(12-03-2014 01:15 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  If the above scenario plays out. B12 will create a CCG asap. The only question will they get to do it with 10 or need to have 12? The may have the ACC but I don't see P12, B10 or SEC approving due to the fact they had to expand to have a CCG.

Good the Big XII NEEDS to create a championship game....ridiculous that they don't have one.

No way they should be viewed on the same level as the other P5 conferences without one

(12-03-2014 01:24 PM)buffdog Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:10 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:07 PM)buffdog Wrote:  No, the clear solution to all this was a 16 team playoff with autobids for all D1A conference champs and at large bids. Just like basketball/baseball. This is after all amateur college sports.

please....give it up. 16 team NCAA tourney isn't going to happen

Nope, didn't give up calling for a playoff and now we will have one this season albeit a less robust than I would like.

And I won't give up either, FBS should have a system similar to FCS, run by the NCAA, and I don't care if the big schools whine and moan about it.

(12-03-2014 03:44 PM)etsuandpurdue3 Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 01:24 PM)buffdog Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:10 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:07 PM)buffdog Wrote:  No, the clear solution to all this was a 16 team playoff with autobids for all D1A conference champs and at large bids. Just like basketball/baseball. This is after all amateur college sports.

please....give it up. 16 team NCAA tourney isn't going to happen

Nope, didn't give up calling for a playoff and now we will have one this season albeit a less robust than I would like.

And I won't give up either, FBS should have a system similar to FCS, run by the NCAA, and I don't care if the big schools whine and moan about it.

autonomy seems to suggest this won't happen.....

A 16 team playoff is officially fantasyland....sorry guys

(12-03-2014 12:57 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:52 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:15 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:10 PM)stever20 Wrote:  1 thing we're seeing is that MOV is totally back in college football as a very big criteria.

the criteria of the committee is extremely meaningless....thats the point

There is no legitimacy behind it at all. Not a single team knows what they have to do to be where they are at....

THINK about it for a long second....AFTER the games Saturday....no one will know where they are at for any of this....

we all have to wait for the guys behind the curtain to tell us....

thats a complete joke

Funny people long for the BCS. The BCS was a total joke that kept getting rigged when they didn't like the results. Coaches rigged their votes to help certain teams and hurt others. MOV came out when a non-BCS school threatened to get too high in the rankings.

The committee is definitely not even close to perfect, but its far better than what we had before.

MOV didn't come out because of non-bcs schools. IT came out after the 2001 season when Oregon(of all teams) didn't make the title game because they had a lot of close wins, while Nebraska who had a lot of big wins got in(even not as division champs).

MOV coming out actually HELPED the non-BCS schools overwhelmingly. See this year.
Marshall in Colley with no MOV is 25
Rothman who was in the BCS way back with MOV is 42

There was a non-BCS team (BYU?) who threatened to get close.
Nebraska was higher because any computer system would have rated them higher. They had a tougher schedule and 1 more win. Humans rated them lower because CU stomped them head to head. To impact the Nebraska situation they juggled the weighting and things like quality wins.

(12-03-2014 01:49 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:52 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:15 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:10 PM)stever20 Wrote:  1 thing we're seeing is that MOV is totally back in college football as a very big criteria.

the criteria of the committee is extremely meaningless....thats the point

There is no legitimacy behind it at all. Not a single team knows what they have to do to be where they are at....

THINK about it for a long second....AFTER the games Saturday....no one will know where they are at for any of this....

we all have to wait for the guys behind the curtain to tell us....

thats a complete joke

Funny people long for the BCS. The BCS was a total joke that kept getting rigged when they didn't like the results. Coaches rigged their votes to help certain teams and hurt others. MOV came out when a non-BCS school threatened to get too high in the rankings.

The committee is definitely not even close to perfect, but its far better than what we had before.

wrong....

The BCS was a failure because there were only 2 SLOTS

4 slots is better than 2, but the BCS poll blows the doors off of this committee ****. If you're forced to use a poll (which sucks by itself), then the BCS was actually a good blend of human and computer voters

Teams and coaches had an idea of where they had to finish and what they had to do. With the SEC Championship, a few years actually formed a 3 team playoff

Disagree totally. These people are much more objective than the Harris and Coaches pollsters. And computers simply have no validity on a 12 game season, even more so when you limit what they can consider.

