The committee experiment failed

[NU_FTW]

Then why did the committee have Wisky ahead of Bama before CCG week?

But, hey, you did end with an "lol" so that must count for something I guess.

Because wisconsin was undefeated, it was sort of just a "must have" which is why they had bama right there should wisconsin faulter.....like i already told you, the only rankings that matter come out after CCGs are done being played. Wisconsin didnt play and beat anybody worth a damn, which is why when they got spanked at the end of the season in their ccg (playoff game for all intents and purposes) they fell behind alabama who looked better and won better games

 

[CJH9972]

It is subjective and objective. SOS, SOR, Eye Test, Style Points, MOV etc it all plays a role and it all matters to the committee which is why the best team is in the top 4 which means the best team is far more likely to win vs an 8 team playoff

Is the best team always the committee's #1 seed? And why is being the best team all important if it is more likely to lose playing another game versus a lesser team?

 

[NU_FTW]

Is the best team always the committee's #1 seed? And why is being the best team all important if it is more likely to lose playing another game versus a lesser team?

That is why they pick 4. Always, hardly, some years it is easy to see some years it is a lot closer.

 

[dtgold88]

I prefer 2, but the case was made that sometimes the difference between #2 and #3 can be razor thin, it is acceptable to bring in #3 to be fair but in most years #4 isnt even close to #1 and #2, thus #5-130 have no business having a shot at 1 or 2 which was the entire point of the 4 team format in the first place.


This was never about being more inclusive of more teams, it was making sure the best 1 and 2 team squared off for the championship.

You clearly dont get it

weird the committee chair has called the case between 4 and 5 being "razor thin".

I could probably just sit back and watch you kick your own ass.

 

[CJH9972]

Because wisconsin was undefeated, it was sort of just a "must have" which is why they had bama right there should wisconsin faulter.....like i already told you, the only rankings that matter come out after CCGs are done being played. Wisconsin didnt play and beat anybody worth a damn, which is why when they got spanked at the end of the season in their ccg (playoff game for all intents and purposes) they fell behind alabama who looked better and won better games

Alabama had two ranked wins, the best was #16 LSU who lost to Troy.

 

[dtgold88]

Wisconsin did get their shot, in teh CCG, they played themselves out of contention

Should add Bama got their shot, then by watching the CCGs?

 

[NU_FTW]

weird the committee chair has called the case between 4 and 5 being "razor thin".

I could probably just sit back and watch you kick your own ass.

who cares? the gap between 3 and 4/5 is huge.

 

[NU_FTW]

Should add Bama got their shot, then by watching the CCGs?

bama looked better played harder and beat better teams

 

[CJH9972]

That is why they pick 4. Always, hardly, some years it is easy to see some years it is a lot closer.

But if they get the seeds wrong if ranking best to worst team, how do we know they didn't leave the best team out?

 

[WizardHawk]

what he is showing you is that in his "system" the top 4 ranked teams wont always be the top 4 in his system. Doesn't matter who the teams are as you seem to think the top 4 are the best 4.

No, under the current system we don't get some unified for sure best 4 teams, and I don't believe anyone suggests otherwise. What we get are the most deserving teams as seen by a committee. There is no way to pick the teams that actually are better than each other to the point of only bringing in the actual 4 best teams. The format of scheduling doesn't allow for it and never could with all these leagues and teams.

 

[NU_FTW]

But if they get the seeds wrong if ranking best to worst team, how do we know they didn't leave the best team out?

Because the gap between the best teams in the top 4 and the teams outside looking in is huge. some years there will be 1 clear cut better team some years the top 3 will be close most years there isnt need for 4 teams. the only point in expanding to 4 was to make sure 1 and 2 got in, since some years the #3 in the BCS was possibly #2 or #1 but too hard to say. That was the justification for 4 teams, it wasnt to find #4, if you dont play well enough to get in the top 4 there are usually very easy things to point at why you didnt make it in.

 

[dtgold88]

Seriously, you have a comprehension problem. Where do i claim you said 130 teams? i used 130 teams because there are that many teams in FBS.... The point is still 100% valid, the more teams in a tournament of 1 and done games the less likely the best team wins it all.

