Dialogue on Oklahoma
Forum rules
NOTICE: Please be sure to check the CFP Message Board Rules and Regulations and the Read Me page before posting.
NOTICE: Please be sure to check the CFP Message Board Rules and Regulations and the Read Me page before posting.
-
Spence
- Administrator
- Posts: 20977
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:52 pm
- Location: Chillicothe, Ohio (Ohio's First Capital)
- Contact:
Dialogue on Oklahoma
I keep hearing how Oklahoma has got it together after losing to Houston and Ohio State. No, they have just played the rest of the bad teams in the Big 12. Imagine had Oklahoma not played Ohio State and Houston in the non conference. They would be number 2 in the country and positioned to be second seeded in the playoff. That is why this system is no better than the BCS. If you are a national brand you can get away with a loss or even two. The committee is no more qualified to determine the four best teams than I am. This is a way to pacify the playoff people without actually giving up control over who plays in the National championship game.
"History doesn't always repeat itself but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
Amen. Succinct, without pontification, blatherskite, balderdash, poppycock, hogwash or crapola. Of course, I prefer the latter.
Statistics are the Morphine of College Football
-
Spence
- Administrator
- Posts: 20977
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:52 pm
- Location: Chillicothe, Ohio (Ohio's First Capital)
- Contact:
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
I do too. I remember when RazorHawk though this was the best solution. I wonder if that is still true?
Because it is really not possible to go back now I believe the only solution is to go to 4 twenty team conferences. The conferences then send each division champ to the conference championship as the first tier of the playoff. Then the final four would be determined. That is essentially the old 8 conference system with a playoff system attached. That way teams can play regionally. The regular season games would still matter and the people who have a deep need for a singular champion would be satisfied. It probably wouldn't be a playoff of the best teams, but it would likely give you the best team from each division without subjective intervention. Of course it won't happen because the powers that be, won't give up their power.
Because it is really not possible to go back now I believe the only solution is to go to 4 twenty team conferences. The conferences then send each division champ to the conference championship as the first tier of the playoff. Then the final four would be determined. That is essentially the old 8 conference system with a playoff system attached. That way teams can play regionally. The regular season games would still matter and the people who have a deep need for a singular champion would be satisfied. It probably wouldn't be a playoff of the best teams, but it would likely give you the best team from each division without subjective intervention. Of course it won't happen because the powers that be, won't give up their power.
"History doesn't always repeat itself but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain
-
collegefbfan-8898
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 256
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 11:27 pm
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
I agree on a lot of those levels. I do like the playoff. But when there are 4 spots and a team or even two is left out, it does leave you thinking. I am left to wonder as these next two weeks transpire:
1) Ohio State beats Michigan but loses Big Ten champs game.
2) Washington wins out, does it make it?
3) What if Wisconsin or Nebraska wins the Big Ten? Are either of them in?
4) Is there any way for Oklahoma to sneak in? Or Oklahoma State?
Some of the crazy scenarios could happen. I will look forward to whatever happens.
1) Ohio State beats Michigan but loses Big Ten champs game.
2) Washington wins out, does it make it?
3) What if Wisconsin or Nebraska wins the Big Ten? Are either of them in?
4) Is there any way for Oklahoma to sneak in? Or Oklahoma State?
Some of the crazy scenarios could happen. I will look forward to whatever happens.
-
Spence
- Administrator
- Posts: 20977
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:52 pm
- Location: Chillicothe, Ohio (Ohio's First Capital)
- Contact:
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
Ohio State won't be in the Big10 championship game. It will be Penn State and Wisconsin
"History doesn't always repeat itself but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
The basic problem with a National Champion has been the same rudimentary mistakes business's that fail make. They design a plan from start to finish and find the finish line is not where they need to be. Every operations management program worth its salt must use backward planning. Where do we want to be and work backward to get there. CFP is trying to take an existing program that was never intended to have a National Champion and wonder why they never get where they need to be.
