|
Post by Bevo on Oct 15, 2019 17:18:34 GMT
So... in 5 years of this system, the # of 1 loss teams that have been selected for the CFP by conference is:
SEC - 4 B1G - 3 ACC - 3 B12 - 2 P12 - 2
and, your beef is?
The P12 and ACC have also gotten the mulligan, EVERY TIME!
Maybe, the B1G is paying the price of having their last two Mulligan recipients score exactly ZERO combined points?
It's a small sample size to date. Sorry, I don't see any gross bias.
OK Which teams are more deserving
WinsVsRanked Losses Team A 11,16,17,23 Unranked Team B 19,23 12 Team C 5,7,14,15 Unranked Team D 13 3 Team E 14 3
If the questions were that simple, we could run a computer program to make the selection. We tried that, most people didn't like it.
There are more factors that matter.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Oct 15, 2019 21:39:01 GMT
OK Which teams are more deserving
WinsVsRanked Losses Team A 11,16,17,23 Unranked Team B 19,23 12 Team C 5,7,14,15 Unranked Team D 13 3 Team E 14 3
If the questions were that simple, we could run a computer program to make the selection. We tried that, most people didn't like it.
There are more factors that matter.
The problem with the BCS is that the computer component was only 1/3 of the selection process. Let met help you out on ranking all these 1 loss teams
#1 Team C 5,7,14,15 Unranked Michigan St
#2 Team A 11,16,17,23 Unranked Oklahoma #3 Team D 13 3 Iowa #4 Team E 14 3 Ohio St
#5 Team B 19,23 12 Alabama
This was 2015 by the way where Alabama was rated ahead of all of these teams. Same argument could be made against Wiscy vs Bama in 2017
Yep there are other factors you can look at but every year the committee seems to point to certain facts that some how become important. We have heard conference champs matter, bad losses matter, the eye test matters.
We pretty much hear the exact same talking points that ESPN spews.
Here what we do know that are facts. The SEC has gotten the benefit of the doubt ever single time.
100% of SEC 1 loss teams have made the CFP
3 0f 7 42% of BIG 1 loss teams have made the CFP
What about 2018 L'S WvsRank losses
Team A 1 15,23,25 15 Team B 2 12,15,23 1,11
Team C 1 7,,12,22 unranked
Some how the committee thinks this year that a 2 loss team was better than 1 loss team that had significantly better wins played an extra game and won their conference???
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Oct 16, 2019 0:24:23 GMT
If the questions were that simple, we could run a computer program to make the selection. We tried that, most people didn't like it.
There are more factors that matter.
The problem with the BCS is that the computer component was only 1/3 of the selection process. Let met help you out on ranking all these 1 loss teams
#1 Team C 5,7,14,15 Unranked Michigan St
#2 Team A 11,16,17,23 Unranked Oklahoma #3 Team D 13 3 Iowa #4 Team E 14 3 Ohio St
#5 Team B 19,23 12 Alabama This was 2015 by the way where Alabama was rated ahead of all of these teams. Same argument could be made against Wiscy vs Bama in 2017 Yep there are other factors you can look at but every year the committee seems to point to certain facts that some how become important. We have heard conference champs matter, bad losses matter, the eye test matters.
We pretty much hear the exact same talking points that ESPN spews.
Here what we do know that are facts. The SEC has gotten the benefit of the doubt ever single time.
100% of SEC 1 loss teams have made the CFP
3 0f 7 42% of BIG 1 loss teams have made the CFP What about 2018 L'S WvsRank losses
Team A 1 15,23,25 15 Team B 2 12,15,23 1,11
Team C 1 7,,12,22 unranked
Some how the committee thinks this year that a 2 loss team was better than 1 loss team that had significantly better wins played an extra game and won their conference???
Wait.. in 2015, Michigan State, a 1-loss B1G team WAS selected. Are you saying the B1G deserved TWO teams in the CFP? Oklahoma, from your list.. was also selected. So, it was down to Ohio State, Iowa, or Bama. Iowa had JUST lost to Mich State. Why give them another shot right away? The B1G CHAMP was already selected. Ohio State COULD have been picked.. they were a very good team that year... but, they'd just lost, an uninspiring game to the eventual B1G Champ. The Committee chose to pick the Champ of the best conference... Alabama. Not all that controversial. Four P5 Champs. And, oh... by the way, your chart above is wrong. During that season, Bama beat #20, #8, #9, #2, #17 and #18 Meanwhile OSU didn't beat a ranked team until the last week of the season, #12. THAT's your argument for bias?? To quote Sleepy Joe Biden, "C'mon MAN!!!" That's weak sauce... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Ohio_State_Buckeyes_football_teamen.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Alabama_Crimson_Tide_football_team
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Oct 16, 2019 0:28:36 GMT
And. NO 2-loss team has yet to be selected. So, I don't even know what that last comment was about?
