Author Topic: Selection Committee Rankings (Read 5722 times)

Panjandrum · « **Reply #25 on:** October 21, 2014, 05:05:34 PM »

Personally, I think we should just have a vicious, Hunger Games style rumble between mascots, and the final four survivors get to have their teams compete for the national title.

I personally want to see the WKU hilltopper thing beat the ever loving crap out of Lil Red.

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #26 on:** October 21, 2014, 05:07:15 PM »

Quote from: Panjandrum on October 21, 2014, 05:05:34 PM

Personally, I think we should just have a vicious, Hunger Games style rumble between mascots, and the final four survivors get to have their teams compete for the national title.

I personally want to see the WKU hilltopper thing beat the ever loving crap out of Lil Red.

If I were Nebraska, I would fill Lil' Red with mustard gas. Talk about a defense mechanism!

CyberToothCat · « **Reply #27 on:** October 21, 2014, 05:51:18 PM »

My biggest gripe with the committee process is definitely the lack of transparency. I mean, if dolts like Kellis Robinette have to make their ballots public for an irrelevant AP poll, then surely the committee votes for the playoff teams should be made public.

I understand that the whole purpose of the playoff is to make sure that the big dogs can keep the little guys on the outside looking in, but shouldn't they at least toss a bone in the general direction of fairness? The lack of transparency is going to cause way more drama than necessary.

Yeah undefeated Marshall, we considered you but our committee only voted you as the 19th best team. Did anyone vote for you to be in one of the four playoff spots? Well, I can't tell you that, that's a secret! Did anyone vote for you to be higher than 19th? Sorry, I can't tell you that either. All I can say is that we looked at your results and magically put you at #19. *shrug*

Sorry 11-1 Big 12 Champ K-State you didn't make the playoff, but 11-1 SEC West Division runner up Ole Miss did. Sorry, I'm not going to tell you how close you were because that's none of your business. All you need to know is that you weren't good enough. Now go play in that sandbox over there and let the adults have some peace and quiet for a while.

star seed 7 · « **Reply #28 on:** October 21, 2014, 06:35:56 PM »

You should stick to asking if we have money for vanier 2, cause that post was bad

wetwillie · « **Reply #29 on:** October 21, 2014, 07:02:44 PM »

It's just a means to an end which is an expanded playoff. They will go to 8 after the 4 proves to be profitable.

pvegs · « **Reply #30 on:** October 21, 2014, 07:15:53 PM »

Honest question, why didn't they want to use the BCS formula to choose the top 4 teams instead of the the top 2? The committee seems like a needless complication.

Frankenklein · « **Reply #31 on:** October 21, 2014, 07:27:02 PM »

Because they couldn't get the stupid computers to pick 3 SEC teams

KITNfury · « **Reply #32 on:** October 21, 2014, 09:47:56 PM »

I like the idea (not practiced to my knowledge) of blank names and resume only. But what's the barometer? They're has to be some baseline for who is good, sos, etc. There has to be some unbiased ranking system to say team x beat team y and team y is good.

If not, you go off record alone

CHONGS · « **Reply #33 on:** October 21, 2014, 10:46:27 PM »

Quote from: KITNfury on October 21, 2014, 09:47:56 PM

I like the idea (not practiced to my knowledge) of blank names and resume only. But what's the barometer? They're has to be some baseline for who is good, sos, etc. There has to be some unbiased ranking system to say team x beat team y and team y is good.

If not, you go off record alone

It's pronounced thermometer.

michigancat · « **Reply #34 on:** October 21, 2014, 11:10:32 PM »

I don't think there's evidence that anyone but the sec would benefit from an unreasonable number of sec teams in the playoff.

Also, the selection should be made by a computer with a formula that is public.

MakeItRain · « **Reply #35 on:** October 22, 2014, 12:57:12 AM »

Quote from: Watershed on October 21, 2014, 02:28:11 PM

Quote from: Pett on October 21, 2014, 01:48:58 PM
If it comes down to Condoleezza Rice the Cats are in for sure

She doesn't know her head from her ass about FB. Couldn't believe they put her on her. Must of tried to cover the minority/women requirement w/ one person. Failed on both accounts!

