quo vadis
Legend
Posts: 50,007
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
|
RE: This is what I think the CFB Playoff format should look like
(08-21-2019 10:01 AM)YNot Wrote: (08-21-2019 08:49 AM)quo vadis Wrote: (08-20-2019 12:53 PM)YNot Wrote: (08-20-2019 12:17 PM)quo vadis Wrote: (08-20-2019 11:52 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: It doesnt "de-legitimize" anything. "The people" are fine with it because they watch the game play out right in front of their faces on live nationwide TV. I think its odd that you seem determined to set up a system that "corrects" what actually happens on the field to fit with the outcome your opinion based system predicts. If they dont win their division or conference---maybe the ranking are just wrong. The fact is---the #1-#8 ranked teams in week one are often not the #1-#8 at the end of the season. Why is that? Well, its because real life games didnt turn out like the way rankings predicted---thus, they recognize their error and change. The general public will be just fine with a system that relies on actual game results.
The idea that a system relying on action playing out on the field in key games in front of millions of nationwide viewers would be seen as "illegitimate" is absolutely preposterous.
Not really. E.g., "VT" just posted numbers showing a very high correlation between initial AP poll ranking - which comes out way before the first CFP rankings, and making the CFP. And that's in part because yes, the rankings do change, as they ought to, when more data comes in. Nobody is suggesting using an AP poll in August to pick playoff teams in December.
You don't often see huge differences in rankings - whether it be CFP, AP, Coaches, computers, etc. because this isn't rocket science. You don't need a PhD in Advanced Calculus to know that Clemson was more deserving of a playoff spot last year than was Washington State.
And as I've explained, your method actually does much more violence to "what happens on the field" than mine, because yours throws out OOC games. Mine doesn't throw out anything, everything is considered, it's just that no one thing is allowed to automatically override everything else.
Which, in a sport with as many vagaries as college football has, IMO easily makes the most sense.
And heck, in terms of practical realities, a S8 system would have been very kind to champs of major conferences - the only ones with an actual path to the title under your proposed system. S8 would have put 24/25 P5 champs in the playoffs the past 5 seasons. That's a very high percentage, not much being 'disregarded' there. And let's face it, the one team that would not have made it, Washington this past year, had no claim to a playoff spot. Their missing the top 8 was utterly uncontroversial.
Doesn't throw out OOC games. OOC games are still important in seeding and selecting the two wild card participants. The automatic bids for conference champs gets rid of the stink that comes from the beauty-contest structure. Win and you're in.
To me, OOC games should obviously matter for all the playoff spots, like they do in the NFL, NBA, MLB, etc. so for them not to matter for 6 out of 8 is really egregious.
And "win and your in" only makes sense if the thing you win is worthy of a playoff spot. If it isn't, then it deligitimizes the system.
Problem with auto-bids for conference champs is that winning a P5 conference doesn't prove that you belong in the playoffs. Had 7-5 Pitt beat Clemson in the ACC title game last year, would that have meant they were more deserving than say 11-2 Georgia? Of course not. Giving P5 champs an auto-bid allows that conference to shield itself from comparison with teams from other conferences. IMO, that is unjustifiable given the nature of college conference championships, which are structured largely for reasons other than competitive validity, and which do throw out OOC games.
And as i said, if you really are worried about P5 champs making the playoffs, that is largely a misplaced fear, as history shows that 24/25 would have made it under straight 8 the past five seasons. Winning a P5 title is a big deal, and should give your playoff chances a strong boost, and history shows it does. Heck, under the four-team CFP, 17 of the 20 playoff teams have been P5 champs even though mathematically, a P5 champ has to miss every year.
Just IMO not an automatic one.
Ummm, the autobids for conference champions are just like the autobids for division winners in the NFL, NBA, MLB, etc. Baltimore Ravens win the AFC North with a lackluster 10-6 record? They're in. St. Louis Cardinals win the NL Central by a single game, but 20 games behind the Dodgers? They're in. Orlando Magic win the Southeast Division with a 42-40 record? They're in, and with first round home-court advantage.
As it should be.
To be viable, an expanded CFP would absolutely have to have the conference champ autobids, if for no other reason than to actually receive the necessary approval from the various schools and conferences to make it a reality. Also, I would argue that the 5+1 autobids are desirable to keep all regions and fan segments across the country interested.
Huh? In the NFL, MLB, NBA, etc. all of the games count towards winning your division, not just the divisional games. If Seattle goes 7-1 in the NFC West but 10-6 overall, while the 49ers go 5-3 in the division but 12-4 overall, the 49ers win the division not Seattle. In college football, only conference games count. That's the difference I was talking about.
As for what will happen, many around here have asserted that the only way that expansion to 8 will occur is if the P5 champs get autobids. IMO, that is a highly questionable assumption. In fact, there's no evidence for it in history, as both the BCS and CFP did not include auto-bids for P5 or AQ champs, nor did they include a rule that says "to be selected for the BCS title game or CFP playoffs, a team must be a conference champ".
And they could have done that all along, which suggests it isn't a huge deal for them. Nor should it be, as it would unduly restrictive, allow for undeserving teams to make the playoffs.
Give winning a P5 title great weight, which it has been given in the CFP, but don't make it automatic.
|
|