|
Post by Hero on Dec 6, 2016 0:28:04 GMT
My biggest problem with the committee is that no one knows what they have to do to get in the playoff. It's become LESS transparent with the College Football Playoff, literally made behind closed doors. AT LEAST with rankings you would know where you needed to be. How they handled this year was absurd on MANY levels....the subjective nature of it just proves one point: There is no true logic to the process. TCU was #3 and got booted out in '14. FSU was undefeated and was as low as #4 that year...an undefeated defending National Champ on the verge of getting booted from the playoff. This year, you had the Penn St-Ohio St argument to most fans, but ESPN and media tried to make it between Michigan-Washington-Penn State for #4. I'm still wondering how Ohio State is ahead of WASHINGTON. Haven't quite figured that out yet. I really don't understand what the rules are for the committee....it's bad for the sport. AT LEAST with the BCS rankings you had a notion of who could pass who.... Either that or define some type of rules:The first 3 spots go to the top 3 conference champs #4 is to At-Large
Do something that lets fans, teams, and coaches know where they are, and what they have to do to get in the playoff! OR create a list of criteria....if teams are comparable, you go down the list as a litany of tiebreakers.1. W/L - team with better W/L gets in 2. Head-to-head - Team winning head 2 head gets in 3. Conference Champ - Team with Conference Championship gets in 4. SOS - Team with better Strength of Schedule gets in That's all you need....those 4 simple guidelines Ohio State had the better W/L, so it's obvious they get in above Penn State....then EVERYONE is on the same page on what is expected. Washington has a better record and Conference Champ over Ohio State....they should be #3 The committee as it is right now is a joke....The Playoff is good, how it's decided is dumb....keep trying college football I had no problem with the BCS Ranking. CJ might do a better job.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 6, 2016 1:29:51 GMT
My biggest problem with the committee is that no one knows what they have to do to get in the playoff. It's become LESS transparent with the College Football Playoff, literally made behind closed doors. AT LEAST with rankings you would know where you needed to be. How they handled this year was absurd on MANY levels....the subjective nature of it just proves one point: There is no true logic to the process. TCU was #3 and got booted out in '14. FSU was undefeated and was as low as #4 that year...an undefeated defending National Champ on the verge of getting booted from the playoff. This year, you had the Penn St-Ohio St argument to most fans, but ESPN and media tried to make it between Michigan-Washington-Penn State for #4. I'm still wondering how Ohio State is ahead of WASHINGTON. Haven't quite figured that out yet. I really don't understand what the rules are for the committee....it's bad for the sport. AT LEAST with the BCS rankings you had a notion of who could pass who.... Either that or define some type of rules:The first 3 spots go to the top 3 conference champs #4 is to At-Large
Do something that lets fans, teams, and coaches know where they are, and what they have to do to get in the playoff! OR create a list of criteria....if teams are comparable, you go down the list as a litany of tiebreakers.1. W/L - team with better W/L gets in 2. Head-to-head - Team winning head 2 head gets in 3. Conference Champ - Team with Conference Championship gets in 4. SOS - Team with better Strength of Schedule gets in That's all you need....those 4 simple guidelines Ohio State had the better W/L, so it's obvious they get in above Penn State....then EVERYONE is on the same page on what is expected. Washington has a better record and Conference Champ over Ohio State....they should be #3 The committee as it is right now is a joke....The Playoff is good, how it's decided is dumb....keep trying college football I had no problem with the BCS Ranking. CJ might do a better job. Yeah, for all the bitching, guess what the BCS computers had as the top 4?
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 6, 2016 1:37:40 GMT
It depends on how you define true champion. "It depends upon how you define true president." That sounds rather stupid doesn't it? "It depends upon how you define true champion" is equally stupid. No one questions that the winner of the NCAA football championship playoffs for each division is the true national champion. But, even many supporters of the power conferences' current version of a championship refer to it as the MNC, i.e., the "mythical national championship ". That is simply because it isn't and never can be accepted as a true national championship. "It depends upon how you define true president."
That sounds rather stupid doesn't it?
Nope, because we have rules that are know before voting occurs. So we only have the President, not some cockamamey true president. Bad analogy.
Some do, others simply call it what it is the national championship, which it is, as much as you want it not to be...
We have the all inclusive NCAA March Madness - how many times has a #16 been sent home when playing a #1 seed? Try every time.
Do we really think #64 is the "best team"?
No, but we're inclusive! Everyone gets a participation trophy!
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Dec 6, 2016 1:52:58 GMT
I had no problem with the BCS Ranking. CJ might do a better job. Yeah, for all the bitching, guess what the BCS computers had as the top 4?
Yeah, we are all here to talk about this stuff(which is exactly what the CFP Committee was designed to do). Call it what you want.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Dec 6, 2016 3:37:15 GMT
"It depends upon how you define true president." That sounds rather stupid doesn't it? "It depends upon how you define true champion" is equally stupid. No one questions that the winner of the NCAA football championship playoffs for each division is the true national champion. But, even many supporters of the power conferences' current version of a championship refer to it as the MNC, i.e., the "mythical national championship ". That is simply because it isn't and never can be accepted as a true national championship. "It dependent nds upon how you define true president."
That sounds rather stupid doesn't it?
