If Indiana beats OSU
- Thread starter fastlax16
- Start date
Play out of their minds. Howard needs turnovers. Perhaps early sleepwalking. Being that it is at Columbus, I think their chances are very low. That defense has given up under 70 points this year. 7 I know we're off a pick 6 (aka the defense didn't surrender it) and 30 sometimes to Oregon (at Oregon).
If IU scores 20, that will be a win for them. Probably need their defense to hold OSU to under 20.
The thing is, with a committee, the rules are subject to change yearly because the people involved rotate. They have very little guideline criteria that they have to go by.
Eye test, to an extent, does matter. If Indiana gets blown out by OSU, how do they get treated? They will have missed 7 of the top 9 in the Big 10 and ooc they played a terrible slate.
You just proved my point. If the "criteria " changes every year it's a joke. Riles for who qualifies need to be defined before a down is played otherwise it will always be eye test 2.0.
I agree. It's always been eye test. The unwritten criteria always came about when they needed to move teams in and out.
It always tells you everything--how in the world do you think it tells you nothing.
It told us Big Ten > SEC in the mind of the committee
It told us other than Miami they had no respect for the Big XII or ACC
That's not going to change.
Tons of insight if you're willing to analyze it.
Exactly. "in the mind of". Your words.
In other words. Opinion opinion opinion.
No way the b1g cheaters let duhO$U take a 2nd loss prior to CCG. Look for the b1g Clown Crew to "let them play" one-way again....
He has no comprehension that opinions are not facts
What the heck do you think seeds 6 through 12 are? It's people deciding that x is better than y. That's not fact it's opinion.
The facts are what we can take away from the rankings not where anyone is ranked--that will change
We know they had a 1-loss Ohio State ahead of Georgia and Texas
We know Penn State was ahead of Tennessee
We know Indiana was ahead of BYU despite their SOS
We know SMU was #13 (clear indication of what they think of the ACC) and Iowa State was #17 (clear indication of what they think of the Big XII)
We know the NIU loss for ND is almost considered two losses and if Bama passes them this week we'll know it is seen as two.
There's a lot you can take from rankings if you pay attention because they're facts not opinions
Lots of committee/eye test type of stuff in this thread that we know exists. Sadly, the bias has corrupted how games are being officiated on the field. The official is employed by the conference. The conference wants a good result for itself, both in participation and in results of the tournament.
I am taking suggestions on how to get rid of human bias. I see it as a driver of corruption.
In my opinion we should be using computer algorithms for the seeding and invitations, even though the flaw in this is that the "eye test" gets replaced by the need to add previous seasons into the weighting. There are simply not enough games, and not enough cross-conference games for the statistics.
Does anyone think that the "best team," or "champion" should not come from the following list?
That looks like a pretty fair tournament. If we want conference championships to matter we simply put those champions at the end of the list (based on their ranking) and have them bump Tennessee, Miami, etc. Run the algorithm after the conference championship games. The best champions will still tend to get a bye. This will prevent the ridiculous seeding of a weak conference winner. There could still be an added weighting to the conference championship game, but at least it would not require putting a team like BYU into the Top 4.
The only thing I might change in this would be to ensure that there is no weighting bias based on the order of games within a particular season. In other words, an early season game is weighted the same as a late season game. As it is now, the "eye test" tends to unweight early season losses. That's not fair. It can lead to scheduling biases by conferences just as there is officiating bias in today's system.
I am taking suggestions on how to get rid of human bias. I see it as a driver of corruption.
In my opinion we should be using computer algorithms for the seeding and invitations, even though the flaw in this is that the "eye test" gets replaced by the need to add previous seasons into the weighting. There are simply not enough games, and not enough cross-conference games for the statistics.
Does anyone think that the "best team," or "champion" should not come from the following list?
- Oregon
- Ohio State
- Alabama
- Indiana
- Texas
- Penn State
- Notre Dame
- Mississippi
- BYU
- Georgia
- Miami
- Tennessee
That looks like a pretty fair tournament. If we want conference championships to matter we simply put those champions at the end of the list (based on their ranking) and have them bump Tennessee, Miami, etc. Run the algorithm after the conference championship games. The best champions will still tend to get a bye. This will prevent the ridiculous seeding of a weak conference winner. There could still be an added weighting to the conference championship game, but at least it would not require putting a team like BYU into the Top 4.
The only thing I might change in this would be to ensure that there is no weighting bias based on the order of games within a particular season. In other words, an early season game is weighted the same as a late season game. As it is now, the "eye test" tends to unweight early season losses. That's not fair. It can lead to scheduling biases by conferences just as there is officiating bias in today's system.
Last edited:
And we're discussing what "facts" we know that they believe
Their opinions (as they're the only ones that matter) create the reality
Definitely opinions. The only facts here are the fact that HandjoCommando is an a-hole, a douche and a troll.
Not a chance, especially with b1g Officiating. Even if they play well enough to win (a la Nebraska) the corrupt b1g Officiating isn't letting it happen.
If it comes to it, it will. You could have said the same thing about Nebraska (and game was played at shoe).... and the Officials had to insert themselves.
The question was this: Is there a reasonable probability that a team NOT on that list could become National Champion, i.e., winning 4 games in a row of increasing difficulty within the Top 12?
This isn't to say that Miami would have a higher probability of winning the tournament than SMU, or vice versa. It's merely to find a system that generates a list, based on past performance (e.g., via the computer rankings), that the champion is virtually certain to be a team on the list. Of secondary importance is that the generation of that list should not contain human value judgments that could drift from year to year, otherwise the "league" becomes objectionable.
Let's look at the odds of a team like SMU winning it all using PSU as a comparison. We would all agree that PSU is perhaps a 50:50 winner against teams in the 5-12 ranking, but we're probably a 1 in 10 type of Team against the Top 5 (or at least this has been our record). Our odds of winning an NC are thus 50% x 50% x 10% x 10%, or 0.25%. Statistically, we have 400:1 odds under these assumptions.
Should the computer algorithm, or "committee," worry about whether it got the right list of teams with 400:1 odds? Is picking SMU over Miami important, beyond being "fair," if the goal is to crown a National Champion? Unless SMU is better than PSU, the answer is most certainly "NO."
No, and that's part of the beauty of this playoff system: all of the teams that deserve a shot will get one - all the undefeated teams and all the major conference champions. There will be controversies, but they will be downstream - between two or thee loss teams that had their chance but lost key games during the regular season. Really, I love PSU but if the Lions lose twice this year do they really deserve a shot at the national championship?
Yes picking SMU over Miami is important but they won't need to decide that.
The reality is, while unlikely, we will see a team like SMU or BYU make a run at some point.
For the record, SMU in my opinion has a much better shot at winning a title than Indiana.
In this scenario, where do you seed OSU and PSU? I guess Indiana goes from 5 to 2. But, Ohio State would then have two losses. Shouldn’t Ohio State then get the Georgia treatment and get dropped out of the top 10. If so, what do you do with Penn State?
It comes down to if the committee values wins over two ranked teams (Louisville and Texas A&M) and one ugly loss over a team with no ranked wins and an “acceptable” loss.
