(12-06-2015 12:26 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  The playoff is way better than what we had before....BCS, Bowl Coalition, AP Poll...

Also, what took the Big 10 so long to get a championship game??? The Big 10 champ game has been a tremendous success

No, no i dont. I honestly dont care who wins. There was a time when college football could have more than one national champion. Now we have nfl lite decided by a commitee in secret and the other bowls are meaningless.

Espn has almost ruined college football

(12-07-2015 06:13 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  As I said, if you have automatic bids, you need to make sure there is room for the second best team. I.e. you would not have every playoff spot determined by an autobid. I did not say it could never happen: it used to happen in baseball all the time. This year the three best teams were all in the same division, and two of them would have been left out 20 years ago or so. It used to happen in college football AND college basketball. I was referring to how you design the playoff if you plan to add auto bids.

But I just explained that it is impossible for a hypothetical #2 in the country to have been screwed out of a chance to be in the playoff.

You'll have to create a feasible hypothetical scenario where #2 in the country (likely 12-0, at worst 11-1) never had a chance to play its way into the playoff.


And frankly, I doubt a team could be ranked at #2 in the country without having played in a CCG or played the best team in its conference during round-robin (ie, it had its chance).



So auto-bids can be done. You just have to make sure the bid goes to the highest ranked team from the conference. NOT the winner of the CCG.

(12-07-2015 07:07 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 05:01 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 03:43 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 03:31 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  If anyone thinks the present system is improvement over the old system, is sadly mistaken, the system is some type of Soviet Politburo system, with their own agenda and marching orders. There is no rhyme or reason to the process, making it up as they go along. Which delegitimizes the whole process IMO.

I disagree that I am mistaken.

HAving 2 more teams is a big step forward, that outweighs the step backward from the BCS formula (which had been tinkered with for 2 decades and was working pretty well) to the committee.

Any process that 100% puts the decision in human hands is automatically superior to an process that gives computers a component of the decision.

Truly believe that? I guess that's why NASA has computers do the flight control of spacecraft and humans have very little to do with its control. Maybe NASA knows something we layperson's do not know, as long as the programming is debugged computers are far more reliable than human beings and are objective in their analysis unlike humans, who come to the table with all their emotional bias' and prejudicial judgements.

I absolutely agree that computers are faster, more accurate and more reliable when it comes to crunching numbers. But as we both know, that's a red herring.

Computers are vastly worse at considering factors that have no mathematical model and selecting the "right" teams from a group. A computer can't even know what's "right" unless someone programs it.

(12-07-2015 07:37 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 05:01 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 04:12 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 03:43 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 03:31 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  If anyone thinks the present system is improvement over the old system, is sadly mistaken, the system is some type of Soviet Politburo system, with their own agenda and marching orders. There is no rhyme or reason to the process, making it up as they go along. Which delegitimizes the whole process IMO.

I disagree that I am mistaken.

HAving 2 more teams is a big step forward, that outweighs the step backward from the BCS formula (which had been tinkered with for 2 decades and was working pretty well) to the committee.

I guess some people like decisions made in smoked filled back rooms with no transparency whatsoever. No one knows how the sausage is made. Could not say that about the BCS system IMO. Plus one system with the cards heavily favored to the blue blood programs, that's not sport too me, it's a oligarchy plain and simple. Surprised many are so satisfied with such a system where the sport is not settled on the field by the dominant participants, only in CFB D1 you have this monstrosity. It's ludicrous,almost laughable if it wasn't so sad to see what they've done to a great a sport, almost like Pro Boxing with the fix in. The committee operates likes they are some Supreme Court of CFB and have the one spokesman speak for all the committee and instead of each committee member being subject to answering on how they voted and why to the media.

So if each of the committee members votes in the process was public, then you'd fine with it?

No I would not. I'm not for any human committee in selecting PO particpant everything should be settled like the NFL on the field of play where the dominant participants earn there way into CFB PO 5 Power CCG Champs and the highest ranked G5. The next highest ranked 6 at large P5 or G5 highest ranked. The top 4 CCG champs teams get a bye the first round and the other 8 pair off in the 1st round.

Well that's never going to happen. These are 21, 20 and even 19 and 18 year old young men, who aren't getting paid, risking their health for your entertainment.

All while trying to pass classes and earn an education.


They already play too many games as it is.

(12-08-2015 09:55 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 06:13 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  As I said, if you have automatic bids, you need to make sure there is room for the second best team. I.e. you would not have every playoff spot determined by an autobid. I did not say it could never happen: it used to happen in baseball all the time. This year the three best teams were all in the same division, and two of them would have been left out 20 years ago or so. It used to happen in college football AND college basketball. I was referring to how you design the playoff if you plan to add auto bids.