Nope, because we have rules that are know before voting occurs. So we only have the President, not some cockamamey true president. Bad analogy.
Some do, others simply call it what it is the national championship, which it is, as much as you want it not to be...
We have the all inclusive NCAA March Madness - how many times has a #16 been sent home when playing a #1 seed? Try every time.
Do we really think #64 is the "best team"?
No, but we're inclusive! Everyone gets a participation trophy!
Did Jim Valvano's 1983 #24-seed Wolfpack team deserve an opportunity to prove that it was the "best team"?
|
|
|
Post by GatorGrad on Dec 6, 2016 3:40:21 GMT
The BCS Standings would have produced the SAME EXACT TOP FOUR TEAMS this year.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Dec 6, 2016 4:46:06 GMT
"It dependent nds upon how you define true president."
That sounds rather stupid doesn't it?
Nope, because we have rules that are know before voting occurs. So we only have the President, not some cockamamey true president. Bad analogy.
Some do, others simply call it what it is the national championship, which it is, as much as you want it not to be...
We have the all inclusive NCAA March Madness - how many times has a #16 been sent home when playing a #1 seed? Try every time.
Do we really think #64 is the "best team"?
No, but we're inclusive! Everyone gets a participation trophy!
Did Jim Valvano's 1983 #24-seed Wolfpack team deserve an opportunity to prove that it was the "best team"? No especially not in a football style playoff.... With one game per week.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Dec 6, 2016 5:43:35 GMT
But, 1983 NC State was the best team. The were only able to prove it because of an inclusive playoff system.
Ever wonder why the schools in the NCAA divisions that have inclusive football playoffs aren't complaining?
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Dec 6, 2016 5:53:59 GMT
But, 1983 NC State was the best team. The were only able to prove it because of an inclusive playoff system. Ever wonder why the schools in the NCAA divisions that have inclusive football playoffs aren't complaining? Which division has a 68 team playoff.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 6, 2016 11:41:47 GMT
"It dependent nds upon how you define true president."
That sounds rather stupid doesn't it?
Nope, because we have rules that are know before voting occurs. So we only have the President, not some cockamamey true president. Bad analogy.
Some do, others simply call it what it is the national championship, which it is, as much as you want it not to be...
We have the all inclusive NCAA March Madness - how many times has a #16 been sent home when playing a #1 seed? Try every time.
Do we really think #64 is the "best team"?
No, but we're inclusive! Everyone gets a participation trophy!
Did Jim Valvano's 1983 #24-seed Wolfpack team deserve an opportunity to prove that it was the "best team"? No. If you are seeded 24th, you don't have a legitimate argument to being the "best". Period. Especially in college football with such a small data set and lack of commonality.
That's why they are called upsets. They weren't the best and weren't supposed to win.
It was never about being "fair". Once the conference/team individual TV networks were out of the bottle, it was over. That genie is not going back in the bottle.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Dec 6, 2016 15:50:50 GMT
But, 1983 NC State was the best team. The were only able to prove it because of an inclusive playoff system. Ever wonder why the schools in the NCAA divisions that have inclusive football playoffs aren't complaining? Which division has a 68 team playoff. I don't recall saying anything about a 68-team playoff... Approximately 1/3 of D-I schools are FBS and another approximately 1/3 are FCS (previously D-IAA), which has had a 16-team playoff system for decades. The remaining D-I schools don't have football programs.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Dec 6, 2016 15:52:25 GMT
Did Jim Valvano's 1983 #24-seed Wolfpack team deserve an opportunity to prove that it was the "best team"? No. If you are seeded 24th, you don't have a legitimate argument to being the "best". Period. Especially in college football with such a small data set and lack of commonality.
That's why they are called upsets. They weren't the best and weren't supposed to win.
It was never about being "fair". Once the conference/team individual TV networks were out of the bottle, it was over. That genie is not going back in the bottle.
They were the best team. They proved it.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Dec 6, 2016 16:03:16 GMT
No. If you are seeded 24th, you don't have a legitimate argument to being the "best". Period. Especially in college football with such a small data set and lack of commonality.
That's why they are called upsets. They weren't the best and weren't supposed to win.
It was never about being "fair". Once the conference/team individual TV networks were out of the bottle, it was over. That genie is not going back in the bottle.
They were the best team. They proved it. Not even close... they were, perhaps, the luckiest team ever.
And, they also abused the rules so badly, the sport changed them.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 6, 2016 17:22:35 GMT
No. If you are seeded 24th, you don't have a legitimate argument to being the "best". Period. Especially in college football with such a small data set and lack of commonality.
That's why they are called upsets. They weren't the best and weren't supposed to win.
It was never about being "fair". Once the conference/team individual TV networks were out of the bottle, it was over. That genie is not going back in the bottle.
They were the best team. They proved it. They were the NCAA Basketball Tournament Champion.
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Dec 6, 2016 19:10:12 GMT
Which division has a 68 team playoff. I don't recall saying anything about a 68-team playoff... Approximately 1/3 of D-I schools are FBS and another approximately 1/3 are FCS (previously D-IAA), which has had a 16-team playoff system for decades. The remaining D-I schools don't have football programs. You're right, in 83 I think it was only 64.
|
|