CFP committee is set to kill interesting college football

[18IsTheMan]

First the playoffs destroyed bowl games since morons bought the narrative that the CFP rendered all non-CFP bowl games meaningless (nobody has yet offered an explanation of why that's the case).

Now, the committee is set to ruin interesting, non-conference matchups by signaling with the rankings that there is no value whatsoever to competitive non-conference matchups. Look how quick bowl game opt-outs spread. This stuff goes like wildfire. Making the CFP is THE be-all, end-all so why would any program take the liability of scheduling competitive non-conference games? It used be that you would schedule such games as a resume builder. When P5 programs look around and see other P5 teams with cake schedules just waltz into the playoffs, nobody's gonna risk their chance on a game that the committee doesn't give a rip about. Numerous coaches have already publicly stated they are going to give a hard to look at scheduling in light of this year's rankings.

 

[Uscg1984]

Indiana beat just one team with a winning record this year? If that's right, sign us up for some of that.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Indiana beat just one team with a winning record this year? If that's right, sign us up for some of that.

Yes. There absolutely is no advantage to scheduling tough games.

It doesn't really help us out a lot as 9 of our 12 games are spoken for.

 

[BftCocks09]

The committee is a joke obviously. As long as we’re being “fair” to the little guy while also making as much money as possible for the sport, that’s all that matters.

 

[BftCocks09]

If you look at the background of these people who make up the committee, it makes absolute sense why they can do nothing correct in the context of the current college football landscape.

 

[Blues man]

I'm just glad the SEC didn't take my advise and and go to a nine game conference schedule. I now plan to lobby for six. We need six OOC games if we want to compete.

 

[18IsTheMan]

If you look at the background of these people who make up the committee, it makes absolute sense why they can do nothing correct in the context of the current college football landscape.

For one thing, you've got 14 people. Way too many. Ever heard the expression "a camel is a horse designed by committee"?

 

[18IsTheMan]

I'm just glad the SEC didn't take my advise and and go to a nine game conference schedule. I now plan to lobby for six. We need six OOC games if we want to compete.

In the current landscape, the best thing for us would be for Clemson to join the SEC and become one of our 8 conference games. That's a huge liability for us to have them as a non-conference game. We could schedule 4 patsies like these other folks.

 

[BftCocks09]

For one thing, you've got 14 people. Way too many. Ever heard the expression "a camel is a horse designed by committee"?

Like I said on another thread, time to go back to the computers.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Like I said on another thread, time to go back to the computers.

Yeah, why not? The whole reason for going away from computers was supposedly so a committee would weigh intangible factors and consider the human element. This year has been a disaster for that.

They did well enough with the 4-team CFP, though excluding FSU last year was a travesty. But asking them to decide on 12 teams is clearly too much for them to handle.

 

[BftCocks09]

Yeah, why not? The whole reason for going away from computers was supposedly so a committee would weigh intangible factors and consider the human element. This year has been a disaster for that.

They did well enough with the 4-team CFP, though excluding FSU last year was a travesty. But asking them to decide on 12 teams is clearly too much for them to handle.

Fully agree with the first part. If we aren’t going to look at bad losses, current trajectory, injury effects, etc., or better known as “the eye test” then a committee is worthless.

Wont rehash this too much though since it’s long gone, but I don’t agree the FSU decision was a travesty. I think they got that one right. In my opinion it was the most logical and level-headed decision the CFP committee has ever made.

 

[FootballLVR]

You can look to Sankey for the expansion from 4 to 12. I'm thinking his idea was that SEC would get 4-6 teams in and take the majority of the money. Of course, we would have to be one of those 4-6 for it to really work for us and we historically haven't been. I guess we are considered 5th at this moment (in the committee's mind - not mine).

 

[Lurker123]

Fully agree with the first part. If we aren’t going to look at bad losses, current trajectory, injury effects, etc., or better known as “the eye test” then a committee is worthless.

Wont rehash this too much though since it’s long gone, but I don’t agree the FSU decision was a travesty. I think they got that one right. In my opinion it was the most logical and level-headed decision the CFP committee has ever made.

Not directed at you, but I have always loathed "the eye test". That, to me, is just a way to come up with reasons to put the teams in we want, without backup from records or on the field play. (H2h)

The eye test is awesome if you're bama, because naturally you must be better than your record. The eye test never benefits teams like us.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Fully agree with the first part. If we aren’t going to look at bad losses, current trajectory, injury effects, etc., or better known as “the eye test” then a committee is worthless.

Wont rehash this too much though since it’s long gone, but I don’t agree the FSU decision was a travesty. I think they got that one right. In my opinion it was the most logical and level-headed decision the CFP committee has ever made.

re: FSU, I suspect we'd feel differently if it had been us.

I think the decision is made to be a travesty, in part, because the committee has shown this year that they can arbitrarily choose when they want to or don't want to consider extenuating factors to get whatever desired outcome they want.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Not directed at you, but I have always loathed "the eye test". That, to me, is just a way to come up with reasons to put the teams in we want, without backup from records or on the field play. (H2h)

The eye test is awesome if you're bama, because naturally you must be better than your record. The eye test never benefits teams like us.

