»
Topic: New Story: Clemson #21 in playoff rankings; Radakovich discusses his role
Replies: 36   Last Post: Nov 9, 2014 2:05 PM by: Dugatiger®
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 36  

New Story: Clemson #21 in playoff rankings; Radakovich discusses his role


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 12:09 PM
 

 
Clemson #21 in playoff rankings; Radakovich discusses his role

Clemson Athletic Director Dan Radakovich is one of 12 members of the College Football Playoff selection committee, and Clemson debuted at No. 21 in the initial rankings. What does Radakovich say about the job? How many games a week does he watch? Full Story »



They had a chance for a fresh start and they failed. The

[4]
Posted: Oct 29, 2014 12:16 PM
 

playoff committee is no better than the talking heads on SEspnC (Yes that include you Fowler).


Re: They had a chance for a fresh start and they failed. The


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 12:20 PM
 

I agree, for now they have a big goose egg on their scoreboard.

2018 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Can you provide some reasons why you think they failed, and

[1]
Posted: Oct 29, 2014 12:44 PM
 

perhaps let us know who your Top 25 would be? I would be intersted to see how much different yours is from the SEC talking heads and if your picks could be justified.

I hate the SEC, ESPN, and the AP polls, but it's hard to argue with all but 1-2 teams in their first poll. For example, I don't quite understand the Ole Miss pick, but I also recognize that they play Auburn this week and it should iron itself out. What I'm more concerned with is what happens to Ole Miss or Auburn when one of them loses. How far will they fall.

I also must say that it is refreshing to see Ohio St and ND drop. Finally the BIG is exposed and ND is forced to recognize that a weak SOS doesn't hold the weight it used to. Now they may have to join the ACC and that only benefits us.

As for Clemson's ranking, it's hard to argue right now. LSU and WV both beat Top 5 teams at the time, while we stubbed our toe twice with the same opportunity. Oklahoma had two close losses, while Clemson couldn't give 4 qtrs against UGA. And they are still playing good ball, while we are struggling due to injuries. I'd say it's about right, plus they have us ahead of some 1 loss teams which is respectable.


They failed because they regurgitated the same polls & SEC

[2]
Posted: Oct 29, 2014 12:52 PM
 

bias. They do not take into account other conferences. You should have to be the best team in your conference to be in the playoff. Here is my top 6 teams.

1 FSU = The Champ should be the Champ until beaten.
2 Miss St. = I actually think that Bama will be in this slot in the end.
3 Oregon
4 TCU
_______
5 Mich St
6 Notre Dame


Re: They failed because they regurgitated the same polls & SEC


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:22 PM
 

Any team that scores 58 pts and still loses the game has no business in the top 4.


Re: They failed because they regurgitated the same polls & SEC


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:22 PM
 

Your picks are more reasonable, and they are defensible.

2018 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Thanks. I've been taking a beating. :)***


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:45 PM
 




and now I ask you the same question. You say his poll is


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 10:21 PM
 

Defensible. How exactly? Does anyone on T-Net explain their thoughts or do they just spew out the first thing that comes to mind and expect everyone else to agree with a general statement?


Re: and now I ask you the same question. You say his poll is


Posted: Nov 9, 2014 2:05 PM
 

Not at all the 1st thing on my mind. Polls are very biased. They are predicated a lot on where a team finished last year, and maybe on who on their team returns. It also is slanted that if a team lost to an sec team then that's okay, because they are so automatically tough. We, we beat LSU pretty good in our game with them, we also beat UGA last year, who finished pretty strong, and beat a pretty good OSU team, too. We weren't expected to win any of those games, but had we been in their conference, we would have gotten more respect, just because we were in that conference. Coots got association kudos, just for being in the secheat, before they actually started winning some games, and most of their conference wins were not against the real powers of the conference. Granted they have beaten us a few times lately, but come on. They haven't exactly beaten the elite. The polls are very biased toward their conference.

2018 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

I don't know

[1]
Posted: Oct 29, 2014 2:25 PM
 

I think they did a pretty good job on it. You can't really argue Miss St., they've been playing good ball. I think the only reason FSU is on the list is b/c they are the only other unbeaten team. They haven't really looked all that good this year. Ole Miss is another one hard to argue against. They, IMO, are the best 1 loss team. Auburn is iffy and could be another team, like Oregon. I don't think the best team from each conference should be in. I don't think anyone can say Oregon or Mich St. are a better team than Ole Miss. The playoff is for the best 4 teams in the country, not a team from 4 of the 5 power conferenes.

military_donation.jpg

You won't know that for sure unless they play each other. Ok


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 3:09 PM
 

wasn't given a chance against Alabama and they manhandled them. They did not upset them or catch them off guard, they destroyed them. The so called Eye Test failed in that case. The same Eye Test that everyone is so confident using now.


Agreed...only way I'd agree with conference champs is if we


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 10:23 PM
 

Expanded to 8 teams. Otherwise you always get the same teams playing. That wouldn't fly.


