Back in the Top 25 at #22 in AP

[QBEagles]

The complaints weren't the BCS formula, it was the fact that we only had the title game. That gave us years where we had more than 2 undefeateds, or years where the top two teams were from the same conference. A playoff with teams selected by BCS formula instead of a committee would be much better.

Eh, there were plenty of complaints about the formula. At its best it was 1/3rd AP poll (the thing we're complaining about now), 1/3rd Coaches or Harris (worse versions of the AP poll), and 1/3rd computers of varying quality that couldn't account for margin of victory and for the most part didn't publish their full methodology.

I'm all for an objective ranking, but let's not retcon the BCS into something it wasn't. A good system would be something like a strength of record formula, but based on something other than ESPN/FPI numbers.

 

[HawaiiClone]

well, there also was the complaint that the formulas would be changed every year to increase the odds of "desired matchups" in the championship game, but yes - the biggest complaint by far was it was just the one game.

and yes - the BCS computers are by far more desirable than the selection committee that places eye test and $$$ above everything else.

I haven't read anywhere how the committee would be influenced by TV ratings so I've wondered could the TV execs be bribing committee members secretly? Or maybe there is some other method. Maybe non P2 conferences could work together secretly to hire private investigators to at least try to catch the activity in the act.

 

[HFCS]

A 2 loss Notre Dame, with one of those losses coming from an undefeated Army team is what could really screw up a cannibalized Big 12.

2 loss ND with a sub 100 home loss and dodging a CCG shouldn’t even remotely be considered. It’d be like a 3 loss team with the worst loss in the top 25.

Texas Tech and KU are dramatically better than NIU. ND couldn’t win their buy game.

 

[jdoggivjc]

2 loss ND with a sub 100 home loss and dodging a CCG shouldn’t even remotely be considered. It’d be like a 3 loss team with the worst loss in the top 25.

Texas Tech and KU are dramatically better than NIU. ND couldn’t win their buy game.

Yeah, the fact that the media and the playoff committee like to pretend the NIU game didn’t happen and by far the best win on their resume is an okay A&M team that isn’t even in the playoff picture at the moment tells you all you need to know about what’s important to these guys. I’ve already mentioned Boise St… Miami’s resume in reality probably isn’t any better than BYU’s, and (I’ll leave the SEC alone because GA, AL , and Ole Miss have beaten each other up) Indiana and Penn St have played absolutely nobody except Ohio St.

I assumed 12 teams was going to be better than 4, but it’s obviously been an excuse to give more playoff spots to SEC and Big 10 teams that didn’t earn it in the past. I’m being given no reason to care about this new playoff system whatsoever.

 

[Dopey]

2 loss ND with a sub 100 home loss and dodging a CCG shouldn’t even remotely be considered. It’d be like a 3 loss team with the worst loss in the top 25.

Texas Tech and KU are dramatically better than NIU. ND couldn’t win their buy game.

You don’t need to bother using logic when justifying leaving out the Big 12.

 

[KidSilverhair]

Eh, there were plenty of complaints about the formula. At its best it was 1/3rd AP poll (the thing we're complaining about now), 1/3rd Coaches or Harris (worse versions of the AP poll), and 1/3rd computers of varying quality that couldn't account for margin of victory and for the most part didn't publish their full methodology.

I'm all for an objective ranking, but let's not retcon the BCS into something it wasn't. A good system would be something like a strength of record formula, but based on something other than ESPN/FPI numbers.

The last couple of weeks I’ve seen an online account that duplicates the BCS formula and compares it to the CFP poll.

Theyve been close to identical, with only a couple of teams being one or two spots different.

I can’t decide if it validates the committee’s decisions or highlights the flaws of the BCS formula. I’m leaning toward the latter.

 

[ISUTex]

A 2 loss Notre Dame, with one of those losses coming from an undefeated Army team is what could really screw up a cannibalized Big 12.

Even if that happens, so what. If you want to determine who makes CFP according to what may happen, then you might as well use Vegas odds to pick teams. But then why even play the games?

I agree. But that's just what I think will happen. I don't think the Big 12 very good this year. But ya never know. Would love it if the Big 12 went on a run in the playoffs.

 

[CycloneSpinning]

The last couple of weeks I’ve seen an online account that duplicates the BCS formula and compares it to the CFP poll.

Theyve been close to identical, with only a couple of teams being one or two spots different.

I can’t decide if it validates the committee’s decisions or highlights the flaws of the BCS formula. I’m leaning toward the latter.

If you begin the season saying Georgia, Alabama, Michigan, Ohio State, Oregon, and Penn State are the best teams…then either they continue to be the best if they win…or anyone who beats them becomes great. It’s a deeply flawed echo chamber.

 

[Taz4President]

That would be funny if the Big 12 gets left out. This playoff is a joke... let it fail miserably for all I care.

Only the B1G and SEC matter anymore. That's the way they want it. So be it. Hope it all fails.

That’s the thing, it’s not going to fail. It will just evolve as the money dictates. At some point, the Big10 and SEC will be some semi-mostly-professional-non-educational thing and there will be everyone else.

 

[HFCS]

Eh, there were plenty of complaints about the formula. At its best it was 1/3rd AP poll (the thing we're complaining about now), 1/3rd Coaches or Harris (worse versions of the AP poll), and 1/3rd computers of varying quality that couldn't account for margin of victory and for the most part didn't publish their full methodology.

I'm all for an objective ranking, but let's not retcon the BCS into something it wasn't. A good system would be something like a strength of record formula, but based on something other than ESPN/FPI numbers.

