#20 CFP Rankings

deanvogs said:
The only one that matters is the CFB poll. AP and coaches polls are a joke. Those guys might watch 1 team play, 2 tops. The CFB poll is at least made up of a committee that their sole job is to compare teams and rank them.
Click to expand...
So you're going to tell me that there's a measurable and definable difference between #4 and #5, or between #25 and #26? Come on. You're being obtuse.

When it comes to splitting those hairs it comes down to the gut feelings of those committee members. Just like a judge decides a figure skater gets a 5.3 vs a 5.4 on his triple axel because it looked like he was 2 degrees short on his rotation.
 
Fryowa said:
LOL. They're not picking the 4 teams based on any criteria right now other than what the committee decides, Jesus. That's the whole problem. It's a group of people in a room who vote on what team is 4th best and what team is 5th best, which is stupid. They can (and do) do whatever they want based on their opinions.

Under the P5 + 3 at large you'd set out (at the beginning of the season) what teams would have to do to make the playoffs...

Champs of the SEC, Big Ten, ACC, PAC12, and Big 12 would all get in. Then you'd have 3 other spots that would be open but not decided by committee because there would be requirements to get in. Just like the Wild Card in baseball and football. Do committees decide those teams? Nope.

And it doesn't matter what criteria you use as long as it's established ahead of time. Because all teams would know what they had to do before the season starts.
Click to expand...
You are really working hard to prove my point by not giving the specifics. (Hint: there is no criteria to determine 3 teams out of 130 without human interpretation of that criteria) but I eagerly await your magic criteria.
 
theboat said:
You are really working hard to prove my point by not giving the specifics. (Hint: there is no criteria to determine 3 teams out of 130 without human interpretation of that criteria) but I eagerly await your magic criteria.
Click to expand...
Would it matter what those criteria are if they were established before the season? You are really working hard to not answer that question.
 
theboat said:
Yeah. It would. That’s why I want to know what pretend criteria it would be.
Click to expand...
First of all, no it wouldn’t. As long as there are defined criteria to make it in then all teams know what they have to do and it’s fair. You can’t blame a committee choosing one team over another on a whim.

But to answer your question, there are 5 non P-5 conferences in FBS football. Give the 3 at larges to the champs with the best records, and establish any tie breakers from there on based on record and net points like they do for NFL Wild Cards. You’d obviously have mis matches according to seedings and my example is just off the cuff, but given the time to sit down and establish some sort of structure it’s be easy to come to terms on an 8 team format. The point is that anything would be better than the junk they have now.

Would lesser FBS schools be playing in the CFP when, say, a top tier P5 school stayed home? Yep. But...that team that stayed home should have won their conference if they wanted in. There’s no complaining to be done because they knew at the beginning of the season that if they want a spot in the playoffs they’d have to win the conference. It sure as hell would be better than chosen by committee members who have tons of bias like any human beings.
 
So what happens when you have like 8 teams tied with 2 or 3 losses?

Your system kinda works when you have 30 or so teams that play comparable schedules. Not when you have the NCAA world
 
theboat said:
So what happens when you have like 8 teams tied with 2 or 3 losses?

Your system kinda works when you have 30 or so teams that play comparable schedules. Not when you have the NCAA world
Click to expand...
I never said or implied that I have the answer to the 3 at larges and there’s no way I’m smart enough to figure out the tie breakers in a couple hours on an internet forum. But I still say in the end it doesn’t matter what they are as long as everyone has a shot and knows what they need to do. What we have now is a glorified popularity contest where everyone stays up on selection night waiting for the oracles to come out of their cave with their decision. Leave that to the gymnasts and synchronized swimmers.
 
Fryowa said:
I never said or implied that I have the answer to the 3 at larges and there’s no way I’m smart enough to figure out the tie breakers in a couple hours on an internet forum. But I still say in the end it doesn’t matter what they are as long as everyone has a shot and knows what they need to do. What we have now is a glorified popularity contest where everyone stays up on selection night waiting for the oracles to come out of their cave with their decision. Leave that to the gymnasts and synchronized swimmers.
Click to expand...
You would end up with zero non conference games worth a damn because best record is all that matters. It’s silly and why humans are needed. It isn’t perfect, it can’t possibly be. But it is what it is. Complaining about it is as useful as pissing in the wind.
 
VTHawk said:
In fairness to this argument, the Hawks almost did just that in 2015. If memory serves me right, we were outside the top 25 to begin that season and slowly made our way to #3 or #4 (my memory slightly hazy) and one play with thirty some odd seconds left in the game away from making the playoff that year. (so damn close).

But I would like to see the CFP expanded to 8 teams like you said. The excitement will still be there as teams try to jockey their way for the last three spots.
Click to expand...

