osubuckeye89
Well-Known Member
I've been perhaps Ohio State's biggest critic all season and I can't say anything without some stupid argument like "LOL MISSOURI BEAT PURDUE THEY GOOD"
Y'all do a real good job
Y'all do a real good job
The currents system relies on "cherry picked stats. The system Mistaken proposed is an upgrade from the current system.
I get some people like debate and opinion. Or are afraid of change and improvement. But this is an upgrade
6 team playoff with 5 autobids CC and 1 WC
The Outbids put emphasis on conference championships . And decide spots based on play on the field. Increasing the on the field impact while reducing the off the field human opinion. 6 teams allows less room for error and reduces question marks
1.Every P5 team plays 10 P5 games and 2 patsy G5/FCS games. The committee can only use P5 games to evaluate a team.
By playing a more uniform schedule. This is a step forward towards a closer gauge. To select the At Large bid.Or WC bids should a CC have more than 2 losses
2. If you have more than 2 losses and win your conference you lose your autobid. That spot becomes an extra WC spot.
Chances are we don't see a 2 loss Conference champion. But should that problem arise this functions as a fail safe.
This system relies much more on the results on the field. Th you use this system that actually has a stronger gauge,set criteria and less room for error. Completely changes the prior play offs by design. The amount of question marks would be remote in comparison to the current system. Its progress and a big step in the right direction.
Mistaken nailed the concept of play off expansion , increasing meaningful games, using a stranger regular season foundation and reducing off the field human influence. His system is much more thorough than the current system. And it gives room to build great post gotta give him credit
EOT/Imo
Worse, he actually believes that making everyone play a total of 10 P5 and 2 whatevs actually balances out the conferences.So auto bids, unless the team doesn’t deserve it. And get conferences who can’t even agree to play the same number of in conference games to all sign off on switching to something with specific schedule requirements. So we keep the committee, have auto bids unless you suck (because you finally realized that auto bids are a terrible concept that will give teams like UCLA a chance to get in), but add two more games, because why the hell not... or, basically what we have now except you waived a magic wand to get conferences to agree to scheduling requirements they won’t sign off on and added two games.
Nah, 4 is working fine.
I don't think you read Mistakens play off format. His format is a 6 team play off with 5 Auto Bids. The fail safe is for a Conference Champion with more than two losses. They haven't had a Conference Champion with more than 2 losses in any play off year .This is what those seasons would actually look like following his format2017:
Georgia, Oklahoma, Clemson, Ohio State, were all conf champs ranked at least top 6 after CCG week. USC was not and had two losses during the year. Bama and Wisky are in purely based off CFP last week poll.
2016:
Bama, Clemson, Washington all top 6 conf champs. The other two had two losses: Oky/PSU. The others that would have been in, Ohio State, Mich, Wisky. So much for SEC bias in the committee eh?
2015:
All P5 CCG winners were top 5. Iowa would have been in.
2014:
All SIX conf champs would have been in. B12 with their weird co-champs and all were top 6.
So, following the edict that 2 game loss champions can be excluded, the current system ALREADY FOLLOWS the proposed changes without the need for fuckery in changing the entire sport to fit it.
That playoff would probably come out just like the one we are going to have will. Bama, Clem, ND and Michigan...Bama wins. Bama, WV, AZ St, Pitt...Bama wins.It would be funny if a 5 loss Northwestern, 5 loss Pitt and a 3/4 loss Pac 12 South team win their conference championships. That would very quickly make the conference championships should matter crowd become extinct.
This would be your playoff:
1. Alabama
2. West Virginia
3. Arizona State
4. Pitt
Lmao.
Bullshit. You still can't/won't answer about imbalanced conf scheduling determining seeds for a playoff. You can't address that glaring issue because it torpedos the whole thing.Disagree using the past 4 play offs under Mistakens format. Its a vast improvement. Cuts out a lot of debate and human influence. Increases the competition level. And those match up scenarios are money.
Has nothing to do with USC......
It clears up the debate with OSU,Penn State,TCU/Baylor.....
Its an improvement as a whole which is as it should be
The Data confirms Mistakens format is a perfect solution across the board. Now hopefully College football progresses to this system.the past 4 years under his system clean up the flaws its perfect. Current system depends on opinion. Cant debate fact EOT
The premise of your argument against the format is based on semantics, opinion and debate. I get some people don't like change,may be closed off by the traditional methods. But in the end the facts within Mistakens actually removed all the question marks over the years. You can keep debating. But I think Mistakens format coupled with the way the data play offs would have played out. Speaks volumes in regards for the need to change. No debating fact with opinion. Ive got nothing more on the topic. The 6 game play off with mistakes format is the perfect formula and a vast improvement to the current flawed system. Point BlankBullshit. You still can't/won't answer about imbalanced conf scheduling determining seeds for a playoff. You can't address that glaring issue because it torpedos the whole thing.