(12-03-2014 01:15 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  I was never a fan of the committee from the start. Even as P5 fan, I stated the G5 needed to realize they are worse off than they ever were with the BCS to have a shot for a playoff spot. I liked the format but thought the BCS rankings should pick the top 4 teams. Even with the G5 slot, that would be more transparent with the old BCS poll.

After watching the show, if FSU, Ore and Bama win they are in. If OSU beats Wisconsin, especially convincingly, I would not be shocked that FSU moves back to three and OSU goes to 4. The CFP guy basically side stepped the question how much ranking does a outright Conference Champ make. The committee line of using the B12 that One True Champion of a conference carries weight over a CO-Champion. If that happens, it probably impacts the AAC as well.

I feel for TCU, they are in no-win situation if OSU wins the B10. If Baylor beats K State, the committee says K. State was no longer an impressive win. If K. State beats Baylor, then TCU lost to Baylor which now looks like a worse loss along with using the co-champs scenario CFP drops them to number 5. TCU needs at least one upset this weekend to feel secure.

If the above scenario plays out. B12 will create a CCG asap. The only question will they get to do it with 10 or need to have 12? The may have the ACC but I don't see P12, B10 or SEC approving due to the fact they had to expand to have a CCG.

Everybody does as expected and Ohio St. and Baylor get left out. FSU jumps TCU for #3.

(12-03-2014 02:08 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 01:15 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  If the above scenario plays out. B12 will create a CCG asap. The only question will they get to do it with 10 or need to have 12? The may have the ACC but I don't see P12, B10 or SEC approving due to the fact they had to expand to have a CCG.

Good the Big XII NEEDS to create a championship game....ridiculous that they don't have one.

No way they should be viewed on the same level as the other P5 conferences without one

Ridiculous that Missouri get into ccgs with weak conference schedules in these larger conferences. Maybe we should leave them out if they win their conference. In the Big 12 they actually have to play everyone else and don't get to skip 5 of the top 6 teams (they lost to the one they played). Maybe we should just leave the SEC out for allowing that to happen.

It's an invitational not a playoff.

They could have designed it right but
Choose not to

You have to include all 10 fbs
Conferences. Even if the bottom
4 conferences have a play in game

Every school should be able to say win all your games
You are the champ

(12-03-2014 01:46 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:48 PM)BoiseStateOfMind Wrote:  The committee does have rules and they're clearly outlined on the website:

http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/se...e-protocol

Interestingly, they are allowed to weigh geography and convenience for fans when determining the top 4. Perhaps the real reason why FSU keeps being ranked so low is because a Bama/FSU matchup in the Sugar Bowl makes it easy for both fanbases to travel.

Personally, I still disagree with TCU being ranked above FSU. I also think that FSU is being unfairly judged by the committee and media, who seem to be forgetting how difficult it is to maintain a long winning streak like the one the Noles are currently on. However, OP comes across as a butthurt fan by spamming all these threads, especially when it's evident that he doesn't know what he's talking about.

go reread the original post again, maybe it will click

I read your original post. You claimed that the playoff needs to have a new transparent set of rules, but the reality is that they already have a transparent set of rules with the committee format.

(12-03-2014 04:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:57 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:52 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:15 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:10 PM)stever20 Wrote:  1 thing we're seeing is that MOV is totally back in college football as a very big criteria.

the criteria of the committee is extremely meaningless....thats the point

There is no legitimacy behind it at all. Not a single team knows what they have to do to be where they are at....

THINK about it for a long second....AFTER the games Saturday....no one will know where they are at for any of this....

we all have to wait for the guys behind the curtain to tell us....

thats a complete joke

Funny people long for the BCS. The BCS was a total joke that kept getting rigged when they didn't like the results. Coaches rigged their votes to help certain teams and hurt others. MOV came out when a non-BCS school threatened to get too high in the rankings.

The committee is definitely not even close to perfect, but its far better than what we had before.

MOV didn't come out because of non-bcs schools. IT came out after the 2001 season when Oregon(of all teams) didn't make the title game because they had a lot of close wins, while Nebraska who had a lot of big wins got in(even not as division champs).

MOV coming out actually HELPED the non-BCS schools overwhelmingly. See this year.
Marshall in Colley with no MOV is 25
Rothman who was in the BCS way back with MOV is 42

There was a non-BCS team (BYU?) who threatened to get close.
Nebraska was higher because any computer system would have rated them higher. They had a tougher schedule and 1 more win. Humans rated them lower because CU stomped them head to head. To impact the Nebraska situation they juggled the weighting and things like quality wins.