It's certainly a balance, which is what the committee was supposed to do. You need a certain amount of the cold, hard analysis that a computer can do, but you also need some subjective analysis. And I'd say, largely, they got it right when they were dealing with a small pool of teams in the 4-team CFP. This 12-team CFP is a travesty though.

 

[BftCocks09]

re: FSU, I suspect we'd feel differently if it had been us.

I think the decision is made to be a travesty, in part, because the committee has shown this year that they can arbitrarily choose when they want to or don't want to consider extenuating factors to get whatever desired outcome they want.

Wholeheartedly agree there.

 

[BftCocks09]

Not directed at you, but I have always loathed "the eye test". That, to me, is just a way to come up with reasons to put the teams in we want, without backup from records or on the field play. (H2h)

The eye test is awesome if you're bama, because naturally you must be better than your record. The eye test never benefits teams like us.

I can agree there. Although, if you’re truly dealing with football minded people that live and breathe it 12 months out of the year I don’t think that becomes as much of a factor. I suppose the real issue at hand truly is just the people they chose from the random bag of marbles to make the biggest decision in a multi-billion dollar industry. Go back to the computers.

 

[will110]

Not directed at you, but I have always loathed "the eye test". That, to me, is just a way to come up with reasons to put the teams in we want, without backup from records or on the field play. (H2h)

The eye test is awesome if you're bama, because naturally you must be better than your record. The eye test never benefits teams like us.

I don't think the committee used the eye test on Alabama...they wouldn't have made it if they did. The eye test favored South Carolina this year, but they ignored that in favor of the brand name and the 2 point head-to-head result 6 weeks ago.

 

[muscleknight]

Need to add another playoff tier. The G5 gets their own playoff and the P4 gets their own.

 

[Lurker123]

I don't think the committee used the eye test on Alabama...they wouldn't have made it if they did. The eye test favored South Carolina this year, but they ignored that in favor of the brand name and the 2 point head-to-head result 6 weeks ago.

I kind of agree. I used them as an example of a "name" school getting preferential treatment.

This year, their resume was better than ours, so they didn't need the eye test.

(Same record with a higher SOS, h2h, better marglquee win vs worse losses)

 

[adcoop]

I'm just glad the SEC didn't take my advise and and go to a nine game conference schedule. I now plan to lobby for six. We need six OOC games if we want to compete.

We are taking the likelihood that we won't be selected poorly. The SEC and BIG are probably going to get 4 spots apiece. We lost big games head-to-head with our direct competitors for a spot. That is what is killing us. Not the playing or avoidance of OOC games. We have our 3rd loss to an Oklahoma or Florida and we would have stood a much better chance of getting in. It's hard to say you deserve to be in against two conference opponents with equal records that beat you. The OOC games help, but only if you win the conference games against opponents that are trying to get to the same place as you. I am taking the position that the LSU refs stole our bid more so than the CFP committee.

 

[Blues man]

We are taking the likelihood that we won't be selected poorly. The SEC and BIG are probably going to get 4 spots apiece. We lost big games head-to-head with our direct competitors for a spot. That is what is killing us. Not the playing or avoidance of OOC games. We have our 3rd loss to an Oklahoma or Florida and we would have stood a much better chance of getting in. It's hard to say you deserve to be in against two conference opponents with equal records that beat you. The OOC games help, but only if you win the conference games against opponents that are trying to get to the same place as you. I am taking the position that the LSU refs stole our bid more so than the CFP committee.

I'm not saying we aren't in because of our schedule or how we played said schedule. We should have been better. We have to leave no doubt and we didn't do that. What I'm saying is it is clear the committee has put SOS on the back burners based on the number of highly ranked teams lacking quality wins. What seems to matter less now than what they used to preach as important attributes is SOS and how you are playing late in the season. Finally yes head to head but even that appears to have it's exceptions with the committee. So head to head matters until it doesn't. As far as I am concerned, they are not to be trusted. I am pro-computer ranking and have been far longer than this year. What this year has shown is the more decisions the committee gets to make the more likely they are to screw it up... and they did not disappoint in that regard.

 

[18IsTheMan]

We are taking the likelihood that we won't be selected poorly. The SEC and BIG are probably going to get 4 spots apiece. We lost big games head-to-head with our direct competitors for a spot. That is what is killing us. Not the playing or avoidance of OOC games. We have our 3rd loss to an Oklahoma or Florida and we would have stood a much better chance of getting in. It's hard to say you deserve to be in against two conference opponents with equal records that beat you. The OOC games help, but only if you win the conference games against opponents that are trying to get to the same place as you. I am taking the position that the LSU refs stole our bid more so than the CFP committee.

I am not even talking about us not making it or not making. Simply pointing out the very obvious fact that head coaches are acknowledging the committee has shown there is zero value to scheduling tough opponents. It has absolutely no impact in the decision making process.

 

[Psycock]

At least expand to 16 and drop the stupid byes. So Clemson- who obviously should be out - not only gets in with a win AND would get a bye. What a joke!

 

[Blues man]

At least expand to 16 and drop the stupid byes. So Clemson- who obviously should be out - not only gets in with a win AND would get a bye. What a joke!

Agreed. 12 never made sense and now thanks to the way this is playing out, I'm not to high on conference champs getting automatic bids either. Top 16 teams in. Rankings determine seeds. End of story.