Started By
Message
re: 16 Team Playoff Field
Posted on 11/6/19 at 1:55 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Posted on 11/6/19 at 1:55 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
Give me a computer algorithm to pick this shite please. DO IT.
There are plenty of computer rankings to subjectively choose from.
This post was edited on 11/6/19 at 1:57 pm
1
Posted on 11/6/19 at 1:55 pm to AubieinNC2009
quote:
I like it but I see the next step as being 8 team.
5 conference champs
top group of 5 team (have to include somehow)
then 2 top remaining teams
I like this idea and no more beyond 8.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 1:55 pm to SummerOfGeorge
It felt like the lady from the Popeye's commercial had sprinkled some cajun seasoning over my hiney while I slept.
I'm never ordering hot wings from Krystal's again.
I'm never ordering hot wings from Krystal's again.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 1:56 pm to biclops
quote:
There are plenty of computer rankings subjectively choose from.
Oh I know.....be more than happy to suggest a few to my friends at the Playoff
Posted on 11/6/19 at 1:59 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
a true championship contender
How is this determined, objectively?
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:00 pm to SummerOfGeorge
I like this composite of just about every computer poll that exists: LINK
My main gripe is the list of polls he includes -- he has some pretty sketchy/opaque ones included. Still, the idea of a comprehensive composite of several reasonable computer polls seems like a start. That's basically what the BCS did, but only included a few computer polls.
My main gripe is the list of polls he includes -- he has some pretty sketchy/opaque ones included. Still, the idea of a comprehensive composite of several reasonable computer polls seems like a start. That's basically what the BCS did, but only included a few computer polls.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:00 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
computer algorithm
Inherently biased.
I prefer a non-biased, objective selection criterion.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:01 pm to MsGarrison
How is a team that's 5-3 in conference play a worthy national championship contender?
Idiots just want a big playoff because they want to see their own team in the playoffs and a bigger playoff would allow that, they don't care about what's good for the sport, or what system produces the best champion.
Not sure why people want to trade 3 months of meaningful football for 3 weekends of it.
Idiots just want a big playoff because they want to see their own team in the playoffs and a bigger playoff would allow that, they don't care about what's good for the sport, or what system produces the best champion.
Not sure why people want to trade 3 months of meaningful football for 3 weekends of it.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:01 pm to MsGarrison
The weird thing is that the 1seed in this bracket appears to have the toughest road to the final, biased opinion obviously
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:04 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
I prefer a non-biased, objective selection criterion
Impossible in college sports. There are too many teams. Every single college championship tournament has people who select/seed the teams.
This isn't the NFL or NBA where you have 30 teams playing large schedules.
It's impossible to compare teams across different conferences without subjective opinion.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:07 pm to MsGarrison
4 is fine, 8 is ideal, 16 is crazy talk.
LSU
UTAH
Alabama
Oregon
Ohio state
Georgia
Clemson
Penn state
Sounds a lot better
LSU
UTAH
Alabama
Oregon
Ohio state
Georgia
Clemson
Penn state
Sounds a lot better
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:07 pm to MsGarrison
This is college football.. kids playing - not the NFL.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:07 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
I prefer a non-biased, objective selection criterion.
Literally does not exist as there are not enough cross data points between teams in different leagues.
It's not the NFL where teams play enough of eachother and secondary opponents to get a firm grasp of who is who. It's not college basketball where teams play a 12 game out of conference schedule and cross polinate.
It's just not reasonable to expect anybody to truly know how to compare Utah to Penn State outside of analytical analysis combined with your eyes.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:07 pm to AubieinNC2009
quote:
top group of 5 team (have to include somehow)
Why do they HAVE to be included?
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:12 pm to MsGarrison
The less voting there is in sports the better. Decide it all on the field.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:14 pm to MsGarrison
Actually that has been my proposal for awhile now. Take the conference champion from the P5 and G5 for a total of ten teams and add 6 wildcard teams.
First round games are at home of the higher seed. Final 8 would use the biggest seven bowl games.
Keep 10 of the biggest, oldest other bowls for the next 20 deserving teams.
In that way you have 36 teams rewarded with post season play. Plus you have a cool play off as well.
First round games are at home of the higher seed. Final 8 would use the biggest seven bowl games.
Keep 10 of the biggest, oldest other bowls for the next 20 deserving teams.
In that way you have 36 teams rewarded with post season play. Plus you have a cool play off as well.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:21 pm to PEPE
quote:
Not sure why people want to trade 3 months of meaningful football for 3 weekends of it.
12 of 32 NFL teams make the playoffs, but I still cared about the Dallas/New York game this last Monday.
I think 16 of 130 is few enough that people will still care.
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:24 pm to Hugh McElroy
quote:
12 of 32 NFL teams make the playoffs, but I still cared about the Dallas/New York game this last Monday.
Glad you can enjoy it. I just can't get interested in the NFL, personally. I pretty much just watch the odd game when I'm bored (maybe 4ish games a year) and the Super Bowl
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:24 pm to mizslu314
quote:
4 is fine, 8 is ideal, 16 is crazy talk.
The 8 team bracket version of this using the current CFP rankings was posted this morning in the More Sports board.
8 Team CFP Bracket
Posted on 11/6/19 at 2:24 pm to PEPE
quote:
It's impossible to compare teams across different conferences without subjective opinion.
Wrong, each team is a member of a conference (sorry, ND), each conference has a champion, all champions gather for a tournament, winner of tournament is declared national champion.
Before you say, "but not all conferences are created equal(sic)!" That's irrelevant. Conference divisions aren't equal ether, but we accept the winner of the SECCG as conference champs. That the SEC runner up MAY be 'better' than the PAC12 champions, that doesn't matter because they are not better than their own conference champs. That's with whom they're competing. If the SEC runner up is better than the pAC122 champs, you can bet the SEC champs are better than the PAC12 champs, and therefore the PAC12 champs will never win a national championship.
But, ultimately, this is COLLEGE sports we're talking about. The point shouldn't be to make it "fair" such that teams who pass the eye test should get a chance at the NC, but fair should be defined by the fact that every team in FBS should have a chance at the championship. Otherwise, as George pointed out, why have 130 teams in the league when only about 30 or so would ever pass the eye test to compete for the national title?
The most fair system is on that tis the simplest, objective and inclusive. To wit:
8 teams, 5 P5 champs, 3 top G5 champs based on SOS.
It's simple, it's fair, it's objective and it's inclusive. there really is no rational argument against it, only subjective emotional ones.
Page 3 of 5
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News