Replace with an algorithm that takes into account all metrics. ***kin rediculous.
The CFP committee needs to go the way of the horse and buggy
4,475 Views |
64 Replies |
Last: 12 hrs ago by RoadkillBBQ
Yes, trust in computers is much higher these days with all the advances in AI technology. Set the parameters and eliminate all the bias and goal post moving.
Because whenever I see copy/pastes from AI I know the information will be accurate.
I guess if they were to just ask ChatGPT that would be a great point.
The committee should only determine the ranking one time - at the end of the season, after the conf championships ( if conf championships stay).
In addition, the committee should not be selected until 2 weeks prior to the team selection and no one affiliated with a school (Alma mater or employed by) in the top 25 can be on the committee.
In addition, the committee should not be selected until 2 weeks prior to the team selection and no one affiliated with a school (Alma mater or employed by) in the top 25 can be on the committee.
Who makes the algorithm?
OHAg82 said:
Replace with an algorithm that takes into account all metrics. ***kin rediculous.
Guess where we would be ranked if they still used the BCS system. #7
OHAg82 said:
Replace with an algorithm that takes into account all metrics. ***kin rediculous.
They have too much invested in blue blood programs. Those are the programs that draw in casual fans and dewschbag fans who can't see thru the bs.
The final poll is all that matters. The other polls are for a TV show and talking points. The final poll should be complete resume, head to head, common opponents with slight adjustment for major injury and Coaching changes
6 team playoff. Top 4 conference champs. Committee relegated to ranking champs and then selecting 2 (to cover odd-man-out scenarios.
Bigballin said:
Who makes the algorithm?
Bama.
They have an algorithm...revenue generators and espn
Bigballin said:
Who makes the algorithm?
When I mentioned AI, I was thinking more along the lines of having a powerful AI engine analyze every possible data point, stat, result, etc from every college football game in modern history and having it look for patterns, anomalies, etc that humans would miss or take ages to find...and then it could create an algorithm based off all of that data.
A. G. Pennypacker said:
The committee should only determine the ranking one time - at the end of the season, after the conf championships ( if conf championships stay).
In addition, the committee should not be selected until 2 weeks prior to the team selection and no one affiliated with a school (Alma mater or employed by) in the top 25 can be on the committee.
This. None oft he other post-season committees announce a bracket before the end of the season. It's a bad idea, and backs them into corners.
Bigballin said:
Who makes the algorithm?
This.
But WHO is programming the algorithm and ensuring there is no "blue blood" bias?
Can't trust any sources but maybe Vegas.
Can't trust any sources but maybe Vegas.
All the computer formulas and algorithms for seeding teams are only as good as the data points put in.
When there are about 2 to 3 games between teams P4 teams from different conferences, the data is pretty skewed.
The P4 conferences don't help by barely playing half the teams within each conference.
The data would be better with 12 weeks of P4 v P4 games including 9 to 10 games within conferences and 2 to 3 vs different P4 games
When there are about 2 to 3 games between teams P4 teams from different conferences, the data is pretty skewed.
The P4 conferences don't help by barely playing half the teams within each conference.
The data would be better with 12 weeks of P4 v P4 games including 9 to 10 games within conferences and 2 to 3 vs different P4 games
Get Off My Lawn said:
6 team playoff. Top 4 conference champs. Committee relegated to ranking champs and then selecting 2 (to cover odd-man-out scenarios.
F*** conference champs. Top 6 teams. Period!
Follow the big money and you have a higher probability of winning.
DL76
Algorithms are written by people. Or SkyNet…OHAg82 said:
Replace with an algorithm that takes into account all metrics. ***kin rediculous.
The idea of a committee is fine. Filling it with ADs and College coaches who are biased towards their own conferences and don't know what they are talking about is the problem. There is a reason no one uses the coaches poll.
TXAG 05 said:OHAg82 said:
Replace with an algorithm that takes into account all metrics. ***kin rediculous.
Guess where we would be ranked if they still used the BCS system. #7
When it was in use, most people complained about the computer rankings.
Unless you go to a system like pro sports use where teams are in divisions and all that matters is win/loss record, head-to-head, point differentials and opponent won/loss record to settle tie breakers, people will complain about bias in the system and how it is messed up.
