81 replies to this topic

[Endless Purple]

Mistletoad, on 29 April 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

The AP top 8 will definately guarantee the top 2 or even the very top 4 getting in with or without bias of a league champ thing which can create a whole new can of worms to createadditional bias... therefor 2 sets of bias over a simple 1 through 8 AP invite. The only  bias effect of an AP 8 formula would be the 'seating' by the bias in ranking and that would occur in any formula... yet the only formula that promises the best 4 to 6 teams ... therefore again, the top 1 and 2 teams. But if it has to be only 4 teams... then AP top 4 in fairness to all teams and conferences... but don't believe, for a moment, the Godon Gee types and many on this forum want anything to do with that sort of fair play scenario recipe or it would not have been brought up in the 1st place... if there wasn't an angle of eliti$m, with some sort of self advantage involved.

Cheers !

We'll simply have to disagree.  Oh well, neither of us is in a decision making spot.

I think there is less bias by winning your conference on the field than by relying on voters.

PS. How do you know a conference ranked #5 is worse than a conference ranked #3 if they only play one or two games the entire season vs each other?  Also why is winning your conference not good enough to count as a first round of a playoff?

[Mistletoad]

Endless Purple, on 29 April 2012 - 02:25 PM, said:

I think there is less bias by winning your conference on the field than by relying on voters.
There is simply the bias of seletion process of who are the 4 best conferences.

PS. How do you know a conference ranked #5 is worse than a conference ranked #3 if they only play one or two games the entire season vs each other?  
That is the whole point of the last 4-5 posts... by yours truly.

Also why is winning your conference not good enough to count as a first round of a playoff?
Have already answered that 3 to 4 times... not sure another reply will convence you of the unfairness of a 7th ranked team in a " 3rd best conf" as a champ ... leap frogging a #3 Team in say, a #5 league(ranked by someone/group out there; probably appointed by the BCS.?.)
... So if one cannot clue you in on the impropriety or unfairness of the "4 best conference's" champs to play for the 4 playoff  to a NCG . Then sure you're one of those that would scream the loudest if B12 had a down year(rated # 5 conf) and Frogs were ranked 3rd nationally while winning its conference.... and was eliminated from 4 team play off by a #7 ranked Miami in the ACC  ... but TCU would have made it in, as one of the top 4 teams ranked nationally in AP.

Cheers !

[Mistletoad]

If the 'Champ of the top 4 ranked Conferences' formula was to play for the NCG in 2011... then #10 Wisconsin, if Big 10 rated higher than ACC, or # 22Clemson. if rated higher than the Big 10...#1 would have invite with #2 LSU/ #3 Okie State/#4 Oregon to a 4 team playoff for NCG. Leap Frogging #1 Alabama/ #5 Arkansas/ #7 Stanford and so on. Again... the point is, to make sure thebestand 2nd best teamhave an opportunity to play for the National Championship.

Cheers !

[BoydAveFrogFan]

Mistletoad, on 29 April 2012 - 03:56 PM, said:

Again... the point is, to make sure thebestand 2nd best teamhave an opportunity to play for the National Championship.

Cheers !

Why does it have to be the 2 best (which is subjective) . What other sport in pro or amateur pits #1 vs #2?

[BUGrad95]

Didn't want a whole new thread, but there was a bit more info released today about Big 12 expansion. I can't verify it's source as its coming from WVU, but the ACC grab seems to have some attachments. Clemson and FSU are the targets. This from the "insider" from WVU:


After 2 days of busting at the seams to tell you guys this I am finally allowed to spill the beans.


FSU wants in....but under their conditions...

FSU wants to be in a League on par with the SEC in both size and Competition.
FSU wants the B12 to go to 14
FSU wants Miami
FSU wants GT
FSU wants the conference title game to be hosted at rotating sites 
FSU wants to keep ties to the Orange bowl in some way

[Mistletoad]

BoydAveFrogFan, on 29 April 2012 - 04:13 PM, said:

Why does it have to be the 2 best (which is subjective) . What other sport in pro or amateur pits #1 vs #2?

Point being if you are the top ranked 4 teams(preferably 8) you will end up with the 2 best, or at least 2 of the top 3 best teams in the NCG. If the best team is ranked 3rd or 4th, then they get a shot in an AP top 4 poll selection system. And those "Conference Champs" that don't rank in top 4 can be alligned with one another if conf champs vs conf champs is what people want too... as usually exists anyway in the Rose Bowl, If one of the league champs are not in the NCG.

