CFP will not use conference championships as tiebreakers

#1

TrueOrange

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
50,992
Likes
6,508
#1
Just an fyi for us all from today.


“The College Football Playoff selection committee will no longer use conference championships as one of its tiebreakers because the new 12-team format guarantees bids for the five highest-ranked conference winners, the CFP announced Thursday.

The change in protocol, which was approved by the FBS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Pete Bevacqua, was implemented at this week's annual meeting of selection committee members in Laguna Niguel, California.

When the commissioners decided upon the 12-team format for this fall, they also agreed to place an emphasis on the importance of winning a conference title. Because it is embedded into the model, that eliminated any need to use a conference title as a tiebreaker when comparing similar teams.

The four highest-ranked conference champions will receive a first-round bye. The other tiebreakers remain and include strength of schedule, head-to-head results, and comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory).

The committee will release its first of six rankings on Nov. 5. The group will continue to meet in person on Mondays and Tuesdays and reveal its top 25 ranking each week on ESPN. The final ranking will be released on Selection Day, Dec. 8, when the committee will also announce the 12-team playoff bracket pairings and game sites.

The CFP also announced its recusals for this season, and that policy hasn't changed in the decade of the event's existence. It is determined annually, though, to account for new selection committee members, as their terms typically expire after three years.

This year's new committee members include former Oregon State and Nebraska coach Mike Riley, former Toledo and Missouri coach Gary Pinkel; Baylor athletic director Mack Rhoades, Virginia athletic director Carla Williams, and Arkansas athletic director Hunter Yurachek.

Recused committee members aren't allowed to vote for any teams they are recused from or be in the room during any discussions regarding that team's selection or ranking, but they are allowed to answer "only factual questions" about that school. They're also not allowed to participate in discussions about the bowl placement of their recused schools.

The six acting athletic directors on the 13-member committee are all recused from their respective schools -- Yurachek (Arkansas); Rhoades (Baylor); Miami (Ohio) athletic director David Sayler; Michigan athletic director Warde Manuel; Navy athletic director Chet Gladchuk; and Virginia athletic director Carla Williams.

The following committee members are also recused from these respective schools: Jim Grobe (Marshall); Pinkel (Missouri); Chris Ault (Nevada); Riley (Oregon State); former sports reporter Kelly Whiteside (Rutgers); Yurachek (SMU, South Carolina); Gladchuk (Texas A&M); Ault (UCLA).

Committee members are recused if an immediate family member is paid by a school, provides any professional services for a school, or is on the football coaching staff or is a player.

The preseason meeting in California is usually the last time the full group meets before they convene again during the season to begin their weekly rankings.

"It is always great to get everyone together before the season starts to welcome our new members and review our procedures in detail," Manuel, who will be serving his first year as committee chair, said in a prepared statement. "The work of the College Football Playoff selection committee has a solid foundation with its processes and protocols, and the committee members are looking forward to ranking the top 25 teams this season as we kick off the first year of the 12-team format."“
 
#4
#4
Until they come up with a method of selection that eliminates this collection of stooges, there will always be issues with these oh-so-subjective "rankings". How on earth can anyone who has worked for a school or schools over the course of years not have developed biases, likes, dislikes, etc.? They are suddenly "objective"? Please stop.

Of course, the powers that be in CFB love the attention and controversy, as it keeps the sport at the top of the headlines and the subject of discussion from November well beyond the end of the season. Why would they change anything?
 
#7
#7
Not really? After the team’s 2nd loss, they shouldn’t have been in the top 4.

