• 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!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

College Playoff

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Beaver;1689359; said:
It's quite easy to finish in the top-16 with a poor schedule.

PSU not only accomplished this with a terrible schedule, but they did so while losing to the only decent opponents on their schedule.
Click to expand...

Their two losses were to teams that were more than "decent" -- the #5 and #7 teams in the final polls. They also beat a solid LSU team in their bowl game. They finished in the top 16 of the BCS poll (#13) at the end of the regular season because they were 10-2 and had pounded their other six conference opponents. They showed they were a pretty solid team despite not having a strong OOS schedule...their #13 ranking was not unreasonable.
 
Upvote 0
TheRob8801;1689504; said:
Gimme about an hour...I'm gonna work up what the polls would've looked like if this were how they were done last year...
Click to expand...

Okay, the way I was doing it is going to take far longer than an hour.

Does anyone know where I can find statistics such as Opp. W-L record and PF/PA per week for previous seasons?
 
Upvote 0
TheRob8801;1689417; said:
If that's the stance taken, I don't see any reason why the games should've been played in the first place...because the outcomes suggest that OU shouldn't have been there in '03-'04 or '08-'09. If we're going to play an arbitrary national championship game in the first place, why not toss in some extra games that add some legitimacy to final outcomes.
Click to expand...
In the bolded comment, you're taking for granted the primary point of disagreement in this discussion. Playing more games would perhaps "add legitimacy" in some peoples' eyes, but it would not in some other peoples' eyes. And to your earlier point, I personally don't think a championship game blowout necessarily suggests that the team that was blown out didn't belong there. It can just as well mean that, of the top two teams, one was significantly better than the other. And probably it most often means that one of the teams just had an off game. Neither of those things is something that a playoff eliminates, or even particularly reduces the likelihood of. It's not all that unusual to have a championship blowout at the end of a playoff. If anything, a playoff probably slightly increases the chance that a team that "doesn't belong" will be playing in the championship game (subjective, but depending principally on the size of the playoff).
 
Upvote 0
zincfinger;1689774; said:
In the bolded comment, you're taking for granted the primary point of disagreement in this discussion. Playing more games would perhaps "add legitimacy" in some peoples' eyes, but it would not in some other peoples' eyes. And to your earlier point, I personally don't think a championship game blowout necessarily suggests that the team that was blown out didn't belong there. It can just as well mean that, of the top two teams, one was significantly better than the other. And probably it most often means that one of the teams just had an off game. Neither of those things is something that a playoff eliminates, or even particularly reduces the likelihood of. It's not all that unusual to have a championship blowout at the end of a playoff. If anything, a playoff probably slightly increases the chance that a team that "doesn't belong" will be playing in the championship game (subjective, but depending principally on the size of the playoff).
Click to expand...

All that noted, the playoff argument is about the legitimacy of the process, not the outcome. Of course a playoff wouldn't eliminate the opportunity for a team that is "better" on paper to lose...or a team that doesn't play up to their best get blown out by a team on their A game.

A playoff isn't about any individual game, it's about surviving and advancing. That's certainly the mindset of the MBB NCAA Tournament. How or by how much one team defeats the others is inconsequential to whether or not they win the title.

In the current realm of college football, a 3 point victory and a 33 point victory can be the difference between playing for the national championship and playing in a glorified exhibition game at the end of the season. How you win, is just as important as IF you win. That doesn't feel right to me.

If you win the games necessary to put you in the final game, you belong there...no if's, and's or but's about it. Surely there weren't many folks outside of the teams they beat that would suggest that Butler didn't "belong" in the title game.

Once again...it's about the perceived legitimacy of the process not the outcome that's important.
 
Upvote 0
t_BuckeyeScott;1690007; said:
Hate to break it too you, but you're basically trying to accomplish what all the computers try to accomplish.
Click to expand...

Not exactly.

I'm taking out all the extra algorithms involved and going simply by percentages and margins.

All the extra things in the computer poll are there to put a numerical value to style points...that's what I'm trying to isolate and remove.
 
Upvote 0
t_BuckeyeScott;1690110; said:
Style points?

All the computers can do is go wins and losses and schedule strength. There is no margin of victory.
Click to expand...

Are these the same computers you're talking about?

There's far more to their rankings than simply W-L and SOS...the things they take into account such as conference records, home/away performance, the previous year's standings and "same condition final scores" are ancillary to my findings. I feel like those things are simply a numerical (and therefore justifiable :roll2:) method of representing how good a team is "supposed" to be as opposed to simply what they've done on the field...anything more than W-L, SOS, and PF/PA is not about pure on-field performance...




...so right now I'm through 30 teams, so a few more left to go...I'm currently doing all of the teams that had votes in week 7 of last year, assuming that those are going to be all of the FBS teams that would be in the top 25 win% by that time of the year.
 
Upvote 0
TheRob8801;1689900; said:
In the current realm of college football, a 3 point victory and a 33 point victory can be the difference between playing for the national championship and playing in a glorified exhibition game at the end of the season. How you win, is just as important as IF you win. That doesn't feel right to me.
Click to expand...
This is an enormous exaggeration. Arguably, "how you win" has served as an informal tie-breaker in rare cases. "If you win" is by far the most important criterion (again, BCS conferences only, here), followed by "whom you beat". "How you win" is far behind those two, and is probably also behind "preconceived notions" and "when did you lose (if you lost)". And while a playoff would probably diminish the importance of "how you win", it would, by a far greater magnitude, increase the importance of "when did you lose".
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
zincfinger;1690306; said:
And while a playoff would probably diminish the importance of "how you win", it would, by a far greater magnitude, increase the importance of "when did you lose".
Click to expand...

In any playoff scenario, the importance of how you win would only matter during the regular season, and even then it would probably only be important to whatever teams are being considered for those last spots in. Once in the playoffs, it's simply a matter of win or go home. It matters not "how" you win.

...but I don't see how it would increase the importance of "when did you lose", unless you're talking about losing IN the playoffs themselves. Because ideally, the playoff spots would be determined by the entire season's performance, and not how "hot" a team is going into the post-season.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top