College football playoff selection process already screwed up...

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,499
46,842
187
No, I'm just waiting on you getting banned from tidefans.com. Do you see the humor in this post? :)
Don't know what to say to such a hateful post. I am just happy that there aren't many more like you on this board. Most have welcomed me.
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,499
46,842
187
Here, I believe we all want the best to win out and not have a trophy awarded because of a desire to spread the wealth. That includes you, our friend in Ohio.
I agree completely - even if it means that my Buckeyes never win another championship. I do not put my team or conference above the sport.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
Not possible -- every person qualified to sit on such a panel has allegiances and biases. That is actually the primary reason that I wish they had simply stuck with the BCS process for team selection.
They want bias, and yes they should have stuck with a process that worked fairly well.

However, don't confuse two different things. When the United States sends a delegate to the UN, they are acting on behalf of the wishes of the United States administration. They are a political animal, with political objectives. If you simply sent someone from the United States as a representative, they would act in an entirely different fashion. The same applies here. When you let the Sun Belt send someone, you know they will have their marching orders. They are there because they are from the Sun Belt, they are there with a specific agenda which is to represent the interests of the Sun Belt, not the interests of college football. If for instance they don't argue for an undefeated Sun Belt team, they will almost certainly lose their job. If on the other hand it happened to be someone that had ties in the past to the Sun Belt, then it's entirely different. Now, while they might have some bias, they are free to act on behalf of college football, and not just the irrelevant conference.

I don't trust the SEC's representative either. I don't trust who Slive might want to represent the SEC. I'd trust someone like Finebaum more (I don't like him, and we all know where he graduated from), simply because he has some incentive to be objective. On the other hand, someone like Lou Holtz would be a disaster because we all know his ballot would be Notre Dame, South Carolina, and Arkansas every single year. The committee should have been chosen based on credibility, as objective observers and instead the qualifications are as subjective observers. To say we are choosing you because is to say we want bias in the process. Even the method for choosing members allows bias, this is all bad news.
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,499
46,842
187
They want bias, and yes they should have stuck with a process that worked fairly well.

However, don't confuse two different things. When the United States sends a delegate to the UN, they are acting on behalf of the wishes of the United States administration. They are a political animal, with political objectives. If you simply sent someone from the United States as a representative, they would act in an entirely different fashion. The same applies here. When you let the Sun Belt send someone, you know they will have their marching orders. They are there because they are from the Sun Belt, they are there with a specific agenda which is to represent the interests of the Sun Belt, not the interests of college football. If for instance they don't argue for an undefeated Sun Belt team, they will almost certainly lose their job. If on the other hand it happened to be someone that had ties in the past to the Sun Belt, then it's entirely different. Now, while they might have some bias, they are free to act on behalf of college football, and not just the irrelevant conference.

I don't trust the SEC's representative either. I don't trust who Slive might want to represent the SEC. I'd trust someone like Finebaum more (I don't like him, and we all know where he graduated from), simply because he has some incentive to be objective. On the other hand, someone like Lou Holtz would be a disaster because we all know his ballot would be Notre Dame, South Carolina, and Arkansas every single year. The committee should have been chosen based on credibility, as objective observers and instead the qualifications are as subjective observers. To say we are choosing you because is to say we want bias in the process. Even the method for choosing members allows bias, this is all bad news.
Solid points
 

tide96

All-SEC
Oct 4, 2005
1,616
32
72
46
This isn't the worst part though:
"The selection committee will receive a "jury charge" from the commissioners. In ranking the teams, the committee will consider strength of schedule, where the games were played, conference championships and whether teams lost games because of injuries to key players."
They have to have some direction and different people will interpret it different ways. That is just how it works when you include human judgment. Conference championships do have some value.

Anything else is just letting the computers have 100% of the vote.
 

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,527
39,616
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
Did Alabama fans think that the panel should consist of Alabama fans, coaches and administrators, giving the SEC automatic preference in the selection process? Anything short of that will seemingly not meet the requirements of some of your posters.
I'm not sure what brought that little sarcastic (and non-responsive) blast, but anyone who doesn't think what motivated the change was not the SEC domination during the BCS era is either naive or disingenuous...
 

nx4bama

All-SEC
Apr 8, 2010
1,141
1
57
NW Alabama
Dude....seriously. That looks like logic backed up with facts. It has no place in this discussion.

/rollingeyescarcasm

Seriously though....I couldn't agree more. FBS is the only major sport known to man with no legitimate way to determine its champion. Even my daughters TBall league that didn't keep score in games had a daggum tourney at the end.
you just compared College Football to a GIRLS tball league to help make your point.... i think that says enough ;)
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,499
46,842
187
...anyone who doesn't think what motivated the change was not the SEC domination during the BCS era is either naive or disingenuous...
I believe that Delany only agreed to entertain the 4 team playoff idea because of the SEC domination, but that doesn't mean that I agree that the system will be a disaster.
 

glasscutter256

All-American
Jan 31, 2009
2,173
29
67
Huntsville
First of all, I appreciate the viewpoint B1Gtide brings. He isn't being rude. Doesn't mean I agree with him on everything.

Second, the injury clause I think goes without saying. Anytime subjective humans start deciding on teams, they will subconsciously factor injuries into their decision. It doesn't have to be said or written to know it factors in. That's another reason the BCS is better than a selection committee.