(Maybe arguing that they should have been 1 spot higher and in the Sugar Bowl rather than the Orange Bowl? Sure. But not top 4.)
Never said top 4
 
  • Like
Reactions: tennrich1
#8
#8
After what happened to FSU last year ( I know some will debate the injury completely changed the team which, IMO, is irrelevant if we are going by records and who you beat etc....and the bowl game was completely gutted of players so not an indicator) personal decisions will still have a place here. Hopefully we can get rid of this 12th team from "the rest of the leagues" thing soon too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#9
#9
After what happened to FSU last year ( I know some will debate the injury completely changed the team which, IMO, is irrelevant if we are going by records and who you beat etc....and the bowl game was completely gutted of players so not an indicator) personal decisions will still have a place here. Hopefully we can get rid of this 12th team from "the rest of the leagues" thing soon too.
Likely not. Having that is how they avoid a massive antitrust suit and Congress getting involved with hearings. There’s a reason it got thrown in there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S.C. OrangeMan
#10
#10
There it goes - they just made the SECCG completely irrelevant (other than the winning team would presumably be the highest ranked from the conference), so other than two teams ending the season with an identical conference record, why play the SECCG anymore?

Why not give that team / teams an extra week of rest and recuperation before the playoff?

Sorry for my ignorance on the subject but i just don't see the point behind the SECCG any longer...
 
  • Like
Reactions: buryMEinORANGE
#11
#11
Likely not. Having that is how they avoid a massive antitrust suit and Congress getting involved with hearings. There’s a reason it got thrown in there.
We'll see. Maybe. Maybe not. CLEARLY...financial parameters rule this thing and antitrust can be danced around. I'd imagine tweaking will occur...again. We have things in place now 5 years ago very few could envision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#14
#14
There it goes - they just made the SECCG completely irrelevant (other than the winning team would presumably be the highest ranked from the conference), so other than two teams ending the season with an identical conference record, why play the SECCG anymore?

Why not give that team / teams an extra week of rest and recuperation before the playoff?

Sorry for my ignorance on the subject but i just don't see the point behind the SECCG any longer...
Not really. The 4 teams that get the byes have to have won their conference. That’s still in place

It’s just that when looking at determining (and ordering) teams 5-11, winning a conference championship isn’t going to give one team an advantage/higher ranking over the other.

Also money. The entirety of the conference gets a ton of money out of the SEC Championship Game being played.
 
#15
#15
Not really. The 4 teams that get the byes have to have won their conference. That’s still in place

It’s just that when looking at determining (and ordering) teams 5-11, winning a conference championship isn’t going to give one team an advantage/higher ranking over the other.

Also money. The entirety of the conference gets a ton of money out of the SEC Championship Game being played.
What team ranked 5-11 will have won a conference title ? I’m not sure I understand what the purpose of this new release of information is. Each P4 gets an AQ bid and a bye. 5-11 is at large and #12 is the G5 school (which is BS IMO). The only team that will have won a title would be the #12 G5 school right ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volanta
#22
#22
the College Football Playoff selection committee will screw us over in a heartbeat if given a chance. I have zero faith in them.

I don't know if they'll screw us necessarily, I just think it's lunacy to leave the selection of a playoff that has such immense ramifications for schools, both financial and recruiting-wise, in the hands of a bunch of people all with their own biases and grudges regardless how pure they appear.

That they can't come up with some sort of objective computer formula in this day and age using the criteria they allegedly use to rank teams is the height of absurdity.
 
#24
#24
I don't know if they'll screw us necessarily, I just think it's lunacy to leave the selection of a playoff that has such immense ramifications for schools, both financial and recruiting-wise, in the hands of a bunch of people all with their own biases and grudges regardless how pure they appear.

That they can't come up with some sort of objective computer formula in this day and age using the criteria they allegedly use to rank teams is the height of absurdity.
Exactly why the went away from the BCS computer model. “They” lost control. (Networks Nielsen powers)
 
  • Like
Reactions: sami
#25
#25
Exactly why the went away from the BCS computer model. “They” lost control. (Networks Nielsen powers)

I was going to reference the BCS model, good catch. It's no shock that the hacks and leeches in the national media have never raised that as a question. Can't chance biting the hand that feeds them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo

VN Store



Back
Top