In principle a +1 doubles the number of contenders that have a shot. That can't be bad. But it would still rely on the unreliable polls and in years like 2008 when there are more than 4 teams with essentially the same credentials, the same ugly arguments would arise, only worse because there would be a stronger illusion that the winner was a true champ despite someone getting left out.
It's rare (maybe never) when one conference champ like this year's LSU can say they beat 2 other conference champs during the regular season. With a dearth of meaningful ooc games, each of the conference champs usually gets to the end of the regular season having been tested only in their own conference by a schedule completely different from the other champs.
We then leave it to the polls to handicap the field for bowl season by whatever criteria the voters wish to use. The results of bowls, however, show how a significant percentage of the conclusions by pollsters were wrong. Just look at the changes in the polls before and after bowl season.
My concern is that with a +1, these unreliable and faulty polls become even more important. The selling point behind the +1 reminds me of the original selling point in support of the BCS 15 years ago... to identify which is really the best team. I think in most years the +1 will bring about more consensus, which is a good thing. But there will still be an element of exclusivity with guidance by perceptions and opinions. I can't help thinking we should be careful what we ask for... because we may get it.
QUOTE(#5):
I can't help thinking we should be careful what we ask for... because we may get it.
That is the essence of change I suppose. I keep thinking the same way as you but I don't fear the same things.
I agree with the Dr. that the silver lining in this historically bad bowl season is that a seeded four tournament is likely to come out of this. I have felt that the system we have would give us the two most deserving teams about seventy five percent of the time. Adding two more deserving teams to the mix should only be good and have next to no downside.
I don't get all the hand wringing about a seeded four and I don't see the huge pitfalls. I think it would keep the best of college football and the uniquness that makes it special. I fear more from those who want to blow up just about everything and start over. I'm glad they are in the minority and mostly among powerless fans.
QUOTE(#5):
We then leave it to the polls to handicap the field for bowl season by whatever criteria the voters wish to use. The results of bowls, however, show how a significant percentage of the conclusions by pollsters were wrong. Just look at the changes in the polls before and after bowl season. My concern is that with a +1, these unreliable and faulty polls become even more important.
Do you really think the polls handicap the field for bowl season? Is Boise a good example of this? There are others.
Are you really surprised that the polls change after bowl season? In each game someone wins and someone loses but I'm pretty sure you know that so I don't get the angst.
QUOTE(#6):
I'm glad they are in the minority and mostly among powerless fans.
I use the word 'fans' while scratching my head in honest bewildermint.
Delany is dillweed, good for pickles, duck eggs, some potato dishes, and little more.
QUOTE:
At first I was turned off by this year's bowl selections and the way in which the BCS champ contestants were "determined" ... but now that I've had a chance to ponder things and take in all the discontent I have to admit ... I think this is the best thing to happen to college football since the BCS was created. Don't get me wrong - I think the bowl match-ups stink with only a handful of games interesting enough or compelling enough for me to watch, not to mention the controversy surrounding the been-there-done-that BCS champ game selection.AT LAST! It appears the events of this year have served to create a perfect storm of dissatisfaction, including the coaches and sportswriters, which hopefully will propel all parties towards real discussions concerning CFB playoffs ... or at least a Plus 1. So in this regard I think what happened this year is the best thing to happen to college football since the BCS was created.Your thoughts?
Just drink the SEC cool-aid and everything will be better. It is so much easier than being a rational CFB fan. There is no debate on who should be in the National title game, just pick the two best SEC teams. It does not matter if they already played each other and one team did not even win its division.
Have a sip and chant SEC SEC SEC! then all your problems will go away.
Total Comments (14428)
QUOTE(#5):
In principle a +1 doubles the number of contenders that have a shot. That can't be bad. But it would still rely on the unreliable polls and in years like 2008 when there are more than 4 teams with essentially the same credentials, the same ugly arguments would arise, only worse because there would be a stronger illusion that the winner was a true champ despite someone getting left out. It's rare (maybe never) when one conference champ like this year's LSU can say they beat 2 other conference champs during the regular season. With a dearth of meaningful ooc games, each of the conference champs usually gets to the end of the regular season having been tested only in their own conference by a schedule completely different from the other champs. We then leave it to the polls to handicap the field for bowl season by whatever criteria the voters wish to use. The results of bowls, however, show how a significant percentage of the conclusions by pollsters were wrong. Just look at the changes in the polls before and after bowl season. My concern is that with a +1, these unreliable and faulty polls become even more important. The selling point behind the +1 reminds me of the original selling point in support of the BCS 15 years ago... to identify which is really the best team. I think in most years the +1 will bring about more consensus, which is a good thing. But there will still be an element of exclusivity with guidance by perceptions and opinions. I can't help thinking we should be careful what we ask for... because we may get it.
