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 ... 4 5 [6] 7   Go Down
Author

Topic: 5+1+2 Model

 (Read 11633 times)

medinabuckeye1

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 10655
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #70 on: December 07, 2021, 04:35:36 PM »
Quote from: rolltidefan on December 07, 2021, 04:18:17 PM
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.
In theory I like the idea of a floor but in practice I'm not able to come up with anything that I like:
  • I don't like top 10/12 because I think that is too high of a floor.  If we are taking eight teams then it should be more like top 15 because if they WON the league that should be a bonus of more than a couple spots, I think.  
  • I don't like win 75% of games because I don't like ANYTHING that discourages tough schedules.  Look, if Purdue goes out and schedules Bama, Clemson, and Notre Dame as their OOC with two of the three on the road and goes 0-3 OOC against three top-5 teams then loses a couple B1G games (say tOSU and PSU) but wins the B1GCG by avenging one of their B1G losses they'd finish 8-5 overall but all five losses could be to top-10 teams.  That is under 75% by almost two games but those are all REALLY good losses and they'd have some REALLY good wins as well.  Hypothetically Bama, Clemson, and ND could all be undefeated while tOSU could be 12-1 (loss to PU in the CG) and Michigan could be 10-2 (losses to PU and tOSU) and PSU could be 10-2 (losses to tOSU and M).  I know it is a crazy hypothetical but for Purdue that would be:
Purdue's hypothetical record against quality opponents here:
  • 0-3 against undefeated teams, the top-three teams in the country:  Bama, Clemson, Notre Dame.  
  • 1-1 against 12-1 teams (split with tOSU)
  • 1-1 against 10-2 teams (beat M, lost to PSU)
  • 6-0 against everybody else which would almost have to include at least SOME decent teams.  

That is a crazy hypothetical but I don't want any AD at Purdue to ever think "We better stop scheduling Notre Dame because if we ever do manage to win the B1G we don't want an OOC loss to Notre Dame to keep us out of the playoff so we're going to replace them with directional Michigan."  

Logged

medinabuckeye1

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 10655
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #71 on: December 07, 2021, 04:37:25 PM »
Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on December 07, 2021, 04:24:52 PM
I mean, say what you will about the tenets of Brigham Young, Dude, at least it's an ethos.
LoL.  



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_29yvYpf4w
Logged

rolltidefan

  • Global Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 2222
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #72 on: December 07, 2021, 04:58:31 PM »
Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on December 07, 2021, 04:24:52 PM
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?
1996 4 loss texas upsets 11-1 nebraska.
2001 3 loss lsu upsets 11-1 tenn
2003 3 loss ksu upsets 12-0 ou
2005 4 loss fsu upsets va tech

for almost upsets
2018 3 loss utah 7pt game
2017 3 loss stan 3pt game
2016 3 loss va tech 7 pt game
2012 6 loss ga tech 6 pt game
2012 3 loss ucla 3 pt game
2009 4 loss clemson 3pt game
2007 3 loss tenn 7pt game

it's within 1 score from being every other year almost.

it's an odd data set. go back more than 10 years, there's only 2 confs with ccg. go back 25 years, and only 1. go back 30, and none. the "almost" is happening a lot more often, while the "actuals" go back pretty far. more frequency makes sense with increase in confs with ccg in last decade, but it's curious that the actual results didn't also follow that increased pattern.
Logged

rolltidefan

  • Global Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 2222
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #73 on: December 07, 2021, 05:02:48 PM »
Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on December 07, 2021, 04:35:36 PM
In theory I like the idea of a floor but in practice I'm not able to come up with anything that I like:
  • I don't like top 10/12 because I think that is too high of a floor.  If we are taking eight teams then it should be more like top 15 because if they WON the league that should be a bonus of more than a couple spots, I think. 
  • I don't like win 75% of games because I don't like ANYTHING that discourages tough schedules.  Look, if Purdue goes out and schedules Bama, Clemson, and Notre Dame as their OOC with two of the three on the road and goes 0-3 OOC against three top-5 teams then loses a couple B1G games (say tOSU and PSU) but wins the B1GCG by avenging one of their B1G losses they'd finish 8-5 overall but all five losses could be to top-10 teams.  That is under 75% by almost two games but those are all REALLY good losses and they'd have some REALLY good wins as well.  Hypothetically Bama, Clemson, and ND could all be undefeated while tOSU could be 12-1 (loss to PU in the CG) and Michigan could be 10-2 (losses to PU and tOSU) and PSU could be 10-2 (losses to tOSU and M).  I know it is a crazy hypothetical but for Purdue that would be:
Purdue's hypothetical record against quality opponents here:
  • 0-3 against undefeated teams, the top-three teams in the country:  Bama, Clemson, Notre Dame. 
  • 1-1 against 12-1 teams (split with tOSU)
  • 1-1 against 10-2 teams (beat M, lost to PSU)
  • 6-0 against everybody else which would almost have to include at least SOME decent teams. 