FDT 1999 said:Get Off My Lawn said:
6 team playoff. Top 4 conference champs. Committee relegated to ranking champs and then selecting 2 (to cover odd-man-out scenarios.
F*** conference champs. Top 6 teams. Period!
Agree with best teams, but it has to be more than six.
Texas tech is going to take a spot from a real team this year.
There have to be enough teams to overcome that kind of crap.
DL76 said:
Follow the big money and you have a higher probability of winning.
Right but why? What do they know? Let them rank teams.
Bigballin said:
Who makes the algorithm?
Third party technology organization
Kansas Kid said:TXAG 05 said:OHAg82 said:
Replace with an algorithm that takes into account all metrics. ***kin rediculous.
Guess where we would be ranked if they still used the BCS system. #7
When it was in use, most people complained about the computer rankings.
People complaining based 2 spots but now there is 12. If a team cant get one of the 12 spots based on some AI model, then your team isn't that great.
AgSnacks16 said:
The idea of a committee is fine. Filling it with ADs and College coaches who are biased towards their own conferences and don't know what they are talking about is the problem. There is a reason no one uses the coaches poll.
Committee of people is by for the worse solution unless you want corruption and incompetence
Lets have 3 CFP committees. 1. AI with the metrics and parameters set (W/L, H to H etc), 2.A group actual experienced football coaches, 3. The current room of compromised, opinionated goobers. 1&2 will show how off 3 is. An injury or coaching change should not eliminate a deserving team from the playoff if they have earned it. There are 84 other players who worked their arse off.
No algorithm
No committee
Top two teams from each conference. New and more conferences that balanced with "blue bloods" spread across
If you can't finish top 2 in your conf, too dame bad.
No committee
Top two teams from each conference. New and more conferences that balanced with "blue bloods" spread across
If you can't finish top 2 in your conf, too dame bad.
Being saying it since BcS days, have Vegas determine the top 12 teams.
Detmersdislocatedshoulder
Joined:
Mar 30, 2020
Posts:
15,067
How long do you want to ignore this user?
get rid of conf championships and take top 16 teams regardless of conference. i don't understand why this is so problematic. the most obvious choice is the best in this case. i believe moving from 12 to 16 is the right number due to the 9th conf game being added.
no byes, top 8 at home first round. 1 vs 16 is a big enough advantage at home for top seed. etc
no byes, top 8 at home first round. 1 vs 16 is a big enough advantage at home for top seed. etc
4 said:FDT 1999 said:Get Off My Lawn said:
6 team playoff. Top 4 conference champs. Committee relegated to ranking champs and then selecting 2 (to cover odd-man-out scenarios.
F*** conference champs. Top 6 teams. Period!
Agree with best teams, but it has to be more than six.
Texas tech is going to take a spot from a real team this year.
There have to be enough teams to overcome that kind of crap.
I agree with that too. It needs to be more than six. I was really responding to the conference champs argument. It should only be the top teams. I personally like 12, but conference champions shouldn't have anything to do with it. Every conference except the SEC and maybe the Big 10 are trash. I could argue that most of the Big 10 is trash too.
How would taking the top 2 work for us this year?? SEC would need a an actual playoff, not opinions of who is better.
Even if uo go with all computers, you have to have humans tell it what matters. Can't get rid of human bias.
He is Ass My Dude said:
No algorithm
No committee
Top two teams from each conference. New and more conferences that balanced with "blue bloods" spread across
If you can't finish top 2 in your conf, too dame bad.
F*** that! Many conferences don't deserve any slots much less 2 of them. This method would give too much representation to sh*tty conferences. If the SEC or Big 10 get 5-6 slots, too f***ing bad. Try sucking less.
Featured Stories
See All
53:12
4h ago
6.5k
The Loochador Podcast: CFP is officially coming to Kyle Field
by Billy Liucci
Texas A&M accomplishes 'step one' by being included in 12-team field
by Olin Buchanan
IN: Texas A&M earns No. 7 seed, will host Miami at Kyle Field
by Richard Zane
A&M's College Football Playoff path to Miami begins against Miami
by Olin Buchanan
FINAL/OT from Arlington: Southern Methodist 93, Texas A&M 80
by Luke Evangelist