So your Top 6 would pretty look the same almost every year.


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 10:18 PM
 

Because that's what you get with conference champions automatically anointed. Don't see how that's better.


Re: Can you provide some reasons why you think they failed, and


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:45 PM
 

Ole Miss is number #4 because they beat #6, Aubur has 1 loss to #1MissSt but beat KSt... they trie to keep the head to heads as much as possible while still allowing for SOS... Oregon had to be ahead of MichSt for example but ASt did not have enough SOS to be that high...

ECarolina being in the poll and Marshall not being in the poll shows they are evaluating SOS. I think for a team in the lower 5 to be considered they will have to play at least 3 big 5 conference teams like ECU did..


I was hoping they would get away from other polls and devise


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:54 PM
 

a method to get the 4 best teams in the country. Not the 4 best teams from the SEC.


Re: I was hoping they would get away from other polls and devise

[1]
Posted: Oct 29, 2014 2:28 PM
 

Everyone knew going into this it would benefit the SEC. It's not that they are biased, it's that those 2 teams from the SEC are that good. One will drop out though.

military_donation.jpg

Re: Can you provide some reasons why you think they failed, and


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 3:13 PM
 

I think they've failed because they still rely too heavily on past success, coaches polls and ap polls. Yes, the SEC west is upside down but what do they have to base SEC west strength on, they really haven't had any good out of conference challengers. When the powers on the west start playing teams like Stanford, Oregon, TCU, and others they really don't have any success to measure by except playing each other. IMO no one should start the season with a ranking at all. All straight eye test.


the problem with your argument is that miss st. Beat auburn


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 10:37 PM
 

and happen to be undefeated. They still have to play Bama, ole miss, and Arkansas. Lose any of those and they will drop out.

But for now they beat Auburn who is a good team, and who btw beat K-State and LSU. So yeah, they have beat a good team out of conference.

Ole miss beat bama, but lost to LSU. They got the benefit of the doubt, but failure to prove their worth this weekend against Auburn will send them plummeting.

So you can't say that it is biased or based on preseason rankings when you throw K state in there. But they are looking at SOS as was shown by ND and Ohio St. you will see the sec teams start falling soon.


Re: They had a chance for a fresh start and they failed. The

[2]
Posted: Oct 29, 2014 3:01 PM
 

This 4 team playoff is not the answer but it is a step in the right direction. Let's give it room to breath this year before we jump to conclusions. However, the answer to Division I football crowning its champion comes straight from its own ranks below, in the other lower divisions, and from the Division I basketball tournament.

All of those NCAA sponsored championships respect the conference champion. Sure, there may be weak conferences and strong conferences, but that does not matter when it comes to tournament selection. Let's have a real championship tournament in Division 1 football. Have a sixteen team playoff. In doing that we can respect the conference champions regardless of whether they are considered great or weak. If you win the conference you are in, just like in Division 1 basketball. In this sixteen team scenario, there are 10 Division 1 football conferences. Whoever wins their conference is in. AAC, Sunbelt, you name it. That takes up 10 spots. That leaves 6 spots for the selection committee to fret over. These would be the six best teams available that are not conference champions. For those who claim SEC bias, this would solve for that. If you win your conference you are automatically in and you take your chances against the best. For those 6 at large bids, you could make up for letting weak conference champs in by selecting the best of the rest (which would also include independents - they would get at large bids if they were good enough). Your conference champions are typically your best teams in the country anyway. The six remaining bids would go to teams probably with only 1-2 losses. Then all sixteen qualifiers would be seeded #1-16 by the committee based on their predetermined formula of teams' relative power indexes. This is where you would compensate for SEC champion compared to Sunbelt champion, ACC champion compared to AAC champion and so on. Seed #1 would open play against #16, and #2 against #15 and so on.

Then, we could either utilize the some of the bowl sites (from the former bowl system that this would replace)as places to play the playoff games. The semifinals and finals could be at rotating locations of the truly traditional big money bowl game sites. Alternatively, you could scrap the vestiges of the old bowl system altogether and have the higher seeded team host games. Imagine the additional buzz on campus at Clemson if we were hosting a college football playoff tournament game. Imagine the additional revenue to the Tiger coffers. And imagine if you get a second round game as well, and a semi-final game...The championship game sites could be pre-selected in advance the way the Super Bowl is. The championship game would be at a neutral and have all the big game hype it deserves, just like the NCAA basketball championship game.

The NCAA would sell the rights to the tournament and its broadcasts to the highest bidding network or collection of networks like it does for the NCAA basketball tournament. You know how big CBS pays for that. Just imagine football...the bigger revenue producer.

It just makes sense. It ends debates about SEC bias. It is settled on the field. It ends debates about whether an undefeated team from a supposedly weaker conference is really worthy of being in the equation. They're in. Let em play. Let it be decided on the field. It respects conference championships and conference championships would really mean so much more. It would make regular season conference games all the more important.