I never complained about it, I thought it was fantastic. It was hundreds of voices for 2/3 of the formula and a few respected computer polls with high/low removed for the other 1/3. FANTASTIC. The only complaints I ever saw were that it fed into a stupid two team playoff when some years there were as many as 5 teams with practically flawless resumes.

We replaced it with a small group of obvious Big Ten homers who think 13 > 12 but also 6 > 12. That's how super stupid and rigged it got real fast. They really think 13 is waaaaay greater than 12, but 6 is also greater than 12. It's that rigged.

I love looking at computer averages but sometimes they can be off in similar or different ways than voters. Blending the two just makes sense. What computers don't do is think it doesn't matter if Notre Dame loses to a total crap team at home but it does matter if some other team does the same.

 

[HFCS]

Yeah, the fact that the media and the playoff committee like to pretend the NIU game didn’t happen and by far the best win on their resume is an okay A&M team that isn’t even in the playoff picture at the moment tells you all you need to know about what’s important to these guys. I’ve already mentioned Boise St… Miami’s resume in reality probably isn’t any better than BYU’s, and (I’ll leave the SEC alone because GA, AL , and Ole Miss have beaten each other up) Indiana and Penn St have played absolutely nobody except Ohio St.

I assumed 12 teams was going to be better than 4, but it’s obviously been an excuse to give more playoff spots to SEC and Big 10 teams that didn’t earn it in the past. I’m being given no reason to care about this new playoff system whatsoever.

Notre Dame and the non CCG at large teams REALLY need to have a loss added to their record when considering at large births.

The committee has been INCREDIBLY clear that not playing a CCG should drop you three spots from your ranking the week before. Or maybe they just keep changing the criteria every year to help their favorite teams/conferences.

 

[alarson]

The last couple of weeks I’ve seen an online account that duplicates the BCS formula and compares it to the CFP poll.

Theyve been close to identical, with only a couple of teams being one or two spots different.

I can’t decide if it validates the committee’s decisions or highlights the flaws of the BCS formula. I’m leaning toward the latter.

Part of that is that account is using the AP and coaches polls I believe. And those start to get closer and closer to the CFP poll once that releases. So 2/3 of the duplicate BCS formula is tilted towards what the committee is doing.

 

[Thomasrickj]

KU sucking so bad early and now getting hot is really screwing up the conference.

They've had it super rough. 5 of their 6 losses were by 6 points or less. I knew the game wouldn't be easy for ISU, but Kansas flat out murdered us. Hopefully Kansas pulls off a nice win over Colorado this weekend.

 

[1SEIACLONE]

What’s really nuts is there’s definitely a possibility that Iowa State, BYU, Colorado, and Arizona State could all tie with 7-2 conference records … and Iowa State wouldn’t have played any of the other three.

Conferences over 12 members are simply unworkable when it comes to determining a champion. You might as well use tock-paper-scissors to get your CCG teams.

The ACC is the same way, Clemson, Miami and SMU do not play each other. Indiana until this coming week when they play Ohio State has not faced one of the other top half of the league teams. Going forward the luck of each teams conference draw will be as important as the returning talent on a year to year basis.
The pathway to a 2nd B12 team getting into the playoff closed with BYU losing, if it was ever possible to begin with.

 

[awd4cy]

Little too high from where we probably should be.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

What’s really nuts is there’s definitely a possibility that Iowa State, BYU, Colorado, and Arizona State could all tie with 7-2 conference records … and Iowa State wouldn’t have played any of the other three.

Conferences over 12 members are simply unworkable when it comes to determining a champion. You might as well use tock-paper-scissors to get your CCG teams.

The Big 12 will move to 10 conference games in the next 3 years.

 

[1SEIACLONE]

I still think ESPN holds grudges against the Big 12 for daring to survive its "eliminate the Big 12" plan. We all know the "Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC" that they facilitated was supposed to be a silent coup, but instead the Big 12 caught wind of it and exposed it.

I mean, from the analytics I've seen not associated with ESPN it shows that the Big 12 is the second-best conference behind the SEC, but yet the conference as a whole is treated as if it's the worst of the P4 by a wide margin. I mean, even the ACC doesn't get the disrespect the Big 12 does.

No the B10 is the 2nd best conference because we have no one that is as good as Oregon or Ohio St., the ACC has national brands of Clemson and Miami, while we have no one like that.
Now top to bottom the B12 is the most competitive conference in the fact that we are all equally matched and their is not 2/4 heavy weights competing for the title.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

probably the same reason the Big 10 and SEC are going to get 4 teams each while the rest fight over the scraps. I mean, you had the **** Dinich on SC last night visibly upset that Tennessee was going to get screwed out of this... literally actively campaigning that the SEC deserves 5 spots.

It's tough to argue against because the top 4 of both the B1G and SEC are really good this year. The SEC is the deepest it's been in a really long time and they deserve those spots. My only beef with the B1G is that after the top 4 the drop off is HUGE. Don't tell me these super conferences are a good thing when you have a sharp drop off like that. Outside of their games against each other, the top 4 teams in the B1G are sleep walking through their schedules.

 

[Daserop]

The Big 12 will move to 10 conference games in the next 3 years.

This is literally shooting yourself in the foot. There's a reason the sec only plays 8 conference games.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

Eh, there were plenty of complaints about the formula. At its best it was 1/3rd AP poll (the thing we're complaining about now), 1/3rd Coaches or Harris (worse versions of the AP poll), and 1/3rd computers of varying quality that couldn't account for margin of victory and for the most part didn't publish their full methodology.

I'm all for an objective ranking, but let's not retcon the BCS into something it wasn't. A good system would be something like a strength of record formula, but based on something other than ESPN/FPI numbers.

The BCS basically nailed it every year...