That is a crazy hypothetical but I don't want any AD at Purdue to ever think "We better stop scheduling Notre Dame because if we ever do manage to win the B1G we don't want an OOC loss to Notre Dame to keep us out of the playoff so we're going to replace them with directional Michigan." 


agree with 2nd bullet.

on first, i like 10, would be fine with 12, but would be begrudgingly ok with 15. I'm open to suggestions on the caveat, just want there to be one. and a reasonable one. not some bs like >.500 or no more than 1 loss. (i think i hit both extremes there).

and if purdue ever schedule bama, clemson and nd (or whatever future era's equivalent is), on top of the b1g schedule, then may God have mercy on their souls.
Logged

betarhoalphadelta

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14561
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #74 on: December 07, 2021, 05:20:28 PM »
Quote from: utee94 on December 07, 2021, 04:23:38 PM
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.
Because I think history predicts the future more than the current level of play. 

PAC: USC is a sleeping giant. Washington has been a traditional power and has made a CFP semi, as has Oregon [which is less traditional of a power]. Stanford has a good program, UCLA has potential in any given year, and Utah has been pretty solid in the conference. Colorado has sucked recently, but they have had national relevance in the past. 

ACC: Clemson has been a CFP mainstay. Florida State won a BCSNC the year prior to the CFP. Miami is down but trying to get back up. Vtech is down, but they had a pretty solid 20-30 year run of relevance if not greatness. Their conference stability on the basketball side underpins their football side. They at least have an identity. 

I know that I'm often derisive when it comes to helmets, but who is/are the new B12's helmet(s)? Who is going to be the standard-bearer for the conference going forward? Who is going to make it relevant? What is their history? What is their identity? What recruit is champing at the bit to go play for Oklahoma State so that they can play Houston and UCF? Why are they a conference that we need to care about? 

I'm being harsh, but that's what it is. They'll be the best of the rest when it comes to conferences, but I strongly believe that both the PAC and the ACC will have more playoff appearances and a better chance at winning the whole damn thing in the next decade than the new B12. 
Logged

utee94

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 22289
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #75 on: December 07, 2021, 05:23:18 PM »
Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on December 07, 2021, 05:20:28 PM
Because I think history predicts the future more than the current level of play.

PAC: USC is a sleeping giant. Washington has been a traditional power and has made a CFP semi, as has Oregon [which is less traditional of a power]. Stanford has a good program, UCLA has potential in any given year, and Utah has been pretty solid in the conference. Colorado has sucked recently, but they have had national relevance in the past.

ACC: Clemson has been a CFP mainstay. Florida State won a BCSNC the year prior to the CFP. Miami is down but trying to get back up. Vtech is down, but they had a pretty solid 20-30 year run of relevance if not greatness. Their conference stability on the basketball side underpins their football side. They at least have an identity.

I know that I'm often derisive when it comes to helmets, but who is/are the new B12's helmet(s)? Who is going to be the standard-bearer for the conference going forward? Who is going to make it relevant? What is their history? What is their identity? What recruit is champing at the bit to go play for Oklahoma State so that they can play Houston and UCF? Why are they a conference that we need to care about?

I'm being harsh, but that's what it is. They'll be the best of the rest when it comes to conferences, but I strongly believe that both the PAC and the ACC will have more playoff appearances and a better chance at winning the whole damn thing in the next decade than the new B12.

If they're given the extra benefits and being advantaged in the way you're requesting, sure.

