|
Post by Bevo on Jan 10, 2017 17:10:06 GMT
The same is not true for G5 teams who are not provided a blueprint for making a four team playoff beyond unrealistic and vague demands that they play top P5 teams all on the road for an indefinite period of time. I don't agree... Houston had the blueprint figured out. All they had to do was "win". With the schedule they had, they would clearly have made it... if undefeated. I think other schools will make runs at it. But, it takes a lot of things falling into place. Would definitely be MUCH easier for the G5 schools if the playoff were expanded to 8. Ultimately, if the playoff isn't going to expand, then the committee must be replaced with an objective system. The only reason not to do this is so the P5 leagues can keep G5 leagues "in their place" and make it very difficult for them to beat a rigged system. Must be? I don't think you'll find many people in the CFP that will agree with that. Especially not those who are on the committee. They love the prestige of it. Frankly, I think THAT is more of a motivating factor than any desire to "keep G5 teams in their place". But, that's just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by cjhawkeyes on Jan 10, 2017 18:42:49 GMT
If the idea is to have the most fair and objective system, using a committee because voters like the prestige of it is not a goo argument for keeping it and still believe the only reason to vote teams in is to maintain the competitive divide between P5 and G5 leagues. I think a system like mine is worth far more to G5 teams than auto NY6 bowl berths.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Jan 10, 2017 19:13:54 GMT
If the idea is to have the most fair and objective system, using a committee because voters like the prestige of it is not a goo argument for keeping it and still believe the only reason to vote teams in is to maintain the competitive divide between P5 and G5 leagues. I think a system like mine is worth far more to G5 teams than auto NY6 bowl berths. I'm not arguing that it's a good argument... I think your system would be a HUGE improvement. I'm simply telling you my opinion of WHY the system is like it is. I'm not as conspiratorial as you guys are.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Jan 10, 2017 21:03:56 GMT
The same is not true for G5 teams who are not provided a blueprint for making a four team playoff beyond unrealistic and vague demands that they play top P5 teams all on the road for an indefinite period of time. I don't agree... Houston had the blueprint figured out. All they had to do was "win". With the schedule they had, they would clearly have made it... if undefeated. I think other schools will make runs at it. But, it takes a lot of things falling into place. Would definitely be MUCH easier for the G5 schools if the playoff were expanded to 8. Ultimately, if the playoff isn't going to expand, then the committee must be replaced with an objective system. The only reason not to do this is so the P5 leagues can keep G5 leagues "in their place" and make it very difficult for them to beat a rigged system. Must be? I don't think you'll find many people in the CFP that will agree with that. Especially not those who are on the committee. They love the prestige of it. Frankly, I think THAT is more of a motivating factor than any desire to "keep G5 teams in their place". But, that's just my opinion. Replace the ESPN/Cartel selection committee with an NCAA selection committee....a good and necessary first step to fairness.
|
|
|
Post by cjhawkeyes on Jan 10, 2017 21:17:30 GMT
If the idea is to have the most fair and objective system, using a committee because voters like the prestige of it is not a goo argument for keeping it and still believe the only reason to vote teams in is to maintain the competitive divide between P5 and G5 leagues. I think a system like mine is worth far more to G5 teams than auto NY6 bowl berths. I'm not arguing that it's a good argument... I think your system would be a HUGE improvement. I'm simply telling you my opinion of WHY the system is like it is. I'm not as conspiratorial as you guys are.
You could be right but I have seen many arguments stated against going completely objective and they are so ridiculous. I suppose its possible they don't even realize the benefits of an objective system for G5 schools since leaders of those schools have not been smart enough to advocate for such.
|
|
|
Post by cjhawkeyes on Jan 10, 2017 21:18:31 GMT
I don't agree... Houston had the blueprint figured out. All they had to do was "win". With the schedule they had, they would clearly have made it... if undefeated. I think other schools will make runs at it. But, it takes a lot of things falling into place. Would definitely be MUCH easier for the G5 schools if the playoff were expanded to 8. Must be? I don't think you'll find many people in the CFP that will agree with that. Especially not those who are on the committee. They love the prestige of it. Frankly, I think THAT is more of a motivating factor than any desire to "keep G5 teams in their place". But, that's just my opinion. Replace the ESPN/Cartel selection committee with an NCAA selection committee....a good and necessary first step to fairness.
NCAA committees are biased against G5 teams as well but I will say that CFP committee seems more biased than polls do
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Jan 11, 2017 0:01:32 GMT
A comparison of CFP rankings and the polls over the years will confirm that you are correct.
There are two reasons, IMO: 1. The CFP selection committee is composed overwhelmingly with members with P5 ties. 2. By prohibiting MOV, the committee is not permitted to evaluate a team's performance relative to its schedule. Thus, all G5 teams are effectively eliminated from fair consideration before the season even begins.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Jan 11, 2017 18:52:24 GMT
"1984 must never ever happen again"...that might be the unofficial battle cry of the Cartel, ESPN and its puppet 'committee'.
|
|