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Oct 16, 2019 0:43:35 GMT
Gee... I REALLY hate to pile one.. but, I failed to mention that that team you suggested was "undeserving" kicked the CRAP out of the B1G CHAMP... 38-0.
You really might want to look for a different topic to argue about.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Oct 16, 2019 1:43:25 GMT
The problem with the BCS is that the computer component was only 1/3 of the selection process. Let met help you out on ranking all these 1 loss teams
#1 Team C 5,7,14,15 Unranked Michigan St
#2 Team A 11,16,17,23 Unranked Oklahoma #3 Team D 13 3 Iowa #4 Team E 14 3 Ohio St
#5 Team B 19,23 12 Alabama This was 2015 by the way where Alabama was rated ahead of all of these teams. Same argument could be made against Wiscy vs Bama in 2017 Yep there are other factors you can look at but every year the committee seems to point to certain facts that some how become important. We have heard conference champs matter, bad losses matter, the eye test matters.
We pretty much hear the exact same talking points that ESPN spews.
Here what we do know that are facts. The SEC has gotten the benefit of the doubt ever single time.
100% of SEC 1 loss teams have made the CFP
3 0f 7 42% of BIG 1 loss teams have made the CFP What about 2018 L'S WvsRank losses
Team A 1 15,23,25 15 Team B 2 12,15,23 1,11
Team C 1 7,,12,22 unranked
Some how the committee thinks this year that a 2 loss team was better than 1 loss team that had significantly better wins played an extra game and won their conference???
Wait.. in 2015, Michigan State, a 1-loss B1G team WAS selected. Are you saying the B1G deserved TWO teams in the CFP? Oklahoma, from your list.. was also selected. So, it was down to Ohio State, Iowa, or Bama. Iowa had JUST lost to Mich State. Why give them another shot right away? The B1G CHAMP was already selected. Ohio State COULD have been picked.. they were a very good team that year... but, they'd just lost, an uninspiring game to the eventual B1G Champ. The Committee chose to pick the Champ of the best conference... Alabama. Not all that controversial. Four P5 Champs. And, oh... by the way, your chart above is wrong. During that season, Bama beat #20, #8, #9, #2, #17 and #18 Meanwhile OSU didn't beat a ranked team until the last week of the season, #12. THAT's your argument for bias?? To quote Sleepy Joe Biden, "C'mon MAN!!!" That's weak sauce... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Ohio_State_Buckeyes_football_teamen.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Alabama_Crimson_Tide_football_teamAre we looking for the eye test, are we lookingA for the most deserving, does confernece chamioships matter. Well that year it clearly did. And some how Bama with its weak resume was #2. BTW, not sure where you got your rankings from by mine came from the CFP rankings prior to the selection. Even you should know better then that when you bring up those numbers.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Oct 16, 2019 1:45:15 GMT
And. NO 2-loss team has yet to be selected. So, I don't even know what that last comment was about? Just goes to show you the bias of the selection process. The put a 2 loss team that could not win there own conference ahead of a one loss conference champ.
Completely inconsistent. And by the way the 2 loss team laid an egg where the one loss team was dominating.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Oct 16, 2019 3:56:02 GMT
And. NO 2-loss team has yet to be selected. So, I don't even know what that last comment was about? Just goes to show you the bias of the selection process. The put a 2 loss team that could not win there own conference ahead of a one loss conference champ.
Completely inconsistent. And by the way the 2 loss team laid an egg where the one loss team was dominating.