Statistics are the Morphine of College Football
-
collegefbfan-8898
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 256
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 11:27 pm
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
You all have been fans of this game way longer than me. As far as the national championship goes, if indeed it doesn't work, where does it end? Like the best place to end it? Would it be the conference championship? I am not asking sarcastically. It is a crazy system full of tons of debate. What is the ideal place to end the season?
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
collegefbfan-8898 wrote:You all have been fans of this game way longer than me. As far as the national championship goes, if indeed it doesn't work, where does it end? Like the best place to end it? Would it be the conference championship? I am not asking sarcastically. It is a crazy system full of tons of debate. What is the ideal place to end the season?
I think we all have different ideas. I am not in favor of a National Championship. I liked certain conferences playing in Bowl Games, that could be expanded, ending on New Years Day and let pollsters, message boards, and water cooler conversations decide.
Statistics are the Morphine of College Football
-
Cane from the Bend
- Athletic Director
- Posts: 5063
- Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:25 am
- Location: South Bend, IN (domerville usa)
- Contact:
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
Well, it's a simple model. However, you just need to know where to look in order to get the answer of where it is going to end ... that is the media.
As bad as they are -- and yes, they are -- the truth is, the direction of the game is never far from the talking heads.
There was a debate on this, and/or the old, site sometime back, about how to shut up the media drivel. The ideologies were broken down to this:
(a.) tune `em out, because the fewer viewers they have, the more they'll realize they have to change their product.
(b.) get proactive, voice your opinion, let the world hear it from those who won't buy in, so we can get the changes we want to see by churning & turning the viewing audience against the grain.
(c.) pay no attention to `em, they're just blowin' smoke in your ear to see if they can get a reaction from you.
To some degree, all of those may have been true. But, the Big Picture is, the media is not forcing the changes we see. Rather, they are the tool the Major Conferences & University Committees utilize to get the product they want to give.
espn can only take things so far. Especially now, with NBC, CBS and FOX all having Sports Channels, as well as College Sports Channels as alternative outlets.
If the NCAA wasn't on board with the media's trite pandering, they have the "Power" to remove the product. And yet, we have no rebuttal from the NCAA.
They are telling the media where things are going to go. And the media delivers it to us, by not telling us. Instead, they give us the illusion that they matter, and they get their results by petition through analysis. They contrive stories & discussion, then ask for your involvement, after they give you the opinion they were told to tell you was theirs [and yours].
We got that with the BCS, when the system was changed, tweaked and tinkered with every year. They were headed toward a playoff, and the system got worse each season, until a tournament was the obvious solution -- even though the system stayed in place, until its contract ran out.
The same will happen now.
We're nearly to the halfway point of the current playoff format. And, the talking heads are telling us of a better day, when with an expansion, we will have an 8 team playoff that is going to solve all the troubles.
Oh, and don't forget ... in order to make the game safer, we still need to shorten the game times, which will be done by no longer stopping the clock on achievement of a first down. Yep, that will cut down on the number of plays by 12%, they tell us.
Except, this will only lead to teams rushing to the line, hurrying to get the next play because time will be running short on them. Which will actually, only increase the chances of players getting injured.
And what have we learned from the time changes that we have already seen..?
Well, they claim they did it for the networks, so they could get to their post game regular broadcasting. Although, why would a broadcast network want to go to what is airing after the game, if other channels are showcasing College Football during those regularly broadcast programming.?.
They wouldn't, because College Football is the largest grousing market in the U.S.
So, why the change then?
Because, even though the actual game play has shortened. The length of the event being broadcast has stayed relatively the same. Which quite literally means, the networks are banking off of the shortened games, by filling the gaps with additional advertising.
Now, how much of a kickback do you suppose the NCAA is getting from that??
.
.
.
As bad as they are -- and yes, they are -- the truth is, the direction of the game is never far from the talking heads.
There was a debate on this, and/or the old, site sometime back, about how to shut up the media drivel. The ideologies were broken down to this:
(a.) tune `em out, because the fewer viewers they have, the more they'll realize they have to change their product.
