(01-08-2018 06:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-08-2018 04:20 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  12 pages and we have it all boiled down to the fact that one group thinks winning the AAC was impressive enough and one group that doesn't...

Which is why ice skating judges are no more valid than than a school declaring itself national champion after finishing a season as the nations only undefeated team. One is based on the opinion of ice skating judges---the other is based on objective results. I used to think we'd really made significant progress in the college football post season---lol...then I realized we really haven't changed much at all. Its all still just based on a poll. Worse yet---we are now using a smaller sampling of opinions to create our final poll (which in the era of "big data", means we have actually have taken a step backwards with respect to the sophistication and accuracy of the polling information we use).

In an interesting note---Im actually kinda hoping 'Bama wins tonight. If Alabama wins tonight---it means that 50% of the time in the CFP era, the last team selected into the playoff field won the national championship. That would suggest that nearly 50% of the BCS era champs (that we all currently accept as "official") very well may not have prevailed in a 4 team playoff. So when I hear arguments that 4 is enough and 8 makes no sense--Im forced to ask----How many 5, 6, 7, and 8 seeds might have won had they been involved? My guess is---based on what we have seen in the CFP era, teams from those bottom 4 seeds would probably have won more often than many think.

It's important to understand what infuriation is actually telling you and it isn't telling you that the BCS wasn't accurate.

The BCS and CFP are simply telling you who is best at different times.