Cheers !

[Mistletoad]

BUGrad95, on 29 April 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

Didn't want a whole new thread, but there was a bit more info released today about Big 12 expansion. I can't verify it's source as its coming from WVU, but the ACC grab seems to have some attachments. Clemson and FSU are the targets. This from the "insider" from WVU:


After 2 days of busting at the seams to tell you guys this I am finally allowed to spill the beans.


FSU wants in....but under their conditions...

FSU wants to be in a League on par with the SEC in both size and Competition.
FSU wants the B12 to go to 14
FSU wants Miami
FSU wants GT
FSU wants the conference title game to be hosted at rotating sites
FSU wants to keep ties to the Orange bowl in some way

They sound more demanding than BYU, if that's their parameters. We already have one UT and don't need another trying to organize everyone else to suit themselves. How about a Louisville or Cincinnati,  who would be extremely grateful to be invited here on our conditions...  plus better fits for B12 North.

Cheers !

[BUGrad95]

I don't have a problem with Ga Tech, but I figured them for a B1G target. They have good academics and would benefit the CIC. Miami, well they have some sanctions coming their way, but early on FSU has said Miami is a deal breaker. There has been push back from Big 12 schools, but I figure they will take Miami to get FSU, and it gets 2 schools in Florida for recruiting purposes. I don't have a problem with rotating CCG. But the Orange Bowl had a contract with the ACC and I don't know that there's much the B12 could do about it unless the Orange drops the ACC since the football schools are leaving. The old Big 8 used to play there so I imagine those schools would embrace it. In fact OU has more Orange appearances than FSU or Miami. These could also be their initial list knowing they will have to compromise on some of it.

[Mistletoad]

Agree on GA Tech over a FSU/Miami addition. If FSU want to run and dominate a conference... then if they and Miami(with or without GA Tech) left for BE... then BE would have FSU/Miami/Louisville/Boise/
Cincinnati/Houston/USF/Rutgers/UConn/SMU/SDSU and etc ... then you're in a Big10/ACC/and PAC 12 battle vying to see who is in the 3rd/4th/5th/6th FB conference in the NCAA. Not saying they would reach #3... but they(in the ACC) rarely, maybe never reached the #3 conference anyway, in football...  then you own perhaps the 3rd if not the 2rd largest TV market in college football. Fantasy material for our USF friend.    

Cheers !

[Big Frog II]

I want 14.

I could live with FSU, Miami, GT, and Clemson.

Have the highest bidder host the championship game.

The Orange Bowl is not that exciting to me, but the Orange Bowl would be fine for those schools in the east.

If this wish list of FSU is true, maybe we can work out a compromise.

[Endless Purple]

Mistletoad, on 29 April 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

Then sure you're one of those that would scream the loudest if B12 had a down year(rated # 5 conf) and Frogs were ranked 3rd nationally while winning its conference.... and was eliminated from 4 team play off by a #7 ranked Miami in the ACC ... but TCU would have made it in, as one of the top 4 teams ranked nationally in AP.

Cheers !

I thought I understood your point of view but:

If the frogs were ranked 3rd while winning the conference they would not be eliminated from getting in the playoff by a 7th ranked Miami - Doesn't matter the conference rank.

[Mistletoad]

Endless Purple, on 29 April 2012 - 10:14 PM, said:

I thought I understood your point of view but:

If the frogs were ranked 3rd while winning the conference they would not be eliminated from getting in the playoff by a 7th ranked Miami - Doesn't matter the conference rank.

So you're not professing the Champs from the top 4 conferences.... then misinterpreted post  #25. So we're clear that's not what you're looking for.

Just help me with... "next highest ranked non conference champions" in that post.

Cheers !

[HG73]

The participants of the "final four" would be the four highest rated TEAMS from the pool of conference champs, not the teams from the four hghest rated conferences.

[BUGrad95]

HG73, on 30 April 2012 - 04:08 AM, said:

The participants of the "final four" would be the four highest rated TEAMS from the pool of conference champs, not the teams from the four hghest rated conferences.

This is yet to be decided, but is one of the options.

[BoydAveFrogFan]

BUGrad95, on 30 April 2012 - 07:54 AM, said:

This is yet to be decided, but is one of the options.

