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

quote:

---

what incentive would a BigEast school ever have to schedule a difficult OOC game?

---

OK, just take the top 4. Now look at 2011 Oregon and explain what incentive ANYONE has for playing a big time OOC game.

quote:

---

You don't think a 12-0 Big East champ would be top 4 with a shite OOC?

---

They could crack the top 6.

quote:

---

NFL: 3 games just to make the title game, ALL of them on the road.

---

Playfully nitpicking, but that's not 100% true. The #5 seed can host the conference title game.

quote:

---

Gee, those are EXACTLY the same. There is absolutely no penalty to not winning your division in the other sports you mentioned.

---

Not sure exactly what your point is or what it does to refute the idea that taking the top four regardless of conference situation isn't the best way to go.

quote:

---

Alabama played a crap OOC, that tells us nothing about them really.

---

The fact that they didn't lose any of them tells us that they don't suck. Not sucking is one of the best ways to get into the title game.

Maybe it doesn't say a LOT (I'd say that 24 points over pre-scandal PSU in State College says a lot), but if you're saying that it says nothing, then you're wrong.

quote:

---

OSU was 3-0 OOC both were 11-1 overall, OSU played a tougher schedule overall.

---

Correct. The fact that Bama scored 5x as many as their opponents and OSU scored 2x as many as their opponents mattered, too. I'm not a fan of counting scoring margin/ratio, but using it isn't unfair.

quote:

---

OK, just take the top 4. Now look at 2011 Oregon and explain what incentive ANYONE has for playing a big time OOC game.

---

Because had Oregon won the LSU game, they would have definitely made the playoffs and possibly hosted a game. It's a gamble. Big upside, big downside. Calculated risk. Some teams would take it; some wouldn't.

quote:

---

Wow if I went and told them we will use the BCS formula to rank conferences champions at the end of the season.

---

Not sure if I asked this before, but why are you not ok with polls determining who the top four teams are, but you're ok with the polls determining who the top four conference champions are? That doesn't make much sense to me.

quote:

---

I would also tell teams to join a fricking conference or don't play along as its stupid anyways. All my bases are covered and no holes.

---

No they aren't. You have one HUGE hole here. Requiring a team to join a conference means requiring a conference to accept them. Have fun with the 8,000 subsequent lawsuits.

Face it. Requiring conference affiliation won't work. Placing arbitrary values on conference affiliation and conference schedules which comprise of only a fraction of a team's schedule is not a plausible possibility no matter how much you want it to be. Taking the top 4 is the way to go.

quote:

---

Looking at the rapid decline of the quality of OOC schedules overall in the BCS era, it's pretty clear what most schools would choose.

BTW - a committee could rectify that, and reward an at large team with a worse record, but strong OOC. Oregon, even with the loss to LSU, had a better resume than almost any team in the country.

---

I can dig where you're going, but I hate committees. Those have people. People have biases. All of them/us. Computers don't. The people who make the computers and devise the formulae do have biases, but if the formula/e are made public, and everyone is equally subject to said formula/e, then the bias is eliminated by everyone playing by the exact same rules.

quote:

---

BCS computers

---

A lot better than the polls.

Same question then. Why are you not ok with BCS computers determining who the top four teams are, but you're ok with the BCS computers determining who the top four conference champions are?

quote:

---

Oh yes you can. More on that in a bit.

---

No, you can't, its simply not possible to cover every single remote possibility in anything.

quote:

---

A hole in what? My health is not in a football tournament

---

Its called an anology. My point is you can't cover every single possibilty in anything and that saying its invalid because we can come up with remote scenarios that have never happened before is a stupid reason to not do it.

You are saying its possible the #1 and #2 team could have not won their conference. Lots of things are possible. We can't cover all of them. Using a coin flip is way worse than using an on field accomplishment like winning a conference.

One exteremly important detail I left out of your 1 and 2 scenario that was a mere 5 touchdowns away from happening last year is that assuming the rankings stay the same, #3-6 WERE NOT ALL C0NFERENCE WINNERS.

In fact, of the top 6, only 2, OSU and Oregon would have been conference winners. so using Delany's plan, LSU and Alabama make it anyway. (LSU, Bama, OSU, SU, UO, Ark) Now, we don't know if UGA would have moved up to #6, ahead of Arkansas had they hung on rallied for 33 more 2nd half points, but if we assume they would have, that still leaves LSU in. Sucks for Alabama, but sucks no worse for them than all the #5 teams you would leave out for no good reason other than that's what an opinion poll says.

quote:

---

Same question then. Why are you not ok with BCS computers determining who the top four teams are, but you're ok with the BCS computers determining who the top four conference champions are?

---

I understand that there is bias created withe formulas based on how they are constructed which could favor certain situations.

By using the conference champions at that point it at least presents a better chance of the system being more accessible to the largest group of teams.

Also we don't want to just eliminate other conferences from being part of the process. I think the SEC is top dog and the other conferences are a bunch of pretenders; however, I would be pissed at a system that would create an unaccessible national championship format.

Since non conference champions are basically eliminated by playoff participants I don't see the any reason for complaints.

quote:

---

You are saying its possible the #1 and #2 team could have not won their conference. Lots of things are possible. We can't cover all of them.

---

Taking the top 4 covers that one.

quote:

---

Using a coin flip is way worse than using an on field accomplishment like winning a conference.

---

Of course. My point there was that if you have two teams with the same record, exact same SOS, exact same points scored vs. points allowed, exact same home record, exact same road record, same strength of victory, same strength of defeat, same graduation rates, same probationary standing with the NCAA, and they haven't played each other and have no common opponents, then you have to either a) flip a coin b) eliminate them both and have a three-team playoff or c) have a playoff to determine the #4 spot.

I think we'd agree that "c" is definitely the best choice there, but it probably won't be logistically possible, so a coin flip would be basically the only way to go. Just a last resort thing--it's included in most tie-breakers.

quote:

---

One exteremly important detail I left out of your 1 and 2 scenario that was a mere 5 touchdowns away from happening last year is that assuming the rankings stay the same, #3-6 WERE NOT ALL C0NFERENCE WINNERS.

In fact, of the top 6, only 2, OSU and Oregon would have been conference winners. so using Delany's plan, LSU and Alabama make it anyway. (LSU, Bama, OSU, SU, UO, Ark) Now, we don't know if UGA would have moved up to #6, ahead of Arkansas had they hung on rallied for 33 more 2nd half points, but if we assume they would have, that still leaves LSU in. Sucks for Alabama, but sucks no worse for them than all the #5 teams you would leave out for no good reason other than that's what an opinion poll says.

---

So you're still admitting that Delaney's system opens the door for #1 and #2 getting shut out.

Sorry, but that's a door that needs to be closed.