TCU/Baylor? The fuck are you on about. There wouldn't be a single difference in 2014 or 2015 as all 5 of the conf winners in both season were in the top 6. Period. INCLUDING the tie in the B12 in 14. Already laid that out.
You only list 5, not 6 teams for 2017. You left Georgia out. The only real difference is USC is in, which is ludicrous and you know it, and wisky would have been in with a 6 team under this system. That Bama outrage? Wouldn't have mattered it seems since you put them in with 6 anyway and so would 6 using the CFP. It's not really much different OUTSIDE OF YOUR TEAM. So tell us how this isn't personal?
There isn't a thing wrong with 2016 either. It isn't a fact that either of the teams you are endlessly crying over had more right to a playoff berth than who was selected. It is a fact that teams with less issues were put in and most of the country wasn't crying over it with you. That's the facts.
Simple question yet again, is it really fair to you that conf records are seriously imbalanced? Again, is it fair if USC doesn't have to play UW and Oregon in the north and Utah does and yet each win/loss counts the same? How is that MORE fair than a system that takes circumstances into account? How is it not more fair to rate teams based on actual performance on the field of play, not just win/loss against other teams not playing the same caliber of teams? YOU AGAIN WILL NOT ADDRESS THIS AND I GUARANTEE IT. Because you can't.
I've literally answered that 5 or more times in this very thread alone.@WizardHawk how would Clark’s scenario destroy OOC? It doesn’t matter if you lose to a powerful or crappy team. The committee has proven they don’t care about OOC by letting you guys in and excluding Ohio State. Not saying his scenario is a great one but I completely disagree that it would hurt the OOC schedules at all and I in fact would make better OOC schedules.
I’m for auto bids but I can understand the argument against, I cannot fathom any rationale argument that auto bids would hurt the OOC schedules any more than it is now when the committee has proven they don’t care about cupcakes.
@WizardHawk how would Clark’s scenario destroy OOC? It doesn’t matter if you lose to a powerful or crappy team. The committee has proven they don’t care about OOC by letting you guys in and excluding Ohio State. Not saying his scenario is a great one but I completely disagree that it would hurt the OOC schedules at all and I in fact would make better OOC schedules.
I’m for auto bids but I can understand the argument against, I cannot fathom any rationale argument that auto bids would hurt the OOC schedules any more than it is now when the committee has proven they don’t care about cupcakes.
I don't think you read Mistakens play off format. His format is a 6 team play off with 5 Auto Bids. The fail safe is for a Conference Champion with more than two losses. They haven't had a Conference Champion with more than 2 losses in any play off year .This is what those seasons would actually look like following his format
2017
Clemson 12-1 CC, 12–1 Oklahoma CC,, 11-2 Ohio State CC , 11-2
USC,
Are in on Auto bid and12-1 Alabama most likely gets the At Large spot
2016
12- 1 Clemson CC, 12-1 Oklahoma CC,11-2 Penn State CC,11-1 Washington CC, 13-0 Alabama CC,
Are all in on Auto bid 11-1 Ohio State moct likely gets the At Large Bid
2015
13-0 Clemson CC,,12-1 Oklahoma CC,12-1 Michigan State CC,11-2 Stanford CC,12-1 Alabama CC
Are allí in on Auto Bids 11-1 Ohio State or !!-1 Iowa most likely get the At Large Bid
2014
13-0 FSU CC, 12-1 Ohio State CC, 12-1 Oregon CC,12-1 Alabama CC
Are all in on Auto Bod 11 - 1 TCU and !1 - 1 Baylor are most likely in as the At Large Bids
It actually clears every question mark aside from UCF which is covered in the uniform gauge using P5's. It even covers the Baylor TCU mess.
His format completely changes the dynamics. And provides the best teams in the play offs. And gives a much more viable True Champion
His post and format are spot on and would take College Football to its highest level.
Well to be fair they're also the same super smart people who think it isn't fair that UCF doesn't just get a chance in the playoff, so at least they're consistent on that part.I will never understand why the people who complain about Alabama's schedule the most are the same people who want to make it where Alabama and every other team in college football will schedule easier.
That's an absurd amount of dumbassery.
Same, that's why I suggest guys like clarkson just drop whatever it is they're hung up on and think about it. I used to think an 8 team playoff would be perfect and where this should all be heading. Autobids with 3 at large spots. Then I paid attention to the what the committee was doing, actually considered what guys against it were saying, thought about it, and dumped that ridiculous horse shit.look, I bought into the BS of autobids at first too. Maybe 4D20 remembers back that far. I thought it through and found it was entirely stupid and horrible.
Just logic it out. You can't not come to the same conclusion.