(b.) get proactive, voice your opinion, let the world hear it from those who won't buy in, so we can get the changes we want to see by churning & turning the viewing audience against the grain.
(c.) pay no attention to `em, they're just blowin' smoke in your ear to see if they can get a reaction from you.
To some degree, all of those may have been true. But, the Big Picture is, the media is not forcing the changes we see. Rather, they are the tool the Major Conferences & University Committees utilize to get the product they want to give.
espn can only take things so far. Especially now, with NBC, CBS and FOX all having Sports Channels, as well as College Sports Channels as alternative outlets.
If the NCAA wasn't on board with the media's trite pandering, they have the "Power" to remove the product. And yet, we have no rebuttal from the NCAA.
They are telling the media where things are going to go. And the media delivers it to us, by not telling us. Instead, they give us the illusion that they matter, and they get their results by petition through analysis. They contrive stories & discussion, then ask for your involvement, after they give you the opinion they were told to tell you was theirs [and yours].
We got that with the BCS, when the system was changed, tweaked and tinkered with every year. They were headed toward a playoff, and the system got worse each season, until a tournament was the obvious solution -- even though the system stayed in place, until its contract ran out.
The same will happen now.
We're nearly to the halfway point of the current playoff format. And, the talking heads are telling us of a better day, when with an expansion, we will have an 8 team playoff that is going to solve all the troubles.
Oh, and don't forget ... in order to make the game safer, we still need to shorten the game times, which will be done by no longer stopping the clock on achievement of a first down. Yep, that will cut down on the number of plays by 12%, they tell us.
Except, this will only lead to teams rushing to the line, hurrying to get the next play because time will be running short on them. Which will actually, only increase the chances of players getting injured.
And what have we learned from the time changes that we have already seen..?
Well, they claim they did it for the networks, so they could get to their post game regular broadcasting. Although, why would a broadcast network want to go to what is airing after the game, if other channels are showcasing College Football during those regularly broadcast programming.?.
They wouldn't, because College Football is the largest grousing market in the U.S.
So, why the change then?
Because, even though the actual game play has shortened. The length of the event being broadcast has stayed relatively the same. Which quite literally means, the networks are banking off of the shortened games, by filling the gaps with additional advertising.
Now, how much of a kickback do you suppose the NCAA is getting from that??
.
.
.
Last edited by Cane from the Bend on Mon Nov 21, 2016 11:53 am, edited 3 times in total.
Cane... [__]
"It is only impossible until it has been accomplished." ... then it becomes standardized ...
Success is measured by results; whereas Character is measured through the means by which one achieves those results . . .
It seems the Rapture did come for two worthy souls:
In Memory of Grandpa Howdy
In Memory of Donovan Davisson
"It is only impossible until it has been accomplished." ... then it becomes standardized ...
Success is measured by results; whereas Character is measured through the means by which one achieves those results . . .
It seems the Rapture did come for two worthy souls:
In Memory of Grandpa Howdy
In Memory of Donovan Davisson
-
Spence
- Administrator
- Posts: 20977
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:52 pm
- Location: Chillicothe, Ohio (Ohio's First Capital)
- Contact:
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
donovan wrote:collegefbfan-8898 wrote:You all have been fans of this game way longer than me. As far as the national championship goes, if indeed it doesn't work, where does it end? Like the best place to end it? Would it be the conference championship? I am not asking sarcastically. It is a crazy system full of tons of debate. What is the ideal place to end the season?
I think we all have different ideas. I am not in favor of a National Championship. I liked certain conferences playing in Bowl Games, that could be expanded, ending on New Years Day and let pollsters, message boards, and water cooler conversations decide.
I'm with Donovan on this. I also believe if there is no clear road for every team to get to the championship we may as well not try to pretend there is one.
