|
Replies: 12
| visibility 1,546
|
Hall of Famer [22127]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5026
Joined: 2/25/13
|
The Fallacy of SOS
Nov 20, 2019, 11:31 AM
|
|
I can well understand SOS being a factor in evaluating those teams for the final four but it appears to me it has now become the overriding factor in these evaluations. The many media experts frequently refer to the weak ACC and that Clemson has an easy path to the playoff. A one point win by Clemson over the Tarheels is a bad win while Alabama has a quality loss to LSU. Such logic flies in the face of common sense. Had we lost to the Tarheels and ended the season 12 - 1, we would probably be ranked below eight teams in the SEC and about six from the other conferences. Our ranking would not be based on the strength of our team but on the perception of a week ACC. Perception is an important factor in these evaluations and, unfortunately, allows bias to override the importance of other factors
Now, let's look at the 2018 season. If our record had been 12 - 1, I seriously doubt we would nave been in the final four. But we were, and we proved to the world we were the best team in spite of our being in the "lowly ACC" with an easy schedule. We didn't just defeat Notre Dame and Alabama, we dominated the game. Are there those in the media who would credit Notre Dame and Alabama with a quality loss?
Take a gander at the current situation. With a couple more weeks in the regular season and the conference championship games, there will be some shakeup in the current standings but the jockeying for a favorable spot among several one loss teams is akin to a political war.
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Medallion [67659]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115405
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: The Fallacy of SOS- How to evaluate any team?
Nov 20, 2019, 11:37 AM
|
|
when played them or current ranking? I always struggle w this. Just one example Clemson and Bama both beat A&M. Aggies were highly ranked at the time CU played them but not so much when Bama played them. Are those wins equally rated or differently rated? Each week has these examples.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27363]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31820
Joined: 8/19/03
|
nothing that we can do
Nov 20, 2019, 11:48 AM
|
|
About the schedule that the Tigers have played. Schedules are made years in advance. What the committee needs to realize is that the Tigers would maul 90 per cent of the currently ranked teams if they had played them. The eye test, combined with the statistics should be all that is necessary to validate Clemson’s existence in the top four. If LSU was not a member of the SEC they would not be ranked number one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Team Captain [473]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 529
Joined: 10/30/19
|
Re: The Fallacy of SOS
Nov 20, 2019, 11:56 AM
|
|
We have to remember that there is also an agenda to get the most recognizable names in the playoff. They can fit it to any game they want. While you're specific examples are undoubtedly correct, there are some other instances that directly contradict. Such as, no one is talking about Georgia losing to SC as being a horrible loss. I think that would be a better comparison, simply because LSU technically is a quality loss. No the fact that by their logic here that Georgia is ranked ahead of Oregon (lost to Auburn who hasn't looked good, but has only lost to top 10 teams). I think a lot of it comes down to the team being analyzed (I know, no duh). I guess to sum up my rambling, there is no hard and fast rule, its whatever they want it to be. They will overlook something to promote a bigger brand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26467]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 20616
Joined: 9/2/02
|
Someone in the upper echelon of ESPN
Nov 20, 2019, 12:01 PM
|
|
wants 2 SEC teams in the Playoffs, for whatever reason.
The most likely reason is $$$$, but we don't know who's getting paid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22127]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5026
Joined: 2/25/13
|
Re: Someone in the upper echelon of ESPN
Nov 20, 2019, 12:12 PM
|
|
I believe this to be PERCEPTION once again rearing it's ugly head. The media and SEC proponents lead me to believe that they hold the belief, "the SEC is head and shoulders better than any other conference, hence, they deserve two spots in the playoff".
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27366]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 26233
Joined: 9/19/11
|
The problem is that SOS is not just based on
Nov 20, 2019, 12:02 PM
|
|
records of teams, it's also subjectively based on "the eye test" for since there are very few out of conference games to base rankings on.
Therefore, rankings using SOS are basing their rankings on their rankings, a form of a tautology.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [36207]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21509
Joined: 10/27/03
|
This is a Snowflake, Everyone Gets a Trophy, No One Loses
Nov 20, 2019, 12:04 PM
|
|
Culture that seeks to agendaize competitive events to a prescribed outcome as deemed acceptable by the media pundits.
The true field of competition results are secondary to the narrative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4561]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3140
Joined: 9/4/03
|
Not surprised, just disappointed
Nov 20, 2019, 12:07 PM
|
|
"Those that cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
Recall last year when everyone proclaimed Alabama as the greatest team in the history of college football... right up until Clemson destroyed them by 28 (could've been 35 except for the grace of Dabo).
