Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Alabama RB says UCF deserved a shot at playoff
Author Message
HeartOfDixie Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,604
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 862
I Root For: Alabama
Location: Huntsville AL
Post: #41
RE: Alabama RB says UCF deserved a shot at playoff
(03-06-2018 12:05 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  Alabama was selected for the playoff 4 spot because of bias.

The only way to get rid of bias in an FBS playoff is for autobids for conference champs.

If you don't like the playoff games, don't watch them. We already don't watch the majority of the bowl games which mean nothing. Banning teams in the division from ever playing for a national championship borders on racketeering. It is criminal.

The committee is supposed to pick the four best teams; they did.
03-06-2018 01:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 26,820
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 594
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #42
RE: Alabama RB says UCF deserved a shot at playoff
(03-06-2018 01:37 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(03-06-2018 01:29 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(03-06-2018 01:24 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(03-06-2018 01:22 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(03-06-2018 12:05 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  Alabama was selected for the playoff 4 spot because of bias.

The only way to get rid of bias in an FBS playoff is for autobids for conference champs.

If you don't like the playoff games, don't watch them. We already don't watch the majority of the bowl games which mean nothing. Banning teams in the division from ever playing for a national championship borders on racketeering. It is criminal.

You act like P5 leagues have auto-bids to the playoffs, but they don't. Nobody does, it's all up to the committee.

The committee has to make the best choices it can given the limits it faces, namely four slots to fill, and the available evidence.

By all accounts, they've done a good job, as their selections comport with the human polls, the computers, everything.

Circular logic.
Computer rankings can influence how poll voters vote. Once the committee votes their released polls can influence the other voters as well and committee is given the computer results in making their votes.

It's not circular. First, the computers aren't influenced by anything but the inputs, the performance numbers.

Poll voters will rely on a variety of sources - games they watch, games they read about, computer rankings, what others are saying about teams, etc. They rely on the available evidence too.

The one idea with no traction is the notion that the CFP determines the AP and coaches polls. For the only CFP vote hat matters, the final one, the AP and Coaches come out first.

There just isn't any ranking system in creation that is going to have Alabama behind Arkansas State, if you believe it's because of 'circular logic' you're deluding yourself.

I have never said Arkansas State should be ranked ahead of Alabama, you want chameleon your arguments all the time to change the terms.

CFP voters get the computer results and see the polls. They vote. When they are using those to vote, it makes no sense to claim the CFP is doing a great job because their polls line up with the data they rely on to vote.

You got pointed out that your argument makes no sense so you create a strawman.

You pointed out nothing. You have zero idea what information committee uses rely on to formulate their opinions. You simply declared that you do, then made the leap that this means the results are 'circular'.

Nonsensical, so I called you on it. 07-coffee3
03-06-2018 01:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goodknightfl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,701
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 228
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #43
RE: Alabama RB says UCF deserved a shot at playoff
SEC gonna hate UCF, Win access bowl over Ranked Au in fb, Win over ranked Al in Al in Basketball. and now beat #1 UF in baseball.
03-07-2018 08:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,548
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 255
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Alabama RB says UCF deserved a shot at playoff
And by next year nobody will remember any of that except UCF fans.

Just the nature of sports
03-07-2018 08:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 21,835
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 636
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Alabama RB says UCF deserved a shot at playoff
(03-06-2018 01:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  You pointed out nothing. You have zero idea what information committee uses rely on to formulate their opinions. You simply declared that you do, then made the leap that this means the results are 'circular'.

Nonsensical, so I called you on it. 07-coffee3

Seriously Quo do you ever read anything or do you just snipe and ignore what is easily known?

