Author
Topic: NCAA
(Read 9121 times)

OrangeAfroMan · « **Reply #294 on:** February 21, 2024, 03:01:55 AM »

This either one thing OR the other nonsense is stupid. It's not solely either. It's both. It's all of it.
And I can't believe my eyes when someone acts like TCU's 1-point win over UM and subsequent 58-pt loss to UGA supports that they belonged.

If you polled the committee members if they actually believed TCU was the 3rd-best team, out of 16, I bet fewer than 5 would admit to it. Not solely because of their roster quality, but also because of their numerous narrow wins vs non-elite teams.

I could fill a barn with all the straw-manning going on in this thread.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #295 on:** February 21, 2024, 07:11:55 AM »

So, how would you do it differently?

bayareabadger · « **Reply #296 on:** February 21, 2024, 07:35:14 AM »

Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on February 21, 2024, 03:01:55 AM

This either one thing OR the other nonsense is stupid. It's not solely either. It's both. It's all of it.
And I can't believe my eyes when someone acts like TCU's 1-point win over UM and subsequent 58-pt loss to UGA supports that they belonged.

If you polled the committee members if they actually believed TCU was the 3rd-best team, out of 16, I bet fewer than 5 would admit to it. Not solely because of their roster quality, but also because of their numerous narrow wins vs non-elite teams.

I could fill a barn with all the straw-manning going on in this thread.

You can’t believe your eyes because TCU didn’t win by 1. So you didn’t see that as all.

(I must admire the bit when getting spun up about basically the most nonsensical part of a sport with polls. “They just lost, WHY DON’T THE DROP?!?” It’s maybe the most flawed and least intelligent way to run these things)

Cincydawg · « **Reply #297 on:** February 21, 2024, 07:47:23 AM »

There's an old joke about a mother who goes to her son's graduation from boot camp, and as his platoon marches by, she says "LOOK! My son is the only one marching in step!!!".

Not much of a joke really.

We have a "System". I think we all agree it's flawed at times. So would every other "system" be anyone might propose. Use computers? Use Vegas lines? Use a committee? Use the AP poll? Whatever, all would have flaws.

The TCU example is pulling one weird happening out of years of debateably reasonably choices.

FearlessF · « **Reply #298 on:** February 21, 2024, 08:19:11 AM »

Every previous system has been trashed because sooner or later it's pulled a weird result that some folks didn't like

MaximumSam · « **Reply #299 on:** February 21, 2024, 08:39:04 AM »

Fourth graders can't understand that a team that loses must drop no matter if it makes sense or not

Cincydawg · « **Reply #300 on:** February 21, 2024, 08:49:35 AM »

ANY system will have flaws, it's inherent. That's why we don't see suggestions here for something better.

utee94 · « **Reply #301 on:** February 21, 2024, 09:20:17 AM »

Quote from: Cincydawg on February 21, 2024, 08:49:35 AM

ANY system will have flaws, it's inherent. That's why we don't see suggestions here for something better.

It's no different than the "I hate the NCAA tear it down" cabal.

That's fine, but there is going to be SOME governing body, and since it will have the same charter as the NCAA, it's still going to look and act pretty much like the NCAA.

The king is dead, long live the king.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #302 on:** February 21, 2024, 09:31:32 AM »

Sure, and that's why I avoid complaining (usually) unless I have what I think could be a better idea.

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #303 on:** February 21, 2024, 10:11:03 AM »

Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on February 21, 2024, 03:01:55 AM

This either one thing OR the other nonsense is stupid. It's not solely either. It's both. It's all of it.
And I can't believe my eyes when someone acts like TCU's 1-point win over UM and subsequent 58-pt loss to UGA supports that they belonged.

If you polled the committee members if they actually believed TCU was the 3rd-best team, out of 16, I bet fewer than 5 would admit to it. Not solely because of their roster quality, but also because of their numerous narrow wins vs non-elite teams.

I could fill a barn with all the straw-manning going on in this thread.

I actually don't give a crap about TCU. I just like watching you twist.

I think there are two decent ways to select a national champion.

