Good..but not Great

[mad2mc]

And... who gives a fuck what DAD posts? He's a fucking troll...

So much for that 'Be nice to Poppy' resolution for this year, right bb.

 

[bbwvfan]

Prior to the first go round with the CFP, the Big 12 was told it did not need a CCG.

The problem in '14 for both TCU and BU is that OU lost the Bedlam game on Championship Saturday... causing both schools a loss of a top 25 win. OU dropping out of the top 25 opened up a spot for Minn to move into the top 25 despite being idle. The B1G CCG gave tOSU a third top 25 win.

Both TCU and BU ended the regular season with two top 25 wins... less than any team ranked #1-#4.

Had the Big 12 played a CCG between the top 2 teams in '14, I truly believe the winner of the BU vs TCU game would have ended up in the top 4. The winner would have had 3 top 25 wins, and those wins would have been better than tOSU's.

BU would have beaten a TCU team ranked #6 at the end of the regular season twice... and would have a win over #12 KSU.

TCU would have had wins over #5 BU, #12 KSU and #25 Minn.

tOSU ended with wins over #8 MSU, #18 Wisky and #25 Minn.

IMO, that is why the Big 12 decided it would go with a CCG between its top 2 teams. It guarantees the Big 12 champ gets a top 25 win for its 13th data point. That is all the 13th game did for conference champions in its first 3 years. Last year, OU did not need a 13th game to earn as many top 25 wins.

 

[WVUDAD]

Well... here is the difference between the NCAA basketball tournament and the CFP, by inclusion of 68 or 69 teams... I can't remember the number anymore... we often see an upset stir the brackets. A team can get hot, and win it all. It makes for an exciting tournament, but it devalues the regular season.

Recently, UConn won the 2014 NC coming into the tournament as a 7 seed. They got hot at the right time and beat some impressive teams along the way! As always, they provided a ton of excitement and enjoyment for basketball fans.

But, were they really deserving of being considered a NC? Were they really the best team in America that year?

IMO, that is the difference between what college football and college basketball have as goals. College football wants to preserve the integrity of the regular season, and wants to identify the best team at the end of it.

Through the first 3 years of the CFP, I say they've accomplished that task quite well.

How meaningful is that regular season when league champions are left out in favor of a team that didn't win that same league and was beaten by the team that won the league? What about a great team that dropped a game during the season because of a deal like Oklahoma State had early this year? When a season starts with a 128 team division and only 64 are technically eligible to "win" and in reality only about ten are, I say the season is totally meaningless. We start with preseason polls, which weigh heavily on perception later in the year, teams this year claimed a win over a top five or ten team when they beat ND and Mich State, and that BS bleeds into the polls later. If the regular season meant anything, we would have a ten team playoff right now with all ten league champions only included, win your league and you are in, don't and youre not. The goals of college football are two, make more money, and keep others from making it, they don't give a crap about integrity of the season, the system, their history, precedent, or anything else. The "playoff" committee has shown it, for two years we heard that being a league champion was a necessity, until that didn't make as much money.......

 

[WVUDAD]

Prior to the first go round with the CFP, the Big 12 was told it did not need a CCG.

The problem in '14 for both TCU and BU is that OU lost the Bedlam game on Championship Saturday... causing both schools a loss of a top 25 win. OU dropping out of the top 25 opened up a spot for Minn to move into the top 25 despite being idle. The B1G CCG gave tOSU a third top 25 win.

Both TCU and BU ended the regular season with two top 25 wins... less than any team ranked #1-#4.

Had the Big 12 played a CCG between the top 2 teams in '14, I truly believe the winner of the BU vs TCU game would have ended up in the top 4. The winner would have had 3 top 25 wins, and those wins would have been better than tOSU's.

BU would have beaten a TCU team ranked #6 at the end of the regular season twice... and would have a win over #12 KSU.

TCU would have had wins over #5 BU, #12 KSU and #25 Minn.

tOSU ended with wins over #8 MSU, #18 Wisky and #25 Minn.

IMO, that is why the Big 12 decided it would go with a CCG between its top 2 teams. It guarantees the Big 12 champ gets a top 25 win for its 13th data point. That is all the 13th game did for conference champions in its first 3 years. Last year, OU did not need a 13th game to earn as many top 25 wins.

