Author
Topic: 5+1+2 Model
(Read 11632 times)

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #56 on:** December 07, 2021, 02:57:50 PM »

Quote from: Brutus Buckeye on December 07, 2021, 02:42:43 PM

FTR, Cincy, Houston and UCF are all joining the Big 12 along with BYU

Oh. Well that changes everything.

The Big 12 will be the P1, and everyone else will be the G9, with those additions

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #57 on:** December 07, 2021, 03:20:38 PM »

Quote from: rolltidefan on December 07, 2021, 02:10:08 PM

cool, so we're only concerned about a single competition, not the 12 others during the season?

No, that isn't what we are saying.

Let me just clarify that I generally agree with you and I'm a fan of a helmet team like yours that has in the past (like yours) gotten a CFP bid in spite of not winning their conference because most people (or at least most of the committee) believe that they were the best team from their league despite not winning it. I firmly believe that Bama in the kick-6 year and tOSU in the loss to PSU year WERE the best teams from their conferences.

What I am saying, and I believe @utee94 and others as well is that winning your (P5) league gets you a guaranteed berth. If you DO NOT win your league then you leave yourself at the mercy of the committee. The committee is going to be faced with differing circumstances. Sometimes there will be an extreme dearth of quality non-champions in which case your very good non-champion (Bama kick-6, tOSU loss to PSU) team will easily get in. Other years Notre Dame will go undefeated or 11-1 and/or there will be a CG upset or two and/or there will be teams like the aforementioned Bama and tOSU squads that miss their CG due to a close loss but end up 11-1. In those years your team *MIGHT* not get in. I'm ok with that because once you don't win your championship well, whatever happens happens and sometimes you will not like it and sometimes I will not like it. That is ok with me.

By having two at-large spots the absolute highest ranked team that could POSSIBLY be left out is #3 and a few years ago #3 was automatically left out as a matter of course. Even that would take a ridiculous outlier year where the top-3 teams were non-champions.

To put this in perspective, the highest ranked teams left out over the eight years of the CFP would have been:

#8, 10-2 MSU in 2014: They lost to tOSU at home by two scores and to Oregon on the road by three scores. Both tOSU and Oregon would have been included and we already saw MSU against playoff caliber teams, they lost both times.
#8, 10-2 Notre Dame in 2015: They lost at Clemson and at Stanford by two points each. Both Clemson and Stanford would have been included and we already saw ND against playoff caliber teams, they lost both times. To be fair, both were close losses on the road but the flip side of that is Notre Dame's best win was . . . Temple? In reality they got slated into the Fiesta Bowl against an Ohio State team that would have been in the hypothetical 8-team playoff and the Irish got drilled.
#8 10-3 Wisconsin in 2016: They lost at Michigan by a TD, at home to Ohio State by a TD, and in the B1GCG to PSU by a TD. All three of those teams would have made the playoff and we already saw Wisconsin against playoff caliber teams, they lost all three times.
#7, 10-3 Auburn in 2017: They lost at Clemson by eight, at LSU by four, and to UGA in the SECCG by 21. Clemson, Georgia, and Bama would all have been in the hypothetical 8-team playoff that year and Auburn went 1-2 against them. That and the extra loss to a good but not great LSU team simply isn't enough. If they'd have gone 2-1 against playoff caliber teams or beaten LSU they'd have been in.
#7 10-2 Michigan in 2018: They lost at Notre Dame by a TD and got drilled in Columbus 62-39. Both ND and tOSU would have been in the 8-team playoff that year and we already saw Michigan against playoff caliber teams, they lost both times. Medinabuckeye is fine with this exclusion, LoL.
#8, 10-3 Wisconsin in 2019: They lost at Ohio State by 31 points then lost to tOSU again in the B1GCG by two scores and they also lost on the road to a bad Illinois team by a point. Thus they were 0-2 against playoff caliber teams with an additional bad loss.
#7, 8-3 Florida in 2020: They lost at aTm by a FG, at home to a .500 LSU team by a FG, and in the SECCG to Bama by six points. aTm and Bama both would have been in the playoff so again, we already saw how UF did against playoff caliber teams, they went 0-2 with an additional bad loss.
#6, 10-2 Ohio State in 2021: They lost at home to Oregon by a TD and on the road to Michigan by 15. Oregon wouldn't be a playoff team so these Buckeyes were 0-1 against 8-team playoff teams with an additional loss. As an Ohio State fan I don't like it and I would feel unlucky that Notre Dame happened to have a good record this year AND the SEC produced two 1-loss teams but this record isn't good enough that I'd have much of a complaint. If the Buckeyes had won either of the games that they lost they'd easily be ranked ahead of Notre Dame (and possibly Georgia also) and in the 8-team playoff) but they didn't so they are out.

