re: I like Delany's proposal Re: Conference Champions

quote:

---

There's a reason they are 1-4.

---

A subjective bias voting system.

quote:

---

A four team playoff is about getting the top four teams a chance to compete for the national title not favoring conference champions over teams that play in the same conference.

---

I would say the goal is to determine a champion (#1 team). It would make a lot more sense to use the tournaments (on field results) that were carried out during the season to drastically shrink the field. Going this route makes the system the fairest and the chance to win a national championship accessible to the most teams.

quote:

---

accessible to the most teams

---

I think a four-team playoff should be accessible to the top four teams.

You think that a four-team playoff should be accessible to teams who aren't good enough to be in the top four.

quote:

---

quote:
The idea we're cooking up right now leaves open the possibility of say, Florida going 12-1 with a loss in the SECCG and a #3 ranking, and Florida State going 10-3 and winning the ACC and a #6 ranking, and FSU goes to the playoffs and not Florida. That's crazy. Florida has a better record, head to head victory, and higher ranking in the polls and computers, but FSU gets in because they won the 5th best conference? It would be crazy to leave the door open for something like that.



This just makes too much sense..

---

And you know what? The minute something like this happens, that's the minute we change the system, and we all know it. Therefore, why even put such a system in place when we know we'd change it if it produced a result like this?

Delaney doesn't want two SEC teams competing for National Championship every year.

quote:

---

Delaney doesn't want two SEC teams competing for National Championship every year.

---

bingo. he is frauding hard.

quote:

---

win your conference

---

Not every team is in a conference.
Not every team is in the same conference.
Why not just treat every team equally and judge them by their entire schedule and count all games the same?

quote:

---

There's a reason they are 1-4

---

yes, because they were voted there, its not a proven fact, just an opinion. What is a fact is who wins their conference.

quote:

---

you going to tell me that Louisville was a better team than LSU or Michigan?

---

They were better than you are probably giving them credit for, but better is an opinion, its arbirary. Taking them and USC over LSU and UM is just a fair method of seperating teams by something other than reputation and opinion.

I think Florida was the 2nd best team in 2009, but they don't even get in if you take just the top 4, undefeated or no, there is no way you can tell me you think cincinati was better than Florida that year.

quote:

---

There's going to be disagreements no matter what system you use. Why should Michigan and LSU be punished for losing to the top 2 seeds

---

You're right, each system will have disagreements, they often gripe about someone being left out of them 64 team BB Tourney. Michigan and LSU are being "punished" because they lost (and LSU lost 2 FTR). Once you lose, you take your fate out of your own hands. This idea will greatly reduce the contraversies.

quote:

---

Based on a team's entire schedule.

---

Yeah voters really based their opinions on Bama and OSU last season on their entire schedules. Actually still trying to figure out what they based it on.

quote:

---

So do we want to base this on the whole schedule or just part of the schedule? Because if we want to base it on just part of the schedule, we will have a system far worse than the current BCS.

---

If you think a system that is based solely on opinion is better than one based on results from the field I don't know what else to say. The only way for that to make sense is to believe that the voters don't have agendas and would vote the same way without names involved. We know that isn't true.

quote:

---

It was an 11-point underdog in December. Had Georgia beat LSU, #1 and #2 would be conference non-champs.

---

what was the score of that game again? I didn't ask for an exmaple were it was a 5 TD swing away from happening, I asked if it ever happened. 2011 was the only year I could find where the final regular season 1 and 2 were from the same conference.

quote:

---

Florida going 12-1 with a loss in the SECCG and a #3 ranking, and Florida State going 10-3 and winning the ACC and a #6 ranking, and FSU goes to the playoffs and not Florida. .

---

Whens the last time the #6 team had 3 losses? Let alone in a year with at least 3 undefeated teams going into the CCG.

If you just took the top 4 conference winners in the BCS era, the lowest ranked conference winners that would have been included are : 2001 #8 Ill, who was 10-1. 2003: #7 FSU who was 10-2 and 2011 #10 Wisconsin 11-2.

If you use the Delany plan, NONE of those teams would have made it and the most loses anyone had that would have made it under either plan is 2.

quote:

---

Yeah voters really based their opinions on Bama and OSU last season on their entire schedules.

---

Correct. While OSU had the same record vs. a slightly tougher schedule, they scored 1.8x as many points as their opponents while Alabama scored an amazing 4.3x as many points as their opponents. Alabama was better than Oklahoma State, and they proved it on the field, and that's why they were #2. (I don't think scoring margin/ratio should count, but I am not vehemently opposed to counting it). Had OSU and/or Bama lost an OOC game, their ranking would have been lower.

And, had OSU lost an OOC game, they wouldn't have been in the top four, but they would have been one of the top four conference champions. With your idea, if OSU had lost to ULL, they still would have made the playoffs, and #2 Alabama wouldn't have. That's absolutely insane.

quote:

---

If you think a system that is based solely on opinion is better than one based on results from the field I don't know what else to say.

---

To that, I have a comment and a question:
C) the computer rankings are not opinions. Those are mathematical formulas. The polls represent opinions, and for my money they count for way too much, but you're incorrect when you say that this system is based purely on opinion.
?) How exactly do you judge which four conference champions are the best four? Somebody's opinion?

quote:

---

The only way for that to make sense is to believe that the voters don't have agendas and would vote the same way without names involved. We know that isn't true.

---

Don't get me wrong, brother. frick the voters. They shouldn't count.