Are you saying that had both Oklahoma and Texas finished 2014 11-1 as league co champs, they would both been left out like TCU and Baylor were? That Oklahoma would have dropped from being ranked #3 to #6 after winning by 40 points that Saturday??? It is as much if not more about your name than anything else, the problem is that most years there are anywhere from six to ten teams with a legit claim for a spot in the playoff, and it is impossible to say that a team they included was not worthy, but it is very easy to see those who they left out who belonged. Hell, this years result showed that including OSU over PSU was probably a mistake, PSU may not have beat Clemson, but they'd have done better than the Luckeyes did!!!!

 

[WVUDAD]

And... who gives a fuck what DAD posts? He's a fucking troll...

What a thoughtful addition to the discussion!!! Thank you so much for your input

 

[Slaton10]

If the ACC was mediocre this year, which conference stood out for you?

OOC, the ACC had wins over Ole Miss when your boy Kelly was healthy, Pitt beat PSU who you feel was elite. Miami dominated WVU, FSU beat a very good Michigan team. And, Clemson destroyed tOSU.

The OOC for the ACC was very impressive this year.

Best Conference this year...I "think" once you filter it out was the Big10..followed closely maybe by the Pac12?..and I could waffle and go a different way on the #2 conference for sure..

Miami beating Wv and Michigan losing..meaningless bowl games...i throw those out...the Pitt win, based off of what they did during the year won two games in UPSET fashion by a combined total of 4 points...so IMHO if Clemson is in who was also beaten by PITT how did Ohio State who didn't even need to play an extra game at the end of the season ( Conference Championship Game) be able to be the 4th team??...it seems to have been what has hurt the champion of the big 12 since the beginning of this format..now you had the double standard....back to DADS point ...again.

 

[bbwvfan]

Man... I'm used to DAD being a stupid fuck... but, you too?

You have used the smell test. "Waffling... not really sure". You throw out some results... you don't throw out other results.

There has been NO DOUBLE STANDARD!! The committee never said you had to have a conference championship... never said you had to be a conference champion. Never said that all teams had to play the same amount of games. NEVER!!

The committee is tasked with identifying the 4 best teams.

Here is the simple criteria from their protocol...

The criteria to be provided to the selection committee must be aligned with the ideals of the commissioners, Presidents, athletic directors and coaches to honor regular season success while at the same time providing enough flexibility and discretion to select a non-champion or independent under circumstances where that particular non-champion or independent is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country.

 

[bbwvfan]

Select a non-champion or independent when this team is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country.

 

[Slaton10]

I think that you hit the nail on the head, Slaton. Each conference goes through a cycle. It always seems that there are 2 teams that rise to the top in each conference. What I think Poppy is saying is that the Big 12 was traditionally lead by OU, TX, and back in the day, Nebraska. Nebraska is gone, and a shell of what they used to be. Texas is going through the cycle and OU has emerged out of the pack this year, but an early lost to tOSU has come back to hurt them. The PAC12 was USC, UCLA, and for a time, a Chip Kelly Oregon Ducks. UCLA faded away but has always been an household name. The Big 10 always seemed to be tOSU and Michigan. The ACC was FSU who handed it off to Clemson. FSU appears to be on the rise again.The SEC has been the dominate league for what, a decade or so. Florida and LSU turned into Alabama, Florida, and LSU with a hint of Auburn. Today, it is Alabama. There is no doubt in a program and a league being so dominate in college football. Another item is how the conference is promoted. The SEC does an excellent job of getting their name brand out there and the SEC fans are fanatics, whether your team is Alabama or Vanderbilt.

BB has provided excellent information on how the polls almost mirror each other. The committee has not helped itself. While in it's infancy, they seem to always tweak something that makes it appear that a big time/historic program gets into the fray. One year they state that a conference champ would weigh into the equation. It appeared to matter with BU/TCU, albeit 1 variable of many, but it didn't seem to matter that PSU won the conference championship and also beat tOSU. The committee went off of the fact that tOSU had a better record and PSU lose to Pitt. Winning the conference championship game didn't matter this year as it did when BU/TCU were named co-conference champs. This season seemed to support the Big 12's assertion that having a championship game does not matter.

I am not sure if I can hit anything on the head especially when it comes to this stuff...I just find myself agreeing with both DAD and BBW... No question you have to have analytics and measures to slot teams and BBW has provided what you would think would be or should be the be all end all....and I have been on that side of the debate for some time believing it is the only way to get to the end result.. but for some reason just watching the poor quality of play overall how do you come up with a SOS?..its still subjective....human element has to be inserted...hence name recognition plays a part...and now I truly beleive there is some conspiracy by the networks to push teams with brand names as high up the charts as they can...not only for the playoffs but other second tier games to MAKE MONEY...

