- 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
0
Posted on 11/6/18 at 10:21 am to xiv
So Notre Dame gets screwed again like in 93?
Posted on 11/6/18 at 10:23 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:The title of the thread suggests otherwise.
I think you are way to hung up on the 12-1 being a better record than 11-1
quote:Buckeyes get left out maybe unless they skulldrag Michigan (and Northwestern) and OU squeaks by WV twice.
The better discussion there would be 12-1 tOSU vs 12-1 OU assuming 13-0 Alabama, 13-0 Clemson 12-0 Notre Dame
OU has a tougher schedule than tOSU, and their remaining schedule is at least as tough as tOSU’s. OU’s close call against Army comes to mind, but Army is probably going to end up with 10 wins vs a ~#75 schedule.
This post was edited on 11/6/18 at 10:34 am
Posted on 11/6/18 at 10:30 am to Korin
quote:In 1993, Florida State finished with a better record and tougher schedule than Notre Dame. No screw job there, nor in the current hypothetical.
So Notre Dame gets screwed again like in 93?
Posted on 11/6/18 at 10:35 am to xiv
quote:
Not impossible for ND to go 11-1 and end up at #5 behind 13-0 Alabama, 13-0 Clemson, 12-1 Michigan, and 12-1 Oklahoma.
I personally would feel they got screwed, depending on the loss, but could at least see the logic behind it and wouldn't be too upset. Obviously the committee wants conference champs. I think Notre Dame has a better resume than Oklahoma, but if they beat WVU back to back weeks on the road then a neutral site, no real argument is there that they are somewhat deserving. Same with Michigan if they beat OSU and win the Big 10 (though the Big 10 West winner is likely to be borderline top 25).
If the final rankings turn out to be 13-0 Clemson, 12-1 Michigan, 12-1 Oklahoma and 12-1 Alabama who loses the SEC championship to UGA, then I will have some real problems.
This post was edited on 11/6/18 at 10:36 am
Posted on 11/6/18 at 10:48 am to lionward2014
Let’s say Notre Dame loses to Syracuse or USC, Alabama loses to Georgia, and no other surprises occur. Here are the basics according to my metric:
School - record - SOS rank
Notre Dame - 11-1 - 23
Oklahoma - 12-1 - 32
Alabama - 12-1 - 38
(This assumes Clemson, Michigan, and Georgia are the top 3.)
Tough choice for the committee. Based on this alone, Alabama is a clear odd man out unless we place literally any mathematical or rhetorical weight on margin of victory, in which case Alabama is a considerable selection. As for Notre Dame and Oklahoma, it’s a matter of how much you count the difference in winning percentage vs the difference in SOS, and there’s really no right or wrong there.
This is why I hate that there is a committee. It is entirely possible to employ a rigid, transparent, mathematical system of determining these things.
The main debate in such a system would be how to account for margin of victory. Simple, I say: don’t use margin of victory at all, but rather account for how much time of the game the winner held their final lead. For example, if you take the opening kick to the house and never look back, you get near-maximum MOV points since you led for 59:50 of the game. If you win in overtime, no MOV points since you led for 0:00.
School - record - SOS rank
Notre Dame - 11-1 - 23
Oklahoma - 12-1 - 32
Alabama - 12-1 - 38
(This assumes Clemson, Michigan, and Georgia are the top 3.)
Tough choice for the committee. Based on this alone, Alabama is a clear odd man out unless we place literally any mathematical or rhetorical weight on margin of victory, in which case Alabama is a considerable selection. As for Notre Dame and Oklahoma, it’s a matter of how much you count the difference in winning percentage vs the difference in SOS, and there’s really no right or wrong there.
This is why I hate that there is a committee. It is entirely possible to employ a rigid, transparent, mathematical system of determining these things.
The main debate in such a system would be how to account for margin of victory. Simple, I say: don’t use margin of victory at all, but rather account for how much time of the game the winner held their final lead. For example, if you take the opening kick to the house and never look back, you get near-maximum MOV points since you led for 59:50 of the game. If you win in overtime, no MOV points since you led for 0:00.
This post was edited on 11/6/18 at 10:52 am
Posted on 11/6/18 at 11:28 am to VerlanderBEAST
quote:
We already know conference Championships are irrelevant
No, we dont, but we do know that losing fewer games and having a better strength of schedule appear to outweigh a conference championship. Maybe.
Really all that we know is that the committee will do whatever they want to get whoever they think are the best four teams.
Posted on 11/6/18 at 11:30 am to xiv
quote:
xiv
You were missed on this board. I share your desire for a truly objective metric on which to decide the participants in a playoff.
