Scheduling

[smathis30]

Then let's just award the trophy to Clemson now. There isn't any point in playing the games. Or while we are at it, let's just skip the entire season and award the trophy to the top rated pre-season team. The NCAA knows how to run championships and they do it for every single sport except FBS football. Money is the only reason that FBS works the way it does. That is going to really hurt the NCAA's case about amateurism when it finally ends up in court. The whole business/gambling/trash talk aspect(s) of NCAA "athletics" is what bothers me.

Then just ignore espns metric then. Look at other people's strength of record like statics and you'll see everyone else comes to a similar confusion. Committee can ignore that ESPNs version of the statistic so can you

 

[RonJohn]

Then just ignore espns metric then. Look at other people's strength of record like statics and you'll see everyone else comes to a similar confusion. Committee can ignore that ESPNs version of the statistic so can you

Or just ignore the CFP, which I believe more and more people will start to do.

 

[Tech93]

I think it will be UGA vs AL in the natl championship

 

[majungatholus1]

Then just ignore espns metric then. Look at other people's strength of record like statics and you'll see everyone else comes to a similar confusion. Committee can ignore that ESPNs version of the statistic so can you

Best phrase in this whole thread.

 

[Jmonty71]

I bet this whole thing boils down to the committee thought a Clemson Bama repeat is more compelling And better for advertisers and ratings than the deserving match up.

IE;..... Money... Money.... Money... Face it. CFB is no longer about the game, it's about money. Which is why ESPN is allowed to do what they do. Bama is guilty of recruitment violations. Yet, until Saban leaves and the program declines, it will not be brought up. Once Bama becomes "normal"...watch.. Just like UNC... things will show.

 

[Jmonty71]

Let's all agree. If you are a P-5 school, there is absolutely no reward for scheduling tough games. You can play cupcakes OOC and just win your conference. Per the new way... That is good enough.

Although one wonders... If GT would lose one game and miss the championship game, would we get into the playoffs? I'm sure there would had been 1000 reasons why we did not get in. #1 would be, we didn't win our conference. Guess, that SEC privilege just shines.

 

[FredJacket]

IE;..... Money... Money.... Money... Face it. CFB is no longer about the game, it's about money. Which is why ESPN is allowed to do what they do. Bama is guilty of recruitment violations. Yet, until Saban leaves and the program declines, it will not be brought up. Once Bama becomes "normal"...watch.. Just like UNC... things will show.

Clearly, CFB is a money making machine for MANY stakeholders. However, it can be about both... football and profits.

I'm considering starting a new thread if no one else will... on the psychology in all this angst. Still working on formulating it to make it an actual "new" discussion. Not along the lines of what we want to change or what's wrong.. but why we care so much and why we pick the "side" we pick (i.e. anti-Saban or anti-SEC or anti-NCAA).

 

[jeffgt14]

Let's all agree. If you are a P-5 school, there is absolutely no reward for scheduling tough games. You can play cupcakes OOC and just win your conference. Per the new way... That is good enough.

Although one wonders... If GT would lose one game and miss the championship game, would we get into the playoffs? I'm sure there would had been 1000 reasons why we did not get in. #1 would be, we didn't win our conference. Guess, that SEC privilege just shines.

I would think Wisconsin would have a better shot at that than GT and they weren't even in consideration.

 

[jeffgt14]

Clearly, CFB is a money making machine for MANY stakeholders. However, it can be about both... football and profits.

I'm considering starting a new thread if no one else will... on the psychology in all this angst. Still working on formulating it to make it an actual "new" discussion. Not along the lines of what we want to change or what's wrong.. but why we care so much and why we pick the "side" we pick (i.e. anti-Saban or anti-SEC or anti-NCAA).

I would make the same argument for Alabama if the situation was reversed. It has nothing to do with anti-Bama or anti-SEC. When the playoffs were first established I thought what they had was a solid foundation for selecting teams. My thought was they would pick the 4 best teams with a heavy weight on conference champions but with rules in place that allowed them to take someone else if a 4 or 5 loss team managed to win their conference.