If the 8-team model as I outlined it had been in effect for the last eight years the top teams left out would have been:

one team ranked #6 (21 tOSU)
three teams ranked #7 (20 UF, 18 M, 17 Auburn)
four teams ranked #8 (19 UW, 16 UW, 15 ND, 14 MSU)
four two-loss teams (21 tOSU, 18 M, 15 ND, 14 MSU
four three-loss teams (20 UF, 19 UW, 17 Auburn, 16 UW)

We are talking about leaving out two and three loss teams that are barely in the top-10 not 1-loss juggernauts that happened to have a bad day.

I realize that there is a hypothetical possibility that Notre Dame could go undefeated AND we could have two or three CG upsets all in the same year such that a really good 1-loss team could find themselves left out but that is simply the risk you take when you don't win all your games and as a fan I'd rather have a high quality 1-loss team get left out once in a while than have a bunch of two and three-loss teams get in almost EVERY year.

Brutus Buckeye · « **Reply #58 on:** December 07, 2021, 03:30:08 PM »

Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on December 07, 2021, 02:57:50 PM

Oh. Well that changes everything.

The Big 12 will be the P1, and everyone else will be the G9, with those additions

You sure do like to dunk on the new Big 12.

Medina's chart clearly shows that the new Big 12 is in better shape than the ACC and Pac 12.

Yes, adding in the number 3 and 18 teams would widen the gap.

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #59 on:** December 07, 2021, 03:43:24 PM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on December 07, 2021, 03:20:38 PM

Let me just clarify that I generally agree with you and I'm a fan of a helmet team like yours that has in the past (like yours) gotten a CFP bid in spite of not winning their conference because most people (or at least most of the committee) believe that they were the best team from their league despite not winning it. I firmly believe that Bama in the kick-6 year and tOSU in the loss to PSU year WERE the best teams from their conferences.

I appreciate the acknowledgement of [potential] motivated reasoning.

I also can't rule out the same, for the opposite reason, as a Purdue fan. I'm a fan of a team that, should we actually win a B1G CCG at some point, is more likely to finish 10-3 or 11-2, with perhaps an OOC loss and getting into the CCG based on a divisional tiebreaker. Hell, the only conference championship Purdue has managed in my lifetime is a co-championship in a 3-way tie at 6-2 in conference (finished 9-3 with OOC loss) where we got the Rose Bowl due to a 2-0 H2H2H record over the other two co-champs.

So as a fan of a non-helmet, I see that Purdue at 13-0 and B1G champs would be in, undeniably. Purdue at 12-1 and B1G champs would probably depend on who the other conference champs are, and their record, and what ND did that year, as well as who that loss was to and by how much, and who they defeated in the CCG.

So maybe I'm just arguing for an auto-bid so that I can someday root for an 11-2 Purdue team that wins the B1G getting a shot at getting trounced by a real helmet in the CPF quarterfinals

rolltidefan · « **Reply #60 on:** December 07, 2021, 04:05:59 PM »

Quote from: utee94 on December 07, 2021, 02:41:06 PM

8-9 of those 12 others determine who gets into the conference championship game.

And the CCGs are just another level of playoff.

