|
Replies: 44
| visibility 1
|
Senior Writer [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7139
Joined: 2/4/09
|
Playoff committee/movement/new details
Dec 9, 2014, 12:01 PM
|
|
Ok, it appears the story from yesterday about the movement costing the ACC and Clemson money caused quite a stir on the boards. I can't answer all of the emails I received - no time - but some further digging has turned up some new info I wanted to pass along. I have a good friend that covered the entire process for the media, and I have some insight into what actually happened with Miss. St. jumping Michigan St. in the final rankings. Once it was explained to me, it made a little more sense. So here goes, and I am hearing this will be the answer once members of the committee are asked about what happened.
The committee grouped teams - and they ranked them in groups of six or four or two or whatever and kind of put their poll together in groups like that. The week prior - Miss. St., Michigan St., Kansas St. and Arizona were all grouped together. Arizona and Kansas St. both lost and dropped out of that group. So they slide the teams up and it's Michigan St. and Miss. St. together, and when they looked at the two of them they saw Miss. St. had four wins they considered quality wins and they were 2-2 against the Top 25. Michigan St. was 0-2 against the Top 25, including a home loss. Michigan St.'s wins over teams over .500 were Nebraska, Maryland and Rutgers. So in the final rankings Michigan St. fell out of the final group with Miss. St. Once the season was done and they looked at quality wins it made a difference in the final rankings. And again, I get this from someone who had knowledge of everything that went on in the room. They didn't necessarily look at the teams (Miss St vs Mich St) the week before, but when the final rankings were put together. So there is what I know.....and she told me that she knew for a fact that DRad had Michigan St still ahead of Miss St. at the end, but the committee speaks. So there ya go.
|
|
|
|
 |
All-In [36450]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18324
Joined: 12/6/13
|
That makes more sense.
Dec 9, 2014, 12:06 PM
|
|
But we still got screwed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [751]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 945
Joined: 11/17/14
|
Re: That makes more sense.
Dec 9, 2014, 1:46 PM
|
|
Not being sarcastic here, I apologize to D Rad for my negative post calling him a greasy, used car salesman.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83625]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63724
Joined: 12/31/06
|
jeez, David....
Dec 9, 2014, 12:06 PM
|
|
That's a lot more boring than the scandal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64590]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88995
Joined: 3/27/01
|
That may be the rational they use but....
Dec 9, 2014, 12:09 PM
|
|
if it looks like bull*** and smells like bull****, it's probably bull****.
Mississippi State lost two of its last three games.
There is no justifiable explanation for them to move up three spots in the poll.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3909]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7986
Joined: 11/30/98
|
When lumped w/ 3 folks...they are 3rd.
Dec 9, 2014, 12:10 PM
|
|
When only 2 are considered, then they are 1st.
come on man, logic!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12539]
TigerPulse: 86%
Posts: 12247
Joined: 11/21/11
|
That is absolutely insane. And it just happened to work out
Dec 9, 2014, 12:10 PM
|
|
to benefit the SEC and BigTen the most. That doesn't make more sense to me. That makes me feel worse about the whole process. Corrupt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4444]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3616
Joined: 5/16/01
|
I agree!***
Dec 9, 2014, 2:31 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [415]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 232
Joined: 8/16/13
|
Re: Playoff committee/movement/new details
Dec 9, 2014, 12:12 PM
|
|
I don't like this at all. Miss St & Mich St. had the same wins & losses the week before, when Mich St. was ranked ahead. The system is broken if that is how the committee justifies this.
I actually talked to D Rad about this the other day and he couldn't believe how some people were voting. He said it was as if some on the committee never watched a football game EVER. He seemed as frustrated with it as everyone on here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Sounds like the error was in the previous week's ranking.***
Dec 9, 2014, 12:14 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64590]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88995
Joined: 3/27/01
|
Aren't they supposed to start with a clean slate each week?***
Dec 9, 2014, 12:15 PM
|
|
null
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Yes, and that's the reason why you saw this "jump".
Dec 9, 2014, 12:19 PM
|
|
Which isn't really a "jump," because the previous week's rankings should be ignored.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64590]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88995
Joined: 3/27/01
|
So losing 2 of 3 justifies a three spot jump in the poll
Dec 9, 2014, 12:22 PM
|
|
as long as you have a bye week the final week of the season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I think the point was they had them too low to begin with
Dec 9, 2014, 12:23 PM
|
|
and when faced with it, saw a need to correct it.
