- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
I hope y'all watched Mike/Mike re: Tourney
Posted on 3/15/10 at 8:39 am
Posted on 3/15/10 at 8:39 am
had the chair of the committee on and were asking if there was a better way to pick the teams
they suggested a BCS-like system that ranked teams 1-65 and you set the brackets that way
basically, this guy went on a major tangent talking about how important subjectivity was. how it was important to see the teams (to see if they play defense, or if they controlled tempo, he suggested)
further, they also discussed some teams being left out or seeded lower, and he began discussing how the team finished
is this REALLY the system that you want to celebrate?
people criticize the BCS as a beauty contest, but it isn't picked by a group of guys. there is a consistent formula and everybody knows the rules going in. in CBB, this is not true. and the chairman of this committee is pushing for subjectivity and rewarding teams who get hot at the end
they suggested a BCS-like system that ranked teams 1-65 and you set the brackets that way
basically, this guy went on a major tangent talking about how important subjectivity was. how it was important to see the teams (to see if they play defense, or if they controlled tempo, he suggested)
further, they also discussed some teams being left out or seeded lower, and he began discussing how the team finished
is this REALLY the system that you want to celebrate?
people criticize the BCS as a beauty contest, but it isn't picked by a group of guys. there is a consistent formula and everybody knows the rules going in. in CBB, this is not true. and the chairman of this committee is pushing for subjectivity and rewarding teams who get hot at the end
8
Posted on 3/15/10 at 8:41 am to SlowFlowPro
All I know is the supposed two #1 seeds got the shaft in their bracket, and Baylor can book plane tickets for the Final Four. I feel like the seeding is very questionable.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 8:42 am to SprintFun
and duke got an easy road
this is what will happen when you allow a group of guys with very few rules to set up the bracket
this is what will happen when you allow a group of guys with very few rules to set up the bracket
Posted on 3/15/10 at 8:43 am to SlowFlowPro
Duke gets upset by Da Ville, IMO. And if they don't I think Baylor beats em. But yea that region is a joke, and Cuse has a pretty easy road too.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 8:44 am to SlowFlowPro
I criticize the BCS for reasons other than its formula. Hell, in my playoff proposals, I've said to us the BCS formula to determine the seedings and to pick the at-large participants.
Sound like Mike and Mike to do something similar with basketball, which I'm a fan of.
Sound like Mike and Mike to do something similar with basketball, which I'm a fan of.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 8:45 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Yes.
is this REALLY the system that you want to celebrate?
None of the teams left out of a 65 team tournament were gonna win anyway
If they've had 30+ ganes to distinguish themselves enough to not be on that "bubble" and failed to do so, thats their fault
Posted on 3/15/10 at 8:49 am to eyeran
Just because the manner in which playoff participants is chosen may be poor doesn't make a playoff a bad system.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 8:52 am to eyeran
quote:
Yes.
None of the teams left out of a 65 team tournament were gonna win anyway
If they've had 30+ ganes to distinguish themselves enough to not be on that "bubble" and failed to do so, thats their fault
This. I get tired every year of hearing the bitching about who got left out and the seeding. The best teams will either win or choke. It's as simple as that. Teams that are hot now, may run out of steam when they play a better team. It's still 100x better than the BCS.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 8:55 am to SprintFun
quote:
and Baylor can book plane tickets for the Final Four.
Do you think that they will be able to get tickets to watch the games too
Posted on 3/15/10 at 9:04 am to Kracka
the Midwest region is retarded, I don't understand what their reasoning was for stacking the Midwest and East like they did
and the South and West are a joke
and the South and West are a joke
Posted on 3/15/10 at 9:08 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
people criticize the BCS as a beauty contest, but it isn't picked by a group of guys. there is a consistent formula and everybody knows the rules going in.
I will agree with this. One point that I heard last night was that the committee changes from year to year, and thus the criteria for making the tournament changes each year. Is it more important to play top ten teams and lose, or to beat teams ranked #42 and #37?
Posted on 3/15/10 at 9:08 am to SlowFlowPro
Uhh. Did you forget that the BCS is 2/3 polling? What consistent formula is the polling exactly? Do those voters have any guidelines whatsoever? Are they accountable at all for their votes? NO. Even the 7(?) computer "polls" that are straight math and only 1/3 of the BCS score are not subject to a specific set of guidelines so cut the bullshite. Bottom line is we'll have a definite champion and whoever wins this tourney is not gonna have to deal w/ questions like "Could you have really beaten Mississippi State had they not been screwed out of their tourney spot?"
I, along w/ most ppl who want a playoff in CFB, have always said that we should use the BCS system to determine playoff participants and seeding. I also completely agree that we should do away w/ the selection committee and conference tourney auto-bids in favor of a ranking formula to determine NCAA tourney selections and seeding.--I know that financial and logistical forces are the ones keeping these stupid conference tourneys alive though.
I, along w/ most ppl who want a playoff in CFB, have always said that we should use the BCS system to determine playoff participants and seeding. I also completely agree that we should do away w/ the selection committee and conference tourney auto-bids in favor of a ranking formula to determine NCAA tourney selections and seeding.--I know that financial and logistical forces are the ones keeping these stupid conference tourneys alive though.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 9:16 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
is this REALLY the system that you want to celebrate?
Yes.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 9:18 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Oh, please God, no.
they suggested a BCS-like system that ranked teams 1-65 and you set the brackets that way
The BCS is not some objective formula. It is the friggin' polls averaged together with another component for computer polls. It is as subjective as formulas come. It is the illusion of mathematics.
The BCS is a terrible, terrible system, but this distracts us from another truism: the BCS formula is indefensibly stupid. It's just the polls. The BCS' awfulness makes us forget how terrible of a formula the BCS uses to rank teams. Anyone who can't see that is simply overawed by the prospect of long division.
The RPI is far from perfect, but that's what is great about the committee. They use it as a guide, not a crutch.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 9:21 am to Baloo
quote:
Baloo
I don't want to get into this with SFP again, but did you read the column in which Bill James eviscerates the BCS process?
Posted on 3/15/10 at 9:49 am to Sophandros
florida was not hot at the end
Posted on 3/15/10 at 10:01 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
and duke got an easy road
They always do
Posted on 3/15/10 at 10:18 am to Baloo
quote:
The BCS is not some objective formula. It is the friggin' polls averaged together with another component for computer polls. It is as subjective as formulas come. It is the illusion of mathematics.
agreed
quote:
The RPI is far from perfect
understatement. I wish they would switch from the RPI to something more like ELO Chess.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 10:23 am to The Easter Bunny
quote:I would to, but I'm not outraged by RPI so long as it is not a hard formula that they absolute rely on. As a guide to sort teams, it's not bad. It's a starting point, not an end.
understatement. I wish they would switch from the RPI to something more like ELO Chess.
And Soph, I did not. Do you have a link?
Posted on 3/15/10 at 10:24 am to Baloo
quote:
As a guide to sort teams, it's not bad. It's a starting point, not an end.
I agree with you. If the committee were to come out and say, "it was close, but we gave X a spot just because of their RPI" then I'd start getting pissed.
Page 1 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News