header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 17   Go Down
Author

Topic: 5+1+2

 (Read 29178 times)

TyphonInc

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2006
  • Easily Amused
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #56 on: December 03, 2018, 01:21:14 PM »
Quote from: MrNubbz on December 03, 2018, 12:39:58 PM
Hey tOSU lost to Purdue - isn't that the same?   ;D
Purdue is easily better than 94% of FCS. It's Not the same at all. 
Logged

TyphonInc

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2006
  • Easily Amused
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #57 on: December 03, 2018, 01:23:16 PM »
Quote from: NorthernOhioBuckeye on December 03, 2018, 09:29:51 AM
I looked at your model and could get behind it. However, my goal would be to completely remove the subjective nature of selecting any team to be in the conference. Simply win your conference and you're in. Everyone would know the criteria before the first kickoff of the season. You control your own destiny and are not at the mercy of a group of people that are not with you day in and day out at practice.
Thank you. You do acknowledge that a fair amount of time there is going to be teams in that setting that is obviously a step or 2 below other champions?
Logged

TyphonInc

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2006
  • Easily Amused
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #58 on: December 03, 2018, 01:33:30 PM »
Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on December 03, 2018, 01:00:29 PM
1 - I haven't harped that the SEC deserves more.  I'm merely saying that 2 of the top 4 or 6 teams may very well come from the same conference (any conference).
2 - If UGA had gotten in over OSU, I would've thought it was messed up, like you.
3 - All of this is merely opinion...why would anyone (myself included) think otherwise?
1- But you typically state that it's the SEC deserving that 2nd, or 3rd bid. Even when presented with evidence that another team is just as deserving. And we have have already seen the SEC offering.
2 - But the committee ranked them higher??? And perhaps I misread your previous post I thought you where campaigning Georgia inclusion due to Virtual Vegas odds makers?
3 - Perhaps it writing style? You leave out those qualifying words like "I think" or "In my Opinion" so when you take a hard line stance I (and others) often read as an OAM fact. and you are right, these are merely our opinions.
Logged

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 82801
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #59 on: December 03, 2018, 01:42:10 PM »
1. The playoff is not going to change any time soon, probably >10 years.
2.  The committee approach isn't going to change either.
3.  The fourth selection will almost always be controversial.  So would the 6th and the 8th.
4.  I bet if we had 12 or so "representatives" of CFB with no obvious bias, they'd choose the same as the committee does most of the time.
5.  If the committee were all Ohio State fans, they wouldn't.
Logged

Brutus Buckeye

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12091
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #60 on: December 03, 2018, 01:46:55 PM »
I disagree that the sixth or eighth would be "as" controversial as "win your conference" would Trump any argument that a scorned team might offer up.
Logged

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 82801
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #61 on: December 03, 2018, 01:48:42 PM »
“Every combination was vetted looking at their full bodies of work, their resumes side by side," Playoff chair Rob Mullens said on Sunday. "In the end, what we decided was amongst the group of three, Oklahoma, Georgia, and Ohio State that the committee voted that no one was unequivocally better than the other. So we then leaned on the protocol. And as we leaned on the protocol, you know what those are — head-to-head, conference champions, strength of schedule, and common opponents — the vote came out that Oklahoma was No. 4, Oklahoma was No. 5, and Ohio State was No. 6.”

They leaned on protocol, and conference championships.
Logged

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 82801
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #62 on: December 03, 2018, 01:49:30 PM »
Quote from: Brutus Buckeye on December 03, 2018, 01:46:55 PM
I disagree that the sixth or eighth would be "as" controversial as "win your conference" would Trump any argument that a scorned team might offer up.
"  The fourth selection will almost always be controversial.  So would the 6th and the 8th."

Logged

betarhoalphadelta

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14536
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #63 on: December 03, 2018, 02:23:32 PM »
Quote from: TyphonInc on December 03, 2018, 01:23:16 PM
Thank you. You do acknowledge that a fair amount of time there is going to be teams in that setting that is obviously a step or 2 below other champions?
Not to answer for @NorthernOhioBuckeye -- but I acknowledge that if you auto-bid conference champions, you're probably going to get at least one CFP participant per year that isn't one of the 6 or 8 best teams in the country, yes.
I think objectivity and valuing conference championships is worth it. 
Logged

Brutus Buckeye

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12091
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #64 on: December 03, 2018, 02:30:51 PM »
Quote from: Cincydawg on December 03, 2018, 01:49:30 PM
"  The fourth selection will almost always be controversial.  So would the 6th and the 8th."


Yep. That's the comment that I'm disagreeing with. 
Leaving out conference champions is more controversial than leaving out non-conference champions. Expanding to six or eight would be inclusive of all P5 conference champions instead of leaving out at least one.
Logged

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 45593
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #65 on: December 03, 2018, 02:57:03 PM »
Quote from: Cincydawg on December 03, 2018, 01:48:42 PM
“Every combination was vetted looking at their full bodies of work, their resumes side by side," Playoff chair Rob Mullens said on Sunday. "In the end, what we decided was amongst the group of three, Oklahoma, Georgia, and Ohio State that the committee voted that no one was unequivocally better than the other. So we then leaned on the protocol. And as we leaned on the protocol, you know what those are — head-to-head, conference champions, strength of schedule, and common opponents — the vote came out that Oklahoma was No. 4, GEORGIA was No. 5, and Ohio State was No. 6.”

