_sturt_
Irritant-in-Chief to the Whiny 5% (hehe)
Posts: 1,550
Joined: Jun 2003
Reputation: 32
I Root For: competence
Location: Bloom County
|
Apply the CFP committee concept to conferences... who would get your vote for...
...conference champion in each of the ten conferences, just based on what you saw during the regular season?
Remember, records aren't necessarily the only indicator by CFP committee standards, of course.
And then, which one of your choices would probably get the most outcry and, accordingly, on what basis would you play Jeff Long and defend that choice?
(This post was last modified: 12-02-2014 11:27 AM by _sturt_.)
|
|
12-02-2014 11:26 AM |
|
ken d
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17,451
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1226
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
|
RE: Apply the CFP committee concept to conferences... who would get your vote for...
Not a fan of the selection committee, are we?
|
|
12-02-2014 11:40 AM |
|
_sturt_
Irritant-in-Chief to the Whiny 5% (hehe)
Posts: 1,550
Joined: Jun 2003
Reputation: 32
I Root For: competence
Location: Bloom County
|
RE: Apply the CFP committee concept to conferences... who would get your vote for...
Actually, it's merely... and sincerely... just curiosity that prompts me to post the question.
But to answer straight-up... in concept, I'm more okay with it than I am depending on AP voters or coaches to make the big decisions. But in terms of the parameters, the composition of the committee is a real problem. There was a focus on appointing "names" seemingly for the purpose of promoting public acceptance and assumption of integrity... but that, at the deficit of eliminating the appearance of potential biases, not only for certain schools but also against others.
They thought a recusal policy was adequate to mitigate that, but obviously, that's just not reality. It's all behind closed doors, and valid or not, there is the appearance that there's a reason they want it behind closed doors.
As stated in another thread, it all could have been solved by having each of the 13 FCS commissioners as the committee, or giving each one latitude to appoint one of the ADs from their conference. Certainly, you can't 100% eliminate biases, but that shouldn't detract from doing due diligence to eliminate the most obvious stuff, and particularly where there is some overt adult-years relationship with a FBS school, pro or con. The result would have been a committee of high integrity, yet without any of the questionable ties that this committee inherently possesses.
Ultimately, though, a completely legit national championship process is one where there is no subjective debate... like March Madness, every team begins every season with a shot, regardless of how realistic it is that they would ascend to the very top, and everything gets decided on the field.
(This post was last modified: 12-02-2014 12:26 PM by _sturt_.)
|
|
12-02-2014 12:21 PM |
|