So let’s talk about this College Football Playoff thingy.

[JLEW1818]

So… 4 teams make it. What’s the criteria for making it? Top 4 highest in what poll/commit vote?

Found a good link.
For the first go around the semis will Rose and Sugar.

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/college-football-playoff-schedule.php

didn't pay attention much. Fill me in on the upcoming process. :very_drunk:

[Collier11]

The committee will release a couple of pre-selection rankings which I think is dumb but I get it as far as keeping it out in the open. Once the regular season is over they will sit down as a group and decide who are the 4 best based on lots of criteria, I hear strength of schedule will be a factor

[picasso]

All we have to do is beat Nebraska every year and we're in.

[8timechamps]

Right now, the problem is that nobody really knows the criteria. All we know is that there is a selection committee, and they will be in charge of naming the 4 teams.

I wish it would become against the law (yes, the law) to produce pre-season polls. I may as well have my dog pick the top 25 teams preseason, he would probably do about the same.

[CK Sooner]

The committee will release a couple of pre-selection rankings which I think is dumb but I get it as far as keeping it out in the open. Once the regular season is over they will sit down as a group and decide who are the 4 best based on lots of criteria, I hear strength of schedule will be a factor

Injuries will also be taken into account, which I found to be very strange.

[BoulderSooner79]

Right now, the problem is that nobody really knows the criteria. All we know is that there is a selection committee, and they will be in charge of naming the 4 teams.

I wish it would become against the law (yes, the law) to produce pre-season polls. I may as well have my dog pick the top 25 teams preseason, he would probably do about the same.

Pre-season polls are fun and will never go away. The bottom line is early rankings have almost never been a factor in the final rankings and yet people are so afraid they will be. I guess that's what makes them fun - they create passion where none exists :)

I think transparency will be a big factor in the success of this committee approach. If the criteria is laid out for all to see, coaches will know what they are striving for. For example, should a coach try to add more points to a blow-out victory or should he go to the reserves early and try to avoid injuries to the starters? Coaches will optimize according to the criteria. IF it become a white smoke/gray smoke thing, everyone will reject it.

[ouwasp]

I wonder if bad calls will be taken into account, like the Oregon fiasco? Here's a look at the folks on the committee, pardon if someone has already posted this. http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2013/10/16/meet-the-faces-behind-the-college-football-playoff-selection-committee/2993911/

seems like the west coast is well-represented...I'm glad Dr. Tom is on the committee, but at 76, he won't be on there for long I'm guessing...

[Collier11]

Preseason polls are worthless, I forget the exact number but a huge number of teams finished ranked that were unranked in the preseason

[Collier11]

Injuries will also be taken into account, which I found to be very strange.

It actually makes sense if you think about it, and the ncaa bball selection committee does the same. Think about this, what if TK gets hurt in the texas game and we lose by 3 pts, but then he returns and we go 11-1. That has to be considered, I think it only needs to be considered in obvious cases though

[CK Sooner]

It actually makes sense if you think about it, and the ncaa bball selection committee does the same. Think about this, what if TK gets hurt in the texas game and we lose by 3 pts, but then he returns and we go 11-1. That has to be considered, I think it only needs to be considered in obvious cases though

I totally agree with it, if it's a situation like you stated. I didn't even know that basketball did that.

[BoulderSooner79]

It actually makes sense if you think about it, and the ncaa bball selection committee does the same. Think about this, what if TK gets hurt in the texas game and we lose by 3 pts, but then he returns and we go 11-1. That has to be considered, I think it only needs to be considered in obvious cases though

It's different in hoops where there are only 5 players and just 1 or 2 guys can dominate. It certainly can apply in football and the QB position is the obvious place. But it can cut many ways. Take the horns in '09 and say McCoy gets hurt in the big12 CCG instead of the title game. They have earned a slot as much as anyone, but have no prayer to advance with true freshman Gilbert starting his first game in a playoff situation. It will be interesting how injuries might play into the mix.

[Sooners78]

Right now, the problem is that nobody really knows the criteria. All we know is that there is a selection committee, and they will be in charge of naming the 4 teams.

I wish it would become against the law (yes, the law) to produce pre-season polls. I may as well have my dog pick the top 25 teams preseason, he would probably do about the same.

That is what concerns me the most. One thing I liked about BCS was that it used a formula that at least tried to take human bias out of the equation. However, the whole 'SEC is the best conference' argument put that human bias right back into the equation. I would expect that argument to remain as long as ESPN has influence.

