Interesting that a site that uses the old BCS model to rank teams has USF at #23. UCF is #10. Back in the 2012 discussions of the new CFP, the P5 were insistent that any playoff had to utilize a "selection committee". Guess we now know why.

(11-22-2017 01:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Interesting that a site that uses the old BCS model to rank teams has USF at #23. UCF is #10. Back in the 2012 discussions of the new CFP, the P5 were insistent that any playoff had to utilize a "selection committee". Guess we now know why.

Colley Matrix offers this.

UCF 11
Memphis 17
USF 23
Boise NR

http://www.colleyrankings.com/foot2017/b...ike12.html

And yes, the playoff committee routinely underranks the Top G5 team. Have done so from the beginning.

Who new Illinois would be an absolute crapfest when the game was scheduled? Also, as mentioned before, Wisconsin was originally on this season's schedule. They asked to have it moved to 2019.

Next year we have Illinois again and GaTech.

(11-22-2017 01:39 PM)Apis Bull Wrote:  Who new Illinois would be an absolute crapfest when the game was scheduled? Also, as mentioned before, Wisconsin was originally on this season's schedule. They asked to have it moved to 2019.

Next year we have Illinois again and GaTech.

You must not be too familiar with the Illinois athletic department...

(11-22-2017 01:41 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(11-22-2017 01:39 PM)Apis Bull Wrote:  Who new Illinois would be an absolute crapfest when the game was scheduled? Also, as mentioned before, Wisconsin was originally on this season's schedule. They asked to have it moved to 2019.

Next year we have Illinois again and GaTech.

You must not be too familiar with the Illinois athletic department...

I thought (hoped) they'd at least be decent.

(11-22-2017 01:39 PM)Apis Bull Wrote:  Who new Illinois would be an absolute crapfest when the game was scheduled? Also, as mentioned before, Wisconsin was originally on this season's schedule. They asked to have it moved to 2019.

Next year we have Illinois again and GaTech.

No joke, but you also have to travel to Umass. They are a good team, and will have their entire Offense returning next season, minus the TE (who admittedly is their best player). They will be a tough out.

Does anyone know if USF tried to get Indiana for 10/7? While not a spectacular win, it probably would've been enough to get them top 25 right now. All bull**** anyway

(11-22-2017 09:52 AM)No Bull Wrote:  It's bull****. a ten win team isn't ranked. Ttl BS.

I'd like for us to be ranked in the CFP like we are in the AP and Coaches polls, but our SOS is really bad, so it's not really worth arguing about.

Beat UCF, and we will be ranked.

(11-22-2017 10:40 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Forgot all this analysis of strength of schedule, sagarin ratings, etc. The people making the decisions are a bunch of old coots walking round wearing Big Ten/SEC/ACC gear. That's all there really is to it.

That about sums it up. Here's this years CFP Selection Committee
Kirby Hocutt, Chair
Director of Athletics, Texas Tech University
Frank Beamer
Former Head Coach, Virginia Tech
Jeff Bower
Former Head Coach, University of Southern Mississippi
Herb Deromedi
Former Head Coach, Central Michigan University. Master’s degree, University of Michigan.
Chris Howard
President, Robert Morris University. Harvard, Oxford.
Bobby Johnson
Former Head Coach, Vanderbilt University. Clemson grad.
Jeff Long
Vice Chancellor and Director of Athletics, University of Arkansas. Former athletics director representative, Southeastern Conference. Various positions at 6 "P5" schools
Rob Mullens
Director of Athletics, University of Oregon
Dan Radakovich
Director of Athletics, Clemson University
Gene Smith
Director of Athletics, Ohio State University
Steve Wieberg
Former College Football Reporter, USA TODAY. University of Missouri grad.

http://collegefootballplayoff.com/sports...ittee.aspx

The bill of goods we were sold when we changed from the BCS formula to the committee setup was that the committee would apply a sniff test/eye test to the numbers and then re-rank the teams at their discretion.

But now it appears the committee and all the apologists have done nothing except pull SoS from the BCS formula and use it as the de facto method/excuse for determining a G5's low ranking. The eye/sniff test does not apply to a G5. It only comes into play as an occasional excuse for an elite P5 to receive the benefit of the doubt after an upset loss because of some inane reason like an elite team's starting QB being out with a boo-boo, for instance. (This one still cracks me up. When did we decide injuries weren't part of the game?)

