Started By
Message
Alternative approach to CFP Selection/Seeding
Posted on 8/21/18 at 12:51 pm
Posted on 8/21/18 at 12:51 pm
Have any of you ever seen this?
The Marble Game
The rules of the Marble Game are simple:
Each team starts with a predetermined amount of marbles.
If a team wins a home game, they take 20% of the loser’s marbles.
If a team wins a road game, they take 25% of the loser’s marbles.
Neutral site games are treated as home wins for the victor (20% marble transfer).
At the end of the season, the four teams with the most marbles are invited to participate in the CFP.
Thoughts from tRant?
The Marble Game
The rules of the Marble Game are simple:
Each team starts with a predetermined amount of marbles.
If a team wins a home game, they take 20% of the loser’s marbles.
If a team wins a road game, they take 25% of the loser’s marbles.
Neutral site games are treated as home wins for the victor (20% marble transfer).
At the end of the season, the four teams with the most marbles are invited to participate in the CFP.
Thoughts from tRant?
12
Posted on 8/21/18 at 12:53 pm to BammerDelendaEst
You must have lost your marbles posting a dumbass idea like this
Posted on 8/21/18 at 12:57 pm to BammerDelendaEst
Posted on 8/21/18 at 12:57 pm to RogerTempleton
quote:
dumbass idea
As opposed to the current Selection Committee and their ever-evolving, yet totally objective "criteria"?
I just found it interesting.
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:00 pm to RogerTempleton
quote:
You must have lost your marbles posting a dumbass idea like this
Just as valid as the "eye test" for the College Football Invitational Tournament.
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:00 pm to BammerDelendaEst
quote:
As opposed to the current Selection Committee and their ever-evolving, yet totally objective "criteria"?
I just found it interesting.
This process wouldn't have had 12-1 SEC Champ Georgia in the playoff last year. It fails.
Imo best option for a four team playoff is just bring back the BCS and use the AP and Coaches poll for the human polls.
8 team playoff as a 5-2-1* model is ideal. 5 conf champs, 2 at larges (rewarding deeper conferences and teams who played a strong SOS) and 1 G5 spot to the highest ranked undefeated team. If no undefeated G5, then this becomes another at large spot.
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:04 pm to BammerDelendaEst
So winning an opening game @UL Monroe would be more beneficial than winning an opening neutral site game against Clemson
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:06 pm to RogerTempleton
quote:
8 team playoff as a 5-2-1* model is ideal.
I looked into this and found something like Ohio State would've made it 10 or 11 of the past 14 years.
I wouldn't call that ideal.
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:07 pm to BammerDelendaEst
quote:
Thoughts from tRant?
should be ...
quote:
Dear Facebook ...
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:09 pm to BammerDelendaEst
this committee clearly favors/prefers the SEC
So I'm fine with them being the way of selecting the 4.
Although so did the BCS, so I really have no gripes with either.
My team just has to perform on the field.
So I'm fine with them being the way of selecting the 4.
Although so did the BCS, so I really have no gripes with either.
My team just has to perform on the field.
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:12 pm to BammerDelendaEst
No changes needed to the current process. Everything is working out just fine.
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:12 pm to TomRollTideRitter
quote:
I looked into this and found something like Ohio State would've made it 10 or 11 of the past 14 years.
Alabama would have made it every year since year 2 of Saban.
Boise State would have made it in 06 and 08. TCU in 2010. UCF last year.
Gives the giants and the little guys a shot.
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:15 pm to I Bleed Garnet
Playoffs arent right for CFB anyway, but they certainly dont make any sense when you have a bunch of humans picking the teams.
Needs to be determined on the field. Get rid of the current conference setups. Have rotating divisions based on the previous years. 8, 8 team divisions. Champions of those divisions make the playoffs.
Or, if all that sounds stupid...and it does. frick the playoffs and go back to the BCS.
Needs to be determined on the field. Get rid of the current conference setups. Have rotating divisions based on the previous years. 8, 8 team divisions. Champions of those divisions make the playoffs.
Or, if all that sounds stupid...and it does. frick the playoffs and go back to the BCS.
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:17 pm to BammerDelendaEst
I think it's interesting ..
What it shows though , is how some teams are unwilling to go on the road OOC.
What it shows though , is how some teams are unwilling to go on the road OOC.
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:19 pm to JesusQuintana
quote:
Or, if all that sounds stupid...and it does. frick the playoffs and go back to the BCS.
How are 2 teams better than 4?
The teams that would have been in the BCS title game are in the CFP anyway, and the controversies we have for no.4 are not as crazy as the controversies for 1 and 2 in 03, 04, 06, 07, 08, etc where major 1-loss conference champions that were sometimes no.1 in the AP poll were getting left out. The BCS was a nightmare in those years. If your suggestion is to use the BCS to decide the top 4 teams, then I agree.
This post was edited on 8/21/18 at 1:21 pm
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:21 pm to RogerTempleton
College football has been about bowl games for its entire existence leading up to the playoff which has rendered them completely meaningless.
CFB is not structured correctly for playoffs, and they wont ever be without massive fundamental changes. The entire premise is nonsensical.
CFB is not structured correctly for playoffs, and they wont ever be without massive fundamental changes. The entire premise is nonsensical.
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:24 pm to BammerDelendaEst
they should just pick the 4 teams that have the hottest cheerleaders
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:25 pm to JesusQuintana
quote:
College football has been about bowl games for its entire existence leading up to the playoff which has rendered them completely meaningless.
It also has been about disputed national championships, paper champions, and controversy. That is bad. I still think the bowls have meaning for the majority of college football programs who are not CFP or bust every single year. And even for big time programs, the prestigious bowls like the Rose Bowl still holds a lot of meaning.
If anything has diminished the importance of bowl games, you can argue that it is crappy lower tier bowls that allow 6-6 teams to play a postseason game.
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:25 pm to Sid E Walker
quote:
No changes needed to the current process. Everything is working out just fine.
Who didn’t know that.
It’s a silly system but it does eliminate the mulligan/bye advantage that Bama gets.
What’s up Sid?
Posted on 8/21/18 at 1:27 pm to BammerDelendaEst
Its literally like someone said "We have to come up with a way that sounds scientific and keeps Alabama out of the playoff."
I've always been a proponent of the eight team playoff.
Power 5 conference champions + Top 3 non-champions.
If a G6 team is ranked in the top 10, then they get a bid and you take the Top 2 non-champions.
First round games on campus. Only conference champions can host.
Semifinals and title game rotating as now.
2017 Power 5 Champions
1. Clemson
2. Oklahoma
3. Georgia
4. Ohio State
5. USC
Three at large teams
6. Alabama
7. Wisconsin
8. Auburn
I've always been a proponent of the eight team playoff.
Power 5 conference champions + Top 3 non-champions.
If a G6 team is ranked in the top 10, then they get a bid and you take the Top 2 non-champions.
First round games on campus. Only conference champions can host.
Semifinals and title game rotating as now.
2017 Power 5 Champions
1. Clemson
2. Oklahoma
3. Georgia
4. Ohio State
5. USC
Three at large teams
6. Alabama
7. Wisconsin
8. Auburn
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News