But I just explained that it is impossible for a hypothetical #2 in the country to have been screwed out of a chance to be in the playoff.

You'll have to create a feasible hypothetical scenario where #2 in the country (likely 12-0, at worst 11-1) never had a chance to play its way into the playoff.


And frankly, I doubt a team could be ranked at #2 in the country without having played in a CCG or played the best team in its conference during round-robin (ie, it had its chance).



So auto-bids can be done. You just have to make sure the bid goes to the highest ranked team from the conference. NOT the winner of the CCG.

won't ever happen. They MUST go to the conference champion or else you invalidate the conference race

(12-07-2015 07:15 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Lets go back to the old days. No more P5 or G5 status.
All teams are treated as equals. This would give schools like Houston, Toledo, Boise State and so forth a chance at a shot at the national title.
Stop favortism of one conference over the other.
No more SEC love by ESPN and others. People on ESPN are saying that Alabama is the number 1 team.

In the old days, Alabama would just be VOTED as the #1 team

Now, the ACC Champ, Big 10 Champ, and Big XII Champ actually get to PLAY for it on the field

It's light years better than it was

(12-08-2015 09:55 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 06:13 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  As I said, if you have automatic bids, you need to make sure there is room for the second best team. I.e. you would not have every playoff spot determined by an autobid. I did not say it could never happen: it used to happen in baseball all the time. This year the three best teams were all in the same division, and two of them would have been left out 20 years ago or so. It used to happen in college football AND college basketball. I was referring to how you design the playoff if you plan to add auto bids.

But I just explained that it is impossible for a hypothetical #2 in the country to have been screwed out of a chance to be in the playoff.

You'll have to create a feasible hypothetical scenario where #2 in the country (likely 12-0, at worst 11-1) never had a chance to play its way into the playoff.


And frankly, I doubt a team could be ranked at #2 in the country without having played in a CCG or played the best team in its conference during round-robin (ie, it had its chance).



So auto-bids can be done. You just have to make sure the bid goes to the highest ranked team from the conference. NOT the winner of the CCG.

Is this a joke? Even in the convoluted scenario you created, which would never happen, as you cannot have an autobid for a conference that does not include their champion, the very scenario made it very easy for the number two team to be left out. If you have four conferences, and four auto bids, it is VERY easy for the number 2 team to be a runner up in their conference. And then they would be "left out." That was the very scenario when LSU played Alabama in the BCS Championship game, where the agreed upon number two team (Alabama) finished second (or not even that) in their conference to the agreed upon number 1 team (LSU), and would have been left out in your scenario. In 2006 a similar scenario played out with Ohio St and Michigan, although politicking moved Florida up over Michigan after people complained about seeing a rematch, but they were essentially the number 2 team as well. It also would have happened if your scenario had played out in baseball, this past year. Has happened in the NBA 3 or 4 times the past decade as well.

So real life, not hypothetical, true examples that played out over the last ten years, that show your scenario would allow for the number 2 two team to be left out. All it takes is for two teams in the same conference to be considered among the best, and you have this problem. And many years we have a second team from a conference flirting with the top five, and thus could create that problem.

I still feel conference champs should remain the preferred teams, but you have to make sure the playoff allows for the team thought to be the second best to be involved. That is the entire reason wild cards were created in professional sports, and why at large teams were allowed in the NCAA tournament. Long before either were huge money makers, it was about making sure the number 2 team (or team with the second best record in the pros) wasn't left out.

(12-08-2015 10:03 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 09:55 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 06:13 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  As I said, if you have automatic bids, you need to make sure there is room for the second best team. I.e. you would not have every playoff spot determined by an autobid. I did not say it could never happen: it used to happen in baseball all the time. This year the three best teams were all in the same division, and two of them would have been left out 20 years ago or so. It used to happen in college football AND college basketball. I was referring to how you design the playoff if you plan to add auto bids.

But I just explained that it is impossible for a hypothetical #2 in the country to have been screwed out of a chance to be in the playoff.

You'll have to create a feasible hypothetical scenario where #2 in the country (likely 12-0, at worst 11-1) never had a chance to play its way into the playoff.


And frankly, I doubt a team could be ranked at #2 in the country without having played in a CCG or played the best team in its conference during round-robin (ie, it had its chance).



So auto-bids can be done. You just have to make sure the bid goes to the highest ranked team from the conference. NOT the winner of the CCG.

won't ever happen. They MUST go to the conference champion or else you invalidate the conference race

Nonsense. It makes the conference games even more important. Because you can't just back into the CCG and become the auto-bid by winning one game.

You have to win most, if not all, the conference games to get the bid.