It could be argued that P5 non-homers who have actually sat down and watched UCF or Memphis play this year know these teams are somewhat stronger than their SoS would otherwise indicate. But there is apparently no committee eye test available for a power G5.

So why the need for a committee where a G5 is concerned? If all they're going to do is cherry-pick SoS as the be-all, end-all...well hell, we still have computers for that.

(11-22-2017 03:19 PM)mikeinoki Wrote:  

(11-22-2017 10:40 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Forgot all this analysis of strength of schedule, sagarin ratings, etc. The people making the decisions are a bunch of old coots walking round wearing Big Ten/SEC/ACC gear. That's all there really is to it.

That about sums it up. Here's this years CFP Selection Committee
Kirby Hocutt, Chair
Director of Athletics, Texas Tech University
Frank Beamer
Former Head Coach, Virginia Tech
Jeff Bower
Former Head Coach, University of Southern Mississippi
Herb Deromedi
Former Head Coach, Central Michigan University. Master’s degree, University of Michigan.
Chris Howard
President, Robert Morris University. Harvard, Oxford.
Bobby Johnson
Former Head Coach, Vanderbilt University. Clemson grad.
Jeff Long
Vice Chancellor and Director of Athletics, University of Arkansas. Former athletics director representative, Southeastern Conference. Various positions at 6 "P5" schools
Rob Mullens
Director of Athletics, University of Oregon
Dan Radakovich
Director of Athletics, Clemson University
Gene Smith
Director of Athletics, Ohio State University
Steve Wieberg
Former College Football Reporter, USA TODAY. University of Missouri grad.

http://collegefootballplayoff.com/sports...ittee.aspx

Jeff Bower, I love that guy!

Great coach! I bet he fights for the G5

(11-22-2017 01:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Interesting that a site that uses the old BCS model to rank teams has USF at #23. UCF is #10. Back in the 2012 discussions of the new CFP, the P5 were insistent that any playoff had to utilize a "selection committee". Guess we now know why.

Remember, AAC teams aren't the only ones being ranked. Compare to the Massey Composite, yes, UCF is under-rated by four positions 15/11, and Memphis is underrated by two positions 20/18.

But these aren't the only cases. Virginia Tech is #20 in MC, #25 in the CFP so they are underrated by 5. Notre Dame is #6 in MC, #8 in the CFP, those are two big positions to be underrated by, because at #6, ND would have a realistic shot at the playoffs, at #8 they are almost surely out. And probably most impactfully, MC has Wisconsin #2 but the CFP has them #5, three very big positions on the cusp of the playoffs.

So you have to look at the total picture, not just the AAC/G5 corner of it. The rankings are about teams not conferences, and the AAC teams aren't the only underrated ones when compared to computers. Any model alleging 'bias' has to be able to explain all of these, not cherry-picked cases.

UCF should be in top 10; Memphis should be ranked higher too; USF should be in the top 25..

I said this 3 years ago and I will say it again.

No G5 team will ever make the playoffs... under the current system.

(11-22-2017 01:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Interesting that a site that uses the old BCS model to rank teams has USF at #23. UCF is #10. Back in the 2012 discussions of the new CFP, the P5 were insistent that any playoff had to utilize a "selection committee". Guess we now know why.

I saw another one today that was a computer formula used in the BCS system. It had UCF #4 and Memphis #5.

It was developed by a VMI professor (Rhamey?) with a lot of logic backup, history, examples, formulas, etc. behind it.

The P5 folks would have a stroke if anybody allowed something like that to interfere with their rigged system.

See here for proof of bias.

Very simple, look at the schedule of all those #2, 3, 4 5, 6 Boise, Utah, and tcu teams back in the day. Please don't tell me with a straight face that this committee would have them higher than 14

And to make this bias as systematic as possible most of the P5 conferences are attempting through rules & schedules to keep their teams from playing the top non-power schools. So if the P-5 don't play the G-5 top schools, there is no direct means of comparison. And with no means of direct comparison, the bias can be perpetuated without any game results to suggest otherwise.