Third, just because every other sport uses a large playoff formula doesn't make it the best for college football. I don't see how the 16th ranked team with 3 or 4 losses should have the right to be called national champion because of a simple tournament at the end of the season. I'm ok with 4 teams, but keep it there.
 

bamafaninOhiO

All-American
May 11, 2010
2,114
0
0
Dayton, Ohio
I believe that Delany only agreed to entertain the 4 team playoff idea because of the SEC domination, but that doesn't mean that I agree that the system will be a disaster.
I partly agree with you. Delaney did agree to the playoff due to SEC domination, that was the only reason he did so. If he didnt think that building subjectivity into the committee wouldn't allow him a better chance at getting in, do you truly believe he would have supported that method, when most preferred a combination which included some form of the current ranking system (polls)???

His agenda was clearly trying to ensure that a two team SEC championship didn't occur again, and now the criteria coming out thats supposed to be used in selecting the teams seem to back up those concerns.

You're right that we cant call it a disaster before it actually becomes one, but the more things that you put into the panels decision based on subjectivity and aren't reflected in the current BCS rankings, the closer you get to it...

They may not use the polls, but the general public, journalists and college football analysts will be.

Things like player injuries being used concern me. That is subjective at its purest essence. they're adding those 'subjective' criteria into the decision to provide a smoke screen which will allow them cover to justify bypassing a team (potentially)...

...Which over the course of the last few years could have been used to keep a second 'SEC' team from getting into the 4 team 'playoff'....

I do appreciate your posting and have found you to be pretty even and unbiased, but this is a VERY touchy subject in SEC country, as we see it as trying to devise a way to get 'your teams' in while keeping the SEC teams out...

BTW: If you're going to defend the committee when its being based on a lot of subjective criteria, be ready to have very thick skin, my friend.
 
Last edited:

dWarriors88

All-American
Jan 4, 2009
4,236
879
137
Tulsa, OK
I'm going to miss the BCS. We have really benifited these past few years from the way the BCS selects who goes and who doesn't, also the controversy that BCS selectedwas awesome. Don't deny it wasn't. For the most part the BCS has gotten it right, as far as picking who the true best team is. Instead of putting a playoff in, I think a Plus one would have been a better scenario, who would not of loved to see Oregon-Bama!?
 

mikes12

All-American
Nov 10, 2005
3,548
0
0
49
Chattanooga, TN
I'm going to miss the BCS. We have really benifited these past few years from the way the BCS selects who goes and who doesn't, also the controversy that BCS selectedwas awesome. Don't deny it wasn't. For the most part the BCS has gotten it right, as far as picking who the true best team is. Instead of putting a playoff in, I think a Plus one would have been a better scenario, who would not of loved to see Oregon-Bama!?
TBH, whichever team lost.
 

bamatex82

All-SEC
Oct 5, 2001
1,769
211
182
Greenville, TX
Every sport, except FBS football, has some sort of playoff that includes more than 4 teams and most any team has a path to earn their way into it.
Not true. British Premier League for instance does not have a playoff system. However, it is a small enough league and long enough season that they play everybody twice. They have a point system for wins, ties, etc. and at the end of the season the team with the most points wins. Of course there other sports that don't have playoffs like track and field and swimming, but I know that you did not mean them. However, I am trying to point out that playoff system is not the only way to anoint a champion. Most think it is the best, but I disagree.
 

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,527
39,616
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
I believe that Delany only agreed to entertain the 4 team playoff idea because of the SEC domination, but that doesn't mean that I agree that the system will be a disaster.
I've never felt that it necessarily had to be a disaster - just that that was the probability. The very reason that it was conceived has bias built into it from the outset. "Let's come up with a system which will crack the SEC hegemony" is hardly an auspicious start, particularly viewed from the standpoint of the SEC. BTW, have you considered using the smileys when attempting humor? Your post which irritated so many would have come across totally differently, if it had had a smiley at the end...
 

scrodz

1st Team
Jan 29, 2008
430
60
52
Baltimore, MD
This whole "injury rule" smells like a negotiating point, sort of like Delaney lobbying for the Rose Bowl during the initial playoff debates. I'm also curious that they didn't mention quality wins and quality losses, or whether or not the individual votes will be made public. I'd be VERY nervous if this went from an open debate to just another "smoke-filled room".
 

GeorgiaTider

All-SEC
Oct 30, 2005
1,565
24
57
62
I don't see one or two people on the panel driving anything down the throats of the rest. Now, will there be back room dealing going on? Who knows. America can be pretty corrupt, and college football is not above that. But the idea that the SEC is now somehow in a worse position than it was before seems pretty far fetched to me.
I disagree. I think the SEC is at a disadvantage as well as some of the other bigger conferences. This is the prime chance for the minor conferences to bring 'equality' and 'justice' to the unfair selection process.
 

Crimson1967

Hall of Fame
Nov 22, 2011
18,734
9,918
187
Not true. British Premier League for instance does not have a playoff system. However, it is a small enough league and long enough season that they play everybody twice. They have a point system for wins, ties, etc. and at the end of the season the team with the most points wins. Of course there other sports that don't have playoffs like track and field and swimming, but I know that you did not mean them. However, I am trying to point out that playoff system is not the only way to anoint a champion. Most think it is the best, but I disagree.
While track, swimming, wrestling, etc. don't have playoffs in the sense that basketball and baseball do, they do have regional tournaments where people qualify for the national meet.
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.