One thing missing in your examples from above....none are in the discussion for being in the playoff....except PSU and tOSU. And head to head then must count for something.
The playoff committee is about to get tested
- Thread starter Loam
- Start date
No love whatsoever, but that's beside the point. I did say it is possible for a B1G champ to get in as well. If they do get in I hope they get trounced in Cumberland fashion.
Well, there's a term I occasionally throw around here and that's "playoff zombies". The idea is that most sports not only have playoffs, but automatic criteria for those playoffs. A lot of people like this because they don't have to think. It's automated and they mindlessly agree with the results. This produces some really ridiculous results though. For instance in the NFL there have been teams with losing records in the playoff. There was a team that went undefeated all the way to the Super Bowl, and they lost to the Giants. So, the 10-6 Giants (regular season) were "champions" and the 16-0 Patriots who in fact beat the Giants earlier were not. Now, this produces a automated result right? It also makes the regular season a farce. In a lot of sports the regular season is just for seeding.
Now, two major things going on in college football. One is that for the longest time champions were just voted on. This was controversial, but it also means that only really good regular season teams could be champion. For instance I'm not aware of a 3 loss team ever being named champion. The other is that conferences did their own thing entirely. This isn't something the NCAA chooses, or the playoff committee chooses, conferences are not created equal, nor is their method for choosing champions. So, in terms of the championship it should become almost meaningless. For instance in 2011, the best team was clearly Alabama. Yet, they didn't even win their division. An argument could be made that not only did that division (not just conference) have the two best teams, their third best team was pretty darn good as well. With this sort of imbalance, you can't really fixate on division or conference champs. A game can be won or lost on a single play, the entire regular season needs to be the determining factor.
Why? It's just one result of many. Penn State beat Ohio State and lost to Michigan. Ohio State lost to Penn State and beat Michigan. What sort of logical conclusion can you reach from that alone? Not much. So then you have the rest of the season to take a look at...
Last edited:
No matter the format used to crown a champion it will have flaws. As one of the CBS analyst said during the halftime show on CBS yesterday "We're about to see how much the committee values conference champions." If Ohio St gets in over a conference champion then people can no longer complain about 2011 Bama. Because that game (LSU/BAMA) is what got this format created.
Yes, I fully understand that if Bama loses to Florida next Saturday the question will be "So do you think Alabama should be left out of the playoff because of that one game?" I don't have a right answer nor do I think there is one. I think we have to understand that with any format there are going to be weaknesses in the system and there will be years where the system doesn't work exactly how it should. But these cries of wanting to change the system every time something doesn't go as planned has got to stop. The same people who wanted this format (back in 2011) are the same ones now who want it changed.
But I will say that in my opinion it should take a lot to dismiss a conference champion for another team within that same conference.
Yes, I fully understand that if Bama loses to Florida next Saturday the question will be "So do you think Alabama should be left out of the playoff because of that one game?" I don't have a right answer nor do I think there is one. I think we have to understand that with any format there are going to be weaknesses in the system and there will be years where the system doesn't work exactly how it should. But these cries of wanting to change the system every time something doesn't go as planned has got to stop. The same people who wanted this format (back in 2011) are the same ones now who want it changed.
But I will say that in my opinion it should take a lot to dismiss a conference champion for another team within that same conference.
Last edited:
I get where you are coming from Krazy and I appreciate it. It is probably the majority and certainly the historical view to determine by vote.
My view is coloured (note the spelling) by my European birth. The best team in the country wins the league, any team - but normally very good ones - can win a cup.
The American system is effectively a hybrid of a league followed by a cup. Winning your league qualifies you for the cup. Even the old bowl system had a one game cup at the end.
I agree 100% that tOSU are better than Penn and I would rather see them in the playoffs but I just can't see how their inclusion can be at the expense of Penn without making the regular season worthless.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
My view is coloured (note the spelling) by my European birth. The best team in the country wins the league, any team - but normally very good ones - can win a cup.
The American system is effectively a hybrid of a league followed by a cup. Winning your league qualifies you for the cup. Even the old bowl system had a one game cup at the end.
I agree 100% that tOSU are better than Penn and I would rather see them in the playoffs but I just can't see how their inclusion can be at the expense of Penn without making the regular season worthless.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
That's strong.
The other problem I have with OSU being included right now is that all the other schools with a chance to get in will all be playing in a conference championship game this weekend.
Oh. State may benefit from one of them losing or having a significant injury while they sit at home and rest, heal up and do not risk losing.
Something about that and losing to Penn. State head to head that doesn't sit right with me.
Sorry - if PSU wins the conference (they probably won't), they beat OSU.
No one can say they're the better team than the team that beat them, if that team is conference champ.