One would think that the narrative this year would be "The ACC may not be strong, but as we learned last year, Clemson is as Elite as it gets." Logically, people should remember the burn they got from a hot stove, and not put their hand on it again. Yet, we see the same narrative this year, which is illogical.
There are other motivations involved... other than logic. There is an agenda being pushed, being marketed daily. That agenda is to promote the SEC at all costs. One of their methods is to proclaim that the ACC is a bad conference and, therefore, Clemson must also be bad. This presumably helps other conferences like the SEC gain a favorable position to put 2 teams in the CFP. But, it's not just Clemson and the ACC.
How about Oregon/Utah and the PAC 12. Or Oklahoma/Baylor and the Big 12? Media personalities are already dismissing 1-loss PAC 12 and Big 12 conference champions as inferior to 1-loss and 2-loss SEC non-Champions. I expect the noise to get even louder in the coming weeks if Bama and UGA win out and LSU ends up at 12-1. However will the media decide which 2 SEC teams should be in the playoff?
And they will continue to ignore any facts that contradict their narrative. When the ACC has more bowl teams than any other conference, it'll still be considered weak. And they'll continue to say Penn State and Florida are great teams, and in the same breath ridicule Pittsburgh and Miami in the ACC despite losing to PSU and UF by 1 score in very competitive games.
What I am most looking forward to is the CFP and whoever lines up across from our Tigers. I don't know which 2 teams are going to lose to Clemson in the CFP. But I do know they are going to get demolished.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Team Captain [473]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 529
Joined: 10/30/19
|
Re: Not surprised, just disappointed
Nov 20, 2019, 12:12 PM
|
|
I would just put out there. There are a lot of pundits calling Clemson elite at this point. Literally heard the words, the ACC sucks but Clemson is for real yesterday on three different shows. The only reason we aren't ranked higher is because the other two teams have better wins. I guess an argument could be made for Ohio St and Clemson switching spots. But I'm really not seeing the disrespect anymore
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4561]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3140
Joined: 9/4/03
|
Check this out...
Nov 20, 2019, 12:27 PM
|
|
This article on Bleacher Report was published yesterday: https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2863423-college-football-playoff-no-changes-up-top-oklahoma-and-minnesota-still-alive
I want to specifically point out this statement:
"But had the selection committee decided to swap Georgia and Clemson at Nos. 3 and 4, it would have been justifiable, albeit controversial.
Yes, the Bulldogs suffered a brutal home loss to 4-7 South Carolina, but they also have six wins over teams in the ESPN FPI top 40—No. 9 Florida, No. 11 Auburn, No. 14 Notre Dame, No. 27 Missouri, No. 35 Tennessee and No. 40 Kentucky. Clemson's only such victory was a home win over No. 15 Texas A&M more than two months ago.
You should be allowed one misstep when you're traveling the much more treacherous path to the mountain's summit. But it's also almost completely irrelevant in the grand scheme of the playoff picture.
If Georgia loses to LSU in the SEC championship game, it will not finish in the Top Four. Alternatively, if Georgia beats LSU, it's going to bypass Clemson in the end anyway."
Read that last sentence again: "If Georgia beats LSU, it's going to bypass Clemson..."
This guy is literally saying that a 13-0 Clemson team that beat USC will get jumped by a 12-1 Georgia team that LOST AT HOME TO THAT SAME USC TEAM!
Have you ever heard anything more illogical in your life?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4816]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6168
Joined: 9/16/06
|
Some of the herd is starting to stray...
Nov 20, 2019, 12:23 PM
|
|
...and giving Clemson credit for being silent killers that no one wants to play, but those few are quickly being shouted down here in ATL by the SEC cult mob that says stuff like "Clemson will get punched in the mouth by an SEC team and wont know how to respond, AND really stoopid stuff like "it doesnt matter who wins the SEC championship, both teams deserve to be in the playoff".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15787]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7686
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I agree...an 8 team playoff with 5 power conf champs and the
Nov 20, 2019, 12:30 PM
|
|
highest ranked group of 5 conference champion would take the bias out of at least 5/6 spots. Let the media/committees decide the highest ranked group of 5 and 2 at-large and the seeding.
The path to the CFP is crystal clear...win your division, win your conference championship and you are in. For any juan saying this makes the regular season less important, please explain.
Also, I wish the committee would define what the #### a good loss or a bad win is (ugly win I understand)? That's extreme coot-ish/ESecPN-ish media BS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 12
| visibility 1,546
|
|
|
50