I do find it interesting the way we consume games now...how ESPN or whoever keeps overpaying for Television rights...by guess we will all find out soon enough when they decrease their payouts per conference on the next tier 3 go around..

 

[Slaton10]

Man... I'm used to DAD being a stupid fuck... but, you too?

You have used the smell test. "Waffling... not really sure". You throw out some results... you don't throw out other results.

There has been NO DOUBLE STANDARD!! The committee never said you had to have a conference championship... never said you had to be a conference champion. Never said that all teams had to play the same amount of games. NEVER!!

The committee is tasked with identifying the 4 best teams.

Here is the simple criteria from their protocol...

The criteria to be provided to the selection committee must be aligned with the ideals of the commissioners, Presidents, athletic directors and coaches to honor regular season success while at the same time providing enough flexibility and discretion to select a non-champion or independent under circumstances where that particular non-champion or independent is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country.

Do you think that conferences like AAC would agree??

 

[bbwvfan]

When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered:

•  Championships won
• Strength of Schedule
• Head to head
• Comparative outcome of common opponents

While PSU won the H/H and won the B1G, they had two losses. tOSU had only 1 loss. At the end of the season, the committee clearly showed tOSU was being rewarded for its great wins. They had them ranked #2, and the chairman said the gap between #2 and #4 was quite large. tOSU was never going to be pushed out.
After conference championships were done, the committee had a discussion about #4. It came down to UW and PSU. PSU's two losses hurt them.

tOSU was rewarded for going on the road and beating the Big 12 champion. That is what should be done.

tOSU and PSU were not comparable teams. That is the gold standard in using H/H or championships won. It has been consistent for 3 years.

 

[bbwvfan]

Do you think that conferences like AAC would agree??

Agree with what?

 

[bbwvfan]

If there was a conspiracy... if it was driven by media... then why would the CFP leave tOSU out last year? They were loaded with talent... they are the big draw.

If the name on the jersey is all that matters, why didn't the committee move tOSU into the final 4 in '14 before the final ranking?

 

[bbwvfan]

It's all about the wins. I've been telling you that for quite some time.

The committee values wins more than losses.

 

[mad2mc]

It's all about the wins. I've been telling you that for quite some time.

The committee values wins more than losses.

Except for a non-power 5 team, i.e., Western Michigan.

 

[bbwvfan]

Except for a non-power 5 team, i.e., Western Michigan.

That isn't true at all. They had no good wins. The committee values wins.

It is very simple...

P5 wins > G5 wins.
P5 wins on the road > P5 wins at home.
P5 above .500 > P5 below .500
Top 25 wins > above .500 wins.
Top 25 wins on the road > top 25 wins at home.

 

[bbwvfan]

WVU was handled similarly to WMU. WVU had zero good wins this year. BYU and KSU were the only two teams with above .500 records. BYU beat zero quality teams through its season. KSU beat no ranked teams.

WVU was ranked higher by the committee than many computer polls.

Miami with 4 losses was favored to beat WVU in the RAB.

ESPN's FPI had Miami as the favorite to beat WVU.

 

[Slaton10]

Agree with what?

That they don't think there isn't a double standard...

 

[bbwvfan]

That they don't think there isn't a double standard...

Oh... they are looking to become a power conference, so they likely feel there is a double standard.

To support this line of logic of yours, last year when the first CFP Ranking came out, I was really surprised to see Memphis ranked as low as they were. They had a nice win over a ranked Ole Miss. Yet, they were #13. Only three undefeated teams were ranked below them.

They had two top 25 ranked teams in the committee's final ranking. So, they are getting some love...

 

[Slaton10]

That isn't true at all. They had no good wins. The committee values wins.

It is very simple...

P5 wins > G5 wins.
P5 wins on the road > P5 wins at home.
P5 above .500 > P5 below .500
Top 25 wins > above .500 wins.
Top 25 wins on the road > top 25 wins at home.

Here is the thing...I can't argue with anything you have said...it all makes sense...you truly don't have to convince me..I believe your comments are concrete....my "feelings" which are in the way are not tangible...here is a bad analagy but its all I can come up with at the moment..its like look at that ferrari..for 200,000 it should never need fixed...but in reality it is flawed...like I said I saw or believed I saw a lot of bad football this year...you made the point that Wv did not play very many teams with winning records...which I think is more than valid...take a look at the ACC they had several teams with winning records than the Big12 but the majority are just one game over .500 how good where those barely records really?..you go team by team and they are not good...at all!..yet they impacted the SOS..say I am right about bad football this year...how can we tell when a team is over valued?...IMHO you can't..