Started By
Message
Does anyone besides me have an issue with the selection committee?
Posted on 1/7/14 at 12:20 am
Posted on 1/7/14 at 12:20 am
I just realized one of the members is currently employed by Clemson's athletic department.
2
Posted on 1/7/14 at 12:24 am to Wholelottacock
No. I've always been of the opinion that the top 4 of the BCS should have been used.
But instead of 3 seperate metrics with hundreds of participants contributing to the decision of who the top 4 teams are we get a committee of 13 people the majority of which are former players or coaches and currently AD (how the frick did this fly) with their own bias influencing their decisions.
I guess its better than the committee for the NCAA tourney since they'll be putting out weekly rankings around midseason similar to the BCS
But instead of 3 seperate metrics with hundreds of participants contributing to the decision of who the top 4 teams are we get a committee of 13 people the majority of which are former players or coaches and currently AD (how the frick did this fly) with their own bias influencing their decisions.
I guess its better than the committee for the NCAA tourney since they'll be putting out weekly rankings around midseason similar to the BCS
Posted on 1/7/14 at 1:32 am to Cockopotamus
quote:This. The BCS wasn't that fricked up, they got it right 98% of the time.
No. I've always been of the opinion that the top 4 of the BCS should have been used.
Posted on 1/7/14 at 1:44 am to CockRocket
quote:
This. The BCS wasn't that fricked up, they got it right 98% of the time.
You could argue that with the ability to pick 4 teams it would have gotten it 100% from 98-13.
Posted on 1/7/14 at 8:34 am to Cockopotamus
quote:
You could argue that with the ability to pick 4 teams it would have gotten it 100% from 98-13.
Agreed. You just know that the fourth team is going to come from out of left field next year. This year, it probably would have been Stanford, when they weren't even close to being the best two-loss team in the country.
Posted on 1/7/14 at 9:08 am to Cockopotamus
quote:
I've always been of the opinion that the top 4 of the BCS should have been used.
I agree with this, but I would have really liked an 8 team playoff. Having a 13 person committee pick this (especially since one of them is a Tater.)
Posted on 1/7/14 at 2:25 pm to CockInYourEar
Im pretty sure that that people have to abstain themselves if its dealing with a vote of their own conference...but if they mess it up next year people will be going for the committees heads
Posted on 1/7/14 at 2:27 pm to AtlantaSportsGuy
quote:
going for the committees heads
I don't understand why we don't just use the coaches' poll. Determine the top 8 teams from the final reg season ranking, play the playoff. So simple, even a tater can do it.
Posted on 1/7/14 at 3:49 pm to atlgamecockman
quote:
I don't understand why we don't just use the coaches' poll. Determine the top 8 teams from the final reg season ranking, play the playoff. So simple, even a tater can do it.
As has been seen in the past, the coaches poll can be a farce at times.
As to the OP, I don't really have a problem with it. At least not right now while it's a mythical thing that hasn't screwed up yet. I reserve the right to change my opinion in a year or so.
Posted on 1/8/14 at 8:38 pm to Wholelottacock
Or a better idea... leave the BCS in place as it currently exists, with computers and polls determining top 4, and go with that.
The only exception would be if two of the top 4 teams had already played each other in the last month, then the loser of that game is out and #5 gets in. Otherwise, if two of the top 4 teams had already played each other but it was more than 4 games back, there could still be the potential for a rematch depending on where they fell between #1 and #4.
It's not frick science.
The only exception would be if two of the top 4 teams had already played each other in the last month, then the loser of that game is out and #5 gets in. Otherwise, if two of the top 4 teams had already played each other but it was more than 4 games back, there could still be the potential for a rematch depending on where they fell between #1 and #4.
It's not frick science.
Posted on 1/8/14 at 8:42 pm to deeprig9
I'm sure that the Big 10 will have a team ranked 12th and they'll get in next year and people will erupt
Posted on 1/9/14 at 10:17 am to AtlantaSportsGuy
And what the fawk does Condoleeza Rica know about college football?
Posted on 1/9/14 at 10:29 am to Wholelottacock
I think Spurrier mentioned that she went to Stanford, so there's that....
This post was edited on 1/9/14 at 10:30 am
Posted on 1/9/14 at 1:58 pm to CockInYourEar
quote:
I think Spurrier mentioned that she went to Stanford, so there's that....
Shes a member of Augusta National so shes ok in Spurrier's book
Posted on 1/9/14 at 11:18 pm to Cockopotamus
Rice should be on a playoff committee like Spurrier should be on a UN panel.
"Well, honestly, I'm not quite sure what I'm doing here, but, here we are, so.... you.. over there, UAE, what's that stand for, the United Arab Emirates? What the hell is an Emirate? Yall got fancy buildings but I heard you have no building codes."
"Well, honestly, I'm not quite sure what I'm doing here, but, here we are, so.... you.. over there, UAE, what's that stand for, the United Arab Emirates? What the hell is an Emirate? Yall got fancy buildings but I heard you have no building codes."
Posted on 1/9/14 at 11:36 pm to deeprig9
quote:
you have no building codes."
Building codes would get in the way of fireworks like this somehow. Live fast, die young and sell it before it falls.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News