It's hard to argue with what is presented by David here. Miss St. does have a better resume.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64590]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88995
Joined: 3/27/01
|
That's totally contrary to conventional wisdom***
Dec 9, 2014, 12:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Which part? Miss St. having a better resume?
Dec 9, 2014, 12:30 PM
|
|
Or the committee "correcting" themselves?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
If Clemson had Miss St.'s resume, would you think
Dec 9, 2014, 12:32 PM
|
|
they should be higher than Michigan St., whose best wins are against Nebraska and Maryland?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [105574]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44178
Joined: 12/22/08
|
If they're truly into comparing resumes and who has the
Dec 9, 2014, 12:44 PM
|
|
better wins, with the downgrading of Michigan State, then why did Ohio State jump TCU and Baylor?
Out of those three, who has the best wins, and who has the worst loss?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I think it's very difficult to distinguish the three...
Dec 9, 2014, 12:51 PM
|
|
Ohio St. had the worst loss of the three, for certain. TCU certainly had the best loss.
I would rank their wins as follows:
1. Baylor vs. TCU
2. Ohio St. @ Michigan St.
3. Ohio St. vs. Wisconsin (neutral)
4. tie - Baylor and TCU both vs. Kansas St.
6. Baylor @ Oklahoma
7. Ohio St. @ Minnesota
8. TCU vs. Oklahoma
9. TCU @ West Virginia
10. Ohio St. vs. Cincinnati
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Forgot TCU vs. Minnesota, which would go in
Dec 9, 2014, 12:52 PM
|
|
around #10 there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Forgot TCU vs. Minnesota, which would go in
Dec 9, 2014, 12:59 PM
|
|
You just made yourself look like a fool. Ohio St. win over Minnesota is #7, But TCU's is #10???? Ohio St. beat minn by 7, TCU beat them 30-7.
And how the hell is a win over minnesota below Oklahoma?
Message was edited by: CUAtTheFinishLine®
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
See the "@"***
Dec 9, 2014, 1:00 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: See the "@"***
Dec 9, 2014, 1:01 PM
|
|
TCU beat them by 23!!! As opposed to Ohio St. 7....How much are you giving for home field advantage? 25?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I didn't look at the scoring margin for this exercise
Dec 9, 2014, 1:02 PM
[ in reply to Re: Forgot TCU vs. Minnesota, which would go in ] |
|
but if I did, Ohio St. would probably have #1 and #2, the 59-point win over Wisconsin, and a 12-point win at Michigan St.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Baylor at Oklahoma would be up there as well, 48-14.***
Dec 9, 2014, 1:04 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [105574]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44178
Joined: 12/22/08
|
So OSU at Minnesota is #7 but TCU vs Minn is 10?
Dec 9, 2014, 1:02 PM
[ in reply to Forgot TCU vs. Minnesota, which would go in ] |
|
Minnesota was overrated in my opinion, especially since their only two "quality wins" were to Nebraska and Iowa, both at home.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13038]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22360
Joined: 4/24/04
|
Not sure losing 2 of 3 really matters. It doesn't factor in
Dec 9, 2014, 1:54 PM
[ in reply to So losing 2 of 3 justifies a three spot jump in the poll ] |
|
when comparing full resumes and while human nature tends to consider trends that suggest teams playing better or worse later in the year, in Mississippi State's case it was more a product of having a backloaded schedule than then not playing well. I think it's likely they would've lost those two games (especially @Bama) no matter where they were on the schedule.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [371]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 340
Joined: 11/9/14
|
Re: Yes, and that's the reason why you saw this "jump".
Dec 9, 2014, 12:25 PM
[ in reply to Yes, and that's the reason why you saw this "jump". ] |
|
Your correct. Its just like TCU falling from 3rd to 6th. Once the whole body of work was completed, the slate was cleaned, and they came up with their final rankings. I think they got it right with miss st over Mich st, unfortunately. Miss st had a way better resume than Mich st. I wish that wasn't the case cuz it hurts Clemson, but it is what it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4854]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9113
Joined: 1/15/08
|
Still not proven résumé.
Dec 9, 2014, 12:30 PM
|
|
Media says SEC is the best, BIG is garbage, yet Ohio St jumps TCU. Preseason picked conferences land @ #1 & #2 in the playoff and the ACC continues to get slandered.
B$
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4947]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6981
Joined: 10/12/06
|
Re: I think they probably were influenced by "recency"...