For the THIRD time. after the 4 are selected for the CFP, the rest of the rankings are adjusted to meet contractual, and desired matchups in Bowl Games.. so, a #5 being ahead of an #6 means NOTHING. I'm not going to explain this again. If you don't get it, I'll just assume you are too stupid, and move on
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Oct 16, 2019 4:01:26 GMT
Are we looking for the eye test, are we lookingA for the most deserving, does confernece chamioships matter. Well that year it clearly did. And some how Bama with its weak resume was #2. BTW, not sure where you got your rankings from by mine came from the CFP rankings prior to the selection. Even you should know better then that when you bring up those numbers. Bama was the CHAMP of the nation's TOP conference. They beat ranked teams ALL SEASON LONG.. that is why they were #2. And, they ended up winning it ALL, after CRUSHING the B1G Champ... 38-0. Do you understand what a BEATDOWN 38-0 is? Do you remember watching that game? Mich St NEVER had a chance.. ever. Bama could have been playing Towson. No difference. Why would you even TRY to argue that the B1G deserved more respect that year? Also.. I SHOWED you where I got the rankings from. I think it matter where teams are ranked WHEN YOU PLAY THEM.. After Bama crushes them, teams have a way of drifting DOWN the rankings.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Oct 16, 2019 14:06:29 GMT
The great guessing game of mythical national championships. Have an inclusive championship playoff (like all other sports, including champ div FB) and no guessing necessary.
Playing is better than voting
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Oct 16, 2019 15:21:13 GMT
Why would you even TRY to argue that the B1G deserved more respect that year? Also.. I SHOWED you where I got the rankings from. I think it matter where teams are ranked WHEN YOU PLAY THEM.. After Bama crushes them, teams have a way of drifting DOWN the rankings. Well the BIG is 2 - 2 in the CFP. Pretty sure the B12 is 0 for forever in the MCFP. Clearly the overall performance is respectable.
The committee does there own rankings after the last week of the season. When I put the scenarios together it was based on their own rankings and perceptions of teams. Somehow the committee puts BAMA at #2 when their best win is against #19. What MSU and OU did was far more deserving. If you don't see a bias based on these results then you are turning a blind eye to the facts.
So you really think it matters that much what the teams rankings are when you play them? You should join ESPN. When BAMA beat #3 FSU in 2017 I recall the ESPN talking heads giving credit to them for that even though they finished with a losing record. They actually credited BAMA for putting the program into a tailspin as a result of that game. In 2018 tOSU went down to Texas and beat TCU. I don't recall them getting any credit for that. In fact they went on to say that because of the poor years that TCU had, it does not help the Buckeyes in anyway.
I find it hard to believe that you can't see that there are preconceived perceptions that come into play when the selection committee does their due diligence. In 2017 when Wisconsin and Bama both had comparable best wins and Bama completely laid an egg against Auburn. That was the last memory the committee had of that team. Wiscy on the other hand went 12 - 0 in the regular season. They had the ball in the fourth quarter against the Buckeyes going for the win in the CCG. That year Wiscy was not even mentioned for consideration.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Oct 16, 2019 15:29:29 GMT
ESPN usually gets what it wants when it comes to CF's biggest extravaganza
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Oct 16, 2019 16:18:33 GMT
So you really think it matters that much what the teams rankings are when you play them? Yes... I do think it matters. When teams come into a game undefeated, highly ranked, and full of confidence? They play harder than they do after two losses, and national title hopes are dashed. Florida State imploded after playing BAMA and losing their Heisman touted QB. No one else, all year, played the same FSU team that Bama beat. My recollection of the OSU-TCU game was quite different. I think Ohio State got plenty of credit for that impressive win. I guess we'll never agree... because, NO.. I absolutely do NOT see bias against the B1G, or for the SEC. I see bias towards picking the BEST teams. There have been only a couple of close calls... The B1G has been on the losing end of a couple of those. But, it's been mostly due to bad luck, or bad losses. I think it'll even out over time.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Oct 16, 2019 19:10:14 GMT
Just goes to show you the bias of the selection process. The put a 2 loss team that could not win there own conference ahead of a one loss conference champ.
Completely inconsistent. And by the way the 2 loss team laid an egg where the one loss team was dominating.
For the THIRD time. after the 4 are selected for the CFP, the rest of the rankings are adjusted to meet contractual, and desired matchups in Bowl Games.. so, a #5 being ahead of an #6 means NOTHING.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Oct 17, 2019 13:43:48 GMT
The great guessing game of mythical national championships. Have an inclusive championship playoff (like all other sports, including champ div FB) and no guessing necessary. Playing is better than voting Clemson has its best performance of the year, and they drop from #2 to #3 in the AP. Which is fine, the AP poll means nothing much....LSU has a far better resume (wins over Texas and Florida). The $64,000 question is why they didn’t also jump Alabama on the same reasoning???
|
|