SEC/Big10 Pushing for 16 Team Playoff

[enisthemenace]

A 1-loss Utah or Okie St. last year would've likely ended the regular season ranked in the top-4. Under these rules they'd get a first round bye.

Why use Utah or Okie State in your example? Because they were highly ranked in the preseason, that’s why.

Would a 1 loss Arizona State or Iowa State have ended the regular season in the top 4?

Meanwhile, 2 loss Georgia, Texas and Penn State are in the top 4.

It’s horse ****.

 

[Gonzo]

Why use Utah or Okie State in your example? Because they were highly ranked in the preseason, that’s why.

Would a 1 loss Arizona State or Iowa State have ended the regular season in the top 4?

Meanwhile, 2 loss Georgia, Texas and Penn State are in the top 4.

It’s horse ****.

Yeah preseason rankings suck but they matter. If Utah, who was ranked #12 in the preseason, would've gone 12-1, there's no way they wouldn't have been ranked higher than a 2-loss PSU.

 

[heitclone]

I don't mind the conference champs not getting a bye but they should at least get a home game. You should get some reward for winning your league. Teams like Penn St and Texas from last year should not be getting home games, they didn't win their league they didn't beat anyone good in their league, they just skated thanks to an easy schedule.

The home game in the first round is the most underrated aspect of all of this. Sure you want a bye but the economic impact of hosting a game is a really nice consolation prize. I can't imagine the money that pumped through Columbus last year for the Tennessee game. Same for Austin, South Bend and Happy Valley.

 

[enisthemenace]

Yeah preseason rankings suck but they matter. If Utah, who was ranked #12 in the preseason, would've gone 12-1, there's no way they wouldn't have been ranked higher than a 2-loss PSU.

By there in lies the issue. The “committee” is explicitly NOT supposed to use preseason ranking in their evaluation. Supposedly there is “no reliance” on that.

Interestingly, “strength of schedule” IS a metric.

Tell me…how does one determine SoS without some kind of ranking?

It’s a crock of ****.

 

[Gonzo]

By there in lies the issue. The “committee” is explicitly NOT supposed to use preseason ranking in their evaluation. Supposedly there is “no reliance” on that.

Interestingly, “strength of schedule” IS a metric.

Tell me…how does one determine SoS without some kind of ranking?

It’s a crock of ****.

I know all that. But it's silly to think it's not going to be harder to climb into the top-5 when you start the season unranked vs. ranked near the top-10.

 

[cyclones500]

In principle, and if ranking method had any “method,” the straight seeding instead of auto-bye makes sense.

I don’t know if I trust the selection process enough to assume it will not slope toward P2 by default.

 

[enisthemenace]

I know all that. But it's silly to think it's not going to be harder to climb into the top-5 when you start the season unranked vs. ranked near the top-10.

So you agree it’s all a crock. Good deal.

 

[enisthemenace]

In principle, and if ranking method had any “method,” the straight seeding instead of auto-bye makes sense.

I don’t know if I trust the selection process enough to assume it will not slope toward P2 by default.

It absolutely will. It does already. This is just the next load to the unbalance. If it doesn’t give the P2 + Notre Dame the top 8+ spots next year, you can bet there will be another adjustment.

 

[Gonzo]

So you agree it’s all a crock. Good deal.

I think preseason polls are a crock, absolutely.

 

[enisthemenace]

I think preseason polls are a crock, absolutely.

Yet, in your own words, “they matter”. Doesn’t that make the whole thing a crock, by definition?

Look…I’m not trying to pick a fight. I’m really not. I’m just pissed off by this ****. Nothing is the way it should be, and it keeps getting worse with every iteration (unless you’re a member of the P2, which I realize you are (and I like you as a member of this board)).

 

[Gonzo]

Yet, in your own words, “they matter”. Doesn’t that make the whole thing a crock, by definition?

Look…I’m not trying to pick a fight. I’m really not. I’m just pissed off by this ****. Nothing is the way it should be, and it keeps getting worse with every iteration (unless you’re a member of the P2, which I realize you are (and I like you as a member of this board)).

Every system is going to be f*cked in one way or another. I think people forget how unpopular the BCS system was back in the day. I think the first poll of the season should come after week 3 or 4, and then go from there. Then using SoS would make more sense. Are you ever going to get away from the biases of human voters? No. Would you rather go with a straight algorithm? I wouldn't.