[olevetonahill]

That is what concerns me the most. One thing I liked about BCS was that it used a formula that at least tried to take human bias out of the equation. However, the whole 'SEC is the best conference' argument put that human bias right back into the equation. I would expect that argument to remain as long as ESPN has influence.

So then FOREVER .

[PrideMom]

Just means that the SEC will get four teams playing against each other.

[Sooners78]

Just means that the SEC will get four teams playing against each other.

Exactly, then it will be time for the SEC to have their national champion, and the rest of college football can get together and have their own playoff system.

[sooneron]

I agree that 4 is going to cause more butt hurt. I'd be ok with 6 or 8, that's it, though.

[SoonerMarkVA]

It should be like the basketball tourney for the main conferences: conf champ == automatic bid for XII, B1G, P12, SEC, and ACC (and maybe AAC ), and figure out some way to weasel ND into the mix. That starts 5/6, and then, 3/2 wildcards. Then we have an 8-team playoff where, I think, nobody from the Big 5/(6) conferences can complain they didn't get a fair shot, since getting to the playoff is always in their hands by winning the conference. First round can be home field for higher seeds.

[KantoSooner]

...I'm glad Dr. Tom is on the committee, but at 76, he won't be on there for long I'm guessing...

You're right. If he so much as hears that a Selmon woman is pregnant, his heart is toast.

[jkjsooner]

Pre-season polls are fun and will never go away. The bottom line is early rankings have almost never been a factor in the final rankings and yet people are so afraid they will be. I guess that's what makes them fun - they create passion where none exists :)

Tell that to Auburn. We haven't had a lot of cases where there are 3 undefeated teams from major conferences but when that happens initial rankings definitely have played a role. (And, yes, I know that we all have other reasons to exclude Auburn but preseason ranking did make a difference.)

Same is probably true when we have multiple one loss teams.

[SoonerorLater]

I guess I just don't understand to allure of a playoff based some guys sitting around a room picking their favorite teams. The only fair way to do it would be to go to more of an NFL model which would kill college football as we know it.

[jkjsooner]

It should be like the basketball tourney for the main conferences: conf champ == automatic bid for XII, B1G, P12, SEC, and ACC (and maybe AAC ), and figure out some way to weasel ND into the mix. That starts 5/6, and then, 3/2 wildcards.

I do not like taking conference affiliation into the mix. It works when you have a 64 team tournament since a crappy conference champion can just be stuck in a very low seed but when there is only 8 teams it allows the possibility of extremely mediocre teams to make it. Would KSU in 2003 (with losses to Marshall, Texas, and OSU) really deserve to be in the playoff just because they won a pathetic Big 12 north and then upset us?

Given, part of the problem with KSU in 2003 was the winner take all conference championship game. In the current Big 12 such a mediocre team probably would never win the Big 12.

One thing most of us want is for the regular season to matter a lot. If you give passes to conference champions then the OOC games become much less meaningful. A loss in OOC would only matter if you happen to not win your conference and are trying to get an at-large bid. What if you happen to have your conference locked up but have a late OOC game? Are you going to play scrubs? (I suppose an 8 team conference will have the first game at one team's home so maybe not since you're fighting for a top seed.)

[jkjsooner]

I guess I just don't understand to allure of a playoff based some guys sitting around a room picking their favorite teams. The only fair way to do it would be to go to more of an NFL model which would kill college football as we know it.

I've said this over and over. You can make a formula with four inputs - wins, losses, opponent's wins, opponent's losses. If you tweak it right you can get pretty darn good results and you can always compare it to the 50 previous years to validate it.

It can be designed so that any team who has a decent schedule (which all major conference teams have) and goes undefeated would get in.

Simple. Objective. Transparent.


The only negative is that a team can't really control their SOS. Sometimes you schedule a blue blood and they happen to be down by the time the game is actually played. But, in that case you should have gone undefeated.

[BoulderSooner79]

I guess I just don't understand to allure of a playoff based some guys sitting around a room picking their favorite teams. The only fair way to do it would be to go to more of an NFL model which would kill college football as we know it.

Not just guys - guys and lesbos, er gals. I guess the allure is a new group of folks to hate on.

[BoulderSooner79]

Tell that to Auburn. We haven't had a lot of cases where there are 3 undefeated teams from major conferences but when that happens initial rankings definitely have played a role. (And, yes, I know that we all have other reasons to exclude Auburn but preseason ranking did make a difference.)

Same is probably true when we have multiple one loss teams.