But alas I dream a dreamer's dream. The four team playoff may eventually lead to my dream. It cannot get here quick enough.


Well said...this would work. Too bad it's a long way off.***


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 10:40 PM
 




Shame on him for giving me hope.

[2]
Posted: Oct 29, 2014 12:19 PM
 

Perhaps they need the two weeks he referenced to refine the system. Maybe they won't be leaning on the other polls by then.

2018 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

White House officials helping...now I'm REALLY concerned.***

[1]
Posted: Oct 29, 2014 12:21 PM
 




Ebola czar?***


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 12:50 PM
 



2018 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


I'd like to subscribe to that video feed..***


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:04 PM
 



2018 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg


Re: New Story: Clemson #21 in playoff rankings; Radakovich discusses his role

[1]
Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:20 PM
 

I am in utter shock that they couldn't revise a way to get 6 ESECPN teams in the top 6 already. Now they have me believing that they're trying to hide their bias intentions until the end. But I am sure that by December, the ESECPN conference bias will have 6 teams in the top 10, with 4 in the top 4. And the 2 out of the top 4 will play in the next 2 best bowls.

2018 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: New Story: Clemson #21 in playoff rankings; Radakovich discusses his role

[1]
Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:24 PM
 

I laugh at this poll. I don't know why I thought it would be any different, but I guess I did. I was wrong!

2018 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

You can't fight City Hall.***


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:47 PM
 




The BCS, the enemy of college football, was defeated.

[3]
Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:48 PM
 

The polls passed to the playoff selection committee...who had this one chance to destroy evil forever.

But the hearts of Men are easily corrupted. And the power of eSECpn has a will of its own.

And some things that should not have been
forgotten...were lost.


Who will have the courage to take the crystal football and


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:51 PM
 

cast it back into the fire that it was forged once and for all breaking the ties of evil over college football?

Whatever you do, always give 100%.....unless it's donating blood


this is an underrated post***

[1]
Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:53 PM
 



"I've been working since I was 15 continually until now. I worked 40 hours a week at 15, when it wasn't even legal for 15 year olds to work that many hours."


The fact that Ole Miss is 4 after losing to previously unranked LSU


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:56 PM
 

Is mind boggling. They have one top 25 win (Alabama) and lost last week. Oregon deserves that spot. The real test will be what they do w Auburn Ole Miss loser. If the 2 loss loser doesn't drop out of the top 10 behind much more deserving 1 loss teams I have no faith in this comitee. Time to end all these pre polls and take the top 4 conference champions.


Agreed. One gets left out, but that is the best way.***


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 2:07 PM
 




Re: The fact that Ole Miss is 4 after losing to previously unranked LSU


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 2:39 PM
 

Ole Miss lost a tough one to LSU. They still beat Bama and A&M. I think this is a pretty good. Oregon doesn't deserve that spot right now. They lost to an Arizona team that has nothing else on its resume.

military_donation.jpg

Some of ya'll forget


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 2:25 PM
 

This is not a projection of the final rankings but is based off of right now. All complaining of the SEC teams in the top forget these teams have to play each other.

Alabama: LSU, MSU, and Auburn
Auburn: Miss, Tx A&M, UGA, and Bama
MSU: Ark, Bama, Ole Miss
Miss: Aub, Ark, MSU

These teams will have several losses by the end of the season and there will only be one team emerge out of these 4 teams inside the top 4 at the seasons end.

The top 4 at the end of the season will be:

1. FSU
2. MSU, Aub, or Bama (whoever survives the next few weeks)
3. Oregon
4. Notre Dame or TCU


I'll take that, but why not project that from the start? Why


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 3:01 PM
 

not have 4 slots and with all eligible teams vying for a slot? Because, when #1 loses, they drop to 4 or 5 because they lost to another SEC team. Thus keeping those same teams waiting in the wings for Oregon to drop another game or FSU to lose 1. It is unbeatable cycle.


Re: New Story: Clemson #21 in playoff rankings; Radakovich discusses his role


Posted: Oct 29, 2014 6:05 PM
 

All the talk about "ESECPN" control over the new.rating system is just that, talk. Get a chance, look at the makeup of the committee. Not many from SEC. As far as Notre Dame becoming full member of ACC Football, slim and none and.slim left town 3 weeks ago. They make.to much money as a independent. Also, they do not.believe in the revenue sharing formula that many conferences use when playing.conference opponents, as.well as bowl money being shared by the conference. Let them string together 3 or 4 years of being at or near the top and they will have their own TV contract again worth billions.

As far.as rankings are concerned, all those SEC have to play each other or some combination of each other. Then who ever survives has to play in Conference Championship. That will thin the herd out when all said and done. Just be patient, this is the 1st poll, and there is still a lot of football left and several more polls to go.


Replies: 36  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Cotton Bowl
FOR SALE: Have 3 Cotton Bowl Tickets for sale $230 per ticket, Section 421, Row 5, Seats 4, 5, and 6. Please ...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
2899 people have read this post