(12-08-2015 10:58 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 09:55 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 06:13 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  As I said, if you have automatic bids, you need to make sure there is room for the second best team. I.e. you would not have every playoff spot determined by an autobid. I did not say it could never happen: it used to happen in baseball all the time. This year the three best teams were all in the same division, and two of them would have been left out 20 years ago or so. It used to happen in college football AND college basketball. I was referring to how you design the playoff if you plan to add auto bids.

But I just explained that it is impossible for a hypothetical #2 in the country to have been screwed out of a chance to be in the playoff.

You'll have to create a feasible hypothetical scenario where #2 in the country (likely 12-0, at worst 11-1) never had a chance to play its way into the playoff.


And frankly, I doubt a team could be ranked at #2 in the country without having played in a CCG or played the best team in its conference during round-robin (ie, it had its chance).



So auto-bids can be done. You just have to make sure the bid goes to the highest ranked team from the conference. NOT the winner of the CCG.

Is this a joke? Even in the convoluted scenario you created, which would never happen, as you cannot have an autobid for a conference that does not include their champion, the very scenario made it very easy for the number two team to be left out. If you have four conferences, and four auto bids, it is VERY easy for the number 2 team to be a runner up in their conference. And then they would be "left out." That was the very scenario when LSU played Alabama in the BCS Championship game, where the agreed upon number two team (Alabama) finished second (or not even that) in their conference to the agreed upon number 1 team (LSU), and would have been left out in your scenario. In 2006 a similar scenario played out with Ohio St and Michigan, although politicking moved Florida up over Michigan after people complained about seeing a rematch, but they were essentially the number 2 team as well. It also would have happened if your scenario had played out in baseball, this past year. Has happened in the NBA 3 or 4 times the past decade as well.

So real life, not hypothetical, true examples that played out over the last ten years, that show your scenario would allow for the number 2 two team to be left out. All it takes is for two teams in the same conference to be considered among the best, and you have this problem. And many years we have a second team from a conference flirting with the top five, and thus could create that problem.

I still feel conference champs should remain the preferred teams, but you have to make sure the playoff allows for the team thought to be the second best to be involved. That is the entire reason wild cards were created in professional sports, and why at large teams were allowed in the NCAA tournament. Long before either were huge money makers, it was about making sure the number 2 team (or team with the second best record in the pros) wasn't left out.

You're using a different definition for "left out" then I am. You're saying left out just means not making the final four, even though they had just as fair a chance to make it as everyone else.

I'm saying "left out" means that the team never even had a chance to play for it. In both the examples you gave (Alabama and Michigan), neither team was "left out". They both had their chance ... and they both lost the regular season game.

So in such cases, I would call upon the committee to (rightly) move such a team down to #5 or lower, so as to avoid such meaningless discussion.

No, you are trying to change the subject. I was the one who made the statement, and you interjected to say it could be done. I made it clear, more than once, we are talking about the team deemed to be considered the second best team. You even quoted it. And as such, any playoff with automatic bids, if designed correctly, make sure there is access for the team deemed number two. In the pros the use overall record, and now all four spots allow for that. In the college ranks, they use committees, and there must be room for an "at large" team so that the number 2 team is not precluded.

Your definition of "left out" is irrelevant both because there is always a selection committee in college who will deem who is the best team and who is second, and because you are responding to my post where the perimeters were clearly laid out, and you are trying to dispute it, under those terms. And because you are wrong.

(12-08-2015 12:52 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  No, you are trying to change the subject. I was the one who made the statement, and you interjected to say it could be done. I made it clear, more than once, we are talking about the team deemed to be considered the second best team. You even quoted it. And as such, any playoff with automatic bids, if designed correctly, make sure there is access for the team deemed number two. In the pros the use overall record, and now all four spots allow for that. In the college ranks, they use committees, and there must be room for an "at large" team so that the number 2 team is not precluded.

Your definition of "left out" is irrelevant both because there is always a selection committee in college who will deem who is the best team and who is second, and because you are responding to my post where the perimeters were clearly laid out, and you are trying to dispute it, under those terms. And because you are wrong.

Because I misunderstood your definition of "left out". I concede that point, because I wouldn't have engaged, if I knew that's what you meant. It is technically possible for the team ranked #2 in CFP, after the CCG games have been played, to be left out of the playoff if it only gives one slot to each conference.

But that point is irrelevant.

Any such #2 team would've had their chance, and lost. So it's just fine to leave them out of the playoff.


Further, as I said, to avoid such meaningless discussion of if such a team ought to have been included -- I would call on the committee to (rightfully) move that team outside the top four.


Finally, your last paragraph is incorrect. I've already given an example of how the committee could avoid this altogether: just pick the top four. Don't seed them.