Unreliable polls: Who gets it right? Coaches, Computers, former players, and Sportswriters.
Coaches watch less college football than my 3 yr old (except for the teams in their conference) and have their SIDs vote for them
Computers are only as good as their programers and few programers that have the skill to rank something as complex as college football fully understand the game and how to weight the importance of each variable vs other data
Former players- while biased to their school and conference, understand football a lot better than the average person and do have the time to watch CFB
Sportswriters-It is their job to watch sports and report what the see, so they have the opportunity to watch a lot of CFB but they have varying degrees of knowledge of the game and are full of hot air. After all their job is to sell papers or websites by calling attention to themselves, not to gather knowledge.
Total Comments (14428)
Hey Dr. B **** maybe we can now get the Big 12, Big 10, and Pac 12 to agree to a playoff system which the SEC proposed in 2008. :)
Total Comments (9815)
QUOTE(#5):
In principle a +1 doubles the number of contenders that have a shot. That can't be bad. But it would still rely on the unreliable polls and in years like 2008 when there are more than 4 teams with essentially the same credentials, the same ugly arguments would arise, only worse because there would be a stronger illusion that the winner was a true champ despite someone getting left out. It's rare (maybe never) when one conference champ like this year's LSU can say they beat 2 other conference champs during the regular season. With a dearth of meaningful ooc games, each of the conference champs usually gets to the end of the regular season having been tested only in their own conference by a schedule completely different from the other champs. We then leave it to the polls to handicap the field for bowl season by whatever criteria the voters wish to use. The results of bowls, however, show how a significant percentage of the conclusions by pollsters were wrong. Just look at the changes in the polls before and after bowl season. My concern is that with a +1, these unreliable and faulty polls become even more important. The selling point behind the +1 reminds me of the original selling point in support of the BCS 15 years ago... to identify which is really the best team. I think in most years the +1 will bring about more consensus, which is a good thing. But there will still be an element of exclusivity with guidance by perceptions and opinions. I can't help thinking we should be careful what we ask for... because we may get it.
I'll draw a graph. Amount of concern fans have for teams left out of a 'n' team selection process.
n | Injustice for those screwed
1 | ******************************************
2 | ***************************************
4 | **********
8 | ***
16| *
Results are scientific and to scale.
QUOTE(#13):
Hey Dr. B **** maybe we can now get the Big 12, Big 10, and Pac 12 to agree to a playoff system which the SEC proposed in 2008. :)
... and if P12 and B1G don't want a Plus 1 because of their traditional tie-in to the Rose Bowl ... the SEC ACC BigEast and Big 12 should just move on. We can always find another stadium/bowl to elevate to tier 1 status and hold our championship tournament for a couple of years. The P12 & B1G will come around eventually because Larry Scott is not stupid (I'm not sure about Darth Delaney though).
'J' comes before 'K' (I should know), and 'D'... Well 'D' never really has been a grade to advance one to the next level.
QUOTE(#3):
About the only post-season game I'll have even a smidgen of interest in will be the Gator Bowl, and the matchup between UF and tOSU will be a comparative sideshow to the Urban Meyer trauma drama that the media is brewing up.
Think anyone will score in that game HM?
Total Comments (17892)
QUOTE(#10):
Delany is dillweed, good for pickles, duck eggs, some potato dishes, and little more.
TM, I admire your creativity in selecting words/analogies. I think Delaney is one of the most arrogant people around but I could never voice it as well as you! Well done sir.
Total Comments (17892)
QUOTE(#15):
... and if P12 and B1G don't want a Plus 1 because of their traditional tie-in to the Rose Bowl ... the SEC ACC BigEast and Big 12 should just move on. We can always find another stadium/bowl to elevate to tier 1 status and hold our championship tournament for a couple of years. The P12 & B1G will come around eventually because Larry Scott is not stupid (I'm not sure about Darth Delaney though).
It censored part of your name, lol.
Total Comments (9815)
QUOTE(#19):
It censored part of your name, lol.
I might have accidentally put it as a D instead of a G which would make sense (somewhat) for a censoring.
Total Comments (9815)
Comment
Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.
Truth & Rumors
MOST POPULAR
-
1
Stunned Cavs open to dealing top pick
- Views
- 6109
- Comments
- 1484
-
2
Duquette's luck running out
- Views
- 2632
- Comments
- 515
-
3
Namath: Jets wasted Smith pick
- Views
- 29699
- Comments
- 95
-
4
Rangers fear 'huge' loss on D
- Views
- 7403
- Comments
- 83
-
5
LeBron knows Indy can beat the Heat
- Views
- 2338
- Comments
- 61
Kate Bock
Kate Upton
LEGO in Sports
Celebrities at the NHL Playoffs
TM & © 2013 Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
FanNation.com is part of Sports Illustrated Sites
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines, your California privacy rights, and ad choices
