quote:

Standards are great, but you can paint yourself in a corner. You do not have to stick with 100% black and white or "move the goal posts" on a whim. You can have criteria as they have laid out. Circumstances do change and you can not account for everything. So having some flexibility is not necessarily a bad thing. Your concerns are based on fear, for lack of a better word, of the unknown, you don't know what the committee will do. As I said before, we have reason to believe they will do something radically stupid.

Some of this reads like nonsense to me.

You can make an argument for just doing the top four or whatever of the BCS if you like (I disagree completely but I know some people like the argument because lately their teams have been highly esteemed even tho the some of the same people have howled about teh BCS rankings in years gone by)

You can also make an argument for inviting the top four ranked conference champs (or top independent if applicable). That's another defensible system. I don't think it is perfect but it has a cogent thought process.

What you can't do is an open invitation for pure bias to make every judgement call. What I would regard as being radically stupid on the part of the committee would be having no consistency with respect to standards. Well, if not stupid, at least inherently corrupted by bias.

The point should be to have a system that stands up to scrutiny and that comes with transparency. If you can't explain the process or criteria by which you would invite four teams then you either don't have a thought process or you have a thought process you are not interested in being transparent with respect to.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by H-Town Tiger

Member since Nov 2003

59164 posts

Posted on 12/17/13 at 11:53 am to Majin Buu

quote:
So them being independent should get them in over a conference winner?

Well that depends. If they are in the final top 4 anyway, what's the problema? If they are not and there are 4 conference winners ahead of them then they are out. If they are out of the top 4, but only 3 conference winners are ahead of them, I understand why people would think that's unfair, but you can;t force them to join a conference and can't exclude independents.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by H-Town Tiger

Member since Nov 2003

59164 posts

Posted on 12/17/13 at 12:23 pm to molsusports

quote:
Some of this reads like nonsense to me.

I'm not surprised if you insist on rigid, unbreakable standards in everything. My only point is you can not account for every possible situation, the world and life are too unpredictable, so leaving a little flexibility is not a bad thing.

quote:
What you can't do is an open invitation for pure bias to make every judgement call. What I would regard as being radically stupid on the part of the committee would be having no consistency with respect to standards. Well, if not stupid, at least inherently corrupted by bias.

This right here shows your disconnect. You just proved my point that your concern is based purely on fear of the unknown. The committee has criteria laid out, until such time as they radically deviate from them, i see no reason to just assume they will.

I'll use this year as an example and I hate having to defend Alabama, but you leave me no choice. If you argue that they are not one of the best teams in the country because they did not win their conference, you are just as biased as you are accusing others of being. 1 game does not prove anything. Bama lost a tough game on the road, on a fluky play (yes they could have lost in OT). Because they lost, they don't win their conference and hence run the risk of not making the playoff, but to say because they lost that one game, especially given how close it was, that means they can not be the best team in the conference or country is just silly.

Now again, I would love the 4 team, only conference winners format. But to say Alabama is not as good as Baylor who has just as many conference loses or Stanford who has 1 more is absurd. That said, they lost and if they are excluded, that's perfectly acceptable.

ETA: To put it simply, just because something is subjective, doesn't automatically mean its wrong. That said, the more objective we can be, the better.

This post was edited on 12/17/13 at 12:27 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Zamoro10

Member since Jul 2008

14743 posts

Posted on 12/17/13 at 12:31 pm to H-Town Tiger

quote:

I'll use this year as an example and I hate having to defend Alabama, but you leave me no choice. If you argue that they are not one of the best teams in the country because they did not win their conference, you are just as biased as you are accusing others of being. 1 game does not prove anything. Bama lost a tough game on the road, on a fluky play (yes they could have lost in OT).

I would hope the committee would flip the script - of which CFB has long been accustomed to - and act more like the March Madness committee.

There is no denying that CFB polling and fans have long been obsessed with the losses...and comparing them...who's loss is worse? This team only lost by X points on the road vs. two TD loss at home, etc...

We pay lip service to close wins, however...because hey! A win is a win!

Hold on, lets be consistent. If we're going to be generous with losses - lets also be unkind to some wins.

Evaluate the entire body of work win or lose...instead of focusing on the "good losses".

This post was edited on 12/17/13 at 12:32 pm

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by molsusports

Member since Jul 2004

36155 posts

Posted on 12/17/13 at 2:59 pm to H-Town Tiger

quote:
You just proved my point that your concern is based purely on fear of the unknown.

No it doesn't

My concern is based on a simple interest in fairness and clarity. If you can't explain what you mean when someone asks "what do you mean?" that means you don't understand yourself. Rather than admit the obvious you resort to name calling.

It isn't that hard. Explain what you mean by using basic logic. If you can't do that then chances are you don't understand yourself.

Page 1 2 3 4 5 6