But, of course, it's not that simple. There's discussion between each round. Large television monitors placed in front of committee members around the room display data from SportSource Analytics with everything from detailed offensive and defensive stats to various strength of schedule measurements. Teams can be viewed individually or in side-by-side comparisons.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristidosh/...e-works/2/

First, the committee was briefed on the data platform that is used by the College Football Playoff, which allows the committee to compare 2-4 teams at a time by using many different metrics. As a college football computer pollster, strength of schedule always interests me, and the CFP has a variety of ways a voter can look at quality of schedule along with other metrics such as offensive, defensive and special team statistics.
https://www.theathletic.com/113415/2017/...selection/
03-07-2018 10:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 26,820
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 594
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #46
RE: Alabama RB says UCF deserved a shot at playoff
(03-07-2018 10:13 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(03-06-2018 01:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  You pointed out nothing. You have zero idea what information committee uses rely on to formulate their opinions. You simply declared that you do, then made the leap that this means the results are 'circular'.

Nonsensical, so I called you on it. 07-coffee3

Seriously Quo do you ever read anything or do you just snipe and ignore what is easily known?

But, of course, it's not that simple. There's discussion between each round. Large television monitors placed in front of committee members around the room display data from SportSource Analytics with everything from detailed offensive and defensive stats to various strength of schedule measurements. Teams can be viewed individually or in side-by-side comparisons.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristidosh/...e-works/2/

First, the committee was briefed on the data platform that is used by the College Football Playoff, which allows the committee to compare 2-4 teams at a time by using many different metrics. As a college football computer pollster, strength of schedule always interests me, and the CFP has a variety of ways a voter can look at quality of schedule along with other metrics such as offensive, defensive and special team statistics.
https://www.theathletic.com/113415/2017/...selection/

This is so dumb ... do you think that committee members should *avoid* seeing data and statistics on the performance of teams? That they should just go into a zombie/zen state and commune with the universe about who the best teams are to avoid looking at data that so that you wouldn't call their conclusion 'circular'?

I guess when a scientist looks at data to draw a conclusion about something, that means the result is "circular" as well?

I fail to see what your point is. But please, explain. 07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 03-07-2018 10:28 AM by quo vadis.)
03-07-2018 10:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mturn017 Offline
ODU Homer
*

Posts: 6,831
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 431
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Roanoke, VA
Post: #47
RE: Alabama RB says UCF deserved a shot at playoff
(03-07-2018 10:27 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(03-07-2018 10:13 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(03-06-2018 01:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  You pointed out nothing. You have zero idea what information committee uses rely on to formulate their opinions. You simply declared that you do, then made the leap that this means the results are 'circular'.

Nonsensical, so I called you on it. 07-coffee3

Seriously Quo do you ever read anything or do you just snipe and ignore what is easily known?

But, of course, it's not that simple. There's discussion between each round. Large television monitors placed in front of committee members around the room display data from SportSource Analytics with everything from detailed offensive and defensive stats to various strength of schedule measurements. Teams can be viewed individually or in side-by-side comparisons.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristidosh/...e-works/2/

First, the committee was briefed on the data platform that is used by the College Football Playoff, which allows the committee to compare 2-4 teams at a time by using many different metrics. As a college football computer pollster, strength of schedule always interests me, and the CFP has a variety of ways a voter can look at quality of schedule along with other metrics such as offensive, defensive and special team statistics.
https://www.theathletic.com/113415/2017/...selection/

This is so dumb ... do you think that committee members should *avoid* seeing data and statistics on the performance of teams? That they should just go into a zombie/zen state and commune with the universe about who the best teams are to avoid looking at data that so that you wouldn't call their conclusion 'circular'?

I guess when a scientist looks at data to draw a conclusion about something, that means the result is "circular" as well?

I fail to see what your point is. But please, explain. 07-coffee3

It's fine for them to look at metrics to inform their decision. Where logic fails is if they use that info to make their decision you can't point to the same info to show how good of a job they're doing.

Waiter: What would you like tonight?
quo: What do you recommend?
Waiter: The salmon is wonderful.
quo: OK, I'll have that.
Waiter: Excellent choice sir!
quo: (Beams with pride)
03-07-2018 04:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.