It baffles me that people who are okay with the idea of a playoff in general-- where we know the preconceived "best" team doesn't always win-- balk and scream bloody murder at the thought of a team that wins its CCG (which is just another playoff game) should then advance to the next level of competition. It's remarkably inconsistent.

So yeah, I'm absolutely good with the position I continue to hold. 100% golden.

5-6 of those other 12, not 8-9, sans the bigxii. divisions.

and the ccg are absolutely not playoffs games.

i'm fine with the cfp when the best team might not win because there's no way to actually know who is the best team with the extremely limited crossover games. even with a ton of crossover, it's near impossible if not actually impossible.

but those that are in the playoff should actually be in consideration of being the best that season.

what i find baffling is people that bitch and moan about a team not winning their conference getting a "second chance", but have no qualms with a team who only won barely half their games over the course of the season.

again, i'm fine with (prefer actually) a guarantee for conf champs, provided the meet some other criteria as well. something like be in top 10/12, have won at least >75 or 80? of games. doesn't have to be those, but something similar to keep out teams that are completely undeserving. they're barely deserving of a bowl game and 25 years ago probably wouldn't have got one. but now they're in the cfp? no thanks.

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #61 on:** December 07, 2021, 04:09:22 PM »

Quote from: Brutus Buckeye on December 07, 2021, 03:30:08 PM

You sure do like to dunk on the new Big 12.

Medina's chart clearly shows that the new Big 12 is in better shape than the ACC and Pac 12.

Yes, adding in the number 3 and 18 teams would widen the gap.

It's not about liking it. It's about objectively looking at the stability of their situation and responding to their legitimate issues.

Six members have now departed in the last decade for greener pastures at other "P5" conferences, which in no case were really considered lateral moves.

Three of those six members were undoubtedly "helmet" teams, much higher in national perception than anyone who remained.

Six schools are being [or have been] brought in to replace those who left. Arguably the only of those six schools that have any national relevance are West Virginia and BYU. You can make an argument that those schools might be similar in stature to Colorado/Mizzou, and probably below A&M. The remaining 4 schools, TCU, UCF, Cincinnati, and Houston are purely to add numbers.

The Big 12 now has, probably, 3 desirable properties for other conferences. Kansas, BYU, and West Virginia. West Virginia would leave in an instant if they got an ACC invite to pair with ND and go to 16. Kansas I'm sure would come to the B1G in an instant if they got an invite, to pair with ND or someone else and go to 16. BYU is in a weird situation where they'd probably only fit in the PAC otherwise, and I don't think they want to be there, so it's questionable.

My view of the new B12 is that it's a temporary holding pen until the next round of conference realignment. The conference may argue it's in great shape, but what do you think the schools who remain would do if they got invites to one of the four other P5 conferences?

I think if half your conference--the best half--departs in a decade for other "P" conferences, can you really continue considering yourself anything other than a "G" at that point?

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #62 on:** December 07, 2021, 04:13:01 PM »

Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on December 07, 2021, 03:43:24 PM

I appreciate the acknowledgement of [potential] motivated reasoning.

I also can't rule out the same, for the opposite reason, as a Purdue fan. I'm a fan of a team that, should we actually win a B1G CCG at some point, is more likely to finish 10-3 or 11-2, with perhaps an OOC loss and getting into the CCG based on a divisional tiebreaker. Hell, the only conference championship Purdue has managed in my lifetime is a co-championship in a 3-way tie at 6-2 in conference (finished 9-3 with OOC loss) where we got the Rose Bowl due to a 2-0 H2H2H record over the other two co-champs.

So as a fan of a non-helmet, I see that Purdue at 13-0 and B1G champs would be in, undeniably. Purdue at 12-1 and B1G champs would probably depend on who the other conference champs are, and their record, and what ND did that year, as well as who that loss was to and by how much, and who they defeated in the CCG.

