Link: Want to get a glimpse of what's wrong with the CFP committee? Read this....

CrmznApklps said:

I kind of see what the guy on the selection show was saying though. TCU is #3 one week and then is #6 the next?

I think the committee needs only to vote ONCE; after the Conference Championship. All the other declarations just muddy the conversation.

Click to expand...

I think the committee either shouldn't release the rankings on a weekly basis or do like polls and give "totals" to each team. That allows teams and fans to know how close a team is. For instance, Alabama can be #1 with a 300 point lead over #2 Oregon, or Alabama can only have a 15 point lead that can change with a big Oregon win.

I do like the fluidity of the rankings, though. We get upset with the AP or Coaches not changing their rankings from the preseason if everyone wins no matter how they played. The committee clearly does care about how well a team plays.

NBF_Bama_Cavalry said:

Of 61 coaches who voted in the coach's poll, 56 voted Alabama either #1 or #2. Four coaches showed a little anti-Alabama bias and voted #3. Art Briles was the only coach who voted Alabama #4. His opinions don't carry much weight with me. He seems like a good fit for the whiners in the Big 12.

Click to expand...

When I saw Briles had put us at #4 in coaches poll I lost any respect I had for him...maybe he and Mike Gundy(2011 crybaby) can go have a pity party together _cry: at least Gary Patterson handled the situation with class!

When the Big 12 learns to count someone might take them seriously. At least the Big 10 has at least 10 teams.

I think Briles should be a little upset at not getting the backing of his own conference. Not saying it would have made a difference in the end, but declaring "Co-Champions" in the "One True Champion" league was definitely a factor. Not having a conference chamionship game was a larger factor.

And for those griping about Baylor's non-conference schedule being so poor, and a loss over a "mediocre" WVU team, I would caution that Alabama's ooc was similar and, even though we have a conference championship game, may hurt us if we dont beef it up somewhat in the future. That WVU team played us very tough and Baylor's ooc against Buffalo, Northwestern State and SMU isn't considerably worse than Alabama's ooc of FAU, Southern Miss and Western Carolina.

The committee got it right imo. OSU shouldve been n the top 4 last week, but the committee was holding out to see if the 3rd string qb could pull it out. As for the pairings, I think they are totally based on draw. Last week it was UA vs FSU and Ore vs TCU. That was wanting the UA vs FSU game with Ore playing the winner in the championship. Now you have two huge draws in both semi finals and in the ship as well no matter how you slice it. Money talks, and the Big 12 was doomed when they lost the claim of undefeated teams. They better get a championship game or this will continue to happen.

They should use the old BCS formula to pick the top four...........but they won't.

GP for Bama said:

They should use the old BCS formula to pick the top four...........but they won't.

Click to expand...

I think we all would agree with that on both accounts, and most of us have said as much. The committee idea was stupid to begin with, but I do agree with their selections this year. However, they are just completely unnecessary. It wouldn't surprise me if the old BCS formula would have selected the same teams. I'll bet FSU would have been higher, though, possibly altereing the matchups.

CrmznApklps said:

I think the committee needs only to vote ONCE; after the Conference Championship. All the other declarations just muddy the conversation.

Click to expand...

That's what they do in basketball. Why not do it with football?

Special K said:

You guys are missing the point. I also believe Briles is speaking mostly from sour grapes and he was really done in by his own conference's stupidity. My point though is that the whole setup, that even allows him the opportunity to whine about "representation on the committee" is in and of itself a problem. I think the committee probably got it right this year, but my point is that it's much easier to influence a smaller group of people with his type of whining and complaining and the whole setup is asking for trouble. Someone will listen to Briles and his ilk at some point and eventually screw the whole thing up even worse. That's the point I was trying to make, not trying to debate whether Baylor belonged or not.

Click to expand...

I get your point, but personally I'd rather have a combination of people watching games and computers. IMO, the committee did a fine job all year long. If you want the system tweaked, I'm OK with that but the way things turned out no team got left out that had an opportunity to be in the top two teams. Oregon would have had a strong case this year if they had been left out of the BCS but going to four teams fixed that. When humans are involved in selection there will always be people suspecting foul play. I didn't see it.

Briles has branded himself a crybaby. Patterson taking the decision graciously makes Briles look that much worse.