They leaned on protocol, and conference championships.
yup, complete BS
conference champs and SOS have nothing to do with their ranking.  Rarely does head to head or common opponents come into play, SO in the end............ there is no protocol.   It's an eye test at best and SEC bias at worst
I'm talking solely about Georgia ranked #5 over #6 Ohio St. 
Logged
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

betarhoalphadelta

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14536
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #66 on: December 03, 2018, 03:20:17 PM »
Quote from: FearlessF on December 03, 2018, 02:57:03 PM
yup, complete BS
conference champs and SOS have nothing to do with their ranking.  Rarely does head to head or common opponents come into play, SO in the end............ there is no protocol.   It's an eye test at best and SEC bias at worst
I'm talking solely about Georgia ranked #5 over #6 Ohio St.
So on which metric does Notre Dame outscore OU, UGA, or OSU? S&P favors OU, UGA, and Michigan over ND with OSU closely behind. Obviously ND has no conference championship, they don't have a head-to-head with OSU (although OSU destroyed UM while ND narrowly beat them, so at least there's a common opponent). 
Yet ND is firmly in the CFP, even though pretty much everyone knows they're a paper tiger. 
Because "0" in the loss column matters more than how good of a team you are--unless you're G5. 
Logged

betarhoalphadelta

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14536
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #67 on: December 03, 2018, 03:25:35 PM »
I don't like ESPN so much, but you look at their "advanced" rankings.

Football Power Index has ND at 7th, behind all of the teams mentioned above. 
Team Efficiency ratings has ND at 6th, behind OU, UGA, UM, just ahead of LSU at 7th and OSU at 8th.

So other than the "damn that helmet is shiny" ranking, I don't see why ND should be in the CFP. I don't think they have a case that they're one of the best 4 teams in the country. 
Logged

TyphonInc

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2006
  • Easily Amused
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #68 on: December 03, 2018, 03:32:59 PM »
Quote from: Cincydawg on December 03, 2018, 01:42:10 PM
1. The playoff is not going to change any time soon, probably >10 years.
2.  The committee approach isn't going to change either.
3.  The fourth selection will almost always be controversial.  So would the 6th and the 8th.
4.  I bet if we had 12 or so "representatives" of CFB with no obvious bias, they'd choose the same as the committee does most of the time.
5.  If the committee were all Ohio State fans, they wouldn't.
aww. did your team get left out of the playoffs? so instead of being sad, you decided to poke the fan base that has an actual complaint about getting left out. how quaint. 
Actually, I think enough of the power people don't like how this iteration of the playoffs is playing out, and I think if the next three years have this much controversy there will be a change.
Logged

medinabuckeye1

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 10629
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #69 on: December 03, 2018, 03:35:37 PM »
Quote from: MrNubbz on December 03, 2018, 08:28:57 AM
No sorry IMO more than 6 is a disaster on a couple of fronts.Fan bases picking up and traipsing all over creation isn't going to happen.1-2 games perhaps after that the ranks will thin - the travel and expense too much.Then when they start bringing the games on campus the visiting teams will cry foul.There will be no end to it.NFL bound talent will just be sitting it out as they should.All that just to satisfy the morbid craving for an amatuer No1. and to make the networks more coin.They'd be killing the goose that laid the golden egg
First, I'm saying that I think 5+1+2 will be the next iteration of the playoff, not that I want it to be.  
Second, I fail to see why eight is substantially worse than six.  Either way, some teams will potentially have three playoff games.  With eight the four quarter-final winners would have a second game and the two semi-final winners would have a third.  With six the two quarter-final winners would have a second game and the two semi-final winners would have a second (if they were top-4) or third (if they were 5/6).  I don't see it as THAT big of a difference.  
At least in theory I like the idea of letting the top-4 host the first round for two reasons:
  • It puts more emphasis on otherwise meaningless regular season games because the difference between being #4 and hosting Georgia as opposed to being #7 and travelling to Clemson is pretty significant.  

In a 5+1+1 this year the teams would be (ranked by seed):
  • #1 Alabama SEC Champion
  • #2 Clemson ACC Champion
  • #3 Notre Dame first at-large
  • #4 Oklahoma B12 Champion
  • #5 Georgia second at-large
  • #6 Ohio State B1G Champion
  • #8 UCF AAC/highest ranked G5 Champion
  • #9 Washington
Well, Michigan fans wouldn't like that.  Quarter-final match-ups with top-4 hosting would be:
  • #9 Washington at #1 Alabama
  • #8 UCF at #2 Clemson
  • #6 Ohio State at Notre Dame
  • #5 Georgia at #4 Oklahoma
Then the semi-finals would be:
  • Bama/Washington vs UGA/OU
  • Clemson/UCF vs tOSU/ND
If you reseeded to keep the two SEC teams in opposite divisions (this would suck for tOSU) the quarter-finals would be:
  • #9 Washington at #1 Alabama
  • #8 UCF at #2 Clemson
  • #5 Georiga (moved down one seed to avoid Bama's bracket) at #3 Notre Dame
  • #6 Ohio State (moved up one seed to replace UGA) at #4 Oklahoma
Then the semi-finals would be:
  • Bama/UW vs OU/tOSU
  • Clemson/UCF vs ND/UGA

The second reason I would like the top-4 to host is that in that case I think we could hold the quarter-finals in mid-December to avoid spreading out the season any further.  The semi-finals would still be around NYD and the CG would still be about a week into January.  
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 17   Go Up
« previous next »
 
Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.
Dock Signs-WeatherPROOF

USN Coat of Arms Carving/Clock