On an even playing field?  Nah.  The PAC has one helmet. The ACC has zero.  And the New B12 is a better football conference top to bottom than both of them.
Logged

betarhoalphadelta

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14561
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #76 on: December 07, 2021, 05:27:10 PM »
Quote from: rolltidefan on December 07, 2021, 04:58:31 PM
1996 4 loss texas upsets 11-1 nebraska.
2001 3 loss lsu upsets 11-1 tenn
2003 3 loss ksu upsets 12-0 ou
2005 4 loss fsu upsets va tech

for almost upsets
2018 3 loss utah 7pt game
2017 3 loss stan 3pt game
2016 3 loss va tech 7 pt game
2012 6 loss ga tech 6 pt game
2012 3 loss ucla 3 pt game
2009 4 loss clemson 3pt game
2007 3 loss tenn 7pt game

it's within 1 score from being every other year almost.

it's an odd data set. go back more than 10 years, there's only 2 confs with ccg. go back 25 years, and only 1. go back 30, and none. the "almost" is happening a lot more often, while the "actuals" go back pretty far. more frequency makes sense with increase in confs with ccg in last decade, but it's curious that the actual results didn't also follow that increased pattern.
Okay, so in 25 years you've pointed to 4 upsets by a team with 3 or more losses. 

Hypothetically, it should happen more often now that more conferences have CCGs, but we haven't had a single 3-loss or worse record team pull the upset in the last 16 years. 

So sure, you can point to "almost", but close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.
Logged

Mdot21

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 16791
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #77 on: December 07, 2021, 06:04:18 PM »
Logged

rolltidefan

  • Global Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 2222
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #78 on: December 08, 2021, 09:19:17 AM »
Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on December 07, 2021, 05:27:10 PM
Okay, so in 25 years you've pointed to 4 upsets by a team with 3 or more losses.

Hypothetically, it should happen more often now that more conferences have CCGs, but we haven't had a single 3-loss or worse record team pull the upset in the last 16 years.

So sure, you can point to "almost", but close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.
just proving it's not hypothetical. it has happened and will happen again. if you guys are fine with that then cool. i'm not gonna change your mind and i doubt you'll be able to change mine.

it's probably moot anyway because they'll likely go to 12.
Logged

utee94

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 22289
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #79 on: December 08, 2021, 10:33:56 AM »
Quote from: rolltidefan on December 08, 2021, 09:19:17 AM
just proving it's not hypothetical. it has happened and will happen again. if you guys are fine with that then cool. i'm not gonna change your mind and i doubt you'll be able to change mine.

it's probably moot anyway because they'll likely go to 12.
Well, yes.  It happened 4 times in 25 years.  And not once in the past 16 years.  And never more than one of those in any given year.  And three of the teams that did it were Texas, LSU, and Florida State-- not exactly Johnny Nobody, all teams that many fans would be happy to watch in the playoffs.

So yeah, I'm 100% golden with it. You don't have to be.  But seeing that there are plenty of people okay with it, it's obviously not some doomsday scenario.  Lots of folks would be just fine with it.


Quote from: Mdot21 on December 07, 2021, 06:04:18 PM
ACC should just kill itself....pathetic...


https://twitter.com/ShehanJeyarajah/status/1468285617989689351?s=20


Yeesh.  Even without Texas or OU in the CCG, the B12 numbers doubled the PAC and tripled the ACC.  That's telling.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2021, 10:39:08 AM by utee94 »
Logged

ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 22875
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #80 on: December 08, 2021, 10:40:21 AM »
Pitt vs. Wake Forest is pretty close to worse case scenario as far as viewership for the ACC.  Wake-Duke is probably the only way it could be worse, because then you aren't even in two media markets.
Logged

utee94

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 22289
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #81 on: December 08, 2021, 10:50:56 AM »
Quote from: ELA on December 08, 2021, 10:40:21 AM
Pitt vs. Wake Forest is pretty close to worse case scenario as far as viewership for the ACC.  Wake-Duke is probably the only way it could be worse, because then you aren't even in two media markets.
I hear ya, but Stillwater, Oklahoma and Waco, TX aren't exactly massive media markets, either.

Logged

rolltidefan

  • Global Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 2222
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #82 on: December 08, 2021, 10:54:25 AM »
Quote from: utee94 on December 08, 2021, 10:33:56 AM


So yeah, I'm 100% golden with it. You don't have to be.  But seeing that there are plenty of people okay with it, it's obviously not some doomsday scenario.  Lots of folks would be just fine with it.
lots of folks are wrong, just like you. :86:
Logged

utee94

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 22289
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2 Model
« Reply #83 on: December 08, 2021, 10:55:17 AM »
Quote from: rolltidefan on December 08, 2021, 10:54:25 AM
lots of folks are wrong, just like you. :86:
Moi??? 

NEVER!!!!!!!! ;)
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7   Go Up
« previous next »
 
Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.
Custom Jeep Badges

USN Coat of Arms Carving/Clock