I'm puzzled by Briles saying that he knew he was doomed when Archie Manning withdrew from the committee. Why did he say that? I'm sure Manning is a fair person and wouldn't be biased toward the Big 12, or probably doesn't know any more about the inter-workings of the Big 12 than any other committee member. Plus the fact that he is only one vote.

But the OP is right. Whining like Briles is doing might eventually sway the committee to make a mistake and screw it up more than it already is. Briles just needs to accept it graciously and shut up.

So using Briles logic, it's wrong for the committee to use their regional biases but it would be ok if Archie did that?
Somebody call Art Briles a waaaaaaaaaaaaymulance!

Were it not for political maneuvering, Baylor wouldn't be in the Big 12. Texas Governor (and Baylor alum) Ann Richards had to go to bat for them.

They should have just said that they were waiting on the Big 12 to complete its schedule and that Baylor had a chance of jumping TCU at the end. Like the BCS or not THEY HAD A NUMBER you could look at. You could see how close "close" was between teams. You could also predict what might hapen if X, Y, Z happened. Perhaps they could use that type of system next year so people could see how close the votes are week to week. Just a thought.

CrimsonTut said:

I think Briles should be a little upset at not getting the backing of his own conference. Not saying it would have made a difference in the end, but declaring "Co-Champions" in the "One True Champion" league was definitely a factor. Not having a conference chamionship game was a larger factor.

And for those griping about Baylor's non-conference schedule being so poor, and a loss over a "mediocre" WVU team, I would caution that Alabama's ooc was similar and, even though we have a conference championship game, may hurt us if we dont beef it up somewhat in the future. That WVU team played us very tough and Baylor's ooc against Buffalo, Northwestern State and SMU isn't considerably worse than Alabama's ooc of FAU, Southern Miss and Western Carolina.

Click to expand...

So, you are saying our opener against WVU didn't count or what???

I can't wait to see the Co-One-True-Champion rings.

It was very clear to me weeks ago that the Committee wanted Ohio State in the play offs and I mentioned this on other threads. The Committee really did a face plant naming TCU #3 the previous week instead of #4. The Committee's rationale that #3, 4, 5 & 6 were virtually equal is lame. If that was the fact, then name 1 and 2 and explain the other four were virtually equal. When Manning dropped out I thought that would hurt the SEC, especially following all the talk about no SEC representative. Of course, the rest of the nation is tired (aka jealous) of the SEC with it winning the last BCS Championships until the Barn failed miserably last year and let the Conference down. Any excuse, however slight, to exclude the SEC would have been taken if it could.RTR

BamaGene said:

So, you are saying our opener against WVU didn't count or what???

Click to expand...

Of course not. WVU was a scrappy, decent team. I'm simply saying those that are criticizing Baylor for losing to them are devaluing WVU. I'm also saying the rest of our OOC was no worse than Baylor's and I wish we'd at least beef up our schedule in the future, even though I understand why we do it and the need for it.

CrmznApklps said:

I kind of see what the guy on the selection show was saying though. TCU is #3 one week and then is #6 the next?

I think the committee needs only to vote ONCE; after the Conference Championship. All the other declarations just muddy the conversation.

Click to expand...

Personally, I don't think the frequency of releasing the playoff poll is an issue. The issue is the methodology behind the voting. The committee showed no appreciation for the games yet to played. For example, moving FSU down to #4 was unnecessary. FSU had a future game that would either move them down for the committee because of losing the game or would at least keep FSU at #3 due to winning the game. Also, back in week 12 after Alabama beat LSU and TCU beat Kansas State (a team already beaten by an imperfect SEC team), the committee moved TCU above Alabama without any consideration of the opponents to come on the two teams' schedules. TCU had no other games left to help it maintain its ranking, and Alabama had up to three games left against ranked opponents, one of which was against the #1 team in the country. It seems obvious to me that the committee could have let Alabama's performance on the field against the #1 team do the work for them -- the game was just 4 days away. Winning would continue to justify Alabama's ranking and likely would move Alabama much higher in the rankings, and losing would move Alabama down for the committee. The committee basically showed no adeptness in managing expectations because of its refusal to think about future scenarios -- political naivety at its finest.

Furthermore, I can easily imagine the hue and cry that would erupt if the playoff poll were only released at the end of the season, especially since we'd have week after week of numerous other polls setting our expectations in advance.