Auburns' situation was the result of SOS from the non-conference play. But there was a bias towards OU that came from strong results from the previous 4 years, so the initial rankings was a symptom and not a cause. But you pick the most controversial year out of 15 to make a point when the real issue was trying to pick 2 teams in a fair way - not possible. But having a pre-season polls is just human nature as well as free speech (and free market). Complaining about them is just pissin' in the wind.

[jkjsooner]

Auburns' situation was the result of SOS from the non-conference play. But there was a bias towards OU that came from strong results from the previous 4 years, so the initial rankings was a symptom and not a cause. But you pick the most controversial year out of 15 to make a point when the real issue was trying to pick 2 teams in a fair way - not possible. But having a pre-season polls is just human nature as well as free speech (and free market). Complaining about them is just pissin' in the wind.

First, I think you'd find that the preseason polls played a role in the years we were picking between one of many one-loss teams as well - at least before the SEC bias become the overriding factor.

I wasn't the one complaining about the preseason polls although I do think that their role in ultimately determining who gets into the tournament should be minimized or eliminated altogether. (I want the purely numerical criteria with no human input whatsoever.)

[BoulderSooner79]

First, I think you'd find that the preseason polls played a role in the years we were picking between one of many one-loss teams as well - at least before the SEC bias become the overriding factor.

I wasn't the one complaining about the preseason polls although I do think that their role in ultimately determining who gets into the tournament should be minimized or eliminated altogether. (I want the purely numerical criteria with no human input whatsoever.)

I still think preseason polls are a symptom and not a cause. If there is a bias pre-season, it will still exist at the end, and the lack of pre-season polls would not change that. The BCS actually did a good job on this account as the first rankings are publish 5 weeks into the season and these ranking are often different from the human polls published up until that time. I just find it amusing that fans spend so much energy and angst on early polls when it is such a small factor - usually a non-factor. Performance on the field after 12 games is >95% of the puzzle.

[8timechamps]

Pre-season polls are fun and will never go away. The bottom line is early rankings have almost never been a factor in the final rankings and yet people are so afraid they will be. I guess that's what makes them fun - they create passion where none exists :)

I think transparency will be a big factor in the success of this committee approach. If the criteria is laid out for all to see, coaches will know what they are striving for. For example, should a coach try to add more points to a blow-out victory or should he go to the reserves early and try to avoid injuries to the starters? Coaches will optimize according to the criteria. IF it become a white smoke/gray smoke thing, everyone will reject it.

What?! Preseason rankings have made a huge difference over the BCS era. They may not have decided the championship game, but they have certainly had an effect on the final standings. And now that there will be 4 teams included in the final playoff, preseason rankings will be more 'important' than ever.

Look at the final top 10 poll:

There are two loss teams that finished ahead of others that only did so because of where they were ranked pre-season. Hell, UCF (a one loss team) finished #10 (behind a lot of 2 loss teams that I think they could beat) after beating up on the Big XII champion, and that's because of where they were ranked (or unranked) preseason. They absolutely have an affect.

There shouldn't be a ranking released until (at a minimum) the third week of the season.

[8timechamps]

I still think preseason polls are a symptom and not a cause. If there is a bias pre-season, it will still exist at the end, and the lack of pre-season polls would not change that. The BCS actually did a good job on this account as the first rankings are publish 5 weeks into the season and these ranking are often different from the human polls published up until that time. I just find it amusing that fans spend so much energy and angst on early polls when it is such a small factor - usually a non-factor. Performance on the field after 12 games is >95% of the puzzle.

I agree that it's more of a symptom, but to say it has absolutely no affect is silly. I don't see how a bias could exist at the end. If a ranking wasn't released until later in the season, then it would be based much more on what a team had done to that point.

We've been force fed the "SEC, SEC, SEC" hype for years, and it has affected the rankings. I don't understand how you could think it has had no affect.

[BoulderSooner79]

I agree that it's more of a symptom, but to say it has absolutely no affect is silly. I don't see how a bias could exist at the end. If a ranking wasn't released until later in the season, then it would be based much more on what a team had done to that point.

We've been force fed the "SEC, SEC, SEC" hype for years, and it has affected the rankings. I don't understand how you could think it has had no affect.

