Started By
Message
re: Ok Bama and Texas fans, let's hear it...
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:09 pm to elposter
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:09 pm to elposter
quote:
The published CFP protocols literally say that it is about the 4 best teams
And then it explains how to determine the 4 "best teams", and that isn't to look at them and throw out the records and decide based on who is playing the best.
1
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:09 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
Yea I don't understand why people say things like "4 best teams". That isn't how they do it. It's the 4 teams with the best resumes
Maybe if you say this people will listen if it comes from you...I've been saying it for years and nobody believes me lol
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:10 pm to PerrillouxToTexas
quote:
head to head wins
At Bama I might add. Texas should get in before Bama.
I think Bama beats Texas if they played today but it doesn't matter. Texas won at Bama when it counted.
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:11 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
Yea I don't understand why people say things like "4 best teams". That isn't how they do it. It's the 4 teams with the best resumes. Almost always has been. If somebody slipped up and said "best teams" at some point, they were wrong.
Would not call it a slip up really.
CFP Selection Committee Protocol - Selecting the Four Best Teams
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:11 pm to WG_Dawg
I mean this is literally the protocol
If we are looking at Alabama and Texas, who will clearly be "comparable teams"......
- Championships won (yes for both)
- Strength of Schedule (will be very similar)
- Head to Head (Texas won in Tuscaloosa)
- Comparative outcomes of common opponents (N/A)
It's pretty straightforward. We picked a bad year to play a very good 1 loss team early in the season with a raw roster and 2 new coordinators. It sucks, but it is what it is.
quote:
When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered:
- Championships won
- Strength of schedule
- Head-to-head competition (if it occurred)
- Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)
If we are looking at Alabama and Texas, who will clearly be "comparable teams"......
- Championships won (yes for both)
- Strength of Schedule (will be very similar)
- Head to Head (Texas won in Tuscaloosa)
- Comparative outcomes of common opponents (N/A)
It's pretty straightforward. We picked a bad year to play a very good 1 loss team early in the season with a raw roster and 2 new coordinators. It sucks, but it is what it is.
This post was edited on 11/20/23 at 12:13 pm
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:11 pm to SummerOfGeorge
All of this, and I'd add a one-loss Pac-12 champ. But, either Udub or Oregon are more deserving than an FSU without their #1 QB and was losing 13-0 to UNA well into the 2nd qtr or a UM team that has proven nothing.
A 1-loss conference champ UTx with a head-to-head win over Bama is more deserving
A 1-loss conference champ UTx with a head-to-head win over Bama is more deserving
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:13 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Right but people asking "why do people think this is about choosing the 4 best teams" should know that the CFP protocol literally says they are choosing the "4 best teams." That's why people use that terminology. It's not a big mystery.
This post was edited on 11/20/23 at 12:15 pm
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:14 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
so 75% of your games played are irrelevant? We should just ignore the majority of your overall body of work and only look at the last 3 weeks?
I didnt say it was irrelevant. The only reason Texas would even be considered above Alabama is because of the head to head but the playoff committee is told to rank the four best teams taking everything into consideration
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:14 pm to elposter
quote:
Right but people asking "why do people think this is about choosing the 4 best teams" should know that the CFP protocols literally says they are choosing the "4 best teams." That's why people use that terminology. It's not a big mystery.
Understand, but "best" is a subjective term and the committee has defined what "best" is in their protocols, and it isn't "who is playing the 'best' over the last month" like people tend to argue in these situations.
This post was edited on 11/20/23 at 12:17 pm
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:15 pm to elposter
quote:
Would not call it a slip up really.
did you read any of what you linked?
I dont' recall seeing anywhere on there who vegas might favor in a hypoehtical matchup between the schools, or who looks better in a subjective "eye test" comparison.
What they DO mention is championships, schedule strength, head to head games on the field...ya know, thigns that make up your resume.
We can play the semantics game by saying that whoever has the resume is by default the best team, but what everyone on message boards means when they say by "best team" is "who looks the best RIGHT NOW". people keep saying bama is a "better team" because they look better than texas, but that's irrelevant.