Try gopowercat.com, you'll like it much better there, if you can afford the $10/month

catastrophe · « **Reply #36 on:** October 22, 2014, 09:31:15 AM »

Assuming they haven't just come out and said as much, it is pretty obvious the selection committee is intended to emulate the NCAA Tournament selection committee. Obviously when you're only picking four teams there will be significantly more controversy, but I think the main impetus behind the committee is that basketball selection committee has been far less criticized than the BCS.

What people seem to already forget about the BCS is that it suffers from two serious issues: (1) the programs themselves still depend on the human element and cannot be perfected (i.e., still subjective, people just pretend its not because the subjectivity happens on the front end); and (2) the polls making up part of the score allow for people who actually have skin in the game to affect the results, which is messed up. Even though what he did wasn't AS egregious, a few years ago when Nick Saban wanted to keep OSU out of the championship game, he could have left them off his ballot entirely.

waks · « **Reply #37 on:** October 25, 2014, 05:02:13 PM »

Quote from: Chingon on October 21, 2014, 10:46:27 PM

Quote from: KITNfury on October 21, 2014, 09:47:56 PM
I like the idea (not practiced to my knowledge) of blank names and resume only. But what's the barometer? They're has to be some baseline for who is good, sos, etc. There has to be some unbiased ranking system to say team x beat team y and team y is good.

If not, you go off record alone
It's pronounced thermometer.

Elite Cosmo Kramer reference

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #38 on:** October 25, 2014, 05:39:46 PM »

It will be equally as good as the basketball committee and infinitely better than letting jock sniffing sports journalists decide.

steve dave · « **Reply #39 on:** October 25, 2014, 05:41:46 PM »

they'll do a great job. the BCS did a pretty great job as well. everyone will bitch about bias and SEC and ESPN and a bunch of small timey bullshit and I'll laugh at those people. circle of life.

Skipper44 · « **Reply #40 on:** October 25, 2014, 05:51:37 PM »

2011 was not a great job

steve dave · « **Reply #41 on:** October 25, 2014, 05:55:23 PM »

Quote from: Skipper44 on October 25, 2014, 05:51:37 PM

2011 was not a great job

it got it right

star seed 7 · « **Reply #42 on:** October 25, 2014, 05:57:43 PM »

Having a coaches vote be part of the bcs was pretty dumb tho

ChiComCat · « **Reply #43 on:** October 25, 2014, 06:12:01 PM »

The BCS did the championship games alright but they mumped up the rest of the matchups plenty.

My hopes for the committee:

-Reward a tough non-con. It will encourage better games and help the sport. Football will be much better if all the teams tried to have the best résumé and not just be undefeated. (This isn't to prop K-State up for playing Auburn as I realize in most years that this criteria wouldn't benefit K-State).

-Rank based on résumé, not hypotheticals and "eye tests."

I don't like 2 teams in from the same conference as it devalues the regular season. Hypothetically, if Miss St beat Ole Miss in the regular season, I don't see why they should have to do it again in the playoff. That said, I don't know what the solution is as the most deserving teams deserve to get in. I guess I would be for a rule saying that a conference can't play itself in the semis or something as that may help. If they both win the semis, than maybe Ole Miss has earned another shot.

steve dave · « **Reply #44 on:** October 25, 2014, 07:44:15 PM »

BCS formula had nothing to do with the non-championship game. Those were all selected by game committees. BCS formula just picked the top two.

Benja · « **Reply #45 on:** October 25, 2014, 08:01:54 PM »

Its so weird how people talk about the playoff committee like its the rough ridin' council of Trent. It's college football. It's not that hard to judge. We do it pretty well on here and half of us are retards.

steve dave · « **Reply #46 on:** October 25, 2014, 08:02:49 PM »

Yeah, I could get it correct 100% of the time. I'm not a whiny homer though.

Benja · « **Reply #47 on:** October 25, 2014, 08:08:17 PM »

Yeah you could easily do it sd

ChiComCat · « **Reply #48 on:** October 25, 2014, 08:21:05 PM »

Quote from: steve dave on October 25, 2014, 07:44:15 PM

BCS formula had nothing to do with the non-championship game. Those were all selected by game committees. BCS formula just picked the top two.

There were rules regarding the formula and who they had to/could pick, particularly towards the end.

KITNfury · « **Reply #49 on:** October 25, 2014, 08:21:42 PM »

2011 was bullshit but only because it made lsu play a team they already beat on the road, not because the two teams weren't the best.