[mike777]

the endless debate is good not bad for football. People are talking football and care.


In any case whatever the max for money....gambling/office pools/tv


I think 16 but perhaps over time more.


Again this in not about the kids or students
--


At this point in time very young kids are dropping out of the sport but dropping back in at the HS and college levels, today.
ONe reason is the very large rosters compared to other options

--



As noted in other forums, gambling and football and tv are a perfect marriage compared to other options.

[billw55]

 Bbradley62, on 2014-November-24, 23:08, said:

If the 2007 New York Giants could win the Super Bowl after arguably not being among the 8 best teams in the NFL (out of 32), I don't see why the 9th best college football team (out of 200+) couldn't sometimes win the NCAA playoff.

Pro teams have much less disparity in skill than college teams. The difference between 1 and 9, or 1 and 32, or whatever, will always be significantly larger in college.

Even so, yes, perhaps rarely the 8th or 9th seed could win. Looking at the most current composite ranks, I see:

8. Georgia
9. UCLA
10. Michigan State

All these teams have two losses. So it is easy to argue that they had their chances. Could these teams win three straight games against elite teams? Unlikely. UCLA and MSU each have a home loss to a higher ranked contender. Georgia has two losses to now unranked SEC teams. I don't think you would find anyone outside of their respective fan bases that would argue any of these teams have a strong claim to inclusion in a playoff.

Of course, I am imagining those as season end ranks. As it is, Georgia could still end up SEC champion. We'll see.

[Bbradley62]

So, going into the last weekend, the Top 5 are from 5 different conferences. Final weekend match-ups are:
#1 Alabama vs #16 Missouri
#2 Oregon vs #7 Arizona
#3 TCU vs unranked Iowa State
#4 FSU vs #11 GA Tech
#5 Ohio State vs # 13 Wisconsin
#6 Baylor vs #9 Kansas State

It seems to me that all of the top 7 have a chance to be included in the championship playoffs. Personally, I think that if Baylor and TCU both win and finish with one loss, Baylor should be ranked higher based on their H2H game.

[billw55]

 Bbradley62, on 2014-December-02, 21:59, said:

It seems to me that all of the top 7 have a chance to be included in the championship playoffs. Personally, I think that if Baylor and TCU both win and finish with one loss, Baylor should be ranked higher based on their H2H game.

Strongly agree.

Also, I think Missouri is in with a win. Leaving out the SEC champ would be ... controversial, to say the least.

[jjbrr]

Na, the SECe is one of the weakest divisions in the entire country this year. The SEC representative should come from the west or not at all

[jjbrr]

And Missouri's losses are to Indiana and 34-0 to UGA, with TAMU their only 'quality' win so far. Pretty tough to argue they deserve it over Baylor or OSU depending on how OSU looks this week

[billw55]

I get all that. Still, SEC champ and defeating Alabama (the champ of the mighty west division) in the process rates a spot in my book.

Although admittedly, it would be amusing to hear the SEC homers howl over getting no bid at all.

[ArtK78]

I don't think you have to worry too much about what would happen if Missouri beat Alabama.

[I can see this comment coming back to bite me]

[billw55]

 ArtK78, on 2014-December-03, 11:06, said:

I don't think you have to worry too much about what would happen if Missouri beat Alabama.

I agree that Alabama is a solid favorite.

Some exaggerate this though. Nate Silver recently published his estimate of the probabilities of each team making the playoff. Alabama was at 94%, which amounts to saying they are 94% to beat Missouri. I consider that a big overbid, and would certainly bet Missouri at 16:1 odds.

[jeffford76]

 billw55, on 2014-December-04, 10:24, said:

I agree that Alabama is a solid favorite.

Some exaggerate this though. Nate Silver recently published his estimate of the probabilities of each team making the playoff. Alabama was at 94%, which amounts to saying they are 94% to beat Missouri. I consider that a big overbid, and would certainly bet Missouri at 16:1 odds.

Actually he has Alabama at 82% to win the game, but also 64% to get in even if they lose the game. Bookmakers are giving odds similar to the 82% number.

[billw55]

 jeffford76, on 2014-December-04, 10:36, said:

Actually he has Alabama at 82% to win the game, but also 64% to get in even if they lose the game. Bookmakers are giving odds similar to the 82% number.