I would like to see an impersonal formula used to determine a national champion.

It would normally result in 4 P5 champions being selected, and I'm 100% fine with that. I just want the smoke and mirrors to be removed from it.

If the purpose of this committee is to keep the unwashed out, then just split already. This is getting tiresome. Just set a list of criteria that separates the two leagues. Make it soft enough to include all of the P5. If a school wants to meet the criteria, then allow them to play as an Indy. The courts can't kill you since you're allowing "other schools" a chance to compete.

(12-08-2015 12:52 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  No, you are trying to change the subject. I was the one who made the statement, and you interjected to say it could be done. I made it clear, more than once, we are talking about the team deemed to be considered the second best team. You even quoted it. And as such, any playoff with automatic bids, if designed correctly, make sure there is access for the team deemed number two. In the pros the use overall record, and now all four spots allow for that. In the college ranks, they use committees, and there must be room for an "at large" team so that the number 2 team is not precluded.

Your definition of "left out" is irrelevant both because there is always a selection committee in college who will deem who is the best team and who is second, and because you are responding to my post where the perimeters were clearly laid out, and you are trying to dispute it, under those terms. And because you are wrong.

For a change, I have to agree with MLPSBison. He's just saying that teams never have a chance to win the national title to begin with, whereas a 2011 Alabama and 2006 Michigan did.

(12-07-2015 09:38 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  My biggest problems with the polls is they seemed to a) project forward too much and b) not quite flexible enough once they were set with something. By project forward, I mean they'd look at someone's schedule and say should lose to x and beat y and z and then make rankings based on that. Rankings should have nothing to do with future games though, just past ones and how good you think the team is on a national level.

The committee I see much more as of the moment which I think is good. It also makes them more flexible for changing rankings as new information arises.

The real biggest problem with the polls is that each person voting has their own criteria and way of voting, let alone their own agenda. Some vote for what teams have accomplished, some vote for how much they've accomplished to date, some vote by records and some vote for their professional colleagues and friends. They need to try and get a unified mindset.

College football hierarchy became what it was by schools refusing to play other schools due to gate receipt. Over a great number of years it resulted in a blue chip hierarchy in college football.

The BCS and CFP are shifting things toward a performance based model where schools actually have to show and schedule up. The G5 is on a 100% performance model already where the conference with the highest rated finisher earns the NY6 game and depending on performance the playoff pool monies are split.

What I say for the next go around is go to 8 teams but move it more toward a performance based model.

1) Eight team playoff using the current NY6 bowls. Keep the individual bowl value high. No historic tie-ins permitted. Rose, Sugar and Orange would be open to anyone. Semifinals and Finals bidded out to high value locations.

2) Top 6 rated conference champions invited to the playoff. That will mean at least 1 non-power conference champ invited, possibly 2 if a P5 has an off season.

3) Split the money 1-10 with the conference with the #1 rated champion getting 10 shares and the #10 rated conference earning 1 share. It would make 55 total shares. Conferences rated #6 through #10 would have 21 total shares or 38% of the money compared to 20% in the current system.

In a performance based system their will be incentives to expand if its going to earn you more playoff money. Houston keeps finishing ahead of the B12 champion for example it will make sense for the B12 to add Houston.

No it wouldn't necessarily make sense for the Big 12 to add Houston. Tulane could win the next 5 AAC titles and appear in 3 Sugar Bowls and I'd bet the SEC would be in no hurry to add them.

Imagine how fun it would have been with 8 teams?

Clemson
Houston

Alabama
Iowa

Mich State
Stanford

Oklahoma
Ohio state

Juggled the seeds around a little bit to avoid rematches. Would be really fun to have this the weekend after the Heisman, etc and then the bowl semi finals like normal

the BCS era was the worst thing to ever happen to college football. I diluted the value in dominating a team since a 60 point win against another highly ranked team was the same thing, according to the computers, as a 3-2 win over an FCS team. It also lead to schools scheduling soft ass schedules that still shows its ugly head to this very day.

The playoff is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH better!!!!!!!

10 conference champs ranked 1-10. Bottom 4 play a play-in game (7v10, 8v9). 2 play-in winners join top 6 for 8 team playoff. Done.

(12-09-2015 01:04 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  10 conference champs ranked 1-10. Bottom 4 play a play-in game (7v10, 8v9). 2 play-in winners join top 6 for 8 team playoff. Done.

Outrageous, you would have a championship of conference champions, with no room for Notre Dame! Or Army! or UMass! or BYU! (or, in another few years perhaps, NMSU! or Idaho!)

No opportunity for the "second best team" in a conference to displace a conference champion!

No at-large bids!! What is a championship in an NCAA (sub)division without at-large bids!