Started By
Message
re: If head-to-head doesn't matter, what's the point of a playoff?
Posted on 11/5/14 at 9:59 am to bama1959
Posted on 11/5/14 at 9:59 am to bama1959
quote:That's my point. You can't put OM ahead of Bama and not put Baylor ahead of TCU, or Arizona ahead of Oregon.
Head to head wins matter (see OM > Bama last week)
Either head-to-head matters - where the two teams involved have the same record - or it doesn't.
And if it doesn't, which was clearly the case in Baylor-TCU and Arizona-Oregon, then that makes a head-to-head playoff pointless.
3
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:03 am to CBandits82
quote:Because the process by which these teams are ranked might be important. Otherwise it would be much easier just to draw four teams out of a hat.
Why do people even care about rankings as of November 5th?
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:04 am to TX Tiger
Did head to head matter in the BCS?
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:07 am to TX Tiger
quote:
We're having a playoff so that teams can decide it on the field in head-to-head competition, yet according to the committee tasked with choosing the teams to participate, head-to-head competition isn't a deciding factor.
Does this make sense to anyone?
It is still early and they are comparing multiple teams. It is not just LSU vs OM. Also I think the head to head only applies for who makes it into playoffs.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:09 am to TX Tiger
quote:
Baylor-TCU and Arizona-Oregon
These are the best examples I can provide as to why the committee is getting it wrong right now.
Why do TCU and Oregon deserve to be in the playoff picture with 1 loss while the teams that beat them, who also have one loss and are in the same conference, are both technically out of it right now? The committee is pretty much saying that those games didn't matter, which is completely unfair to Baylor and Arizona. Winning the game shouldn't be the only thing that matters, but it should absolutely matter more than any other measurement.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:11 am to RB10
TCU and Oregon are better brands that's the only thing I can think of right meow
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:14 am to DMagic
quote:
TCU and Oregon are better brands that's the only thing I can think of right meow
Exactly. Oregon and TCU are ranked higher because the committee members like them more than Arizona and Baylor.
"Results on the field? Who gives a shite about that stuff. Oregon and TCU are more popular so they should be in the playoff."
This post was edited on 11/5/14 at 10:17 am
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:15 am to RB10
It's all about the dreaded eyeball test again I'm afraid. No matter the games will sort it out.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:22 am to RB10
quote:Absolutely, if the two teams involved have the same record.
Winning the game shouldn't be the only thing that matters, but it should absolutely matter more than any other measurement.
Otherwise they're saying that head-to-head doesn't matter, but the champion is going to be determined by head-to-head (playoff).
Posted on 11/5/14 at 11:08 am to TX Tiger
Much like in the NCAA basketball committee rankings. Te committee looks at the overall body of work.
They look at good wins and bad losses. Team with bad losses are ranked lower when win/loss records are equal.
They look at good wins and bad losses. Team with bad losses are ranked lower when win/loss records are equal.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 11:36 am to Spirit Of Aggieland
quote:When NCAA football becomes like NCAA basketball, I'll stop watching.
Much like in the NCAA basketball
quote:If head-to-head isn't the determining factor, then how is it reasonable to accept head-to-head as the determining factor (in the playoffs).
Team with bad losses are ranked lower when win/loss records are equal.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:40 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
If both teams have the same record, then yes it should. Otherwise it's rather hypocritical to tell me that the championship is going to be decided on head-to-head.
That's your opinion, but it's obviously not how reality works. 2008 Oklahoma was ranked higher than tu because they annihilated Tech. Same scenario. Outside of the head to head, LSU has more losses, one in which they got annihilated. Absolutely dismantled. Ole Miss played that same team close. At the end of the day, LSU upset Ole Miss. Ole Miss is the better team and everyone knows it, but upsets are a part of the sport. Be happy with your upset.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:42 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
Otherwise they're saying that head-to-head doesn't matter
It does matter, but it's not the overriding factor in this scenario. Had LSU beaten Ole Miss 42-7, and not got molested by Auburn, they would be ranked higher because of the dominating head to head win.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:50 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
That's my point. You can't put OM ahead of Bama and not put Baylor ahead of TCU, or Arizona ahead of Oregon.