Dec 9, 2014, 1:42 PM
|
|
It should matter if you are trying to put together the best teams in the playoff. Why do you think teams play warm up games to start the year. You don't find out what you have until week 3-4 and if injuries strike and you lose games down the stretch you are no longer the best team available. Look at OSU until the backup showed what he could do no one had them in with a hurt QB.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2609]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6653
Joined: 9/1/11
|
So then why are our losses not quality losses and help
Dec 9, 2014, 12:20 PM
|
|
us move up in the end? We lost to #1 and dropped out earlier!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24777]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42510
Joined: 7/31/10
|
Wrong conference....***
Dec 9, 2014, 12:23 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13038]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22360
Joined: 4/24/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4854]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9113
Joined: 1/15/08
|
So they are saying losing to #2 & #4 is worse
Dec 9, 2014, 12:23 PM
|
|
than losing to #1 & a crippled #9.
For some reason I don't buy that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2563]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4860
Joined: 10/2/08
|
Folks, please don't forget the $EC multiplication factor...
Dec 9, 2014, 12:36 PM
|
|
Do I have to remind you again ?
An $EC win is actually worth 1.5 another conference win.
And an $EC loss is actually counted as .5 another conference win.
You're never gonna get this committee stuff if you don't keep up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15813]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7694
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Thanks David! Glad you are on top of things! I still think
Dec 9, 2014, 12:46 PM
|
|
this system is no better than the BCS. Just take the BCS and use the top 4 teams for the playoff. It seems to me that the CFPC used whatever rational they needed to place the teams where they wanted.
Personally, I think it was a failure and a complete crock-a-crap and if DRad has no sway or pull, let him stay in Clemson and try to help Clemson. Padding his resume does nothing for our University.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93668]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95422
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Re: Playoff committee/movement/new details
Dec 9, 2014, 12:51 PM
|
|
I think it's important to understand none of these people have deal with such as this. They are all feeling their way through this though they had a fairly good plan to begin with.
If there is a mistake it's not matching teams to give everyone a good game to watch. IMO, three to five places in the ranking shouldn't make much difference. If there's a blowout in any of these games the committee will surely see their mistakes and hopefully they will learn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [363]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 953
Joined: 11/14/03
|
Re: Playoff committee/movement/new details
Dec 9, 2014, 12:52 PM
|
|
Thought that might be the case and glad to hear DRad at least had our back in the selection process. Maybe some fans will cut him a break that he is going to have a hard time convincing other members to pick Mich. St. over Miss. St. when you actually look at everything. While it would have been nice to go to the Citrus Bowl it is hard to argue that Mich. State was better than Miss. State if you look at things over the course of the year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2517]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 3835
Joined: 6/21/03
|
While it might make sense???, it shows a lack of consistency
Dec 9, 2014, 12:54 PM
|
|
by the selection committee in how they are making decisions week to week. You can not have two teams, whose wins and loses from the week before did not, flip final rankings because the criteria they were being benchmarked against changed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I don't really dig this "grouping" thing myself.
Dec 9, 2014, 12:57 PM
|
|
Maybe that's the best way to do it because the teams are easier to digest in chunks. But if it causes misses like that, then it should be evaluated as maybe not the best method.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4947]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6981
Joined: 10/12/06
|
Re: I don't really dig this "grouping" thing myself.
Dec 9, 2014, 2:06 PM
|
|
I am fine with the grouping if that's the way they want to do it but do they not have some checks and balances. Does no one go down the rankings and reevaluate after they assign places based on groups. Its not like they put this rankings out on a whim. They have plenty of time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [33]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 44
Joined: 8/30/99
|
Too much power and responsibility
Dec 9, 2014, 1:31 PM
[ in reply to While it might make sense???, it shows a lack of consistency ] |
|
I can see how you can have the committee select 1-4, but for them to manipulate the rankings to get the bowl games that they wanted outside of the playoff is way too much power for them. And the fact that they didn't do their homework in the penultimate poll shows they were in over their heads.
They are admitting that they were clueless the Tuesday before, or they manipulated the rankings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4444]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3616
Joined: 5/16/01
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13360]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9886
Joined: 1/23/06
|
This is explanation is worse than I originally thought...
Dec 9, 2014, 2:16 PM
|
|
When we considered more teams, we determined that miss st wasn't better, but when we looked at just those 2 teams, they were actually the best. What???
Oh it's a rankings thing. You see when you base the conclusion off of preseason and early season rankings that are unjustified and quite honestly we made up, it makes more sense, amIrite???? No, well do you remember that miss St plays in the SEC? That trumps all, we win!
There is no good answer.... NONE!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 44
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
