Rolling Stone vs ESPN

[GTNavyNuke]

.....In the current system, things are based on poll opinions. ........

That is it exactly. The book "Study Hall" brings up how the BCS rankings were done and how when computer algorithms came up with rankings which didn't agree with popular opinion, the computer algorithms were watered down or de-emphasized. We need something more like the basketball ranking which is simple and based on how well your opponent has done.

But having it be based on arbitrary opinions is optimum if you want to maximize interest and discussion (and revenue).

Finally, I understand your opinion on Cinderellas. For me, I couldn't tell you has won the last couple of NCAAs and might only remember if it had been a Jimmy V type run. Again, unless you go to the 7 game series, you really are only finding out who is playing best at the time. Thus having conference champs makes sense to weed out a lot of the late bloomers.

Edit: I took out the comment that FSU wouldn't be in the top 4 by statistical systems since JHowell has them at #4 (barely). Other systems like Football Outsiders look at don't have FSU that high - like #8.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

That is it exactly. The book "Study Hall" brings up how the BCS rankings were done and how when computer algorithms came up with rankings which didn't agree with popular opinion, the computer algorithms were watered down or de-emphasized. We need something more like the basketball ranking which is simple and based on how well your opponent has done.

As any good, or not so good, scientist knows, sample size is everything. Basketball teams play a ton of games and you can easily compare performances against the same teams. Football teams play a very limited schedule. Many times you have teams across the country that play none of the same teams. Therefore, it's all based on opinions of strength of schedule. It's really easy to prop up a conference with no, or very little, comparative data. The SEC is good, why, because they beat other SEC teams???? What kind of logic is that?

What makes it worse is when the guys controlling the narrative have a vested interest in one particular conference.

 

[ibeattetris]

As any good, or not so good, scientist knows, sample size is everything. Basketball teams play a ton of games and you can easily compare performances against the same teams. Football teams play a very limited schedule. Many times you have teams across the country that play none of the same teams. Therefore, it's all based on opinions of strength of schedule. It's really easy to prop up a conference with no, or very little, comparative data. The SEC is good, why, because they beat other SEC teams???? What kind of logic is that?

What makes it worse is when the guys controlling the narrative have a vested interest in one particular conference.

This is pretty much where I am. I can't wrap my head around a playoff that could potentially include 3 out of the 5 competitive conferences when the conferences rarely play each other. Supposition over relative strength of conferences is a fun to do over a beer, I'd prefer to watch athletes decide it on the field.

 

[Animal02]

As any good, or not so good, scientist knows, sample size is everything. Basketball teams play a ton of games and you can easily compare performances against the same teams. Football teams play a very limited schedule. Many times you have teams across the country that play none of the same teams. Therefore, it's all based on opinions of strength of schedule. It's really easy to prop up a conference with no, or very little, comparative data. The SEC is good, why, because they beat other SEC teams???? What kind of logic is that?

What makes it worse is when the guys controlling the narrative have a vested interest in one particular conference.

I agree.....it is amazing in 100+ years of football.....the number of teams we have never played. From the three P-5 conferences (not the SEC and ACC) we have never played 15 of the teams 41%.

 

[Boomergump]

I don't think ANY scenario, playoff or otherwise, is consistently able to determine the BEST team. Even if it is all decided on the field, in the playoff among conference champions, all it really determines is who was better on the given days that they played. After all, did our win against PITT determine, once and for all, that we were the better team? We got some breaks. We cashed in. We were better that day. The UNC game was pretty much the opposite. Was NCST the best basketball team that year under Valvano? You get my drift. There is no perfect scenario, but at least there is integrity to deciding all championships on the field and keeping it away from subjective notions, money, and politics.

I throw my support behind a conference champion ONLY playoff scenario, where every conference, Sun Belt or otherwise has a seat at the table. If media types can't stand the idea of losing influence, let their flawed biased voting seed the brackets. That is all.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I don't think ANY scenario, playoff or otherwise, is consistently able to determine the BEST team. Even if it is all decided on the field, in the playoff among conference champions, all it really determines is who was better on the given days that they played. After all, did our win against PITT determine, once and for all, that we were the better team? We got some breaks. We cashed in. We were better that day. The UNC game was pretty much the opposite. Was NCST the best basketball team that year under Valvano? You get my drift. There is no perfect scenario, but at least there is integrity to deciding all championships on the field and keeping it away from subjective notions, money, and politics.

I throw my support behind a conference champion ONLY playoff scenario, where every conference, Sun Belt or otherwise has a seat at the table. If media types can't stand the idea of losing influence, let their flawed biased voting seed the brackets. That is all.

Well that would, at the very least, force ND fully into the conference.

 

[Ggee87]

Its all about making money. The playoffs need to include all power 5 conference champions no doubt. Then you could add 5 "others" who had good seasons, but had a few bad breaks. I dont think 4 teams being selected by a committee is easy enough to reasonably expect the right outcome. You need to give the committee a little room for error. I dont think many people would argue with P5 Conf. CHAMPS plus 5 at large bids. Picking the at larges would be made much easier once you take out the champions. It also leaves room for the non power 5 undefeateds and conferences that have more than 1 good team. It would also cover the base of "the best" team losing in the conference championship and avoid rematches like BAMA-LSU for all the marbles. There are just WAY too many teams in Division 1 to only allow 4 into the playoffs. Also only playing 12 games... Its just no where near enough data to come to a precise conclusion. FSU is the #1 team this year regardless of what ESPN says.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

What about if you thought a mythical Fluke team was a legit team and could demonstrate it by Fluke winning Coastal twice in a row? Then get destroyed in the ACCCG and whatever bowl twice in a row? Would kind of show the greatness of the Atlantic team and bowl team. Come on people, out of conference games matter a lot in determining which conference is "better". That mythical Fluke team may have won Coastal due to scheduling and so could other teams in favorable post season match ups. But the fact remains they won they games they played.

To really know who is playing the best football at the end of the season, you need a much deeper playoff. Hopefully we'll get to the ideal (IMHO) of 16 teams at some point. Then it would be 14 SEC teams plus 2? (tic)

I have said it before and I will say it again. I actually think you could get by with a six team playoff. Four of the teams have to be conference winners. Two at large teams might include non-conference teams depending on rankings in certain years. First and Second seed teams get a bye and are in opposite divisions of the playoff. Third and fourth seed teams have a play in game with the at large team in each division. And it goes from there.