I, for one, am tired of the bias in the human polls in favor of G5 schools. I don't know if that bias is an attempt at political correctness or if it results from there not being a separate poll for G5 schools to measure which ones are the contenders for the NY6 slot. Maybe that could be fixed by not giving the G5 an autobid. Make them earn it.

(11-01-2018 01:02 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 09:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 09:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 09:02 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  UCF last year isn't strictly relevant.

A G5 team can make. UCF just isn't as compelling as many would like to make them out to be.

Like Ive said before--every P5 plays 8 or more P5 schools and every G5 is stuck playing at least 8 G5 schools. Thus, no G5 will ever get much past #66 in SOS. UCF was #72 last year---so, a G5 isnt ever going to do significantly better with respect to SOS. Finishing undefeated against the #72 schedule didnt even get them into the top 10.

Basically, if your going to eliminate schools based strictly on schedule, the G5 is toast. No chance. Its a flawed methodology--but the G5 has zero power to change it. It is what it is. I'll admit--it was always going to be extremely difficult to judge between the top of the G5 and the top of the P5. They play few crossover games and have vastly different schedules. That said, the Committee basically doesnt even try. They have chosen to simply dismiss the G5 as across the board "unworthy" and used SOS as the standard excuse. They throw in a couple of token G5 picks---always well out of the playoff picture striking range---and call it a day. Its either lazy--or flat out dishomest---either way---its a flawed methodology....and people are starting to notice.

It may seem harsh but it is less about a flawed system and more of a reflection of a very real difference.

There’s a very real difference between the competitiveness of the average P5 team and the competitiveness of the average G5 team. That’s indisputable.

But it’s also irrelevant. The rightful purpose of an FBS-level playoff is not to crown the best team from the stronger FBS conferences as national champion. Its purpose is to crown the best team from all of the FBS conferences as national champion.

To fulfill that purpose, in years when the G5 is able to field a team that can compete head-to-head with the P5 elite — as it has in the past with TCU and Utah, and last year with UCF — there has to be a realistic opportunity for that team to qualify for the playoff. A system that consistently excludes such a team from playoff participation based on the strength of its opponents without regard to its own strength is fundamentally flawed IMHO.

If it's indisputable why are you then basing your final opinion on rejecting it?

We agree on the purpose of the playoff.

In truth, that's a syllogism right there. How are you reaching that conclusion logically?

(11-01-2018 06:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 04:58 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 08:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 06:25 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 06:13 PM)Hilltop75 Wrote:  When they got rid of the BCS they touted in the playoff any team that was FBS can make the championship. The make up of the committee should have the same % as P5 vs G5 . I am not sure they have 1 G5 member

UCF goes undefeated 2 years and doesn't even get ranked in the top 10.

Why do you G5 guys keep yammering about what UCF did *last year* when this is about the playoffs *this year*?

I mean, last year, the Houston Rockets had the best record in the NBA. Right now, they are off to a 1-5 start. Should they get to count last year's W-L record to boost their place in the conference standings this year? How dumb is that?

Worst of all, you folks never mention anyone else getting to invoke last year. If UCF gets to count last year's achievements towards this year's playoffs, then surely Georgia should get to count last year's SEC title and Rose Bowl win this year, and Ohio State should get to count last year's B1G title and Cotton Bowl win too right?

No, only UCF does.

The Committe has a 4-3 team in the top 25. I mean---how does that even happen? lol....With only 4 wins they may not even make a bowl (well, they probably will with Kansas and an FCS still on the schedule). Yet---the Committee has multiple 7 and 8 win one-loss teams unranked. I mean----C'mon---a little common sense please. That team is not a viable top 25 team and wont be there at seasons end. Its just dumb to have them there.

They ranked that 4-3 team so that they could justify Bama record. They would be the only ranked win that they have so far this season.

That might make sense, except that Iowa State isn't on Alabama's schedule. Good Grief.

As for Iowa State being ranked #24, they deserve to be. They have already played three ranked teams and beat WVU. No AAC team has a win as good.

And remember, since AAC fans like "last year" so much, a pitiful 7-5 Iowa State team that finished 7th in the Big 12 went to Memphis and beat a Memphis team in the Liberty Bowl that shouldn't have been ranked but was, because the committee was dumb enough to give them credit for going 10-2 against a patsy AAC schedule.