God, you are dumb, dude. Baylor had 5 bye weeks to start the season. They've played two actual teams, and got owned by WVU. Ole Miss suffered two last-minute heartbreakers. LSU got FUBARed twice, one at home. Arizona has one quality win. Lost a home game to an unranked team. Do you pay attention to anything?
Posted on 11/6/14 at 10:34 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:That's just it, it's not my OPINION. It's what happened on the field. I tought that's what the tards have been crying about, they want it decided on the field and not by opinion.
If both teams have the same record, then yes it should. Otherwise it's rather hypocritical to tell me that the championship is going to be decided on head-to-head.
That's your opinion,
quote:O.K. So if No. 4 beats No. 1 in the playoffs it doesn't count because it was an upset?
Ole Miss is the better team and everyone knows it, but upsets are a part of the sport. Be happy with your upset.
With your "logic" No. 1 still advances to the championship game despite the loss to No. 4 because it was "an upset" and therefore doesn't count.
Posted on 11/6/14 at 10:38 am to jsmoove
quote:Yes, I pay attention to head-to-head. It's how I'm told a champion is to be decided.
That's my point. You can't put OM ahead of Bama and not put Baylor ahead of TCU, or Arizona ahead of Oregon.
God, you are dumb, dude. Baylor had 5 bye weeks to start the season. They've played two actual teams, and got owned by WVU. Ole Miss suffered two last-minute heartbreakers. LSU got FUBARed twice, one at home. Arizona has one quality win. Lost a home game to an unranked team. Do you pay attention to anything?
How can you crown a champion based on head-to-head when head-to-head doesn't matter?
Posted on 11/6/14 at 11:06 am to TeLeFaWx
So moral victories count to the committee? Ole Miss is actually 2-0 in moral victories and has more experience in with them.
Beat Bama and it will work itself out.
Beat Bama and it will work itself out.
Posted on 11/6/14 at 11:17 am to TX Tiger
committee knows that sometimes a worse team can jump up and knock off a better team. happened with ole miss bama this year, and happened with lsu ole miss. you only have to worry about it for a few more days, then you will have 3 losses and will be whining about which 3 loss team is ranked higher than you.
Posted on 11/6/14 at 11:25 am to narddogg81
quote:
committee knows that sometimes a worse team can jump up and knock off a better team. happened with ole miss bama this year, and happened with lsu ole miss. you only have to worry about it for a few more days, then you will have 3 losses and will be whining about which 3 loss team is ranked higher than you.
So, say the 4 seed jumps up and knocks off the 1 seed. Do they just say that 1 is better than 4 and let them advance to the championship game?
Why does opinion matter sometimes and head-to-head matters some other times?
Posted on 11/6/14 at 11:42 am to Nuts4LSU
quote:
It's pretty clear the committee has no intention of following the stated criteria (conf. championship, strength of schedule, head-to-head). Considering those criteria, two of the three favor LSU over Ole Miss and the other is a wash, but Ole Miss is ranked five spots higher than LSU. With a win over Ole Miss and an extra loss, we were 15 spots behind Ole Miss. Ole Miss suffering its second loss narrowed that gap by 10 spots. Alabama is currently 11 spots ahead of LSU with one less loss. If LSU wins Saturday, handing Alabama its second loss, and if the committee stays true to form (narrowing the Alabama-LSU gap by 10 spots), next week there will be two teams with equal records, weaker schedules and head-to-head losses to LSU that will still be ranked ahead of LSU.
Margin of victory or defeat has never been mentioned as a factor in the committee's evaluations, but it seems that margin (specifically LSU's lopsided loss to Auburn) is the only one they are looking at when evaluating LSU compared to Ole Miss (and presumably Alabama if we win). Meanwhile, they are pointedly ignoring two of the factors specifically stated when the system was formed.
If this is an indication of how the committee will act going forward, then how will their openly bad-faith conduct affect the legitimacy of the playoff system?
Could you cry a little more? LSU is a two loss team that good mauled twice. LSU doesn't deserve to sniff the top four this season no matter how they finish. If Bama loses to LSU on Saturday I will feel the same way about them. One close loss can be forgiven, but the committee wasn't blind when they saw LSU get bitched slapped twice in three weeks to SEC West competition. Come back and try again next year, but this post is beyond pathetic.
Page 5 of 6
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News