 

[enisthemenace]

Every system is going to be f*cked in one way or another. I think people forget how unpopular the BCS system was back in the day. I think the first poll of the season should come after week 3 or 4, and then go from there. Then using SoS would make more sense. Are you ever going to get away from the biases of human voters? No. Would you rather go with a straight algorithm? I wouldn't.

I don’t necessarily disagree. All systems are flawed. I can accept that. What I have a problem with is when the imperfect systems in place are gamed.

 

[Clonehomer]

Every system is going to be f*cked in one way or another. I think people forget how unpopular the BCS system was back in the day. I think the first poll of the season should come after week 3 or 4, and then go from there. Then using SoS would make more sense. Are you ever going to get away from the biases of human voters? No. Would you rather go with a straight algorithm? I wouldn't.

The BCS was unpopular with the fans because it only picked two teams. Put that system in to pick the 12 teams and it’d be fine.

The BCS was unpopular with the TV talking heads because they couldn’t influence the selection of the teams with the way they covered them.

A straight algorithm is the most fair way to judge teams. Everyone knows at the start of the season how the teams will be selected. That algorithm can be tweaked over time to give preference to different criteria, but ultimately what matters is everyone is graded on that same scale. None of this BS about giving different reasons for selecting a team or not selecting a team with inconsistent reasoning.

 

[MountainManHawk]

If it’s any consolation, it seems very likely this system will completely change again next year so we will only have a single year with this format.

 

[SolterraCyclone]

The BCS was unpopular with the fans because it only picked two teams. Put that system in to pick the 12 teams and it’d be fine.

The BCS was unpopular with the TV talking heads because they couldn’t influence the selection of the teams with the way they covered them.

A straight algorithm is the most fair way to judge teams. Everyone knows at the start of the season how the teams will be selected. That algorithm can be tweaked over time to give preference to different criteria, but ultimately what matters is everyone is graded on that same scale. None of this BS about giving different reasons for selecting a team or not selecting a team with inconsistent reasoning.

I don’t necessarily disagree, but an algorithm is only as good as the signals it uses.

The problem with football is you only have a sample size of 12 games. There’s really not enough data for an algorithm to work properly.

I thought the committee last year did a good job. The year before though, they really f’d up imo putting Bama in over FSU, but a lot of people agreed with that decision. So it’s not so black and white.

 

[Clonehomer]

I don’t necessarily disagree, but an algorithm is only as good as the signals it uses.

The problem with football is you only have a sample size of 12 games. There’s really not enough data for an algorithm to work properly.

I thought the committee last year did a good job. The year before though, they really f’d up imo putting Bama in over FSU, but a lot of people agreed with that decision. So it’s not so black and white.

I agree on the signals. And I think the algorithm would have to evolve. But the point is that you’re not using a different justification for one team vs another. Everyone is graded on the same scale.

 

[CascadeClone]

The BCS was unpopular with the fans because it only picked two teams. Put that system in to pick the 12 teams and it’d be fine.

The BCS was unpopular with the TV talking heads because they couldn’t influence the selection of the teams with the way they covered them.

I think this was the main driver. Something totally objective and fair was NOT what the guys writing checks wanted. So the guys cashing the checks changed it so the guys writing the checks would keep writing them.

It's all so dumb. There's never a need for more than 4 teams to determine a champ. It's just about having more games to make more money. Which is fine, and gives a bunch of 2nd tier teams a chance to say "we made the playoff", which never would have happened before. But its a charade.

If I've done the math right, in the past 25 years, 8 teams have won 21 championships. All blue bloods, as were the other 4 winners, and that's highly unlikely to change.

So we can all think the Big12 is getting hosed (and it is) but end of the day, there's ~15-20 schools just playing a different game than the other 80.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

Ahh I get your point now. And sure I can’t say that sentiment is entirely wrong but it also corresponds with the expanded playoff so I don’t see an issue with it in addition to the fact that to me that doesn’t really matter.

The rivalries that mattered most got protected and I personally kinda like mixing up the teams a little bit. Allows for situations like Indiana last year

There are zero good excuses for Iowa to have 3 protected rivalries. ZERO! Tradition went out the window once the B1G and SEC became greedy a-holes.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

A 1-loss Utah or Okie St. last year would've likely ended the regular season ranked in the top-4. Under these rules they'd get a first round bye.

The amount of tomfuckery by the committee wouldn't allow that to happen. It's all a sham at this point.

 

[WooBadger18]

There are zero good excuses for Iowa to have 3 protected rivalries. ZERO! Tradition went out the window once the B1G and SEC became greedy a-holes.

Maybe there aren’t good excuses, but there are good reasons to have 3 protected rivalries: they have three rivalries.