Nope. BYU's one year was before the BCS.

Colorado wasn't the team they had a problem with(although Colorado smashed them 62-36), it was Oregon. 2001 season.

http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819366
2002
The commissioners agreed that margin of victory was not an appropriate element in the standings and accordingly removed the Matthews and Rothman rankings from the formula. The New York Times ranking returned, resulting in a total of seven computer rankings for the 2002 season. Only the lowest score was eliminated before averaging the remaining six computer rankings.

Roughly 20% of the NCAA D1 basketball teams make it to the NCAA tourny. They play 2 games per week in the NCAA. Using that scale 24 teams is roughly 20% of FBS, but since they would only play one game per week cut that in half to 12.

Top 2 Go5 conf champs in, All P5 conf champs in, and 5 at large.

Top 4 get a first round bye.

That's 4 weeks of playoffs. This season:

1st Rd December 13
2nd Rd December 20
3rd Rd New years day
Championship January 10

(12-03-2014 04:42 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 04:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:57 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:52 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:15 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  the criteria of the committee is extremely meaningless....thats the point

There is no legitimacy behind it at all. Not a single team knows what they have to do to be where they are at....

THINK about it for a long second....AFTER the games Saturday....no one will know where they are at for any of this....

we all have to wait for the guys behind the curtain to tell us....

thats a complete joke

Funny people long for the BCS. The BCS was a total joke that kept getting rigged when they didn't like the results. Coaches rigged their votes to help certain teams and hurt others. MOV came out when a non-BCS school threatened to get too high in the rankings.

The committee is definitely not even close to perfect, but its far better than what we had before.

MOV didn't come out because of non-bcs schools. IT came out after the 2001 season when Oregon(of all teams) didn't make the title game because they had a lot of close wins, while Nebraska who had a lot of big wins got in(even not as division champs).

MOV coming out actually HELPED the non-BCS schools overwhelmingly. See this year.
Marshall in Colley with no MOV is 25
Rothman who was in the BCS way back with MOV is 42

There was a non-BCS team (BYU?) who threatened to get close.
Nebraska was higher because any computer system would have rated them higher. They had a tougher schedule and 1 more win. Humans rated them lower because CU stomped them head to head. To impact the Nebraska situation they juggled the weighting and things like quality wins.

Nope. BYU's one year was before the BCS.

Colorado wasn't the team they had a problem with(although Colorado smashed them 62-36), it was Oregon. 2001 season.

http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819366
2002
The commissioners agreed that margin of victory was not an appropriate element in the standings and accordingly removed the Matthews and Rothman rankings from the formula. The New York Times ranking returned, resulting in a total of seven computer rankings for the 2002 season. Only the lowest score was eliminated before averaging the remaining six computer rankings.

BYU was 12-1 in 2001 and was #12 in the BCS before they lost their last game at Hawaii. Next year they changed the formula. It wasn't about Nebraska. BYU was between 9 and 18 in the computer polls before they lost. If you take out MOV, they would have been a lot lower. http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/pdf/bcs_2001.pdf

(12-03-2014 04:39 PM)BoiseStateOfMind Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 01:46 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:48 PM)BoiseStateOfMind Wrote:  The committee does have rules and they're clearly outlined on the website:

http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/se...e-protocol

Interestingly, they are allowed to weigh geography and convenience for fans when determining the top 4. Perhaps the real reason why FSU keeps being ranked so low is because a Bama/FSU matchup in the Sugar Bowl makes it easy for both fanbases to travel.

Personally, I still disagree with TCU being ranked above FSU. I also think that FSU is being unfairly judged by the committee and media, who seem to be forgetting how difficult it is to maintain a long winning streak like the one the Noles are currently on. However, OP comes across as a butthurt fan by spamming all these threads, especially when it's evident that he doesn't know what he's talking about.

go reread the original post again, maybe it will click

I read your original post. You claimed that the playoff needs to have a new transparent set of rules, but the reality is that they already have a transparent set of rules with the committee format.

Maybe he should suould have set "a transparent set of rules, actually stick to them, then apply them evenly to everyone."

