Feelings, nothing more than feelings

Sure, it’s an Eleven Warriors post, so naturally it’s going to take affront at how the selection committee weighs Ohio State’s worth, but after reading it…

So, with all of that in mind, I feel comfortable in saying that in my completely unbiased and objective opinion, the College Football Playoff Selection Committee is worthless. In fact, I believe that their vague, nebulous criteria is actually a step backwards from what we had in the poll-dominated eras of days gone by. Also, the ridiculous media availabilities that committee chair Rob Mullens subjects us to every Tuesday after the weekly rankings are revealed are doing them no favors, as they actually make the process look worse, and undermine what little credibility that the committee has.

Now, I have no problems with the current top four, or even the top five; those teams all seem like legitimate selections to occupy those spots, but when you get down to comparing No. 6 Oklahoma and the No. 10 Buckeyes, that’s when I start to question the methodology of the committee (and I’m not going to get into the absurdity of a two-loss LSU at No. 7).

… ask yourself if the problem with the CFP is over the size of the playoff field or if it’s over the subjective nature of the selection process itself.

Going to an eight-team field won’t calm the waters if things are left in the hands of the selection committee.  In fact, there’s a legitimate argument to be made that, since it’s highly unusual in a given season for eight teams to have a valid claim to a national title game, the subjective hair-splitting for the last spots will actually serve to make things worse in that regard.

But, you do you, Cinderella.

Advertisements

40 Comments

Filed under BCS/Playoffs

40 responses to “Feelings, nothing more than feelings

  1. Nate Dawg

    Wait…so room full of humans, with their biases and prejudices and allegiances….but wait you sit this discussion out cuz your son coaches at OU and you sit this out cuz your the ATHLETIC DIRECTOR (!) at this top 4 school and you sit this out because…ugh…and don’t forget Saban has to be in! I mean, he’s earned it! He just has to be – win or lose!
    Yep, shit show.

    Like

  2. All of this is exactly why I think the committee was a terrible idea created by Jim Delany to make sure a B1G school was in the final 4 every year. The bias created by 13-14 people in a room in a Grapevine, Texas hotel is so much bigger than the polls. While the polls have their own set of challenges (looking at you, Hal Mumme and Mike Bianchi), at least those biases are 1 of many. The statistics would coalesce around who really are the best 4. A BCS type of formula agreed to by all of the parties (including the Gof5) would be a better method.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Tony Barnfart

      BCS type formulas give you Oklahoma in a championship game after they got beat 35-7 in their conference title game. Polls are made by biased humans who actually have less time to take measured and objective views of the polls they are submitting.

      There’s no way to create objectivity in a sport with 130 teams and a 12 game season. Human beings are part of it.

      Like

      • I agree there’s no way to create objectivity. The BCS got it right most years until Jim Delany got mad that two SEC teams ended up in the championship game. At least with the BCS, everyone understood the rules. Now no one really knows from year to year what the committee values. If the committee didn’t meet until December, I could live with it. Who cares about the committee’s ranking after the top 4?

        Like

    • Macallanlover

      Oh come on, the prior system using pencil headed newspaper guys who see 1-2 games every Saturday, and nerds with computers, deciding who should get in was not better than this committee’s work. At least the AP and Coaches Poll has been neutered, and Sagarin certainly has bias built into his opening model. Just another pre-season poll with input from where exactly?

      Biggest problem now is the format doesn’t allow each conference champ a spot, it is simply inadequate by design and gives life to a minimum of one conference being slighted/insulted as unworthy every single year. Get the playoff size right, keep the computers on the sidelines, and please, don’t have ohio fans lecturing anyone about college football, or playoffs.

      Like

      • Oh come on, Mac. Do you really think these 13 people watch every game every Saturday? I would go along with 8 if it were champions only, but that’s not happening. I hated that Bama made it last year. I’ve been consistent that I want the regular season to matter. Any time a wild card wins the championship, the regular season means less.

        Like

        • I hated it that Bama made it last year because I feared they would win it. They did and proved they should have been in so what was the problem other than if you are a Dawg and they prevented a Championship?

          Like

          • I hate it when wild cards win the Super Bowl … I hate it when someone who didn’t win their conference wins the national championship. It cheapens the value of the regular season. YMMV.

            Like

            • I see your point. But, Bama had lost one game like everyone else in that playoff so you can’t really say they had a mediocre regular season like a 9-7 wildcard team that suddenly caught fire.

              Like

              • They had lost 1 playing 1 fewer game. I didn’t say they weren’t deserving because they were over the 2-loss other conference champions. My only point is they benefited from sitting home on Championship Saturday while every other team in the vying for spots had to play.

                It’s the system we have.

                Like

                • The point I am making is that no matter what system is put in place, it’s not going to be perfect. It will be impossible to make everything completely fair and some team or conference will always feel like they got slighted.

                  I was semi okay with the old system because I was used to college football ending by Jan 2. Don’t know if anyone else feels this way but I really don’t like the season being extended a week and certainly don’t want it going any father than it does now.

                  Liked by 1 person

  3. PTC DAWG

    I think they have gotten it right, every year.

    Like

  4. Jared S.

    I still don’t understand why they didn’t stick with BCS and just take the top four from it’s ranking.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Texas Dawg

    Mach Madness puts 68 teams into the tournament now. Just about any team with a pulse makes it (and some that may not have a pulse). Even with that absurd number, numbers 69 on down will swear that they were screwed and that given an invite, they had a legitimate shot at the title. Maybe we should have an 8 team playoff. Even if it does expand, just as sure as the sun rises in the east, teams 9 on down will scream that there is bias (especially SEC bias if more than 1 gets in) and they were screwed. Nothing will stop the complaining.