So maybe I'm just arguing for an auto-bid so that I can someday root for an 11-2 Purdue team that wins the B1G getting a shot at getting trounced by a real helmet in the CPF quarterfinals

Upthread you mentioned that you felt like if PU were in the new (without OU/TX) B12 you would think they would be able to contend in a good year unlike in the B1G where they just aren't realistically going to have the athletes that tOSU, M, and PSU have.

Basically in the B1G what PU needs to win a title is all of the following to happen in the same year:

To have a REALLY good year themselves, and
For at least one and probably two of tOSU/M/PSU to have an off year, and
To pull off the upset against the remaining helmet team(s).

Looking at their 2000 Championship:

PU had a really good year. They went 8-3 in the regular season with a close road loss to ND and league losses to PSU and MSU (both under .500 teams but both on the road) and the Boilermakers got wins over Michigan and Ohio State.
PSU was sub .500. They did still beat the Boilermakers but it didn't hurt PU's league title ambitions because PSU wasn't close enough for that to be a tiebreaker. Ohio State was just 8-3 with losses to MN and M in addition to PU. Michigan wasn't exactly a juggernaut with losses to a .500 UCLA team and Northwester in addition to PU.
Purdue did beat both tOSU and M which one could argue were better teams.

Looking at their 1967 Championship:

PU had a really good year (much better than 2000). They beat a good ND team OOC, beat aTm OOC, and drilled tOSU in Columbus.
PSU wasn't in the league yet, Michigan was in their pre-Bo not very goodness (and PU missed them on the schedule) and tOSU had an off year (by tOSU standards).
PU did beat tOSU and it really wasn't even an upset. Actually, the next year tOSU beating PU was an upset at gametime.

Any one of those three happening isn't terribly unlikely in any given year but all three in the same year, well PU has won one title in the last 54 years (1968-2021), two in the last 69 years (1953-2021), three in the last 78 years (1944-2021), and four in the last 89 years (1933-2021). Prior to that they won three in the four years from 1929-1932. That works out to one title every roughly 26-54 years so it is basically a generational thing. I guess that is why I'm not overly worried about letting in a bad P5 Champion. If Purdue has a great year in 2022 and two out of tOSU/M/PSU are down and PU knocks off the other one in the CG but finishes 10-3 with a couple conference losses and an OOC loss to ND, I'd let them in and if it cost a REALLY good 11-1 tOSU or M squad a spot well, don't get upset in the CG.

Mdot21 · « **Reply #63 on:** December 07, 2021, 04:14:32 PM »

I pray to god the B1G never adds Kansas. Would be a stupid move and disgusting addition to what is still and always will be primarily a football conference.

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #64 on:** December 07, 2021, 04:15:55 PM »

Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on December 07, 2021, 04:09:22 PM

BYU is in a weird situation where they'd probably only fit in the PAC otherwise, and I don't think they want to be there, so it's questionable.

Geographically yes, culturally/politically, NO.

rolltidefan · « **Reply #65 on:** December 07, 2021, 04:15:56 PM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on December 07, 2021, 03:20:38 PM

No, that isn't what we are saying.

deleted most to save space

it's cool that you're ok with that. i'm just not. but boiling it down to ccg win and you're in, it's essentially ignoring the remainder of the season.

and, again, using the updated 2018 hypothetical, we were 1 pitt upset away from not having to choose from 2 11-1 clemson, 12-0 notre dame, and seccg runner up. plus a couple others with good seasons that didn't make the ccg.

rolltidefan · « **Reply #66 on:** December 07, 2021, 04:18:17 PM »

Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on December 07, 2021, 03:43:24 PM

I appreciate the acknowledgement of [potential] motivated reasoning.

I also can't rule out the same, for the opposite reason, as a Purdue fan. I'm a fan of a team that, should we actually win a B1G CCG at some point, is more likely to finish 10-3 or 11-2, with perhaps an OOC loss and getting into the CCG based on a divisional tiebreaker. Hell, the only conference championship Purdue has managed in my lifetime is a co-championship in a 3-way tie at 6-2 in conference (finished 9-3 with OOC loss) where we got the Rose Bowl due to a 2-0 H2H2H record over the other two co-champs.