"History doesn't always repeat itself but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
Sadly, there is no real solution in sight at this point. Not sure where they go from here, possibly 8 team playoff but the selection will still be just as skewed and biased leaving worthy teams out while rewarding 3 loss teams from the SEC and Big 10. The only positive would be if 6 spots were automatic bids, but again choosing who the "best" from the group of 5 is would come down to reputations and how well a fan base travels more than anything else. Its not even all that fair and yet making things more spread and giving the illusion of being even still would not fly with the money so a system like this seems unlikely.
The one thing I can hope for as early as next season would be reducing overall bowl games by at least 5. I would like to dream of 10 or 12 less but baby steps would suffice. More likely to see one change venue than simply dropping completely tho.
The one thing I can hope for as early as next season would be reducing overall bowl games by at least 5. I would like to dream of 10 or 12 less but baby steps would suffice. More likely to see one change venue than simply dropping completely tho.
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
Oklahoma has an SOS of #17...they should be considered if a two loss conference champ....they will have played a tough schedule
Clemson is #34 in SOS
Michigan is #51
Penn State is #35
Ohio State is #23
Washington is #65
Western Michigan is 11-0....but with an SOS of #120
Clemson is #34 in SOS
Michigan is #51
Penn State is #35
Ohio State is #23
Washington is #65
Western Michigan is 11-0....but with an SOS of #120
“If short hair and good manners won football games, Army and Navy would play for the national championship every year.”
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
Year number 10 of this discussion where no one has changed their mind.
Strength of schedule. Reminds me of a Startrek TV show where Kirk and everyone in the cast was so concerned the Universe was going to be destroyed because of some aliens launching a mega some kind of a bomb and all would be destroyed. For 55 minutes the Startrek people were beamed up and down and in a complete frenzy only to learn in the last five minutes that it was just a computer war and nothing was really happening.
This is what controls SOS.
"2016 FANTASY STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE (SOS)
Strength of schedule is important tool in the arsenal of serious fantasy football drafters. By knowing what players have easier schedules you'll be able to make the hard decisions between two players.
Our Strength of Schedule rankings are based on fantasy points (performance scoring) allowed by position. #1 is the best/easiest/most favorable schedule for that position and #32 is the hardest/least favorable schedule. #1 means that the opponents that the team faces during the selected period allow the most fantasy points. Click the table headers to sort.
For example, the team listed as #1 for QBs has the best/easiest/most favorable schedule for the selected time frame because those opponents surrendered the most fantasy points to QBs over the time period."
Strength of schedule. Reminds me of a Startrek TV show where Kirk and everyone in the cast was so concerned the Universe was going to be destroyed because of some aliens launching a mega some kind of a bomb and all would be destroyed. For 55 minutes the Startrek people were beamed up and down and in a complete frenzy only to learn in the last five minutes that it was just a computer war and nothing was really happening.
This is what controls SOS.
"2016 FANTASY STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE (SOS)
Strength of schedule is important tool in the arsenal of serious fantasy football drafters. By knowing what players have easier schedules you'll be able to make the hard decisions between two players.
Our Strength of Schedule rankings are based on fantasy points (performance scoring) allowed by position. #1 is the best/easiest/most favorable schedule for that position and #32 is the hardest/least favorable schedule. #1 means that the opponents that the team faces during the selected period allow the most fantasy points. Click the table headers to sort.
For example, the team listed as #1 for QBs has the best/easiest/most favorable schedule for the selected time frame because those opponents surrendered the most fantasy points to QBs over the time period."
Statistics are the Morphine of College Football
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
At least the fantasy people have the integrity to say how they determine SOS. No proprietary algorithms in fantasy.
Statistics are the Morphine of College Football
Re: Dialogue on Oklahoma
Without SOS as a factor...
We would now be talking about 11-0 Western Michigan and 10-1 Boise State for the Play off....Hey, Sam Houston State is 11-0,,,BUT with an SOS of #220
We would now be talking about 11-0 Western Michigan and 10-1 Boise State for the Play off....Hey, Sam Houston State is 11-0,,,BUT with an SOS of #220
“If short hair and good manners won football games, Army and Navy would play for the national championship every year.”
Return to “General Discussion”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 91 guests