College Playoff Rankings

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,636
Location
Georgia
I would also expect that most of their comments and discussions are planned and / or rehearsed. Is that the case?

there are discussion points that are listed in pre-game meetings that get mentioned. The conversation is not rehearsed. ie they may decide to bring up the success of one team over the years at a position. Or more often or not what they do is relay what the coaches tell them in the friday meetings. The staff meets with the announcers on friday and tell them tidbits and keys to the game saturday and what to look for, as well as other little stats, and the crew re-iterates those during the games...often becoming the keys to the game.

The really good announcers put in alot of time analyzing a team through the week, the film etc. The ok ones or ones pressed for schedule/time...just rely alot on the friday meetings.

But most of the broadcast or all of it is not rehearsed other than opening comments....the talking points are jotted down and may or may not be discussed.

As an example...often you hear announcers say this is the spread option at GT. Paul tells them, look this is what it is...we run the triple, but its a version of the spread option...he emphasizes that with them on friday. TRUST ME, GT can help tweak the broadcast messaging.

When you get pompous announcers like pollack, who have the agenda to blatantly say you can't recruit to it, GT has to show me, the offense is a detriment....then it becomes really obvious who has the agendas and who doesn't.

For instance. Brock Huard....no agenda. Supported CPJ and GT with the messaging all broadcast. Same with Dave Archer and Tim Brando. Matt Millen loves our O. So does Charles Johnson.

Pollack. Not so much. Palmer. Not so much.

Herbstriet...a big fan...he would love to talk GT more...but we need to be 9-1 and on the radar...we never are...we screw it up for ourselves.
 

GTNavyNuke

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
9,918
Location
Williamsburg Virginia
I really don't understand why everyone is so amped up about the rankings. We win our next three (or four) and we'll get great rankings. We lose one or two or three and we'll end up between 15th and 40th.......

Till then, we've lost two - one to 4-5 UNC and to Fluke (which most people recognize is living on a weak SOS and luck (Pitt missing a chip shot at the end of the game)). Our only two wins over teams with a winning record are GSU (8-2 and a damn good team) and Miami (6-3).

Once you get of ranking the top couple, it gets so subjective.
images
 

Fatmike91

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,264
Location
SW Florida
I really don't understand why everyone is so amped up about the rankings. We win our next three (or four) and we'll get great rankings. We lose one or two or three and we'll end up between 15th and 40th.......

Till then, we've lost two - one to 4-5 UNC and to Fluke (which most people recognize is living on a weak SOS and luck (Pitt missing a chip shot at the end of the game)). Our only two wins over teams with a winning record are GSU (8-2 and a damn good team) and Miami (6-3).

Once you get of ranking the top couple, it gets so subjective.
images


Some good posts in this thread. This and 33Jacket's too.

Just keep perspective: There are only 17 teams in FBS that have 8 or more wins at this point in the season. We do. And, we beat a team that also does.

/
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,046
clearly you get my point though. I was just using her as an example. The committee is a joke.

and coaches on TV are talking heads. They know a ton about the game...they are entertainers on TV. Put them behind closed doors in a serious evaluation like this and you don't get that "fun" you do on TV.

a good buddy of mine is a ex-coach and a ESPN analyst and he says they 100% have to put in a entertain aspect to make it interesting and create conversation
So you're good buddies with Tom Luginbill?
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,636
Location
Georgia
So you're good buddies with Tom Luginbill?

was tom an ex-coach?

in other words no, and he is one analyst that I think absolutely has no clue what he is talking about; its why he is a sideline reporter too IMO.

when he does his x and o's stuff on the tv screen with other analysts he is repetition mode and over his head.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,046
A huge flaw in the system is that they weigh SoS and quality wins in their reasoning. The problem with that is that those two things are highly subjective and ultimately depend on original rankings which are based mostly on reputation/opinion.

It all boils down to preconceived notions. If the committee members have a high preconceived notion about you and your schedule, you fare a lot better than if they don't. That doesn't reflect reality and it's not fair.

The way I see it, there is no fair way to determine the best team in the nation. The best you can do is crown a champion. There's a difference. An overall champion should be decided from a list of champions, iow, the conference champions. I used to be in favor of a wild card selection, but that just brings up more 'politics'.

Just invite the winners of each conference and if you happen to be a good team that doesn't win it, you can blame yourself for not winning your conference and not random opinion.

aside: In medieval Ireland they crowned a High King. The High King was selected from the provincial kings. You had to be a king to become a king.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,046
was tom an ex-coach?

in other words no, and he is one analyst that I think absolutely has no clue what he is talking about.

when he does his x and o's stuff on the tv screen with other analysts he is repetition mode and over his head.
I should have used a smiley, sorry. ;)
 

B Lifsey

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,379
Location
Barnesville, Georgia
The way I see it, there is no fair way to determine the best team in the nation. The best you can do is crown a champion. There's a difference. An overall champion should be decided from a list of champions, iow, the conference champions.
YES!

Just invite the winners of each conference and if you happen to be a good team that doesn't win it, you can blame yourself for not winning your conference and not random opinion.
And YES!
 

DaddyBill

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
340
Location
Hahira, GA (It's near Valdosta)
If the NCAA's FCS and Divisions II and II can have 16-team plaoffs, then why can the Power-Five -plus???? Eliminate about 20 of the who-cares? bowls and line them up....eight games, four games, two games and the title game. Doesn't add that much.

What if basketball had just four teams in the champship?

I have always wondered why the top division in football can't do what all the other sports in the NCAA do...have a legitimate playoff system.
 

jeffgt14

We don't quite suck as much anymore.
Messages
5,789
Location
Mt Juliet, TN
I think 8 is enough for Football. Once you factor in the conference championship games it’s essentially like 16 anyways. I agree the Power 5 conference champions should be guaranteed the first 5 slots but I also think the highest ranked non power 5 team should get a slot as well with just 2 at large teams. There’s no reason a team like Marshall shouldn’t at least get a chance.
 

DTGT

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
530
I think 8 is enough for Football. Once you factor in the conference championship games it’s essentially like 16 anyways. I agree the Power 5 conference champions should be guaranteed the first 5 slots but I also think the highest ranked non power 5 team should get a slot as well with just 2 at large teams. There’s no reason a team like Marshall shouldn’t at least get a chance.
This is my favorite proposal so far.
 

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,016
Top three power5 conference champs with a play in game on conf champ week for outsiders.
 

GT Man

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
898
That scenario will happen sooner than later. Power 5 Champions get automatic qualification for playoffs, 3 wildcard teams. Gonna be too much money and outrage of P5 teams being left out for it not to happen.

just read this. agree 100%
 

AtWork

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
268
Location
Marietta, GA
I'm just pissed about Wisconsin jumping us. They got more credit for a relatively close win over a terrible Purdue team than we did smoking a bad-to-mediocre NC State, and their best win is either Illinois, Maryland, or Rutgers. Maybe I'm still bitter over Ron Dayne stealing Joe Ham's Heisman, but F Wisconsin!
I don't think it was them beating purdue as much as who they lost too and how closely. They are giving points for losing a tough game. Atleast that is what it looks like to me.
 
Top