Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message

Have the playoffs become a "beauty/popularity contest"?

Posted on 11/4/26 at 10:18 am
Posted by LSU4Life2021
In the dump known as Mississippi
Member since Dec 2021
1547 posts
Posted on 11/4/26 at 10:18 am
We all suspect as much but with the recent #5 ranking of Alabama in the projected playoffs, combined with other "teams with a good storyline", are we seeing where the "committee" will put in teams based not so much on their record (as long as they at least have a winning record) as to the amount of media story they generate by being in? If that is the case, then how do you eliminate LSU with the Lane Kiffin story? The BCS had it right with the computers but the sports writers got mad because they were not relevant and thus the death of the BCS.
Posted by TheFlyingTiger
Member since Oct 2009
4332 posts
Posted on 11/4/26 at 10:27 am to
they didn't call it the "alabama invitational" for nothin


don't think for a second they don't consider drama matchups, eyeballs, betting sites and money when ranking teams to ensure the best possible financial outcome in these things.
Posted by SG_Geaux
Beautiful St George, LA
Member since Aug 2004
81277 posts
Posted on 11/4/26 at 10:28 am to
We need a CFB Equivalent of the NET or RPI rankings and that should HEAVILY influence the rankings
Posted by TheFlyingTiger
Member since Oct 2009
4332 posts
Posted on 11/4/26 at 10:30 am to
quote:

We need a CFB Equivalent of the NET or RPI rankings and that should HEAVILY influence the rankings




best i can do is condi rice on the committee
This post was edited on 11/4/26 at 10:33 am
Posted by mtntiger
Asheville, NC
Member since Oct 2003
30069 posts
Posted on 11/4/26 at 11:32 am to
quote:

The BCS had it right with the computers but the sports writers got mad because they were not relevant and thus the death of the BCS.


This is absolutely, 100 percent, the truth.
Posted by atxfan
Member since Jul 2004
4349 posts
Posted on 11/4/26 at 11:40 am to
Based on Indiana’s ranking it is definitely not a beauty contest.
Posted by Stew2581
Covington
Member since Oct 2021
1913 posts
Posted on 11/4/26 at 11:51 am to
Alabama will always get the Saban/Bama bump in the rankings just as their recruits did with an extra star magically once they committed to Bama. It will take some time before that goes away. Texas gets a little bump because of the money.
Posted by mdomingue
Lafayette, LA
Member since Nov 2010
50774 posts
Posted on 11/4/26 at 11:56 am to
quote:

The BCS had it right with the computers


Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.


One of those is better for LSU if they win the next 3 games or even 2 of the next 3. You go ahead and decide if beating the # 5, #7, and # 13 teams is better than playing the #9, #10, and #16 teams.
Posted by Salviati
Member since Apr 2006
8423 posts
Posted on 11/4/26 at 12:02 pm to
Many cognoscenti believe there is a "Q-Score" equivalent for each team based upon how many viewers would watch that team play.

Let's be honest, the playoffs generate millions of dollars for college football (schools, broadcasters, advertisers, etc.) and everyone is incentivized to increase viewership, and thus income, without popularity being an obvious factor in selecting teams.

This post was edited on 11/4/26 at 12:09 pm
Posted by LSU Delirium
Member since Aug 2013
526 posts
Posted on 11/4/26 at 12:03 pm to
Some wise men once said “Cash Rules Everything Around Me (C.R.E.A.M).

Anyone that thinks the primary driver of all this isn’t to make as much money as possible (I.e. ratings) is being willfully ignorant.

There was a post not even a week ago about how many views AL has compared to everyone else for this season.

It is that simple, don’t overthink it. It’s all for getting as many people to watch, and gamble, on the games. Everything else is secondary.
This post was edited on 11/4/26 at 12:04 pm
Posted by mdomingue
Lafayette, LA
Member since Nov 2010
50774 posts
Posted on 11/4/26 at 12:11 pm to
quote:

The BCS had it right with the computers but the sports writers got mad because they were not relevant and thus the death of the BCS.


This is absolutely, 100 percent, the truth.



Then why do the simulated BCS rankings so closely follow the committee rankings?

I mean, the top 12 are the same, just slightly jumbled around. So you think UCLA, Notre Dame, and BYU should be ahead of Texas and Alabama, while LSU moves up one spot and Tennessee drops 3?

All those things devalue the strength of LSU's schedule.
Posted by tgerb8
Huntsvegas
Member since Aug 2007
6701 posts
Posted on 11/4/26 at 12:31 pm to
quote:

We need a CFB Equivalent of the NET or RPI rankings and that should HEAVILY influence the rankings


Yes. There has to be some sort of algorithm to determine all of the nuances that (should) go into rankings.

Using today's poll.. The 9 non SEC teams ranked ahead of LSU have played 20 out of ~108 games against another ranked opponent. For a whopping 18.5 percent.

The 5 SEC teams ranked ahead of LSU played 27 out of ~60 games against another ranked opponent. Which comes out to 45 percent.

An awful schedule doesn't mean a team isn't national championship caliber, but it certainly needs to be taken into account.

It's like they are pushing "cinderella story" more than beauty/popularity in a lot of cases. Bama will always get biased treatement. They were the first 3 loss team in the playoffs.They'll be the first 4 loss. They'll be ranked above others in headscratching fashion. It is what it is.

first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

Facebook•X•Instagram