So as a fan of a non-helmet, I see that Purdue at 13-0 and B1G champs would be in, undeniably. Purdue at 12-1 and B1G champs would probably depend on who the other conference champs are, and their record, and what ND did that year, as well as who that loss was to and by how much, and who they defeated in the CCG.

So maybe I'm just arguing for an auto-bid so that I can someday root for an 11-2 Purdue team that wins the B1G getting a shot at getting trounced by a real helmet in the CPF quarterfinals

based on my preferred method (conf champs guaranteed if in top 10/12) an 11-2 purdue b1g champ will certainly be in guaranteed. 10-3 is a decent chance as well. or guaranteed if the caveat is win% >.75 or something. i'm good with that too.

Mdot21 · « **Reply #67 on:** December 07, 2021, 04:18:51 PM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on December 07, 2021, 04:15:55 PM

Geographically yes, culturally/politically, NO.

they are a bunch of weird ass mormons. they don't fit in culturally/politically anywhere.

utee94 · « **Reply #68 on:** December 07, 2021, 04:23:38 PM »

Quote from: rolltidefan on December 07, 2021, 04:05:59 PM

5-6 of those other 12, not 8-9, sans the bigxii. divisions.

Overall record matters, not just divisional record. It's counted into tie-breakers in numerous different ways, depending on conference.

Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on December 07, 2021, 04:09:22 PM

I think if half your conference--the best half--departs in a decade for other "P" conferences, can you really continue considering yourself anything other than a "G" at that point?

If you're still better than both the ACC and the PAC, then, yes. Of course. Quite obviously.

Why would you be looking at history rather than current level of play? The B12 has been significantly better than both the PAC and the ACC over the past decade, and the new B12 will still be better than both the PAC and the ACC. I think you're considering oddly irrelevant criteria for establishing the relative quality or importance of conferences. Not sure why you'd do that. It seems oddly illogical of you, when you're reasonable on most other issues.

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #69 on:** December 07, 2021, 04:24:52 PM »

Quote from: rolltidefan on December 07, 2021, 04:15:56 PM

it's cool that you're ok with that. i'm just not. but boiling it down to ccg win and you're in, it's essentially ignoring the remainder of the season.

and, again, using the updated 2018 hypothetical, we were 1 pitt upset away from not having to choose from 2 11-1 clemson, 12-0 notre dame, and seccg runner up. plus a couple others with good seasons that didn't make the ccg.

Yeah, but you keep bringing up hypotheticals based on past divisional winners who, predictably, got beat in the CCG.

Having a CCG makes it much less likely that any of these teams will actually pull off that hypothetical upset. It can happen, sure... But will it happen often enough to be anything more than a once every half-decade outlier?

Quote from: Mdot21 on December 07, 2021, 04:18:51 PM

they are a bunch of weird ass mormons. they don't fit in culturally/politically anywhere.

Probably not, but I'd argue they fit better culturally/politically in Texas, Oklahoma, Iowa and Kansas than they do in Washington, Oregon, Colorado and California. (I leave out Arizona because they're their own particularly brand of weird, unlike the rest of the PAC or B12).

I mean, say what you will about the tenets of Brigham Young, Dude, at least it's an ethos.

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.

Topic: 5+1+2 Model

betarhoalphadelta

Re: 5+1+2 Model

medinabuckeye1

Re: 5+1+2 Model

Brutus Buckeye

Re: 5+1+2 Model

betarhoalphadelta

Re: 5+1+2 Model

rolltidefan

Re: 5+1+2 Model

betarhoalphadelta

Re: 5+1+2 Model

medinabuckeye1

Re: 5+1+2 Model

Mdot21

Re: 5+1+2 Model

medinabuckeye1

Re: 5+1+2 Model

rolltidefan

Re: 5+1+2 Model

rolltidefan

Re: 5+1+2 Model

Mdot21

Re: 5+1+2 Model

utee94

Re: 5+1+2 Model

betarhoalphadelta

Re: 5+1+2 Model