There would still be all the excitement of the big conference title games and whether smaller schools could get in. Eight teams would be fun and only one more weekend but that is the limit. getting way too hard toward finals week as it is.
 
hawkeyebob62 said:
Four teams make it to the CFP, but they are actually slotting the full NY6 bowls. T

My guess is that Michigan/Michigan State/Ohio State/Penn State will have something to play for, as well :)
Click to expand...

Michigan can really salvage their season with three wins over Wisky, OSU and whatever other team. actually Harbaugh needs it but it will be hard to pull for either Harbaugh or OSU. I like Michigan more than OSU but Harbaugh throws another factor into that game.
 
Fryowa said:
Until they get to a system that uses math instead of a bunch of people's subjective opinions they're all bullpuckey. The AP, Coaches, CFP...they're all based 100% on people's opinion of who's better than who, and it's evident by how different the polls always are that no matter what the ranking is, it's always crap.

We'll never get to a scientific system because 1) no one will agree on the method, and 2) humans aren't capable of creating a system that won't give absurd resluts like the BCS.

It's like figure skating and gymnastics. The only thing you can prove is what a bunch of judges thought.

The only way to solve the question definitively is to have at least an 8 team playoff with the winners of the P5's + 3 at large spots with criteria spelled out before the season. There's no other way.
Click to expand...


What scientific system would you like? There's a pretty good list of rankings at https://www.masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm I haven't looked through most of them but there's probably a good/decent system in there somewhere.

Absurd resluts?! ;P

I think an 8 team playoff is likely. At the very least a 6 team but that get's preferential and serpentine. Too much bias comes into play with 6 teams. I favor a 16 team playoff with each conference champ plus 6 at large spots with the criteria spelled out before the season as you've stated. There are some legitimate concerns about a longer football season for academic reasons but the FCS, DII, and DIII do it and it seems to workout fine. I think an expanded playoff adds to the regular season and gives each game more meaning. It's ridiculous seeing two 6-6 teams play in a bowl to not have a losing season.
 
Bowl games need to go completely. We need a 14 team playoff. You move to an 11 game season with 10 conference games 1 non con and an exhibition for some D2 school to play as a tune up. Under this format you would have the 5 power conference champs and the 5 power conference runner ups. In most cases the conference runner up will be the 2nd team from a division the team that didn't just lose the conference championship. The 4 remaining spots go to the 4 highest ranked non power 5 schools. This way there is very little objectivity in the selection process aside from picking the 4 non P5 teams. Then the human committee can worry about seeding the bracket. This system has been proposed and has a workable revenue model to back it. The increased revenue from the larger playoff should compensate every power conference for the loss of a non con home game during the season and of course the non power 5 conferences will get a smaller portion of proceeds unless somehow one of their teams makes the Championship. This is the model I support because it is what is fair to the student athletes.
 
Fryowa said:
So you're going to tell me that there's a measurable and definable difference between #4 and #5, or between #25 and #26? Come on. You're being obtuse.

When it comes to splitting those hairs it comes down to the gut feelings of those committee members. Just like a judge decides a figure skater gets a 5.3 vs a 5.4 on his triple axel because it looked like he was 2 degrees short on his rotation.
Click to expand...

I'd rather have a designated committee than a bunch of media writers do it. The media that vote, typically cover a specific team, and watch very little other football. The coaches is a bigger joke, as it isn't even the coaches who are actually voting, and talk about not paying attention to other teams/games, they are focused on their team.

As far as who is #25 vs #26, I don't really care, I only said that a dedicated CFB playoff committee poll is gonna be better than the AP or coaches poll.

Oh, and I agree on the playoffs. It needs to be expanded to include every conference champ.
 
Going to a 8 team playoff system will not end the polls, all it does is move the bar down on what we are debating over. Instead of debating over who gets the 4th spot in the playoffs we'll all be debating on who gets the 8th spot. Heck basketball lets 68 teams into their NC tournament and their is still controversy over polls and who gets those last 4 spots. Instead of arguing over AP we're arguing over RPI. No matter what they do human element will always be involved and there will always be controversy.
 
ssckelley said:
Going to a 8 team playoff system will not end the polls, all it does is move the bar down on what we are debating over. Instead of debating over who gets the 4th spot in the playoffs we'll all be debating on who gets the 8th spot. Heck basketball lets 68 teams into their NC tournament and their is still controversy over polls and who gets those last 4 spots. Instead of arguing over AP we're arguing over RPI. No matter what they do human element will always be involved and there will always be controversy.
Click to expand...

True, but if all 5 conference champs get in, that ends the debate for 5 of the 8.

My issue with 4 teams isn't anything other than we have 5 major conferences now, and all conference champs should be in. I mean take last year for example. Penn St. won the B1G and Ohio St. went to the playoffs. That was bullshit (not that I like Penn St.). I just think results on the field should matter more than the girl with the curl award does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top