- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: When college football champions are finally determined through playoffs...
Posted on 12/2/12 at 11:32 am to Bestbank Tiger
Posted on 12/2/12 at 11:32 am to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
They're not objective. They change the rules to fit an agenda.
they still use objective data. losses, for example, are a HUGE component to the process. losses are objective
quote:
Do you honestly believe that if Mississippi State had been in al-Abama's position last year, and Texas had been in Okie Lite's position, MSU would have gotten a mulligan?
probably not, but that's a completely different hypoghetical that has never happened in real life
it's very likely that MSU would still have gotten a huge media push based on a stalemate game against LSU, though
quote:
You need to take the human element out of it.
that's literally impossible. you can't even do an all-conference champion playoff, unless you just select which conferences get in....b/c the # of conferences doesn't line up with the needs for #s in a playoff
quote:
If you want to prevent a "bad" result, generate the computer rankings
in the end these are nothing more than human subjectivity also
quote:
I don't see the argument for 2003.
you can make the argument, bro
quote:
You could also quibble about 2008,
with 1-loss OU and UF? no
i don't think there is a bigger fan of Utah during their 2004-2008 run than me, and i couldn't make that argument with a straight face
2
Posted on 12/2/12 at 11:38 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
with 1-loss OU and UF? no
i don't think there is a bigger fan of Utah during their 2004-2008 run than me, and i couldn't make that argument with a straight face
but what about USC, the actual best team in 2008? Their loss was about the same as UF's and that was not a great year in the SEC.
Posted on 12/2/12 at 11:48 am to H-Town Tiger
i don't even think USC fans were really pushing that hard in 2008 
Posted on 12/2/12 at 11:56 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
in the end these are nothing more than human subjectivity also
I'll concede that it's subjective to select the criteria. But at least the rules will be applied consistently. A computer doesn't care about the name of the team. The exact same results on the field will generate the exact same ranking, whether the team is Southern Cal or Southern Miss. That would be an improvement over giving certain teams a boost in the ranking because BSPN hypes them.
The human polls are the equivalent of spotting the Yankees, Red Sox, and Dodgers a few extra wins in the standings every year.
Posted on 12/2/12 at 11:57 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Their loss was about the same as UF's and that was not a great year in the SEC.
I actually think Texas had the better argument in 08, especially given the "quality loss" crap we were fed last year. Yes, OU was wrecking people at the end of that year, but so was Okie St last year and we saw where that got them.
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:02 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
The human polls are the equivalent of spotting the Yankees, Red Sox, and Dodgers a few extra wins in the standings every year.
i don't fully disagree, but what most people forget when trying to compare CFB to pro sports (especially the NFL) is that CFB has very little parity, and almost no parity at the top. CFB has a very wide gap between even 1 and 10
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:20 pm to UltimateHog
quote:
No, not until 8 teams.
frick 4 teams.
I think 4 teams is perfect.
Posted on 12/2/12 at 1:00 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i don't even think USC fans were really pushing that hard in 2008
because they were too far back due to the Big XII-SEC circle jerk.
1 loss kills some teams but not others, that's the problem.
You want a perfect system, which is not possible. The playoff people want one that's a little more fair. A little more dependent on what happens on the field than subjective opinion. The important question is what's worse. Leaving a deserving team out or an accidental champion? I think 4 is the perfect balance, but looking at past years, 8 is not as terrible as I thought, you'd never get a Villanova or 9-7 Giants even with 8, but still i prefer 4.
Page 8 of 8
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News