Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Official CFP Selection Freakout Thread

You mother****ers still on about this?

As Ferris says, "It's over. Go home."

The end of the story is this - ESPN and the CFP have done the impossible. They turned 75% of the nation into fans of a program that literally had its coach suspended for cheating.
 
LesGrossman said:
So just to make sure I understand incentive alignment correctly…..

Georgia loses to Alabama, but Milroe is healthy so Alabama goes to playoff.

Georgia loses to Alabama, but they bounty Milroe (ala Blackburn/CSU) and injure him so Georgia goes to the playoff.

CFP, ESPN, SEC, referees, and internal audit are heavily incentivized for Georgia to win the NC. No case of wrongdoing is found. Pass Go and collect $200


I really am starting to hate this sport and I’m gonna have to pick an NFL team soon. Dying traditions, one-year mercenaries, never ending arms race of raw donations, no competitive balance, all incentives encouraging cheating/bad officiating/corruption, etc. NFL is starting to look much more worth my time tbh

Yeah the fight song matters. Bands matter. Rivalries matter. Tradition matters. Kids coming to your school, walking the same halls, and growing up in the town where you can see them develop matters. All that **** is what makes CFB different than the NFL.

If we’re NFL-lite with more corruption, worse talent, and I’m on the hook for the bill, then there’s no reason to watch imo

/rant
Click to expand...
I agree and while the NFL has it's issues the spirit of competition is alive and well. You WIN and you go places in the NFL.

Maybe college football should be scaled back to just conference championships.
 
LesGrossman said:
So just to make sure I understand incentive alignment correctly…..

Georgia loses to Alabama, but Milroe is healthy so Alabama goes to playoff.

Georgia loses to Alabama, but they bounty Milroe (ala Blackburn/CSU) and injure him so Georgia goes to the playoff.

CFP, ESPN, SEC, referees, and internal audit are heavily incentivized for Georgia to win the NC. No case of wrongdoing is found. Pass Go and collect $200


I really am starting to hate this sport and I’m gonna have to pick an NFL team soon. Dying traditions, one-year mercenaries, never ending arms race of raw donations, no competitive balance, all incentives encouraging cheating/bad officiating/corruption, etc. NFL is starting to look much more worth my time tbh

Yeah the fight song matters. Bands matter. Rivalries matter. Tradition matters. Kids coming to your school, walking the same halls, and growing up in the town where you can see them develop matters. All that **** is what makes CFB different than the NFL.

If we’re NFL-lite with more corruption, worse talent, and I’m on the hook for the bill, then there’s no reason to watch imo

/rant
Click to expand...
I had not considered that, but you're 100% correct that this incentivizes teams in CFP contention to head hunt players on other contending teams.

UGA would be in the CFP if they had some walk on player intentionally injure Milroe. Is that the system we want?
 
Last edited:
It's laughable the folks that are relying on the "injured player clause" and skewed/made up SOS arguments to explain why FSU got jobbed. The only answer is that the committee was bound and determined, or flat out instructed, that an SEC team and a future SEC team must make the playoff. You can be happy that FSU got left out, but don't flatter yourselves that your double-secret probation spreadsheet has all the right answers - just own your bias.

My bias is that I prefer a system wherein an undefeated P5 that was ranked in the top 4 prior to winning a conference championship earns a slot in the playoff. If not, what's the point of the regular season/conference championships?
 
Flat_Iron_Rising said:
Yeah, I do not like the player availability criteria because it negates all the hard work the team put in. The spirit of competition is negated to a point. Football is a team sport is it not?

This is a bad look for college football regardless of the criteria.

Also, I'm assuming this is the SOS formula they use below or is this an older version (maybe there is a newer one with more factors)?
View attachment 67672
Click to expand...
The availability of key players, especially QBs, affects the evaluation of best four. It does not negate the hard work of the team and their success.

Yes, some formulas use a two tier system. Some don’t. Those that do generally weight the opponents component over the opponents’ opponents component as above. Some use percentage, thus the denominator is 3 as above. Others use wins whereby you have to count the number of games against opponents and opponents’ opponents to determine the denominator.

They all point the same direction.
 