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:16 pm to StopRobot
quote:
The only reason Texas would even be considered above Alabama is because of the head to head but the playoff committee is told to rank the four best teams taking everything into consideration
It wouldn't be the only reason. They'd be 12-1 with one of the 2-3 best wins in the country, a bunch of Top 25 wins, a Top 5ish strength of resume and a Top 10-15 strength of schedule.
It just so happens that their best win was on the road against one of the 2 teams they are competing with for the final spot.
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:17 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
Yea I don't understand why people say things like "4 best teams". That isn't how they do it. It's the 4 teams with the best resumes
Because the CFP Protocol literally says
"For purposes of any four-team playoff, the process will inevitably need to select the four best teams from among several with legitimate claims to participate."
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:17 pm to StopRobot
quote:
The only reason Texas would even be considered above Alabama is because of the head to head but the playoff committee is told to rank the four best teams taking everything into consideration
Right, so taking everything into consideration we'd have:
-Both teams are 12-1, that's a wash
-Both teams are P5 champions, that's a wash
-Both teams have a high quality, top 5 win
-Bama would have a better loss, so that's a point in their favor
-Texas would have beaten alabama head to head, that's a big point in texas's favor
I don't think you can jsut throw out september/october jsut because it happened a while ago. It still makes up your resume.
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:18 pm to PerrillouxToTexas
quote:
and Michigan, FSU, Washington. Eye test isn't the only criteria.
It's not the only criteria but this is supposed to be a multi-faceted, nuanced approach and the committee admits they use the eye test.
George keeps up with advanced stats and shite like that. Maybe he'll post them. Let's see what the objective criteria has to say and then we'll compare it to the subjective.
This post was edited on 11/20/23 at 12:19 pm
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:18 pm to StopRobot
quote:
Because the CFP Protocol literally says
"For purposes of any four-team playoff, the process will inevitably need to select the four best teams from among several with legitimate claims to participate."
And then goes on to define "best" in the ways that have been noted above, specifically when the two teams are "comparable". I don't see anyway that Texas and Alabama wouldn't be looked at as comparable given their metrics, results, championships in P5 leagues, etc will all be similar.
This post was edited on 11/20/23 at 12:19 pm
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:19 pm to StopRobot
quote:
Because the CFP Protocol literally says
"For purposes of any four-team playoff, the process will inevitably need to select the four best teams from among several with legitimate claims to participate."
Right, and then they talk about how they pick the best teams based on wins, championships, etc. Nowhere in their criteria does it talk about eye tests or who is playing better late in the season.
The CFP committee's definition of "best teams" and the average internet poster's definition are wildly differnet.
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:20 pm to Pandy Fackler
quote:
George keeps up with advanced stats and shite like that. Maybe he'll post them. Let's see what the objective criteria has to say and then we'll compare it to the subjective.
I posted them earlier. We're both basically the same.
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:20 pm to Pandy Fackler
quote:
and Michigan, FSU, Washington. Eye test isn't the only criteria.
It's not the only criteria but this is supposed to be a multi-faceted, nuanced approach and the committee admits they use the eye test.
Can you share where the committee admits they use the eye test? Because I'm pretty sure the entire point of the selection committee is to AVOID using the subjective, undefined "eye test".
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:22 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
Can you share where the committee admits they use the eye test? Because I'm pretty sure the entire point of the selection committee is to AVOID using the subjective, undefined "eye test".
And honestly, at this point we have metrics that basically define "eye test". Much like in baseball we used to say things like "I feel like he's hitting the ball right at guys a bunch the last few weeks" and we now have actual stats that can define that, football has the same thing.
And the eye test stats say Alabama and Texas are pretty similar - Texas was better early and Alabama has been better lately. Alabama managed to hold on and win some of those early games when they weren't playing great (USF, Ole Miss, A&M) and Texas has done similar lately (TCU, KSU, ISU).
This post was edited on 11/20/23 at 12:23 pm
Posted on 11/20/23 at 12:24 pm to SummerOfGeorge
What you say is true, but whenever I see a poster mention the eye test I imagine what they really mean is "I watched my team's game in its entirety this weekend and we looked really good and I saw the score of another team come across the ticker and they didn't win by as much as expected against a lesser team so my team is better".
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News