and the next year and the next year, then when George Godsey takes over, we make it to the playoff. Think 2022
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top