-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter ScriptOhio
- Start date
CincyInterloper
Hall of Fame
I’d just like to thank Florida, Oklahoma, and Kansas for taking care of business yesterday. I don’t see any three loss teams getting in, although I am often proven wrong in such things.
Upvote
0
This is going to be the real bias test. Ole Miss and Bama should both free fall but I’m guessing neither falls as much as they really should. They’ll be right on the outside looking in
Upvote
0
LovelandBuckeye
You never lose to those pricks. Ever. Ever. - UFM
Casual fans are the worst.
Upvote
0
The NIL teams take time to gel? Lol that’s the stupidest reason to want a 24 team or whatever playoff. It also makes no sense. A&M is a NIL team and they just lost to a 4-6 team to take their 3rd loss in November.
Upvote
0
While the chaos in the SEC helps Indiana's case, it is a shame that they actually need help. If people could wrench themselves out of their preconceived biases, they might be able to see that this is a legit team. Are they made up of 3 stars? Sure. But they are 3 stars that proved they could play. There are plenty of former 3 stars (and below) in the NFL.
One way of cutting through the bias is to look just at the losses incurred by each 1-loss team.
There are 3 criteria. The first criterion is, "who did you lose to?" Not "what is my impression of who you lost to". No, that still leaves too much room for bias. Let's keep it simple. How many losses does the team that beat you have?
The second criterion is, How many points did you lose by?
The third is, Where did you play?
Looking at it this way does not produce a final ranking. I am not arguing that it should, because I'm not insane (ok, maybe insane-adjacent). This is just a tool. It's a data point. First, take a look at it with the names covered up and see if you agree with the rankings (there is still plenty of room for subjectivity. For example, does a 23 point loss to a 1-loss team on the road look better than a 15 point loss to a 2-loss team at home? I think it does; make your own determination).
Here is the table with the names included:
One way of cutting through the bias is to look just at the losses incurred by each 1-loss team.
There are 3 criteria. The first criterion is, "who did you lose to?" Not "what is my impression of who you lost to". No, that still leaves too much room for bias. Let's keep it simple. How many losses does the team that beat you have?
The second criterion is, How many points did you lose by?
The third is, Where did you play?
Looking at it this way does not produce a final ranking. I am not arguing that it should, because I'm not insane (ok, maybe insane-adjacent). This is just a tool. It's a data point. First, take a look at it with the names covered up and see if you agree with the rankings (there is still plenty of room for subjectivity. For example, does a 23 point loss to a 1-loss team on the road look better than a 15 point loss to a 2-loss team at home? I think it does; make your own determination).
Here is the table with the names included:
Upvote
0
CincyInterloper
Hall of Fame
I think this is a pretty good metric to consider. Personally, I’d include the top six and leave out the bottom three. I consider a blowout loss to someone outside the top five and losses to teams with four or more losses to be “bad” losses. Bad losses are hard to overlook. Teams E and F’s losses are concerning, but I don’t think they are necessarily disqualifying depending on who else is available to put in the playoffs.
Upvote
0
The committee isn’t interested in good or reasonable metrics they are only interested in the metrics that support the teams they really want in the given season.
Upvote
0
I like how Indiana losing on the road to the #2 team “proves they don’t belong”
But Tennessee definitely belongs with 2 losses, one being to a 6-5 Arkansas team that lost to 3-8 Oklahoma State.
Upvote
0
You’ll get the same people arguing Clemson belongs too. They got blown out by the only good team they played and lost by 2 scores at home to Louisville.
Upvote
0
CincyInterloper
Hall of Fame
The committee’s selection metrics are ratings and advertising dollars. That’s corporate business management 101. The rest is just marketing their selection to the viewers.
Upvote
0
If Georgia beats Ga Tech and loses in the SEC CCG, or loses to Ga Tech and wins the CCG, they’re in with 3 losses.
If Clemson loses to Sakerlina, Syracuse beats Miami in the Carrier Dome, and Clemson beats SMU in the ACC CCG, they’re in with 3 losses.
If aTm beats Texas and then beats Georgia in the CCG, they‘re In with 3 losses.
If Boise State loses, a Big XII CCG winner with 3 losses could get in.
So it’s quite possible.
Upvote
0
My annual reminder that the E in ESPN stands for Entertainment just like the E in WWE.
Unlike WWE, the matches are not fixed. Like WWE, the narratives are written to push the buttons on some very passionate people.
Good guys and bad guys, cheating and fairness...it's storytelling 101 more than business 101. The business part is easy after you master the storytelling and get millions of CFB fans to interact with whatever bullshit you may be able to get your on air personalities to say with a straight face.
Unlike WWE, the matches are not fixed. Like WWE, the narratives are written to push the buttons on some very passionate people.
Good guys and bad guys, cheating and fairness...it's storytelling 101 more than business 101. The business part is easy after you master the storytelling and get millions of CFB fans to interact with whatever bullshit you may be able to get your on air personalities to say with a straight face.
Upvote
0