I disagree with the philosophy of picking the “4 best teams” because that’s not how sports works. Every game is different, certain teams matchup better against other teams, luck occurs, injuries occur, one player may catch fire (or vice versa) and completely alter the outcome of a game. These are the things that make sports fun (and agonizing).

Due to the inequality of schedules for 12 games in college football, you need some rules in place to make sure some 8-4 team who hasn’t looked great all year but won a 3 way tiebreaker in their division somehow wins their conference doesn’t get in. I have a major problem with the committee continuing to utilize this eye test BS to justify why a 2 loss conference champion shouldn’t get in while a 1 loss team that sat at home should.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Then just ignore espns metric then. Look at other people's strength of record like statics and you'll see everyone else comes to a similar confusion. Committee can ignore that ESPNs version of the statistic so can you

To be fair, in comparing the SoS of Bama and Ohio State, the "raw" score, which OSU wins hands down, doesn't account for OSU's "bad" losses or Bama's "good" loss. It also doesn't differentiate between wins, either. It can be done. If you subtract the losses from the schedule, you can calculate a SoSw (SoS wins only). Similarly, if you subtract the wins from the schedule, you can calculate a SoSl (SoS losses only).

Here's some facts:
OSU's(28) total SoS is better than Bama's(56).
OSU's wins are way better than Bama's wins.
OSU's losses are way worse than Bama's loss.


So, here's the final analysis:
1. OSU wins the "raw" SoS.
2. OSU wins the SoSw category, their wins are way better than Bama's.
3. Bama wins the SoSl category, their loss not nearly as bad as OSU's losses.

Now factor in OSU is a P5 Champion and the choice is clear.

My eval puts OSU ahead of Bama for the 4th playoff and it does factor in OSU's bad losses.

 

[smathis30]

Let's all agree. If you are a P-5 school, there is absolutely no reward for scheduling tough games. You can play cupcakes OOC and just win your conference. Per the new way... That is good enough.

Although one wonders... If GT would lose one game and miss the championship game, would we get into the playoffs? I'm sure there would had been 1000 reasons why we did not get in. #1 would be, we didn't win our conference. Guess, that SEC privilege just shines.

If Wisconsin scheduled a p5 team OOC they would be in. Their division is too weak to rely on it.

 

[smathis30]

To be fair, in comparing the SoS of Bama and Ohio State, the "raw" score, which OSU wins hands down, doesn't account for OSU's "bad" losses or Bama's "good" loss. It also doesn't differentiate between wins, either. It can be done. If you subtract the losses from the schedule, you can calculate a SoSw (SoS wins only). Similarly, if you subtract the wins from the schedule, you can calculate a SoSl (SoS losses only).

Here's some facts:
OSU's(28) total SoS is better than Bama's(56).
OSU's wins are way better than Bama's wins.
OSU's losses are way worse than Bama's loss.


So, here's the final analysis:
1. OSU wins the "raw" SoS.
2. OSU wins the SoSw category, their wins are way better than Bama's.
3. Bama wins the SoSl category, their loss not nearly as bad as OSU's losses.

Now factor in OSU is a P5 Champion and the choice is clear.

My eval puts OSU ahead of Bama for the 4th playoff and it does factor in OSU's bad losses.

Yeah but then you account for the second loss and it's bad. Ohio states four best wins are better than bamas but every win after that favors albama. 7 bowl eligible wins is infinitely better than 5. but the whole point is that the second loss is inexcusable. You have to look at the entirety of the schedule, not just the good parts. So again. Why should Ohio state Be the first national champion with two losses And also Ben the first national champion to lose to an unranked team by 30?

 

[FredJacket]

I would make the same argument for Alabama if the situation was reversed. It has nothing to do with anti-Bama or anti-SEC. When the playoffs were first established I thought what they had was a solid foundation for selecting teams. My thought was they would pick the 4 best teams with a heavy weight on conference champions but with rules in place that allowed them to take someone else if a 4 or 5 loss team managed to win their conference.

