OK, let's get WAY ahead of ourselves here. Here's one of the big problems that I have with the whole playoff committee nonsense, and it would be so nice to prove the farcical nature this year. If you've not read the Sherlock Holmes mystery that comprises the voodoo means of how teams are selected, then do so. And I say this as an unapologetic advocate of a four team playoff using the old BCS system. That - in my view - would have been the best of all worlds - a valid regular season, valid polls, and nobody really getting 'hosed' because of the misfortune of being in the same division with the other best team or roaring through a tough conference undefeated but left out in the cold because they weren't ranked high enough in the pre-season.
Here's the criteria they have, one in particular that I have opposed from day one:
Principles. The committee will select the teams using a process that distinguishes among otherwise comparable teams by considering:
Conference championships won,
Strength of schedule,
Head-to-head competition,
Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory), and,
Other relevant factors such as key injuries that may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance.
I think this is absurd, and it no doubt should be called the 'if only Colt hadn't gotten hurt' rule. However, we now have a major problem - follow me in this.
Let's say Alabama runs the gauntlet the rest of the way. It could be ANY team, but let's say it's current one-loss Alabama. Let's further say Ole Miss runs the table. I know I sound drunk but just follow me. We wind up at the end of the season with the usual suspects near the top plus Ole Miss. Let's say Ohio State and Michigan St both have a loss, UCLA is unbeaten, Oklahoma is unbeaten, it's a top heavy mess.
Ole Miss wins the SEC by knocking off Georgia. Oh, but the SEC comes out acknowledging that ONE TOUCHDOWN should not have counted in the Ole Miss-Alabama game (which may well happen folks). You now have a problem - the wrong team won the game. The wrong team played for the SEC title, the wrong team won the Western division, and the wrong team is the conference champion.
Now I know you're all thinking the exact same thing I'm thinking - this is ridiculous because (let's say it together) - 'you cannot ASSUME that everything that happens after the bad call happens and Alabama wins.' And you're right. But here's the problem - you also cannot ASSUME that because Player X was injured that it was the difference in the game, either; Ohio State proved that conclusively last year. Yet we're being told to ASSUME one thing and given an open-ended criteria of things we might include. What if several committee members decided to conclude that the wrong team won the SEC?
This, of course, is not going to happen, nor should it. But the thing is the committee makes this thing possible whereas the other ranking system made it IMPOSSIBLE to rig this way.
Let me cover the obvious points before I get blasted left and right. Ole Miss won the game. Ole Miss SHOULD have and DESERVED to win the game regardless of that one play, okay? We have problems to address and fix and this must be done quickly - as in right now. The problems go beyond 'we turned it over five times' but they're not insurmountable obstacles, either.
I'm just pointing out that it is incredibly inconsistent to have to consider injuries on one hand but NOT other 'relevant factors' like 'officials hosing teams with their ineptitude.' I would be fine if this subjective criterion was removed completely as it should be. Most of you who have known me over the last seven years of constant posting here would vouch for me being reasonable and willing to buck the trends if necessary, so don't consider this a conspiracy-laden leap into nonsense or even a whine about how 'we might get messed over.' We DO have business to take care of, and Ole Miss is not getting through the year unscathed, either. And I'm not longing for the 'bad old days' of the BCS, either, a system I said was neither as good as some argue nor as bad as the pilers on alleged.
I'm simply making the point that this wax nose can stretch quite far.
Here's the criteria they have, one in particular that I have opposed from day one:
Principles. The committee will select the teams using a process that distinguishes among otherwise comparable teams by considering:
Conference championships won,
Strength of schedule,
Head-to-head competition,
Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory), and,
Other relevant factors such as key injuries that may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance.
I think this is absurd, and it no doubt should be called the 'if only Colt hadn't gotten hurt' rule. However, we now have a major problem - follow me in this.
Let's say Alabama runs the gauntlet the rest of the way. It could be ANY team, but let's say it's current one-loss Alabama. Let's further say Ole Miss runs the table. I know I sound drunk but just follow me. We wind up at the end of the season with the usual suspects near the top plus Ole Miss. Let's say Ohio State and Michigan St both have a loss, UCLA is unbeaten, Oklahoma is unbeaten, it's a top heavy mess.
Ole Miss wins the SEC by knocking off Georgia. Oh, but the SEC comes out acknowledging that ONE TOUCHDOWN should not have counted in the Ole Miss-Alabama game (which may well happen folks). You now have a problem - the wrong team won the game. The wrong team played for the SEC title, the wrong team won the Western division, and the wrong team is the conference champion.
Now I know you're all thinking the exact same thing I'm thinking - this is ridiculous because (let's say it together) - 'you cannot ASSUME that everything that happens after the bad call happens and Alabama wins.' And you're right. But here's the problem - you also cannot ASSUME that because Player X was injured that it was the difference in the game, either; Ohio State proved that conclusively last year. Yet we're being told to ASSUME one thing and given an open-ended criteria of things we might include. What if several committee members decided to conclude that the wrong team won the SEC?
This, of course, is not going to happen, nor should it. But the thing is the committee makes this thing possible whereas the other ranking system made it IMPOSSIBLE to rig this way.
Let me cover the obvious points before I get blasted left and right. Ole Miss won the game. Ole Miss SHOULD have and DESERVED to win the game regardless of that one play, okay? We have problems to address and fix and this must be done quickly - as in right now. The problems go beyond 'we turned it over five times' but they're not insurmountable obstacles, either.
I'm just pointing out that it is incredibly inconsistent to have to consider injuries on one hand but NOT other 'relevant factors' like 'officials hosing teams with their ineptitude.' I would be fine if this subjective criterion was removed completely as it should be. Most of you who have known me over the last seven years of constant posting here would vouch for me being reasonable and willing to buck the trends if necessary, so don't consider this a conspiracy-laden leap into nonsense or even a whine about how 'we might get messed over.' We DO have business to take care of, and Ole Miss is not getting through the year unscathed, either. And I'm not longing for the 'bad old days' of the BCS, either, a system I said was neither as good as some argue nor as bad as the pilers on alleged.
I'm simply making the point that this wax nose can stretch quite far.