This move has alienated more than half of the College Football World, and one thing that I think Yormack and the others could be sitting on is Anti-Trust litigation for what is happening and what is brewing. The B1G and the SEC cannot walk away and do whatever they want without getting Congress or DOJ involved, even more so with this supposedly being Amateur and Collegiate athletics.

This is headed for something big and it will happen sooner than later, especially with the new TV deals, the expanded playoffs, and not choosing FSU brought a huge spotlight they may not have wanted on the sport.

Very interesting where this is headed
 
hawg1 said:
Your statements on importance of win over LSU are not consistent with the charter. You are cherry-picking games to determine a proxy for SOS which meets your preferences and biases. The SOS services aren’t perfect. All point to Bama.
Click to expand...
I'm only going by what the selection committee identifies as the criteria. One of the points listed, right alongside and with presumably equal weight to "SoS" is outcomes in games against common opponents.

The SoS services aren't perfect, but we don't even know which the committee uses, and how they're calculated. In fact, this article from 5 years ago says that each CFP committee member uses their own SoS metric if they so choose, but also that it's more of a qualitative (e.g. record vs. top 25 teams, record vs. 0.500+ teams, etc) rather than quantitative (i.e. ranking) measure.

Doing it that way makes it much closer than the SoS services you reference:

  • Record against P5 competition:
    • Bama: 9-1
    • FSU: 11-0
  • Record against FBS competition:
    • Bama: 10-1
    • FSU: 12-0
  • Record against 0.500+ competition
    • Bama: 8-1
    • FSU: 8-0
  • Record against teams with 0.500+ against FBS schools
    • Bama: 6-1
    • FSU: 6-0
  • Record against teams in the final CFP rankings
    • Bama: 4-1
    • FSU: 3-0
  • Record away from home against teams in the final CFP rankings:
    • Bama: 1-0
    • FSU: 3-0
 
Lol...now Rick Scott, one of the US Senators for Florida has sent a letter to the Committee Chairman demanding answers. Probably mostly a political stunt since I think he is up for reelection, but probably not something the committee thought was going to happen. The rest of P5 is not going to accept relegation quietly.

 
Buffnik said:
So, if Alabama's QB1 gets injured during practices leading up to the playoffs, will they swap them out to another team?
Click to expand...
I think the CFP selection committee's work is done regardless of what happens between their announcement and the games. there's no provision for changing teams after that that I see
 
hokiehead said:
yes, the CFP charter speaks of SOS, not "non conference SOS"

I appreciate the point Tante raises in support of the position I take, but it's not terribly relevant in the discussion.

you're point is well made that by any conventional measure, Alabama had better SOS.
Click to expand...

It's just a number until you add the context that it is a completely unweighted SOS. I don't see how SOS can be compared if the basis (conference games, locations ) are not used to validate the data in any way. It is just a lazy argument.
 
Denver_sc said:
I'm only going by what the selection committee identifies as the criteria. One of the points listed, right alongside and with presumably equal weight to "SoS" is outcomes in games against common opponents.

The SoS services aren't perfect, but we don't even know which the committee uses, and how they're calculated. In fact, this article from 5 years ago says that each CFP committee member uses their own SoS metric if they so choose, but also that it's more of a qualitative (e.g. record vs. top 25 teams, record vs. 0.500+ teams, etc) rather than quantitative (i.e. ranking) measure.

Doing it that way makes it much closer than the SoS services you reference:

  • Record against P5 competition:
    • Bama: 9-1
    • FSU: 11-0
  • Record against FBS competition:
    • Bama: 10-1
    • FSU: 12-0
  • Record against 0.500+ competition
    • Bama: 8-1
    • FSU: 8-0
  • Record against teams with 0.500+ against FBS schools
    • Bama: 6-1
    • FSU: 6-0
  • Record against teams in the final CFP rankings
    • Bama: 4-1
    • FSU: 3-0
  • Record away from home against teams in the final CFP rankings:
    • Bama: 1-0
    • FSU: 3-0
Click to expand...
You failed to look at the principles which includes injuries to key players likely to affect postseason.

Margin of victory against common opponents are not considered.