Vote using polls at the end of the year. Bowl games intact, no attempt at finishing the year with a "1 vs 2" matchup. Just lean into the fact that it's all a beauty pageant and let it be. Let CFB be the unique and beautiful thing that it is, and stop trying to make a playoff happen.
An objective playoff that gives teams a reasonable understanding before the season what it takes to get in via a purely objective path. Purely objective would include all conference champs, but that leads to a too-large playoff and includes too many midgets. I like the 8-team 5+3 model where it's the top 5 conference champs and 3 at-large.

I prefer we actually go back to #1. But it seems that the CFB world wants a playoff. So if we must, I'd prefer #2.

Some years, that means a P4 team will go 1-2 OOC, go 8-1 in conference, win the CCG to finish 10-3, and then make the playoff as a (gasp!!!) 3-loss team. Maybe even 2 of those 3 losses are even "bad losses". I know... Ew. Gross. But it's better than the sh!t we've had since the BCS started in 1997.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #304 on:** February 21, 2024, 10:13:41 AM »

How would you choose the 3 at large?

We only have 4 power conferences now, but you include one "G5" which seems like a legal requirement today.

There is too much money at 12 to return to a more sensible 8 or 6, or the previous bowl system.

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #305 on:** February 21, 2024, 10:25:16 AM »

Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on February 21, 2024, 03:01:55 AM

If you polled the committee members if they actually believed TCU was the 3rd-best team, out of 16, I bet fewer than 5 would admit to it.

But here's the bit of why people needle you on this...

The CFP committee is made up of legitimate college football "experts". People who have spent much of their adult lives as part of the sport. People whose combined decades of experience is a multiple of your lifespan. And it's set up as a committee to ensure that multiple competing voices are heard and the rankings they end up with are a consensus of the group's expertise and opinion.

You've never played nor coached college football. This isn't a criticism, but your adult life has been spent as a schoolteacher. Your expertise regarding college football is that of being an interested fan, the creator of a college football historically-based board game, and arguing with yahoos like us on the internet.

So the CFP, a group of legitimate experts, comes to the conclusion that TCU is the #3 team in the country, despite a loss. And you, a yahoo on the internet, say: "Well, I know better! They're so obviously wrong and stupid! Why doesn't everyone listen to me?"

Which is why I say that it's all just a beauty pageant, and you're pissed off that they don't share your aesthetic taste.

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #306 on:** February 21, 2024, 10:34:32 AM »

Quote from: Cincydawg on February 21, 2024, 10:13:41 AM

How would you choose the 3 at large?

We only have 4 power conferences now, but you include one "G5" which seems like a legal requirement today.

Let the committee do it.

That's the thing with the 5 conf champs as well. The one non-objective problem there is that you have limited spots and too many conferences, and if you base it on ranking a P4 conference champ could still be excluded. So assume there's a conference is still based on division winners facing each other, and has 8 conference games. There's a tiny chance you might have a team that goes 0-4 OOC, barely squeaks by into the CCG in the weaker division at 6-2 via tiebreaker, faces a weaker-than-expected division winner from the other side and wins, to become a P4 conference champ at 7-6. A slightly more extreme example of the 2010 UConn situation. At that point there's a more than even chance IMHO that there will be at least 2 G5 conference champs ranked higher. There's also a larger chance you might have two undefeated G5 conference champs and a weaker P4 conference champ (say at 10-3 with a solid but not stellar resume, and at least one "bad loss") that gets edged out.

But we have a history of the sport based on the beauty pageant. I think a 5+3 model is a compromise between near-objectivity, i.e. the P4 conference champs will always or almost always be included, and the beauty pageant for the at-large selections.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #307 on:** February 21, 2024, 10:39:19 AM »

I'd be fine with 5+3, or even 5+1, or whatever else really. But we're at 12, and I can deal with it I reckon, having no real choice in the matter.

It's all a bit like Olympic diving etc.

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: NCAA

OrangeAfroMan

Re: NCAA

Cincydawg

Re: NCAA

bayareabadger

Re: NCAA

Cincydawg

Re: NCAA

FearlessF

Re: NCAA

MaximumSam

Re: NCAA

Cincydawg

Re: NCAA

utee94

Re: NCAA

Cincydawg

Re: NCAA

betarhoalphadelta

Re: NCAA

Cincydawg

Re: NCAA

betarhoalphadelta

Re: NCAA

betarhoalphadelta

Re: NCAA

Cincydawg

Re: NCAA