    Like

    • Boz

      This^.

      History shows that a couple of teams are most deserving, with outliers such as Auburn’s 2004 season that another 1 is left out though equally deserving, but as a rule, the first teams out (i.e. 5th, 6th, 7th ranked teams) has an ugly wart that should eliminate them from college football NC consideration. When you go to 8, which is going to happen, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,10, 11, 12 will have ugly losses, and likely 2 ugly losses. It just gets more subjective the further down the list you go.

      You want to hear people scream: put 3-4 SEC teams in that 8 team playoff every year.

      Like

    • ASEF

      There were only two teams last year that could see themselves in the ballpark with Alabama’s resume, and both of them had 2 losses, including a blow out curb stomping.

      Move down to spots 7 and 8, and you’ve got a rotation of about 10 team every year that see themselves as equally worthy of those chosen for spots 7 and 8. And even the chosen 8 will bitch about seeding. Not only will 8 not stop the complaining, it will make it worse.

      Like

  6. Former Fan

    I still think only conference champions should be in the playoffs. If you are not the best team in your conference, how can you be the best team in the nation? Go to 6 teams and grant all 5 of the P5 champions a spot, then the best team from the rest of college football for the final spot. No conference gets 2 teams in. The two highest ranked teams get a bye in the playoff.

    The regular season conference schedule will matter more than it ever has and will serve as a playoff of sorts as the season plays out. All conference championship games will now become de facto playoff games.

    Like

    • If a four-loss team wins its conference, is it one of the best teams in the nation? Asking for a Northwestern friend…

      Like

      • Wolfman

        That’s the fault of the conference for having a terrible system to crown their champion. If Northwestern wins, and they represent the B1G, and get pummeled, hopefully it would force the commissioners to reconsider the idea of how the determine their representative.

        Of course, logic may not apply with these guys.

        Like

      • Former Fan

        If they went on to win the playoffs would you consider them one of the best teams in the nation?

        If we are going to have a playoff, make the conference titles mean something. Make the regular season mean something. Let the champions play to be national champion. If you are not the best team in your conference, how can you be the best team in the country?

        Like

    • That 6th team likely didn’t win their conference unless you either give the spot to ND or to the highest ranked Gof5 champion.

      Like

    • Texas Dawg

      1996 Big 12
      10-1 (#3) Nebraska 27 lost to 7-4 (unranked) Texas 37
      Hard to argue that they were the best team in the conference. They just caught lightning in a bottle. This season, Utah could easily knock off Washington State. Northwestern gave Michigan all they could handle the first time around. Pretty much the onlyconference championship game where the lower ranked team winning would still be seen as the legit best (other than by Bama fans) would be UGA vs Bama.

      Liked by 2 people

    • ASEF

      Conferences are economic collaborations. Those conferences jumped through a lot of stupid hoops to meet some arbitrary NCAA rules about conference championship games to make more money – including coming up with randomly grouped divisions that annually produce some division winners that just stink.

      I’m really not interested in bolting a playoff formula on top of those monstrosities.

      Like

  7. Otto

    The debate on the playoff will never end just look at basketball.

    The beauty and the fun of college football is the debate, and the playoff has taken away from that and the regular season. Bring back the BCS.

    Like

  8. Hogbody Spradlin

    The solution to this guy’s complaint is to disclose only the top four weekly, and/or disclose only on selection Sunday.

    It’ll never fly.

    Like

  9. Jim

    I dread the day of playoff expansion

    Like

  10. AusDawg85

    Just have the committee select the New Year’s six bowl game participants. Then hold a lottery to select two of the winners at random to play in the championship. The ping pong ball drop show will be one of the highest rated events each year on ESPN and those team’s fans who miss out will get to relive the glorious old days before the playoffs of arguing “Who’s really #1” the entire off season (e.g. Tech was NOT a national champion in 1990…it was Colorado!). This plan contains all of the elements fans are looking for and thus is perfect. You are welcome.

    Like

  11. stoopnagle

    I wish we still were doing the Mumme Poll with it’s unique voting system and that the committee might adopt that method where only viable teams are ranked.

    Like

  12. TNDAWG

    Many years ago, there were a group of former college coaches putting together their poll of team rankings. It was comprised of coaches from every conference and some which had been at independents. The methodology used was very open and produced some of the best rankings of the time. It was the best poll I have seen. Too bad it wasn’t taken seriously.

    Like

  13. Thus far the system has worked correctly. Does it really matter where anyone is that doesn’t wind up in the top 4? He admits the top 5 are correct. He has no argument.

    Like

  14. UGA '97

    To say the committee is worthless based their 6 -10 rankings is a useless argument especially to a fanbase worn down by a season of tumult. How comical and convenient since OSU just got an invite 2 years ago, without winning their division, nor their conference as well and then proceeded to get shit stomped on national TV. After all the emotional exhaustion surrounding Ohio State, the sun is setting on Urban and 11 Warriors is grasping for disappearing straws. In other words, dude put a plug in it, this is wasted breath. Go outside, find a cold hard buckeye nut on the ground and chew on it a while, all while thinking about that absolute blowout by Purdue and the on-field, garbage pickup game at Thanksgiving with the out-of-shape, coachless uncles of Maryland. Your team gave the committee absolutely nothing to hang a hat on, nothing. Their only job is to establish the best 4 teams, that’s it. Yes, it is another fake system built for TV ratings. But, the fact that if teams that don’t win a conference, and can still play one less game than an opponent and the CFP can still give your team an invite (here’s looking at you Notre Dame) is no reason to complain. Since you already had, but wasted that opportunity, then shut your piehole and be thankful until we set a predetermined, preseason criteria, just like the rest of all divisions at all levels of football and we no longer need a “committee”.

    Like