I should qualify and say I was talking about the BCS championship pairings because this was a playoff thread. We've had a playoff since the BCS was created, it's just been 2 teams and now it is going to 4. Pre-season polls have had little to do with the final 2 and decisions about which of the various 1 loss teams gets to go; it's almost always goes to who's loss was earlier and secondarily, whose loss was to a weaker foe. I'll admit up front, I don't really care about final rankings outside the top 2. The other BCS bowls use other criteria including projected ticket sales. Yes, we have the BCS buster rules, so those non-AQ teams care a lot, but I'm guessing that goes away. Along with going to 4 teams, we are also changing the formula - we just don't know what it is yet. My guess is it won't be that much different that what we have now since the current scheme has been honed over the years. But you can rest assured those might beings on the committee are carrying conference/team biases in their heads that exist regardless of whether they publish them pre-season or not.

[rock on sooner]

Preseason polls are worthless, I forget the exact number but a huge number of teams finished ranked that were unranked in the preseason

I wouldn't say they're worthless...a team gets a high rank and wins,
albeit it barely, won't drop far and those unranked have a harder time
climbing. That high rank will stay in the conversation. (This may have
been discussed but I don't know, 'cause this thread stays on the first
page for me...???)

[8timechamps]

I should qualify and say I was talking about the BCS championship pairings because this was a playoff thread. We've had a playoff since the BCS was created, it's just been 2 teams and now it is going to 4. Pre-season polls have had little to do with the final 2 and decisions about which of the various 1 loss teams gets to go; it's almost always goes to who's loss was earlier and secondarily, whose loss was to a weaker foe. I'll admit up front, I don't really care about final rankings outside the top 2. The other BCS bowls use other criteria including projected ticket sales. Yes, we have the BCS buster rules, so those non-AQ teams care a lot, but I'm guessing that goes away. Along with going to 4 teams, we are also changing the formula - we just don't know what it is yet. My guess is it won't be that much different that what we have now since the current scheme has been honed over the years. But you can rest assured those might beings on the committee are carrying conference/team biases in their heads that exist regardless of whether they publish them pre-season or not.

Okay, that make a difference.

For all the heat it got, the BCS usually did a good job pairing the two best teams in the country, and when it comes down to such a small size (two teams), then I agree, pre-season polls mean nothing (as for affecting which teams are there). It may not have an affect on a final 4, but when the size goes to 8 (and I think we can all agree, it's just a matter of time), I think there could be teams included that benefit from their pre-season rankings.

In the end, all that really matters is winning. If OU wins, they'll be there in the end. Same can be said for most teams. We know how hard it is to go undefeated these days, so that's one way to almost guarantee a spot.

[oupride]

I'll just go ahead and say what everyone doesn't. Or maybe its been covered in another thread. We should consistently see 2 teams from the SEC in the 4 team tournament. We all know if the tournament had started this year both Auburn and Alabama would have been presented as the 2 and 3 seed. I hope they prove me wrong.

[Collier11]

It's different in hoops where there are only 5 players and just 1 or 2 guys can dominate. It certainly can apply in football and the QB position is the obvious place. But it can cut many ways. Take the horns in '09 and say McCoy gets hurt in the big12 CCG instead of the title game. They have earned a slot as much as anyone, but have no prayer to advance with true freshman Gilbert starting his first game in a playoff situation. It will be interesting how injuries might play into the mix.

I only think it will be taken into account if someone gets hurt early or mid season, loses closely, then that player comes back and shows that they make a big impact

[JLEW1818]

I could see Mack Brown being on the committee.

[BoulderSooner79]

I only think it will be taken into account if someone gets hurt early or mid season, loses closely, then that player comes back and shows that they make a big impact

Like say, Sam Bradford against TTech for example? ;)

[soonergirlNeugene]

I agree, this one is going to open the door for a lot more controversy.

[King Barry's Back]

It actually makes sense if you think about it, and the ncaa bball selection committee does the same. Think about this, what if TK gets hurt in the texas game and we lose by 3 pts, but then he returns and we go 11-1. That has to be considered, I think it only needs to be considered in obvious cases though

In basketball, the rule is used more in an example like: Oklahoma goes 11-0, and TK tears up the place all season. Then in the fourth quarter of the last game, with the Sooners ahead by 17 points, he tears up his ACL and is done for a year.

If you ignore the injury, the Sooners are almost certainly in the playoffs, and being considered for the no 1 seed. If you consider the injury, they might say that the weakened team doesn't even deserve an invitation to the playoffs.

Granted, a single injury is far more important on a 5-member team with maybe only 4-5 meaningful subs than it is in football, but that's how I expect injuries to be taken into consideration.

[dennis580]

Tom Osborn mentioned HE would take injuries into account. I seriously doubt most of the other members will.

[ouwasp]

I could see Mack Brown being on the committee.

Man...me too........

[oupride]

I could see Mack Brown being on the committee.
I'll speak for Mack.