re: I don't like the new playoff system

At the end of the season, when has anyone ever complained that the 16th ranked team was better than #1?

quote:

---

BCS was fine

Should just use BCS rankings not a committee

---

This. The BCS rankings got it right for the most part. The problem was that there were not enough games to determine the champion.

Ger rid of the silly committee and let the BCS rankings decide 1 v 4 and 2 v 3.

quote:

---

I,was always a big proponent of the BCS, but it was inherently flawed too. 2/3 of it was made up by humans, 1/2 of that--the coaches poll-- had infinitely more reason to be biased than the new committee. Besides the fact that none of them had time to watch all the other teams, because they were, you know, coaching their fricking own. Word was always that the assistant AD was filling out ballots anyway.

And the Harris voters were similar to the committee only less prestigious representatives with a much less transparent vote.

And even the computers--who,we all relied being the most objective and taking the human element out--did anything but. All those computers were totally different, based on subjective criteria that humans had deemed more or less important than other humans. Thats why you'd have some crazy 2'loss,team always inexplicably ranked higher than some undefeateds at certain points. One dude always had Pav 12 teams ranked higher based on their SOS because they played 9 conference games every year. So, even the computers had biases brought into their formulas by the biases that their creators had.

There is just absolutely no way to have an objective system with so many teams who play such different schedules. Human subjectivity will have to play a part. There's no way around it it. And I see no reason to shite on the committee before they frick up. I mean, Condelizza Rice is perhaps the most successful woman I the history of American politics. She is a serious lady who know doubt takes this--and every job she's ever had extremely seriously. But because she's a woman a you played high school football, you think you are somehow more qualified to make assessments on who is deserving of the playoff than her? Get fricking real. She is more qualified to do just about anything on this planet than 99.9999% of the tiny-dicked mysogynist trolls on this board

---

I see what you're saying but I disagree. When you have that many voters and formulas averaged together you are going to get rid of the anomalies that will be present in certain voters. And there is nothing wrong with a 2 loss team being ranked ahead of an unbeaten. I can name several 2 loss teams right now that are more deserving to play in the playoff than Marshall.

Basically we took a step backwards as someone else pointed out. We were tired of the "biased" voters deciding the champion so we created several iterations of the BCS in order to combine as many factors as possible to determine who played in the championship. If you want to expand to 4 teams, fine. But I don't understand the need to blow up the entire system. A 12 person committee lends itself to more anomalies in rankings and persuasion of picks than any system we had before.

quote:

---

A playoff system that guarantees LSU is playing in it is what we all want

---

Negative

quote:

---

Keep in mind that all 12 of these people have affiliations to college football teams or conferences. They also have a past that will drive their decisions. For example, Jeff Long has strong ties to Michigan. Will he be fair to Ohio State? Doubtful. Ty Willingham was an awful coach who was fired early from 2 programs (ND and UW). Do you think he will be fair to those programs? Ha.

---

All true. The positive is that you do seem to have a lot of people with multiple interests. Jeff Long may be the AD at Arkansas, but as you stated, he has a huge love of Michigan too. Does that make him an SEC/B1G support guy, or just an Arky/Michigan guy? Alvarez seems like a pro B1G guy. Did they make sure all conferences were represented easily. Does Rice know the first thing about the actual game of football, as opposed to just being a fan. Does she understand coverages/blitz schemes/reads etc?

My main qualm is this:

If Alvarez and Rice are in disagreement and Alvarez brings up actual football coach talk like "this team picks up the blitz better as a whole than this team" does Rice understand how he analyzes that? Or if he says this teams secondary is better EVEN IF they give up more yards because of the scheme they play, does she understand why?

I'm just using Alvarez/Rice as an example, since one has been a HC in college for 15 years and Rice never has been anything other than a fan (that I know of)

This playoff system is bullshite, not because of only four teams, but because of HUMAN BIAS.

I don't care how often that slimy bastard named Condi Rice pretends to be impartial. Human bias is inescapable.

A much better system would have been a FORMULA agreed upon by vote of AD's and head coaches... and then no changes or human input as the season progressed.

I really can't think of one year in which 8 teams deserved to play for the title

I'm just afraid of the slippery slope. Let in 8 teams. Then talk goes to 16 and it gets extremely ridiculous

Get rid of outdated conferences and play national schedules.

This archaic conference alignment crap is why issues exist.

Brb have only 12 games a year let's play 11 of them in one region of the country. Just lol

I like the conference schedules, but I see your point.

At the very least, get rid of the cupcakes, and rotate the nonconference games. One year, every SEC team plays the PAC, the next year the ACC, etc.

They would have to get rid of nonconference rivals, but it's all for the best.