Hmmm, interesting. I consider Alabama losing and still getting in to be a longshot.

First of all, it would be a travesty if Alabama got in and Missouri did not. So you would need both of them in. So to fill out the four team field, you would have room for only two teams among TCU, Baylor, Oregon, Florida State, and Ohio State. Hence you need three losses there. And the right three losses at that: for example if Arizona beats Oregon while Alabama plus two other top teams lose, then Arizona could be considered for a spot.

I can't see this parlay as 64%, I would think probably less than 25%.

[jjbrr]

that's not how this works. that's not how any of this works

[billw55]

 jjbrr, on 2014-December-05, 09:31, said:

that's not how this works. that's not how any of this works

Are you sure? These are humans on a committee, not computer ranks.

How do *you* think they work?

[jjbrr]

I think they work exactly how they claim they work:

Quote

What is the Mission of the Selection Committee?

The committee’s task will be to select the best teams, rank the teams for inclusion in the playoff and selected other bowl games and, then assign the teams to sites.

http://www.collegefo...-committee-faqs

The goal of a conference championship is not to determine the "best teams", but rather to determine the most successful team within only its conference. And so while a conference championship game should and will be heavily weighted in determining the "best teams", it is still only one game in a long season. Obviously the committee system won't be perfect, but it will always be better to use a sample of lots of games rather than 1 conference game to determine the "best teams", particularly when the 1 conference game might not even be between the "best teams" in the conference.

I'm not sure what your point is about humans vs computers. I think either humans or computers can do a fine job of selecting "best teams", particularly if they weigh other factors into their decision besides potentially shitty "best team" predictors like conference championship games.

I put "best teams" in quotations because I think there are different arguments about what can and should determine who the "best teams" are, but imo and in the opinion of pretty much everyone, "best team" and "most successful within only its conference" are often completely different things.

[jeffford76]

 billw55, on 2014-December-05, 07:27, said:

First of all, it would be a travesty if Alabama got in and Missouri did not.

Why? Even if Missouri beats them, Alabama played better throughout the year against a better schedule. That's what the playoffs are supposed to select for, not just the result of one head-to-head matchup. See also Baylor/TCU.

[billw55]

My point is that humans may have other agendas that are not openly proclaimed. In the case of the selection committee, that may include maintaining the credibility and success of the new playoff system. And I do think a big chunk of credibility will be lost if Missouri beats Alabama, then Alabama gets in the playoff and Missouri does not. At least, a big chunk outside Tuscaloosa. I believe so because of one principle of athletics: wins matter more than opinions. People believe it.

By the same token, I do believe that the committee would not under any circumstance place three teams from one conference in the playoff. Doing so would cause a large drop in national interest, with associated revenue implications. No, they won't put this in their mission statement.

Quote

Why? Even if Missouri beats them, Alabama played better throughout the year against a better schedule. That's what the playoffs are supposed to select for, not just the result of one head-to-head matchup. See also Baylor/TCU.

same record
better conference record, in the same conference
head to head win
in the championship game !

This is totally convincing to me. And yes, I do think Baylor should get a spot over TCU if it comes down to that. IMO head to head wins should always be the first tiebreaker.

[jeffford76]

 billw55, on 2014-December-05, 11:43, said:

better conference record, in the same conference

I don't think conference record is a meaningful measure when the teams have such different conference schedules. Of the 8 conference games each played, only 4 were against the same opponents.

[jjbrr]

 billw55, on 2014-December-05, 11:43, said:

same record
better conference record, in the same conference
head to head win
in the championship game !

I think this would be a valid point if conferences were balanced and divisions within conferences were balanced, but obviously they're not

[Bbradley62]

One berth determined... three to go.

Go, Ramblin' Wreck!

[GreenMan]

 billw55, on 2014-December-05, 11:43, said:

My point is that humans may have other agendas that are not openly proclaimed. In the case of the selection committee, that may include maintaining the credibility and success of the new playoff system. And I do think a big chunk of credibility will be lost if Missouri beats Alabama, then Alabama gets in the playoff and Missouri does not.

There's precedent for that sort of thing. Not long ago Oklahoma lost its conference championship game by 28 points to Kansas State and was still selected for the championship game.

The selectors might well decide that letting Missouri into the playoffs ahead of more highly regarded teams will be a bigger blow to the system's credibility and success.