"Winners & losers: post-playoff edition" Guess who wins!

[TN Tider]

Yeah I guess we all tick in different ways. For instance, since we don't know how this thing will turn out, I choose to think it will be for the better, where as some might see the sky falling. On the other hand, occasionally "professional" writers might really bother me with crazy words, where as some might be unbothered. Either way, roll tide!

[Jamos]

Lets use bullet points:

* We have no idea how or who in selecting 4 teams. We are kinda sure 1 SEC team will get in each year. We can only hope THEY pick the best one out of the 2,- or maybe 3.

* Journalist Dan Kaplan was on the national news this AM saying how we'll finally have a REAL national champion. Everyone agreed with him. Then they started talking about using the billion this plan would generate (BS) to pay players.

* The slippery slope danger zone. Watch the tweaking because now these Anti-SECites will not be satisfied if we win in 2014. The 8 playoff team people are already screaming blooddy murder.

* Enjoy the super-conferences. The regionality (word?) of college ball will soon be gone.

Football as we know it will be gone in the next few years and just remember who sat there and took it like a little girl.

I agree with you WV. I can see some big changes ahead for the fans and it may not be so pleasant. These liberal ideas could turn college football into a totally different game.

[ALTideUp]

I have been doing a lot of reading and thinking about this new system and I am not optimistic. My concerns rest with the selection committee and how it will function. Although the details are yet to be settled, it is clear that it will be a smallish number of humans who will make decisions "a posteriori", or after the fact. The current system makes at least some of it's decisions "a priori", before the fact. That is, the computers are programmed with some algorithm, the games are played, and the ranks are spit out in December. The polls are an a posteriori component of the current system but involve a large and wide pool of voters. Although they may have their own agendas, they are all different agendas and what emerges from the ooze is probably a pretty good reflection of "the truth".

To get to the point, my biggest concern is that the committee system can make huge impacts by bumping teams up or down a notch. Such small variances are common in the polls that we already employ and no one bats an eye when the coaches have it Stanford-Oregon and the media have it Oregon-Stanford. But when a selection committee does it's work it can decide that a big east team is 4 over an SEC team that is 5 just so there won't be two SEC teams. They can look at top four that includes a number 2 SEC team and a number 4 SEC team and bump the number two team to number 1, eliminating the possibility of an all SEC NCG. Since these important and politically motivated influences can be achieved by moving teams both up and down, and only a single position, there will be no way prove that the ratings are being influenced by illegitimate criteria. Even with the inevitable comparisons points of the polls and computers (which are so popular they will not go away just because they are no longer being used to set the top four) the small variances that can cause the SEC trouble won't look blatantly biased.

Infinitesimal tampering can lead to infinitely large impacts. 

[TN Tider]

I have been doing a lot of reading and thinking about this new system and I am not optimistic. My concerns rest with the selection committee and how it will function. Although the details are yet to be settled, it is clear that it will be a smallish number of humans who will make decisions "a posteriori", or after the fact. The current system makes at least some of it's decisions "a priori", before the fact. That is, the computers are programmed with some algorithm, the games are played, and the ranks are spit out in December. The polls are an a posteriori component of the current system but involve a large and wide pool of voters. Although they may have their own agendas, they are all different agendas and what emerges from the ooze is probably a pretty good reflection of "the truth".

To get to the point, my biggest concern is that the committee system can make huge impacts by bumping teams up or down a notch. Such small variances are common in the polls that we already employ and no one bats an eye when the coaches have it Stanford-Oregon and the media have it Oregon-Stanford. But when a selection committee does it's work it can decide that a big east team is 4 over an SEC team that is 5 just so there won't be two SEC teams. They can look at top four that includes a number 2 SEC team and a number 4 SEC team and bump the number two team to number 1, eliminating the possibility of an all SEC NCG. Since these important and politically motivated influences can be achieved by moving teams both up and down, and only a single position, there will be no way prove that the ratings are being influenced by illegitimate criteria. Even with the inevitable comparisons points of the polls and computers (which are so popular they will not go away just because they are no longer being used to set the top four) the small variances that can cause the SEC trouble won't look blatantly biased.

Infinitesimal tampering can lead to infinitely large impacts.  

Good post...and even better usage of the language!

[Guest]

Username:
Password:
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

There aren't any users online.

Loading Tweet...