This has not been decided because NOTHING has been decided.

[Endless Purple]

Mistletoad, on 30 April 2012 - 12:08 AM, said:

So you're not professing the Champs from the top 4 conferences.... then misinterpreted post  #25. So we're clear that's not what you're looking for.

Just help me with... "next highest ranked non conference champions" in that post.

Cheers !

Nope - could care less what the conference is ranked.  That would explain our impass in opinions.

"My ideal choice of teams would be top 4 ranked conference champions, but.. They have to be within the top 8 in the rankings to qualify. If there are not 4 that qualify then open it up to at large spots of the next highest ranked non conference champions. (Only too long to put as a choice in the poll)"

Top 4 ranked teams that are conference champions.

example:
1. LSU (win SEC)
2. Alabama
3. Ok St (win B12)
4. Stanford
5. Oregon (win P12)
6. Arkansas
7. OU
8. Kansas St
9. Wisconsin (win B10)
10. Michigan

LSU, Ok St, Oregon and Alabama would be in.  Wisconsin out of the top 8 would not qualify.

Also: swap out a MWC champion for the 3 spot in place of B12 champ and they would be in.

[Metropolis777]

BUGrad95, on 29 April 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

FSU wants to be in a League on par with the SEC in both size and Competition.

So does everyone that's already in the Big 12.

BUGrad95, on 29 April 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

FSU wants the B12 to go to 14

Considering the attractiveness of their demanded teams, I doubt anyone has a problem with this.

BUGrad95, on 29 April 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

FSU wants Miami

Why not?

BUGrad95, on 29 April 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

FSU wants GT

Why not?

BUGrad95, on 29 April 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

FSU wants the conference title game to be hosted at rotating sites

Might as well. It happened before in the Big 12. How about rotate between Dallas & Tampa?

BUGrad95, on 29 April 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

FSU wants to keep ties to the Orange bowl in some way

Sure. The Orange will clamor for getting FSU & the old Big 8 schools that it once had. Does this mean we can ditch the Fiesta while we're at it?

[RSF]

Mistletoad, on 29 April 2012 - 03:56 PM, said:

If the 'Champ of the top 4 ranked Conferences' formula was to play for the NCG in 2011... then #10 Wisconsin, if Big 10 rated higher than ACC, or # 22Clemson. if rated higher than the Big 10...#1 would have invite with #2 LSU/ #3 Okie State/#4 Oregon to a 4 team playoff for NCG. Leap Frogging #1 Alabama/ #5 Arkansas/ #7 Stanford and so on. Again... the point is, to make sure thebestand 2nd best teamhave an opportunity to play for the National Championship.

Cheers !

Actually, the point IN THEORY is to make sure the 4 best teams have an opportunity to play for the national championship.  If it were just the top 2 then the current system would be sufficient.


And Oregon was not #4 last year, despite winning the Pac 12.  Stanford was, as several have pointed out, despite not even making the Pac 12 title game..

[Mistletoad]

RSF, on 30 April 2012 - 10:40 AM, said:

Actually, the point IN THEORY is to make sure the 4 best teams have an opportunity to play for the national championship. If it were just the top 2 then the current system would be sufficient. And Oregon was not #4 last year, despite winning the Pac 12. Stanford was, as several have pointed out, despite not even making the Pac 12 title game..

As have said all along, over 1/2 dozen posts in one form or another, the Idea is to  guarantee(almost absolutely) that the 2 best teams have a shot at the NCG and that the top 4 AP(or  top 4 BCS if it must be) is the way to go and not worry about conference champs or not.

Would personally prefer top 8 which would absolutely  guarantee the best team is not left out. The existing system is crap as 6 or 8 times out of 10 ... the best team could have been #3/4/or 5 and no way to settle this.

Again one example was in 2010 when most the media felt that Wisconsin(BCS #5/AP #4) was the hottest team in the country at seasons end... plus one of the 2 or 3 best teams in the country. The top 4 ranked would not have settled it and there are other examples over the years. So a top 4 does gives the best team, in most cases, a chance at the NCG, whether ranked 1/2/3/ or 4.  

Cheers !

[Mistletoad]

RSF ... your comment that Oregon really wasn't #4 is another example how 8 teams is an absolute guarantee that the 2 best teams are given the opportunity/shot at the national Championship... though it looks like 4 is the Number the Cartel wants.

Cheers !