Disband CFP Committee

#178
#178
we will still need the Committee to hold closed door meetings to decide the last 2 in when the playoffs expand. The pressure will be intense.
 
#179
#179
Of the power 5 schools , they got it right.
Ga and MI were both undefeated.
OSU and TCU both had 1 loss. Period. When we get to 12 teams in two years then we don’t have to here whining any more .
Their will be 1 from PAC12, 2 from Big12, 1 from group of 5, 1 from ACC, that will leave 4 SEC schools and 3 BiGTen schools . Eventually I see a Sweet 16 tournament run down in the future.
GOVOLS!!!!! Great season.
 
#180
#180
willinhf said:
Can you remind me of why? Was it because they took margin of victory into account? I would like to see the computer rankings be part of the selection criteria.

NCAA basketball has a ton of analytics that the selection committee uses in their selection process. NCAA football does not seem to use any of this but the eye test.

They (NCAAF CFP selection committee) published "hard and fast" rules regarding how to rank two teams with same records (head-to-head, common opponents, conference championships, etc) but the humans just discarded that and did whatever they wanted to. THAT is the problem with humans selecting anything.

The bias that humans have makes them feel their "feelings" trump whatever pre-determined criteria that they put in place....i.e., the coding that humans put into place is trumped whenever they feel that the coding is wrong.

A computer cannot do that and will always default to the pre-determined coding for rankings....computers = unemotional ranking...humans = emotional overrides and bias into rankings.
Click to expand...

Some of the computer findings were so far off from the eye test that they completely skewed the results. Silly results were so obvious with some that the committee decided they have no place. Also, the disparity of competition was a real issue with computers. They can’t differentiate between great stats in a game played between, say BALL ST and AKRON as it relates to a game played between Florida and Georgia. Humans can get it wrong. They did this year. The most glaring issues were osu and Bama over Tennessee. Local bias, recency boss, personal bias and regional bias is hard for humans to set aside and look objectively at the equation. From what I know, all the members of the committee are honorable people who try very hard to get it right. But let’s face it. There’s always been a strong bias against the SEC. There’s not a member of that committee that believes Bama wouldn’t beat osu and Tennessee wouldn’t beat TCU. We have what we have though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sami
#182
#182

In your opinion, what was the worst example of that?

2003 - Miami of Ohio (MAC) ended the regular season #14 in the polls but was around 6th on the computer algorithms - there were 4 separate ones recognized by BCS. It certainly wasn't clear that the computers got it wrong. That season, Toledo (MAC) had beaten Pitt (ranked 9th at the time), BGSU (MAC) had beaten Purdue (ranked 16th at the time), Northern Illinois (MAC) had beaten Maryland (ranked 15th at the time) and Alabama (ranked 21st at the time), and Marshall (MAC) had beaten Kansas State (ranked 6th at the time).

Now you can say small sample size or something but it certainly didn't flunk the eye test. It may have flunked the politics test.
 
#185
#185
Budalicious said:
Why can’t there be clear cut criteria and or a point system that does away with the selection process like the NFL. This sh!+ show is like NFL on Fox or NFL Today on CBS talking heads picking the playoff team for the NFL
Click to expand...


There was. The #1 and #2 teams played in the BCS championship game. But every sport had a playoff even FCS. LOL careful what you wish for.
CFP says hello, NIL says hold my beer
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sudden Impact
#188
#188
ClearwaterVol said:
TCU lost in ot in their conference championship game.
Click to expand...
A loss is a loss is a loss… don’t care when or how it happens… if you lose you don’t stay put; of course if if you lose to a team and have the same records, you shouldn’t be ranked ahead of them either… so, all that to say, the committee sucks.
 
#189
#189
BanditVol said:
As long as OSUs loss is to to TCU in the final, I agree

Uga must die, horribly
Click to expand...

As much as I don't like GA, we might get rid of some of the Big 10 bias if GA beats OSU and then Mich by 30 after Mich beats TCU by about the same. The Bama and UT positions will provide lots of comparative analysis by the masses on who should have been in the 4.. Especially if we both take care of business in the bowls. This phase of championship team selection has a good shot at going down badly. A GA loss does not help future considerations for the SEC.