You keep using this as though it matters.....no one in this discussion thinks any more than 8 should be in the CFP yet you keep mentioning a "tourney" with every team.

Focus, little fella.

 

[NU_FTW]

No, under the current system we don't get some unified for sure best 4 teams, and I don't believe anyone suggests otherwise. What we get are the most deserving teams as seen by a committee. There is no way to pick the teams that actually are better than each other to the point of only bringing in the actual 4 best teams. The format of scheduling doesn't allow for it and never could with all these leagues and teams.

exactly, it was done to make sure the best team was there though, (as best as we can do using objective and subjective criteria given the number of games played) People see the CFP as something that was meant to emulate the NFL when that was never the intent

 

[NU_FTW]

You keep using this as though it matters.....no one in this discussion thinks any more than 8 should be in the CFP yet you keep mentioning a "tourney" with every team.

Focus, little fella.

what are you talking about? there doesnt need to be 8 teams in teh CFP there doesnt need to be 4 most years. You keep ignoring that i am not saying every team and i never claimed that you said every team. i am talking about your ridiculous idea that 8 teams should be in

keep up child

 

[WizardHawk]

weird the committee chair has called the case between 4 and 5 being "razor thin".

I could probably just sit back and watch you kick your own ass.

What does the difference between 4 and 5, or 8 and 9 (next iteration after going to 8 and that doesn't satisfy you) have to do with the large gap between 1 and 4, 1 and 5, or more? The farther you go away from 1, the more gap there is in talent and earned accolades.

 

[dtgold88]

So now you are bringing up the BCS to justify expanding from 8 to 4 but using a system that only picked 2? Rivals posters are such retards (most only a handful actually worth a shit)

Talk about comprehension issues. and I already explained if you are going to call people stupid or retarded you might want to learn basic math yourself and the meaning of the word, literal.

I am only trying to explain to you fans at the end don't care who the best team is. They care who the champion is.

I guess if you are a Nebraska fan I get it, as it's been so long since your team has been relevant and if you are the age I suspect you don't remember.

 

[dtgold88]

The point of the CFP is to crown the best team....

There exists products that already satisfy your wants and desires, head on over to the FCS they have your expanded playoffs with automatic qualifications involved

You claimed you didn't want to go from 2 to 4 teams so why did you not drop CFB altogether when they did?

 

[NU_FTW]

Talk about comprehension issues. and I already explained if you are going to call people stupid or retarded you might want to learn basic math yourself and the meaning of the word, literal.

I am only trying to explain to you fans at the end don't care who the best team is. They care who the champion is.

I guess if you are a Nebraska fan I get it, as it's been so long since your team has been relevant and if you are the age I suspect you don't remember.

Rivals posters, ignore what is said and make things up to try and talk smack. You people havent changed.

If you cannot read and comprehend what you read that is not something i can help you with.


Does your mom know you are on the internet?

 

[NU_FTW]

You claimed you didn't want to go from 2 to 4 teams so why did you not drop CFB altogether when they did?

where did i claim that?

again the kid from rivals doesnt know how to comprehend what he reads

 

[WizardHawk]

exactly, it was done to make sure the best team was there though, (as best as we can do using objective and subjective criteria given the number of games played) People see the CFP as something that was meant to emulate the NFL when that was never the intent

Originally the declared champion wasn't considered the same thing it is today. There was a time when there were 3 or 4 different panels that declared their own and often there were more than one winner each season. And everyone was fine with it.

The goal was to win your conference and beat your rivals. Then, make it to one of the VERY few bowl games. Never had to worry about 'bowl eligibility' because there wasn't any such thing as a sub .500 going to one. There were many over .500 that didn't get to a bowl because of how few there were. It was special to get an invite. THAT was the pinnacle of the sport. Be attractive enough to get a good bowl invite.

 

[CJH9972]

exactly, it was done to make sure the best team was there though, (as best as we can do using objective and subjective criteria given the number of games played) People see the CFP as something that was meant to emulate the NFL when that was never the intent

So no one can be for a larger playoff because of the intent someone else assigns to the CFP? Personally, although I prefer 8, I'm fine with four so long as subjectivity does not determine the playoff teams.