Delany's botched B1G CFP plan

[redfanusa]

In its desire to feel superior, the B1G routinely shoots itself in the foot. Limiting over-signing and penalizing attrition, they damage competitiveness in all sports, but especially football and baseball. Adding a 9th conference game might have brought in some extra conference TV $$$, but it guaranteed an extra loss for half of the conference's teams. Bad for rankings and bad for bowl games.

Strangely enough, though, the B1G seems to encourage child molestation. Penn State...Michigan State...it's like the run a child sex trafficking ring in this conference.

 

[Solana Beach Husker]

The SEC is all about gaming the system and cheating. The NCAA does nothing and asks the SEC to self regulate themselves, what a joke.

The SEC has better players and teams...we are lucky we don't get another Alabama and Georgia game...as we should...there is no way that georgia is worse than OU...effin OSU had to beat one good team...they did, but lost to a horrible team at Purdue...the 9 conference games is a necessity to ever get a big 10 team in because the conference is so pathetic.

 

[Baxter48_rivals204143]

The SEC has better players and teams...we are lucky we don't get another Alabama and Georgia game...as we should...there is no way that georgia is worse than OU...effin OSU had to beat one good team...they did, but lost to a horrible team at Purdue...the 9 conference games is a necessity to ever get a big 10 team in because the conference is so pathetic.

Really the sec is that much better? You ever think they are over rated because of espn. I realize the big 10 is down this year, but really who has bama played besides George and only reason they won because George coach did a bill Callahan. We really don't know how good the other sec schools are. Could ATM beat penn st could lsu beat Michigan or Oklahoma? You falling in to the same trap fans do they believe they hype from the polls and espn. Heck even the pack 12 doesn't schedule a cupcake team in November.

 

[BAB1995]

ESPN is a joke now. It refuses to even acknowledge how the SEC and ACC work the playoff system or that teams in the conference are vastly overrated each year. Last year the SEC tanked in bowl games but since Bama got their yearly mulligan and won the playoff the entire conference is world beaters. If the BIG or PAC had that bowl record they would be all over them and how much the conference sucked on the field.

Herbie lost any credibility he had left with his Georgia rants. His whining reminded me of the time he went off on Nebraska when they won the poll for greatest of all time. According to Herbie's logic playing 11/12 games vs the P5 conference teams and 4 teams who finished in the top 10 is a "weak" schedule. Yet playing Bama close, losing to LSU by 20 and whipping up on Austin Peay, UMASS and Middle Tennessee State, is a gauntlet type of schedule which deserves being rewarded.

It's bad enough Bama gets a mulligan every year, we gonna start giving one to the SEC runner up each year now as well...

 

[saluno22]

The P12 plays 9.

The rest of this is nonsense. OSU was supposed to have snuck in a few years ago as a percieved "non elite team". They won the title.


The eye test is TRASH. Every single year so far there has been a concensus #1 team going into the playoffs that the eye test said was the best team. Not a single #1 seed has won a title in the playoff era.


Based on the eye test in the eyes of national perception as shown/dictated by the media:

1995 Nebraska would have been a 2 seed
2005 USC would have been a 1 seed.

That should be all the info you need to see a HUGE problem with using what people think they know as a legitimate ranking criteria.

I get what you're saying, but I wouldn't put 2005 USC as part of the evidence list. They were a failed 4th and 2 away from winning the game, may have won it with a punt.

 

[Blackshirt316]

I get what you're saying, but I wouldn't put 2005 USC as part of the evidence list. They were a failed 4th and 2 away from winning the game, may have won it with a punt.

The point of using those two teams is that the national narative using the eye test showed that the team that was considered to not even be the best team in that season is now called the greatest team of all time and the team the eye test said was the greatest team of all time wasn't even the best team that season.

IE:
If the eye test isn't even reliable enough to pick out which teams are so good they are among the best of all time or not which is a pretty big data set and has a wide margin for error, how can it in any way at all be reliable enough to determine if a team is even the best in a single season when the data is so small and margin so narrow?