I was pretty confident they would not allow Bama in to avoid the nationalization of the list of considerations Burns put out there earlier. Both outside it can be hidden. Bama in and us out, not so easy. Pretty close to Bennet getting to the ceremony and Hooker not, when HH took all the honors they were both up for in the SEC. Bennet is a great underdog story, HH took a whole team into over achievement mode leading the nation in scoring and total offense and did so without 5 stars stacked up around him like cord wood.

Are all Heisman ballots public? Love to see the distribution of votes by region. Where did all of Bennet over Hooker votes come from? If they were both given another year of eligibility as Grads... and you could only make one inquiry as a coach, what would the distribution of calls be? Same logic I applied to the Peyton Woodson debate back in the day..... Woodson was great for a long time too, but.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: sami
#190
#190
OldVol said:
Some of the computer findings were so far off from the eye test that they completely skewed the results. Silly results were so obvious with some that the committee decided they have no place. Also, the disparity of competition was a real issue with computers. They can’t differentiate between great stats in a game played between, say BALL ST and AKRON as it relates to a game played between Florida and Georgia. Humans can get it wrong. They did this year. The most glaring issues were osu and Bama over Tennessee. Local bias, recency boss, personal bias and regional bias is hard for humans to set aside and look objectively at the equation. From what I know, all the members of the committee are honorable people who try very hard to get it right. But let’s face it. There’s always been a strong bias against the SEC. There’s not a member of that committee that believes Bama wouldn’t beat osu and Tennessee wouldn’t beat TCU. We have what we have though.
Click to expand...

Agree completely. I just wish they wouldn't go on about the "best four teams" when this is clearly not the case. There isn't an honest person in the country who wouldn't say that the four best this year were GA, MI, TN, and AL, and without Hooker perhaps OSU over TN.
 
#191
#191
GUNTERSVOL said:
As much as I don't like GA, we might get rid of some of the Big 10 bias if GA beats OSU and then Mich by 30 after Mich beats TCU by about the same. The Bama and UT positions will provide lots of comparative analysis by the masses on who should have been in the 4.. Especially if we both take care of business in the bowls. This phase of championship team selection has a good shot at going down badly. A GA loss does not help future considerations for the SEC.
Click to expand...

I won't watch the CFP because it's a lose-lose situation. If GA wins (which is the most likely scenario) they've won two in a row and will have done it without playing anyone but us all season. If OSU or MI win the Big 10 bias will spiral out of control, if it isn't doing that already.

I hope one of two things happens - either two GA blowouts over both Big 10 pretenders exposing them for what they are, or an OSU blowout over GA. The former is better for the SEC, the latter is better because it puts GA and their 'fans' back in their place.
 
#192
#192
DrTNT said:
A loss is a loss is a loss… don’t care when or how it happens… if you lose you don’t stay put; of course if if you lose to a team and have the same records, you shouldn’t be ranked ahead of them either… so, all that to say, the committee sucks.
Click to expand...

Nope, teams shouldn’t be penalized for playing an extra game over teams that weren’t good enough to make it to conference championships and have more losses
 
#196
#196
DrTNT said:
A loss is a loss is a loss… don’t care when or how it happens… if you lose you don’t stay put; of course if if you lose to a team and have the same records, you shouldn’t be ranked ahead of them either… so, all that to say, the committee sucks.
Click to expand...
Yea and everyone else not in has more then one loss. They have double the amount of a "loss is a loss is a loss." And that's why they aren't in and TCU is. This isn't hard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spacificislander
#197
#197
dcibrando said:
I’ve always said there’s a reason they have closed door meetings to discuss and decide the top 4 and don’t let anyone else including reporters in the room. It’s bias with the middle 2 letters removed
Click to expand...
`2 things can be true herre....lol
 
#198
#198
VolArmy74 said:
44 percent of NFL teams make the playoffs. A 12 team College playoff is less than 10 percent. When you are dealing with such a small amount you can't seed it with bad teams because they finished 2nd in a 10 team league when 5th place in a 16 team league might be better than the other league champion.
Click to expand...
The less than 10% argument is bogus.

You are pulling from 32 teams in the NFL in college you are really only selecting from 25 in college football.

There are 105 teams that will never come close to making the CFP.

What's more in the NFL you can have a team below .500 make the playoffs. That will never happen in CFP.

To complicate this even more, is that Clemson Conference Champion would have received the 4th Seed in the CFP this year.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top