(12-03-2014 05:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 04:42 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 04:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:57 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:52 PM)bullet Wrote:  Funny people long for the BCS. The BCS was a total joke that kept getting rigged when they didn't like the results. Coaches rigged their votes to help certain teams and hurt others. MOV came out when a non-BCS school threatened to get too high in the rankings.

The committee is definitely not even close to perfect, but its far better than what we had before.

MOV didn't come out because of non-bcs schools. IT came out after the 2001 season when Oregon(of all teams) didn't make the title game because they had a lot of close wins, while Nebraska who had a lot of big wins got in(even not as division champs).

MOV coming out actually HELPED the non-BCS schools overwhelmingly. See this year.
Marshall in Colley with no MOV is 25
Rothman who was in the BCS way back with MOV is 42

There was a non-BCS team (BYU?) who threatened to get close.
Nebraska was higher because any computer system would have rated them higher. They had a tougher schedule and 1 more win. Humans rated them lower because CU stomped them head to head. To impact the Nebraska situation they juggled the weighting and things like quality wins.

Nope. BYU's one year was before the BCS.

Colorado wasn't the team they had a problem with(although Colorado smashed them 62-36), it was Oregon. 2001 season.

http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819366
2002
The commissioners agreed that margin of victory was not an appropriate element in the standings and accordingly removed the Matthews and Rothman rankings from the formula. The New York Times ranking returned, resulting in a total of seven computer rankings for the 2002 season. Only the lowest score was eliminated before averaging the remaining six computer rankings.

BYU was 12-1 in 2001 and was #12 in the BCS before they lost their last game at Hawaii. Next year they changed the formula. It wasn't about Nebraska. BYU was between 9 and 18 in the computer polls before they lost. If you take out MOV, they would have been a lot lower. http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/pdf/bcs_2001.pdf

didn't have a damn thing to do with BYU. Nothing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/26/sports...ating.html

Everything to do with Oregon/Nebraska/Colorado- nothing to do with BYU. For one remember back then BYU had to get into the top 6 to make the BCS- which was never a chance of happening that year.

Just look at the computers with Boise St right now. The ones that don't have MOV have them a whole hell of a lot HIGHER than the ones that do have MOV.

(12-03-2014 07:30 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 05:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 04:42 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 04:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 12:57 PM)stever20 Wrote:  MOV didn't come out because of non-bcs schools. IT came out after the 2001 season when Oregon(of all teams) didn't make the title game because they had a lot of close wins, while Nebraska who had a lot of big wins got in(even not as division champs).

MOV coming out actually HELPED the non-BCS schools overwhelmingly. See this year.
Marshall in Colley with no MOV is 25
Rothman who was in the BCS way back with MOV is 42

There was a non-BCS team (BYU?) who threatened to get close.
Nebraska was higher because any computer system would have rated them higher. They had a tougher schedule and 1 more win. Humans rated them lower because CU stomped them head to head. To impact the Nebraska situation they juggled the weighting and things like quality wins.

Nope. BYU's one year was before the BCS.

Colorado wasn't the team they had a problem with(although Colorado smashed them 62-36), it was Oregon. 2001 season.

http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819366
2002
The commissioners agreed that margin of victory was not an appropriate element in the standings and accordingly removed the Matthews and Rothman rankings from the formula. The New York Times ranking returned, resulting in a total of seven computer rankings for the 2002 season. Only the lowest score was eliminated before averaging the remaining six computer rankings.

BYU was 12-1 in 2001 and was #12 in the BCS before they lost their last game at Hawaii. Next year they changed the formula. It wasn't about Nebraska. BYU was between 9 and 18 in the computer polls before they lost. If you take out MOV, they would have been a lot lower. http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/pdf/bcs_2001.pdf

didn't have a damn thing to do with BYU. Nothing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/26/sports...ating.html

Everything to do with Oregon/Nebraska/Colorado- nothing to do with BYU. For one remember back then BYU had to get into the top 6 to make the BCS- which was never a chance of happening that year.

Just look at the computers with Boise St right now. The ones that don't have MOV have them a whole hell of a lot HIGHER than the ones that do have MOV.

Do you really think they would admit it? And Tranghese didn't even say why in the article. He said he didn't know how it would impact Nebraska. They were scared to death during the season that BYU would work its way up. There was a lot of talk that it wasn't fair BYU was moving up without playing a tough schedule.

It TOTALLY was about BYU and the non-BCS schools.