They were far from pitiful. 8-5 team with 2 T5 and 3 T20 victories. Losses by 1, 3, 4, 7, & 10 to Texas/WVU/Iowa/KSU/OkSt.

Last year’s Cyclones were probably a top 25 caliber team.

(11-01-2018 07:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  I, for one, am tired of the bias in the human polls in favor of G5 schools.

Uh, examples please?

(11-01-2018 07:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  Maybe that could be fixed by not giving the G5 an autobid. Make them earn it.

65 schools compete for one bid, another 65 schools compete for the other 11 (effectively). That's a 1.5% chance for a G5 team to make the NY6 versus a 17% chance for a P5 team to make the NY6. If that's not earning it idk what else could be done.

(11-01-2018 09:50 AM)McKinney Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 07:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  I, for one, am tired of the bias in the human polls in favor of G5 schools.

Uh, examples please?

(11-01-2018 07:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  Maybe that could be fixed by not giving the G5 an autobid. Make them earn it.

65 schools compete for one bid, another 65 schools compete for the other 11 (effectively). That's a 1.5% chance for a G5 team to make the NY6 versus a 17% chance for a P5 team to make the NY6. If that's not earning it idk what else could be done.

What’s the G5’s record in those bowls? That should show who’s earning it on the field and who’s getting a free ride.

(10-31-2018 09:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 09:02 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  UCF last year isn't strictly relevant.

A G5 team can make. UCF just isn't as compelling as many would like to make them out to be.

Like Ive said before--every P5 plays 8 or more P5 schools and every G5 is stuck playing at least 8 G5 schools. Thus, no G5 will ever get much past #66 in SOS. UCF was #72 last year---so, a G5 isnt ever going to do significantly better with respect to SOS. Finishing undefeated against the #72 schedule didnt even get them into the top 10.

Basically, if your going to eliminate schools based strictly on schedule, the G5 is toast.

Nobody is eliminated "strictly" on schedule. In fact, the vast bulk of teams are eliminated on wins and losses. No matter how tough your schedule, if you lose one game your chances of making the playoffs are greatly imperiled and if you lose two you are toast. Not fair, because depending on schedule a team with 3-4 losses could easily be better than a team with 0-1 losses, but that bias towards W-L is there, is what it is.

(10-31-2018 10:20 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  Still, Hilltop75 does have some valid points.

The one point he and "Attack" make that I agree with is that the CFP committee should be balanced in terms of membership from all 10 conferences, it should not be 'stacked' in favor of the P5 as it currently is.

Not that this would matter in terms of who is selected, but it does matter from a perception standpoint.

(11-01-2018 09:57 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 09:50 AM)McKinney Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 07:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  I, for one, am tired of the bias in the human polls in favor of G5 schools.

Uh, examples please?

(11-01-2018 07:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  Maybe that could be fixed by not giving the G5 an autobid. Make them earn it.

65 schools compete for one bid, another 65 schools compete for the other 11 (effectively). That's a 1.5% chance for a G5 team to make the NY6 versus a 17% chance for a P5 team to make the NY6. If that's not earning it idk what else could be done.

What’s the G5’s record in those bowls? That should show who’s earning it on the field and who’s getting a free ride.

I guess it's the Big XII that's getting the free ride.

(11-01-2018 10:15 AM)McKinney Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 09:57 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 09:50 AM)McKinney Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 07:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  I, for one, am tired of the bias in the human polls in favor of G5 schools.

Uh, examples please?

(11-01-2018 07:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  Maybe that could be fixed by not giving the G5 an autobid. Make them earn it.

65 schools compete for one bid, another 65 schools compete for the other 11 (effectively). That's a 1.5% chance for a G5 team to make the NY6 versus a 17% chance for a P5 team to make the NY6. If that's not earning it idk what else could be done.

What’s the G5’s record in those bowls? That should show who’s earning it on the field and who’s getting a free ride.

Code:

        Wins    Loss    Pct
G5          3    1    0.750
B1G         8    5    0.615
ACC         5    5    0.500
SEC         6    7    0.462
Pac-12      3    5    0.375
Big XII     2    4    0.333
Indy        0    1    0.000

I guess it's the Big XII that's getting the free ride.

I think the SEC's record is instructive. IIRC, the SEC is 6-3 in playoff games, or 5-2 if you throw out the game between Alabama and Georgia as that was a forced-outcome situation.

That means the SEC is what, 1-5 in the other NY6 games?

That speaks to motivation. The SEC is really good in the the games linked to winning the title, less so in the "for show" games.

