T-Rode's Unpopular Opinion - Session 1: BCS vs. CFP

[Yo Tee]

I'm gonna do these regularly.

T-Rode's Unpopular Opinion - Session 1:

The BCS was a better system for deciding who is the College Football National Champion than the College Football Playoff system is. The CFP is a matter of opinion from old men with (sarcasm) absolutely no bias whatsoever (sarcasm).

The BCS, while an imperfect system, went by data, statistics, facts. Choosing the best teams in the country shouldn't be based on an eye test or have any room for error/personal bias/OPINIONS. It should be based on facts. The BCS wasn't perfect, but it was better than what we have right now.

BCS > CFP All day.

That's my unpopular opinion.

 

[rmilia1]

I'd be fine using the old bcs system to pick the top 4 teams . Committee seems kind of irrelevant to me

 

[7Samurai13]

What if I told you that every simulation of the BCS done during the College Football Playoff era has resulted in the same 4 teams being selected to the playoffs as was selected by the committee?

 

[Yo Tee]

What if I told you that every simulation of the BCS done during the College Football Playoff era has resulted in the same 4 teams being selected to the playoffs as was selected by the committee?

I would obviously need proof of that and if that's the case, then what was the point of changing things up?

 

[Lance Armstrong]

yeah, I always wondered why they just didn't keep the BCS system and take the top 4. The problem with "the eye test" is we have hyped Bama up so much that even if they finally play a really good team and lose, we'll just put them in the playoff anyway.

 

[Yo Tee]

yeah, I always wondered why they just didn't keep the BCS system and take the top 4. The problem with "the eye test" is we have hyped Bama up so much that even if they finally play a really good team and lose, we'll just put them in the playoff anyway.

I honestly don't think Bama should've been the #1 team until week 8. ND should've been the #1 team with wins over Michigan, Stanford and Va. Tech, who were all ranked at the time ND beat them. ND had a much better resume up until Bama's game with LSU. Bama scored 50-60 points on bottom of the barrel P5 teams and an FCS team. Why should I be impressed by that?

 

[7Samurai13]

I would obviously need proof of that and if that's the case, then what was the point of changing things up?

Because computers can’t use logic and look at specific situations. They can only use whatever biased formula that the writer used.

 

[Deep Creek]

I'd be fine using the old bcs system to pick the top 4 teams . Committee seems kind of irrelevant to me

I like the fact that now teams have to beat a semifinal opponent to play in the finals as opposed to just going straight to the finals. If they'd have just added a semifinal game to the BCS that would have been enough for me.

The old bowl system was a voting sytem. The BCS and CFP systems still rely on "votes" from humans to a certain extent. All three are a version of a beauty contest to a degree.

 

[Yo Tee]

Because computers can’t use logic and look at specific situations. They can only use whatever biased formula that the writer used.

How is it bias if the computer is using statistical/factual information? Also, is it any more bias than a group of humans we've trusted to NOT use their NATURAL bias?

 

[7Samurai13]

How is it bias if the computer is using statistical/factual information? Also, is it any more bias than a group of humans we've trusted to NOT use their NATURAL bias?

Because the writer of the program has bias so it has the same bias as everyone else.

 

[TheDayMan]

The BCS had a human element too... 2/3 of it was based on human polls It'd be for the best if everyone could just stop pretending the human judgement aspect is inherently bad or faulty. I din't like the idea of the committee at first, but they've been fine, if you can't figure out what they're looking for you're a stupid asshole.

Look at this, the evil biased playoff committee knows no bounds.

 

[Deep Creek]

How is it bias if the computer is using statistical/factual information? Also, is it any more bias than a group of humans we've trusted to NOT use their NATURAL bias?

Me thinks he was referring to the possibility of the program having biased built into it by the programmer.

 

[Yo Tee]

Because the writer of the program has bias so it has the same bias as everyone else.

But there SHOULD be a formula that is mutually agreed upon, no? Use SOS, defensive rankings and offensive rankings and other statistical information that can have NO bias and make a formula out of that information.

 

[Deep Creek]

Because the writer of the program has bias so it has the same bias as everyone else.

 

[TheDayMan]

I honestly don't think Bama should've been the #1 team until week 8. ND should've been the #1 team with wins over Michigan, Stanford and Va. Tech, who were all ranked at the time ND beat them. ND had a much better resume up until Bama's game with LSU. Bama scored 50-60 points on bottom of the barrel P5 teams and an FCS team. Why should I be impressed by that?

They didn't release the first playoff rankings until after week 9...

 

[Yo Tee]

The BCS had a human element too... 2/3 of it was based on human polls It'd be for the best if everyone could just stop pretending the human judgement aspect is inherently bad or faulty. I din't like the idea of the committee at first, but they've been fine, if you can't figure out what they're looking for you're a stupid asshole.

Look at this, the evil biased playoff committee knows no bounds.

View attachment 190735

It's not that noone knows what they are looking for, it's that the judgement of the top 4 teams right now are based on opinions, not factual information, which leaves those like me uncomfortable and less trusting of this process. And yes, while they have the rankings correct now, because the rankings are pretty flawless as there are 4 CLEAR CUT teams at this point, I'd love to see the differences, or similarities, after the conference title games. Where did you get that graphic from, by the way?

 

[Deep Creek]

They didn't release the first playoff rankings until after week 9...

Which is still too early IMO.

 

[Yo Tee]

They didn't release the first playoff rankings until after week 9...

Wasn't talking about playoff rankings in the specific comment. Talking AP polls, which is by humans as well, no?

 

[Deep Creek]

It's not that noone knows what they are looking for, it's that the judgement of the top 4 teams right now are based on opinions, not factual information, which leaves those like me uncomfortable and less trusting of this process. And yes, while they have the rankings correct now, because the rankings are pretty flawless as there are 4 CLEAR CUT teams at this point, I'd love to see the differences, or similarities, after the conference title games. Where did you get that graphic from, by the way?

CFP = 13 opinions. BCS = hundreds of voters' opinions + computer data.

 

[7Samurai13]

But there SHOULD be a formula that is mutually agreed upon, no? Use SOS, defensive rankings and offensive rankings and other statistical information that can have NO bias and make a formula out of that information.

No, there is not a mutually agreed upon formula which is why there was 10 different formulas combined in the BCS.