|
|
Post by doc on Nov 10, 2021 15:22:26 GMT
a professor from Arizona State University. What her credentials to be part of the selection committee are I have no idea. Anyway, their job is to identify the top 4 teams to make the college football playoff. They have total control and their rankings are constructed to justify their top 4, no matter the contradictions and inconsistencies. Criteria for team A doesn't necessarily apply to team B. At the end of the day the committee is going to sit in that room and come up with a narrative to support how the teams are ranked.
I'm not here to say that Georgia doesn't deserve to be #1, they've clearly been the most impressive team. And I'm not going to argue that Alabama isn't one of the top 4 teams in the country - in fact, if I had to bet my house and Alabama is playing any team but Georgia, I'll take the Crimson Tide. Based on head to head, Oregon deserves to be ahead of Ohio State. But there are so many inconsistencies and noticeable omissions that make you say, they know how they want this to play out and we have to make our rankings accordingly to assure that what we want has the best possible chance of occurring.
Problem is, you're dealing with 18-22 year old kids and they don't always follow script. I'll predict that 2 or 3 of the current final 4 will lose and then the committee will be scrambling to come up with a ranking to keep Cincinnati out of the playoff. Oklahoma will miraculously jump from 8 to top 4. Michigan or MSU will leap frog the Bearcats. Heck, Notre Dame, who plays nobody and has a loss to UC could pass them in the end. If Bama loses you could see the first 2 loss team to make the playoff. 13 people control this entire thing and they're going to do all they can to make sure their right 4 gets in. As long as there's going to be a #5, there will always be questions about who gets in. First year it was TCU, OSU was 12-1 and got shut out by a non conference champ, last year it was A+M. But in each instance they came up with a narrative as to why - regardless of the contradictions - not only in the end but from week to week.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Nov 10, 2021 15:49:17 GMT
Did a 'selection committee' vote the Atlanta Braves an opportunity to compete for a championship ? Was the Braves' NL East title 'opinionated' or factual by 'standings ? Standings are better than rankings Playing is better than voting I'm glad the mythical bullshit system is relegated to only one team sport on Earth.
A genuine inclusive playoff solves it all.
|
|
|
|
Post by EvilVodka on Nov 10, 2021 19:02:37 GMT
a professor from Arizona State University. What her credentials to be part of the selection committee are I have no idea. Anyway, their job is to identify the top 4 teams to make the college football playoff. They have total control and their rankings are constructed to justify their top 4, no matter the contradictions and inconsistencies. Criteria for team A doesn't necessarily apply to team B. At the end of the day the committee is going to sit in that room and come up with a narrative to support how the teams are ranked.
I'm not here to say that Georgia doesn't deserve to be #1, they've clearly been the most impressive team. And I'm not going to argue that Alabama isn't one of the top 4 teams in the country - in fact, if I had to bet my house and Alabama is playing any team but Georgia, I'll take the Crimson Tide. Based on head to head, Oregon deserves to be ahead of Ohio State. But there are so many inconsistencies and noticeable omissions that make you say, they know how they want this to play out and we have to make our rankings accordingly to assure that what we want has the best possible chance of occurring.
Problem is, you're dealing with 18-22 year old kids and they don't always follow script. I'll predict that 2 or 3 of the current final 4 will lose and then the committee will be scrambling to come up with a ranking to keep Cincinnati out of the playoff. Oklahoma will miraculously jump from 8 to top 4. Michigan or MSU will leap frog the Bearcats. Heck, Notre Dame, who plays nobody and has a loss to UC could pass them in the end. If Bama loses you could see the first 2 loss team to make the playoff. 13 people control this entire thing and they're going to do all they can to make sure their right 4 gets in. As long as there's going to be a #5, there will always be questions about who gets in. First year it was TCU, OSU was 12-1 and got shut out by a non conference champ, last year it was A+M. But in each instance they came up with a narrative as to why - regardless of the contradictions - not only in the end but from week to week.
Great summary of the problem with the committee
|
|
|
|
Post by aufan on Nov 10, 2021 23:05:57 GMT
I love it. The more ridiculous and controversial the committee is, the faster we get to a real playoff.
|
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Nov 11, 2021 15:54:02 GMT
You nailed that one. So head to head is the difference maker for Ohio State and Oregon but it does not apply to the Wolverines and the Spartans?
The case for Alabama number 2 is pretty weak. Ohio State and Alabama wins are comparable when you look at the records of the teams (not including FCS opponents) Ohio St closest win was a 9 point game. Alabama has 2 wins by less than a TD against teams with losing records.
So last week a 3 loss Miss St was not only ranked but in the top 20 of the CFP. They lost and dropped out. Penn St with 3 losses with wins over Wiscy and Auburn still not ranked but somehow Arkansas with 3 losses is?
I guess using there own CFP rankings BAMA has a better record against teams that are ranked.
Nevermind this all now makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by doc on Nov 11, 2021 16:54:44 GMT
As I said, their rankings are set up to validate their Top 4. Problem is every one sees that and can poke holes in their logic. Obviously they're going to rank Arkansas in hopes they beat LSU so Alabama can play another top 25 match-up. Baylor loses to TCU but doesn't even drop while SMU, with the same record and a win over TCU is unranked. Maybe they don't rank SMU becasue they just lost to Memphis with a 5-4 record - fine. Guess who else lost to Memphis; the committee's #15 team Ole Miss. Staying with the AAC, Houston at 8-1 also isn't ranked. This is significant because SMU and Houston are the big games remaining on Cincinnati's schedule which means they currently have no shot at picking up another top 25 win.
Baylor doesn't drop because they have Oklahoma coming up and the Sooners need a win over a top 25 team so they can eventually leap frog UC.
The one I find most amusing is their handling of Penn State. The Nittany Lions are 6-3 with 2 top 25 wins. 2 of their 3 losses are to teams that were/are top 5 opponents in Iowa and Ohio State. They lost to Illinois IN 9 OT'S when their QB was severely limited due to injury. So that loss to the Illini, which clearly was aided by the QB injury, trumps 2 top 25 wins and 2 close losses to top 5 teams?
Oregon is ahead of Ohio State due to head to head which is more than fair. Michigan lost to MSU less than 2 weeks ago in a game where they blew a 30-14 lead and they're a spot ahead of the Spartans.
All you want is consistency and fairness but as I said in the original post, it appears there's a set criteria for each team.
|
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Nov 11, 2021 20:49:52 GMT
Ranking of 3 loss teams from the SEC and the BIG.
Massey (Compilation of about 70 polls)
#10 Wiscy
#16 Penn St
#18 Auburn
#22 Purdue
CFP Rankings
#17 Auburn
#18 Wiscy
#19 Purdue
#25 Arkansas
|
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Nov 11, 2021 21:37:32 GMT
Ranking of 3 loss teams from the SEC and the BIG. Massey (Compilation of about 70 polls) #10 Wiscy #16 Penn St #18 Auburn #22 Purdue CFP Rankings #17 Auburn #18 Wiscy #19 Purdue #25 Arkansas Very nice point. What else do you expect from an ESECPN influenced operation (CFP) ? |
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Nov 11, 2021 21:39:24 GMT
I love it. The more ridiculous and controversial the committee is, the faster we get to a real playoff. fully agree |
|