The G5 schools have not played in any playoff games, but typically view the NY6 game as their "super bowl", are hyped-up about it, while their P5 opponent is usually in the dumps because they missed the playoffs.

What happened last year IS relevant. If you have a habit of being a good team in previous years you are going to be ranked higher in the first poll, because there is not enough information to go by halfway through the season. Teams that are regularly good are going to get the benefit of the doubt. If they're P5 anyway.

Too bad UCF, Houston, Cincy & ??? couldn't join the Big 12.

(11-01-2018 10:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 10:15 AM)McKinney Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 09:57 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 09:50 AM)McKinney Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 07:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  I, for one, am tired of the bias in the human polls in favor of G5 schools.

Uh, examples please?

(11-01-2018 07:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  Maybe that could be fixed by not giving the G5 an autobid. Make them earn it.

65 schools compete for one bid, another 65 schools compete for the other 11 (effectively). That's a 1.5% chance for a G5 team to make the NY6 versus a 17% chance for a P5 team to make the NY6. If that's not earning it idk what else could be done.

What’s the G5’s record in those bowls? That should show who’s earning it on the field and who’s getting a free ride.

Code:

        Wins    Loss    Pct
G5          3    1    0.750
B1G         8    5    0.615
ACC         5    5    0.500
SEC         6    7    0.462
Pac-12      3    5    0.375
Big XII     2    4    0.333
Indy        0    1    0.000

I guess it's the Big XII that's getting the free ride.

I think the SEC's record is instructive. IIRC, the SEC is 6-3 in playoff games, or 5-2 if you throw out the game between Alabama and Georgia as that was a forced-outcome situation.

That means the SEC is what, 1-5 in the other NY6 games?

That speaks to motivation. The SEC is really good in the the games linked to winning the title, less so in the "for show" games.

The G5 schools have not played in any playoff games, but typically view the NY6 game as their "super bowl", are hyped-up about it, while their P5 opponent is usually in the dumps because they missed the playoffs.

It could speak to motivation. Or it could speak to Alabama being really good and the rest of the SEC not quite as good as perceived.

(11-01-2018 10:20 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  What happened last year IS relevant. If you have a habit of being a good team in previous years you are going to be ranked higher in the first poll, because there is not enough information to go by halfway through the season. Teams that are regularly good are going to get the benefit of the doubt. If they're P5 anyway.

No question, the polls always factor in what was done last year. So do the computers, like Sagarin, for the same reason.

But the CFP starts on 10/30 for a reason, namely that last year shouldn't count, as we are talking about this year's playoffs, not last year's.

(11-01-2018 10:46 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 10:20 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  What happened last year IS relevant. If you have a habit of being a good team in previous years you are going to be ranked higher in the first poll, because there is not enough information to go by halfway through the season. Teams that are regularly good are going to get the benefit of the doubt. If they're P5 anyway.

No question, the polls always factor in what was done last year. So do the computers, like Sagarin, for the same reason.

But the CFP starts on 10/30 for a reason, namely that last year shouldn't count, as we are talking about this year's playoffs, not last year's.

The computers can exclude prior years if they're programmed that way, but I don't think humans will exclude them, consciously or subconsciously. I also don't think there's enough data to go by with 8 games, of which 4 (or 5) are against conference foes.

(11-01-2018 10:09 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 09:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 09:02 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  UCF last year isn't strictly relevant.

A G5 team can make. UCF just isn't as compelling as many would like to make them out to be.

Like Ive said before--every P5 plays 8 or more P5 schools and every G5 is stuck playing at least 8 G5 schools. Thus, no G5 will ever get much past #66 in SOS. UCF was #72 last year---so, a G5 isnt ever going to do significantly better with respect to SOS. Finishing undefeated against the #72 schedule didnt even get them into the top 10.

Basically, if your going to eliminate schools based strictly on schedule, the G5 is toast.

Nobody is eliminated "strictly" on schedule. In fact, the vast bulk of teams are eliminated on wins and losses. No matter how tough your schedule, if you lose one game your chances of making the playoffs are greatly imperiled and if you lose two you are toast. Not fair, because depending on schedule a team with 3-4 losses could easily be better than a team with 0-1 losses, but that bias towards W-L is there, is what it is.