Those than have sat through Mich committees have mentioned FPI, Sagarin, Massey and CP+ as being the SOS services used.

Your suggestion is interesting. Its reliability and validity would need to be tested with a season or two worth of data, not just 23 Bama and FSU data. Maybe it’s equal to the other models available.
 
tante said:
It's just a number until you add the context that it is a completely unweighted SOS. I don't see how SOS can be compared if the basis (conference games, locations ) are not used to validate the data in any way. It is just a lazy argument.
Click to expand...
I'm not following. Is there an SoS measurement of the full season in which FSU looks better than Alabama?
 
SuperD said:
Lol...now Rick Scott, one of the US Senators for Florida has sent a letter to the Committee Chairman demanding answers. Probably mostly a political stunt since I think he is up for reelection, but probably not something the committee thought was going to happen. The rest of P5 is not going to accept relegation quietly.

Click to expand...


The only problem is that nobody takes Rick 'Skeletor' Scott seriously.
 
So, a team that won all its games despite suffering what would otherwise be deemed debilitating injuries is penalized because they are perceived by some to not have enough of a chance to compete. Even though they we objectively a good enough, deep enough team to overcome those injuries. Cool.

The only thing that makes sense is the cultists have once again demonstrated how ****ed up this all is.
 
Bliff Cranch said:
So, a team that won all its games despite suffering what would otherwise be deemed debilitating injuries is penalized because they are perceived by some to not have enough of a chance to compete. Even though they we objectively a good enough, deep enough team to overcome those injuries. Cool.

The only thing that makes sense is the cultists have once again demonstrated how ****ed up this all is.
Click to expand...
Because the prevailing groupthink is that Alabama is more likely to win a playoff game than Florida State and that is more important than actual on-field results.
 
SuperD said:
Lol...now Rick Scott, one of the US Senators for Florida has sent a letter to the Committee Chairman demanding answers. Probably mostly a political stunt since I think he is up for reelection, but probably not something the committee thought was going to happen. The rest of P5 is not going to accept relegation quietly.

Click to expand...

As silly as this seems, there is a real financial implication to the decision, and maybe this is the sort of things Senators should look into.
 
Bliff Cranch said:
So, a team that won all its games despite suffering what would otherwise be deemed debilitating injuries is penalized because they are perceived by some to not have enough of a chance to compete. Even though they we objectively a good enough, deep enough team to overcome those injuries. Cool.

The only thing that makes sense is the cultists have once again demonstrated how ****ed up this all is.
Click to expand...
Data were available post injury. Good D. Sketch O. Iowa.
 
Buffnik said:
Because the prevailing groupthink is that Alabama is more likely to win a playoff game than Florida State and that is more important than actual on-field results.
Click to expand...
The prevailing thinking is that Bama is better with Travis out. And they had an inferior SOS. That’s what the chair said.
 
I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but I can't wrap my head around being ranked #4, winning vs #14 despite having to play the true frosh backup QB because the starter was out with a concussion, seeing #1 and #5 lose, but dropping in the rankings to #5.
 
Buffnik said:
I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but I can't wrap my head around being ranked #4, winning vs #14 despite having to play the true frosh backup QB because the starter was out with a concussion, seeing #1 and #5 lose, but dropping in the rankings to #5.
Click to expand...
100% this.

if anything, the CFP should announce that they screwed up the ranking last week and should've had FSU rated lower at that point. then we'd be able to rationalize the point you're raising.
 
Buffnik said:
I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but I can't wrap my head around being ranked #4, winning vs #14 despite having to play the true frosh backup QB because the starter was out with a concussion, seeing #1 and #5 lose, but dropping in the rankings to #5.
Click to expand...

This is a good point.

I think most of us, in the back of our minds, knew that if Bama beat Georgia, they'd be in. So why not put them in front of FSU the week prior? What changed? Certainly not Travis's injury. If they were going to use that as an excuse, then why wait? I can't help but think they were hoping that Georgia and/or Louisville would save them the trouble.

Moreover, if Texas jumped FSU too, then why were they behind FSU the week before? Was UT going to be in the outside looking in before Alabama won and the committee had no choice but to put Texas in?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top