I disagree with the philosophy of picking the “4 best teams” because that’s not how sports works. Every game is different, certain teams matchup better against other teams, luck occurs, injuries occur, one player may catch fire (or vice versa) and completely alter the outcome of a game. These are the things that make sports fun (and agonizing).

Due to the inequality of schedules for 12 games in college football, you need some rules in place to make sure some 8-4 team who hasn’t looked great all year but won a 3 way tiebreaker in their division somehow wins their conference doesn’t get in. I have a major problem with the committee continuing to utilize this eye test BS to justify why a 2 loss conference champion shouldn’t get in while a 1 loss team that sat at home should.

Good post. Just to be clear, I did not intend to place an anti-anything label on you, specifically. I agree your arguments are consistent and your post here does a great job confirming you want the system to work a slightly different (but significant this year) way.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Yeah but then you account for the second loss and it's bad. Ohio states four best wins are better than bamas but every win after that favors albama. 7 bowl eligible wins is infinitely better than 5. but the whole point is that the second loss is inexcusable. You have to look at the entirety of the schedule, not just the good parts. So again. Why should Ohio state Be the first national champion with two losses And also Ben the first national champion to lose to an unranked team by 30?

Actually, I already accounted for both losses.

Why does Bama, who DIDN'T WIN THEIR DIVISION AND BEAT NOBODY GOOD, deserve a shot over a P5 CHAMPION? Don't give me FSU, Missy State or LSU. They were all crap teams this year. Bama lost to the only team worth a damn on their crap schedule and lost handily then sat at home and watched all the Conference Championships on tv.

You should have to beat some good teams along the way to deserve a shot, not just not lose - which they did, anyway.

 

[smathis30]

Actually, I already accounted for both losses.

Why does Bama, who DIDN'T WIN THEIR DIVISION AND BEAT NOBODY GOOD, deserve a shot over a P5 CHAMPION? Don't give me FSU, Missy State or LSU. They were all crap teams this year. Bama lost to the only team worth a damn on their crap schedule and lost handily then sat at home and watched all the Conference Championships on tv.

You should have to beat some good teams along the way to deserve a shot, not just not lose - which they did, anyway.

I already answered. Their schedule and resume are better than all the others an drew on the field performance is better as verified by advanced stats. FSU is a better win than Rutgers.

Or in short cuz Ohio state did last year

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I already answered. Their schedule and resume are better than all the others an drew on the field performance is better as verified by advanced stats. FSU is a better win than Rutgers.

Or in short cuz Ohio state did last year

Then why did the committee chair say one week earlier that there was little to no separation between teams 5 through 8? What happened to catapult an idle Bama ahead of a team that actually played, won and was crowned conference champion? That makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[WreckinGT]

I think it will be UGA vs AL in the natl championship

Well, on the plus side, I won't lose any sleep because there is no chance im watching that crap.

 

[LibertyTurns]

Then why did the committee chair say one week earlier that there was little to no separation between teams 5 through 8? What happened to catapult an idle Bama ahead of a team that actually played, won and was crowned conference champion? That makes no sense whatsoever.

I’m amazed this thread is still going. Bammer was picked because Bammer can only be eliminated by 2 losses or more. Conference Championships, strength of schedule, etc does not matter because in the end those with the $$ prefer Bammer. Until the NCAAF Championship is decided by a playoff instead of a beauty pageant type selection process it will always be this way. Expect those with the power & money to resist that as surely as the swamp critters in DC protect their own. I just hope I’m dead before GT gets screwed the only year they have a chance of sniffing the title. You know we’d be the easiest school ever to screw over. Nobody besides us would give a crap and that’s the basic problem with a process that’s not administered straight up on the merits.

 

[GTfan4Life]

I think it will be UGA vs AL in the natl championship

Oh, God, please don't let this abomination happen...

 

[Tech93]

Oh, God, please don't let this abomination happen...

The way GT sports has gone this year, this is the next big disappointment for us to look forward to