As for Boise, they really aren't that good this year. They have won a lot of close games against mediocre teams. The biggest difference in their first 6 conference games was 14 points. And they lost that game. MOV doesn't help them.

Its really very simple math. If you have a weaker SOS, you have to have a better record or bigger MOV to be ranked higher. Without MOV, it made it very hard for the non-BCS.

looking at the data in the 2001 season for BYU...

The 4 computers that had MOV-
numbers are end of season/before loss to Hawaii
Matthews 24/13
Rothman 31/18
Sagarin 21/13
Wolfe 27/15
avg 25.75/14.75
the 4 that didn't-
AH 17/11
Bil 13/9
Colley 17/12
Massey 20/14
avg 16.75/11.5

As you can see, a really big difference there, especially after they lost a game. Even before the loss though a difference of 3.25 spots.

compare that though then to 2003 when TCU was 11-1 with the #95 schedule that year(BYU in 2001 had the #96 SOS). TCU had a cpu avg of 16.67, which matches almost exactly the average of the non-SOS computers from 2001 BYU. The computer numbers went up for the non BCS schools when MOV was gone. Look at '98 Tulane. In AH(non MOV) they were 8. In the other 2 MOV computers they were 14 and 23.

It was EVERYTHING to do with Oregon/Nebraska/Colorado.

I have to agree with Stever on this one, MOV was removed because of BCS schools taking advantage of it.

(12-03-2014 12:48 PM)BoiseStateOfMind Wrote:  The committee does have rules and they're clearly outlined on the website:

http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/se...e-protocol

Interestingly, they are allowed to weigh geography and convenience for fans when determining the top 4. Perhaps the real reason why FSU keeps being ranked so low is because a Bama/FSU matchup in the Sugar Bowl makes it easy for both fanbases to travel.

Personally, I still disagree with TCU being ranked above FSU. I also think that FSU is being unfairly judged by the committee and media, who seem to be forgetting how difficult it is to maintain a long winning streak like the one the Noles are currently on. However, OP comes across as a butthurt fan by spamming all these threads, especially when it's evident that he doesn't know what he's talking about.

I know and its not like FSU is pulling through undefeated in a tweener 8 team conference. They are doing it from a 14 team P5.

Fortunately, this new system will pis enough people off that changes will be made to it.

(12-03-2014 09:58 PM)stever20 Wrote:  looking at the data in the 2001 season for BYU...

The 4 computers that had MOV-
numbers are end of season/before loss to Hawaii
Matthews 24/13
Rothman 31/18
Sagarin 21/13
Wolfe 27/15
avg 25.75/14.75
the 4 that didn't-
AH 17/11
Bil 13/9
Colley 17/12
Massey 20/14
avg 16.75/11.5

As you can see, a really big difference there, especially after they lost a game. Even before the loss though a difference of 3.25 spots.

compare that though then to 2003 when TCU was 11-1 with the #95 schedule that year(BYU in 2001 had the #96 SOS). TCU had a cpu avg of 16.67, which matches almost exactly the average of the non-SOS computers from 2001 BYU. The computer numbers went up for the non BCS schools when MOV was gone. Look at '98 Tulane. In AH(non MOV) they were 8. In the other 2 MOV computers they were 14 and 23.

It was EVERYTHING to do with Oregon/Nebraska/Colorado.

Interesting data. Shows a lot of differences between the formulas. But its still simple math. Non-BCS have weaker schedules. If you take out MOV it makes it almost impossible for them to get very high. And there was the constant discussion (and complaining) about BYU during the season that maybe you don't remember.

Has zero to do with Nebraska/Colorado. Nebraska had one less loss. They had a win over then #2 Oklahoma. Colorado lost to Texas as well as Fresno. Hard to see that it would have made any difference with Oregon. Both had big wins over bad teams. Close wins over good teams. Oregon perhaps a few more close ones, but Nebraska had a big loss while Oregon's was close. Big 12 was pretty good that year and Nebraska had strong SOS.

The justification they used at the time was they didn't want coaches running up scores. They couldn't come out and say we don't want non-BCS schools with weak schedules to run up scores on bad teams and displace BCS schools in the major bowls.

2001 is a perfect example of why computer polls are a lousy measure. In almost any system Nebraska will finish ahead of Colorado, just as Stanford/Oregon in 2011.