And PSU mauled MSU, whom OSU barely beat.
We'll have to disagree in this one.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think this could be good for us. If the SEC bounces back again, as I believe it will, we may benefit from a non champion Ohio State being in the group of 4. Not hard to imagine us going 11-1 and being one of the 2 best teams in the nation. With all this talk of conference champions we would have been left out of the playoffs in 2011 when it was clearly Alabama LSU than everyone else was way down the list. If Ohio State were to play Penn State again I believe they would murder them. Penn State lost to Michigan 49-10.
Ohio State is better than Penn State, regardless of what happened on the field earlier in the season IMO. However, I fully understand the other side of the argument.
Said the Ok St fan back in 2011.
Why are so many folks on this board using Ok St. arguments to keep OSU out this year?
I thought the switch to a playoffs was to allow a team like OSU to still have a chance. That is, a team who will have a better winning percentage than the conference champion.
If 2 teams have equal resumes then a conference title should be the deciding factor. When one team has more losses, a conference championship shouldn't be used to ignore those losses, IMO.
IMO, divisions should be eliminated across college football and conferences should put the best 2 teams in there championship games. If that's how it worked, OSU vs Penn St. would be the B1G championship game.
depends on which Ohio State team showed up. The team that beat Oklahoma and Michigan or the team that lost to that same Penn State team and came very close to losing to a very bad Michigan State team (if the coach hadn't out coached himself they would have lost). Ohio State also had a very close game with a mediocre Northwestern team.
Last edited:
Actually, it depends on the weather. JT is a poor passer on cold and windy days, and those games were cold and very windy.
Well he doesn't think they should exist at all. He would rather Bama lose a game, get eliminated from the SECC and miss winning a conference championship so that Bama can play one less game and rest for the Playoff.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I can't fathom why this needs to be so complicated. In conference, the comparison between Penn State and Ohio State is very close. Both have one loss, you can argue either side if you just look at conference games. OOC? Not even close, not even in the same zip code. Ohio State mauled Oklahoma. Penn State lost to Pitt. Unless you want to pretend those two games didn't occur, you have an easy choice between Penn State and Ohio State. If you want to pretend they didn't occur, what is wrong with you?
Though I would point out I think the playoff itself shouldn't exist. I'd much rather Alabama not have to play Ohio State a couple years ago, when Alabama was the #1 seed. Same here, I'd much rather they play the SECCG and just have to play the BCSCG. But, I digress...
Path of least resistance :biggrin:
Though I would point out I think the playoff itself shouldn't exist. I'd much rather Alabama not have to play Ohio State a couple years ago, when Alabama was the #1 seed. Same here, I'd much rather they play the SECCG and just have to play the BCSCG. But, I digress...
If you are comparing #4 and #4a.....head to head should be the main tie-breaker....just like when determining who gets in to the conference championship games.
the B1G decided that PSU made the conference title game based on one thing....PSU won head to head....they considered no other factors when determining who between the two would get in.
Last edited:
Right, and yet some people seem to think the playoff committee should use such overly simplistic criteria to choose who gets in? Really? Yeah, just ignore that Ohio State both had one less loss and played a tougher schedule. That makes perfect sense, as long as you've been hit in the head a lot.
This is an argument that would never even exist in the BCS era. People did argue that conference champions mattered, but elevating a two loss power 5 team over a 1 loss power 5 team? C'mon...
Last edited:
This is a big problem. People want to use a subjective eye test to say that OSU is better than PSU, but then those same people say the championship should be settled on the field. The day they played, PSU was better based on having more points, which is how winners and losers are decided. I also think OSU would probably beat PSU 8 out of 10 times, but football isn't baseball. You have to be ready to play each time you take the field. Otherwise, we may as well just pick who people think will be the best at the beginning of the year and let them play and cancel the rest of the season. This season is odd in that the Big 10 champion will have two losses, though. I don't have a problem with OSU being put in over Whisky or PSU, but the Big should not have two teams if Clemson and Washington are league champs with only one loss each. If that happens, it should be Bama, Clemson, Big 10 team(OSU, Whisky, PSU), and Washington.
I agree with both points. Wisconsin has two conference losses to the #2 and #3 teams while PSU was blown out by Michigan and lost an OCC game to Pitt who finished 7-5. Who really has the better resume? The CFPC is not going to drop tOSU. If PSU had only the loss to Michigan then they would be in over tOSU due to head to head. The whole situation should be resolved after next weekend, but the CFPC has more issues and bias than the BCS system.
Latest threads
-
Final Home Midweek for Alabama Brings Samford to The Joe- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
-
I'd like to hear about some actual prayer requests that have been answered the way it made sense to answer them.- Started by Labrador
- Replies: 13