Huh?? Your talking pure gibberish at this point. Every G5 is eliminated strictly on schedule. There are literally a ton of unranked 1-loss G5 schools. The ENTIRE case for them not being ranked is SOS. One undefeated G5 is ranked way back a #12 and one single 1-loss G5 is ranked (at #23). The rest are unranked---totally based on SOS.

(11-01-2018 09:50 AM)McKinney Wrote:  [quote='ken d' pid='15624605' dateline='1541076548']
I, for one, am tired of the bias in the human polls in favor of G5 schools.

Uh, examples please?

[quote='ken d' pid='15624605' dateline='1541076548']

Numerous.

This year alone UCF is overrated at #9. The average of their Massey Composite and Sagarin ratings stands at #22.

Houston: AP #17, Massey/Sagarin #39

Both USF and Cincinnati were grossly overrated until they were exposed by unranked teams just because they hadn't yet lost to anyone on their weak schedules.

Sunbelt teams that get ranked at all.

Let me get this logic straight:

ND beats #5 team.
LSU beats #6 team. LSU has a loss.
LSU ranked higher than ND.

(11-01-2018 09:24 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 01:02 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 09:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 09:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-31-2018 09:02 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  UCF last year isn't strictly relevant.

A G5 team can make. UCF just isn't as compelling as many would like to make them out to be.

Like Ive said before--every P5 plays 8 or more P5 schools and every G5 is stuck playing at least 8 G5 schools. Thus, no G5 will ever get much past #66 in SOS. UCF was #72 last year---so, a G5 isnt ever going to do significantly better with respect to SOS. Finishing undefeated against the #72 schedule didnt even get them into the top 10.

Basically, if your going to eliminate schools based strictly on schedule, the G5 is toast. No chance. Its a flawed methodology--but the G5 has zero power to change it. It is what it is. I'll admit--it was always going to be extremely difficult to judge between the top of the G5 and the top of the P5. They play few crossover games and have vastly different schedules. That said, the Committee basically doesnt even try. They have chosen to simply dismiss the G5 as across the board "unworthy" and used SOS as the standard excuse. They throw in a couple of token G5 picks---always well out of the playoff picture striking range---and call it a day. Its either lazy--or flat out dishomest---either way---its a flawed methodology....and people are starting to notice.

It may seem harsh but it is less about a flawed system and more of a reflection of a very real difference.

There’s a very real difference between the competitiveness of the average P5 team and the competitiveness of the average G5 team. That’s indisputable.

But it’s also irrelevant. The rightful purpose of an FBS-level playoff is not to crown the best team from the stronger FBS conferences as national champion. Its purpose is to crown the best team from all of the FBS conferences as national champion.

To fulfill that purpose, in years when the G5 is able to field a team that can compete head-to-head with the P5 elite — as it has in the past with TCU and Utah, and last year with UCF — there has to be a realistic opportunity for that team to qualify for the playoff. A system that consistently excludes such a team from playoff participation based on the strength of its opponents without regard to its own strength is fundamentally flawed IMHO.

If it's indisputable why are you then basing your final opinion on rejecting it?

We agree on the purpose of the playoff.

In truth, that's a syllogism right there. How are you reaching that conclusion logically?

I don't want to answer for him but he said that the difference of the "average" G5 to P5 is indisputable. That doesn't preclude an individual G5 team from being among the top of the nation, as was shown last year.

IMO, there's two solutions. The easy way and the hard way. The easy way is to expand the playoffs and provide access to all FBS teams. The hard way is to force the P5 to play G5 more often during the regular season.

(11-01-2018 12:20 PM)ken d Wrote:  [quote='McKinney' pid='15624892' dateline='1541083808']
[quote='ken d' pid='15624605' dateline='1541076548']
I, for one, am tired of the bias in the human polls in favor of G5 schools.

Uh, examples please?

(11-01-2018 07:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  Numerous.

This year alone UCF is overrated at #9. The average of their Massey Composite and Sagarin ratings stands at #22.

Houston: AP #17, Massey/Sagarin #39

Both USF and Cincinnati were grossly overrated until they were exposed by unranked teams just because they hadn't yet lost to anyone on their weak schedules.

Sunbelt teams that get ranked at all.

Virginia Tech was ranked too. Hindsight's 20/20.

(11-01-2018 12:25 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  IMO, there's two solutions. The easy way and the hard way. The easy way is to expand the playoffs and provide access to all FBS teams. The hard way is to force the P5 to play G5 more often during the regular season.

Or both.

Or the extra hard way: Amazon takes its 32 golden children.