The BCS wasn't that bad of a system, it was just too exclusive. This committee sucks and the lack of knowledge of what criteria they use sucks.
Posted on 11/6/18 at 11:33 am to xiv
lol ur dum
Posted on 11/6/18 at 11:34 am to xiv
quote:
The better discussion there would be 12-1 tOSU vs 12-1 OU assuming 13-0 Alabama, 13-0 Clemson 12-0 Notre Dame
Buckeyes get left out maybe unless they skulldrag Michigan (and Northwestern) and OU squeaks by WV twice.
quote:
OU has a tougher schedule than tOSU, and their remaining schedule is at least as tough as tOSU’s.
I mean I don't know what SOS says, but just looking at team names they look pretty close as of now. OSU's remaining schedule is better than OU's. Michigan is better than WVU and MSU is right on the cusp likely of being in the top 25.
I think that will be a fascinating debate if it gets there, but OSU needs to take care of business this weekend to even have a chance to make that debate
Posted on 11/6/18 at 11:41 am to Ross
quote:Wanna know a secret? They basically just go with the Massey composite and craft a narrative that supports that.
This committee sucks and the lack of knowledge of what criteria they use sucks.
And thanks to you and others for the kind words.
This post was edited on 11/6/18 at 11:42 am
Posted on 11/6/18 at 11:44 am to xiv
None of this matters because Michigan is NOT beating Ohio St.
Posted on 11/6/18 at 11:49 am to xiv
quote:
Wanna know a secret? They basically just go with the Massey composite and craft a narrative that supports that.
We'll see, Massey has Georgia and Michigan in the top 4 now ahead of Notre Dame.
LINK
It wasn't true last year since it had Ohio State over Oklahoma.
LINK
This post was edited on 11/6/18 at 11:50 am
Posted on 11/6/18 at 11:54 am to Korin
Touché. Also FSU was #5 and undefeated the first CFP year but got in over TCU. Those are the two exceptions in their 16 selections so far. I do think this makes Massey the most reliable predictor.
2014 FSU and 2017 OU both got in over teams with more losses than they had, which I think is noteworthy.
2014 FSU and 2017 OU both got in over teams with more losses than they had, which I think is noteworthy.
This post was edited on 11/6/18 at 11:56 am
Posted on 11/6/18 at 11:55 am to Korin
quote:too bad they had two losses AND a pretty dominant head to head HOME loss.
since it had Ohio State over Oklahoma.
That's why you combine computers with common sense.
Posted on 11/6/18 at 12:00 pm to castorinho
quote:
And I'm pretty sure one of the chairman is on record saying they're all weighted equally.
lol at you buying this.
It’s impossible to weigh those equally. It’s a room full of humans. Bias will work its way into the discussion.
This post was edited on 11/6/18 at 12:01 pm
Posted on 11/6/18 at 12:12 pm to TH03
quote:
And I'm pretty sure one of the chairman is on record saying they're all weighted equally.
lol at you buying this.
It’s impossible to weigh those equally. It’s a room full of humans. Bias will work its way into the discussion.
Yea I will no longer pay attention to what the committee says.
Last year going into CCG week, they said Bama and OSU (along with a few other teams) were very close. After they said that, OSU beat a top 10 Wisconsin team and won a conference title, Fresno St. lost which took a top 25 win off Bama's resume, and Auburn lost, which hurt their resume as well.
LINK
quote:
“Reflecting on the discussions over the last two days, obviously there’s three spots that separate them right there, but it’s close separation from team No. 5, Alabama; 6, Georgia; 7, Miami; 8, Ohio State. Those teams are close,” Hocutt said. “Very little separation in the committee’s eyes between teams 5 through 8.”
The next week they said Bama was clearly better. I'm not saying Bama was not deserving or OSU was moreso; I'm stating that they made a comment about the committee, then 3 things happened that hurt one team and helped another, and they didn't flip those teams even though there was "very little separation" before
Posted on 11/6/18 at 12:14 pm to dukke v
Ohio St has 3 weeks to get it together. I think if they played right now, UM wins. But I still think OSU is the better team. Athletically, they're as good as Bama. They just don't have Saban coaching them.
Posted on 11/6/18 at 12:20 pm to Buckeye06
Shoulda just kept the BCS and took the top 4 teams.
Posted on 11/6/18 at 12:24 pm to TH03
quote:Not a terrible idea, but the same four teams would have been in the playoff each year so far.
Shoulda just kept the BCS and took the top 4 teams.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News