🏈 Danny Kanell speaks, Herbie says "Dude, what's happened to you...you're better than this."

[musso]

Then you realize that "some of this fog" from the committee is just smoke. They do it for the entertainment factor.

Like my first post originally stated.

But the eye test is still the answer...

Sure, if you want to preserve the power that committees have over what happens on the field. Personally, I prefer making progress in the opposite direction.

 

[TerryP]

Where did I say they have Bama fatigue?

Used that statement as a thought about the fallacy found in some opinions.

 

[Tidestalker]

Used that statement as a thought about the fallacy found in some opinions.

Ahhh touche.

 

[TerryP]

However, everyone I have heard express an opinion believes Bama would provide a more entertaining

In the off season some will admit opinions/arguments are scripted. In season? Not so much.

Crunch time opinions change: See @Sgt. Lincoln Osiris lust

I saw Santa rassel before

 

[TUSKtimes]

Like my first post originally stated.


.

You are a little too subjective, in that you left out the full quote. You know, the point. "I have failed to see the committee screw up the final poll." That's all you can ask for. Now I have to go and pick up my playoff tickets. :dance:

 

[Sgt. Lincoln Osiris]

In the off season some will admit opinions/arguments are scripted. In season? Not so much.

Crunch time opinions change: See @Sgt. Lincoln Osiris lust

Lust...

LUST, YOU SAY?

Kick her out of bed? I wouldn't have her in my bed (or my yard, or my zip code, for that matter) to begin with. Not even in an apocalypse and human existence depended on our (shudder) copulation.

 

['65 Cobra]

You're misunderstanding me. I don't think "eye test" is complicated. It's simple, but more importantly it is subjective. And subjectivity gives power to committees. Objectivity gives power to the teams and players themselves. Like I already stated, when teams know more clearly exactly what they must do (and avoid doing), their destiny becomes theirs. But the powers that be don't want to give "amateur" players any more leverage. They need to keep them in a fog for as long as possible in order to make the game more entertaining and profitable for the profiteers.

Just curious, my friend, - and to avoid inferring anything because of a lack of specificity - but exactly what criteria are to be included in your definition of "objectivity?"

 

[musso]

You are a little too subjective, in that you left out the full quote.

That's not what subjective means.

You know, the point. "I have failed to see the committee screw up the final poll." That's all you can ask for.

I didn't ignore that. I already expressed in this thread I don't support expanding to 8 teams. So we don't differ enough to warrant a response.

Although since you're pressing me, I will admit I thought initially that including Ohio St in 2014 was a mistake. I never expected their 3rd string QB to do what he did to us.

I don't let my general satisfaction with something prevent me from critiquing it further. We should always want something better than the status quo, right? I'm with Saban in that I tend to focus more on things which can be improved regardless of how well they may be at present.

Now I have to go and pick up my playoff tickets. :dance:

:dance:indeed!

 

[musso]

Just curious, my friend, - and to avoid inferring anything because of a lack of specificity - but exactly what criteria are to be included in your definition of "objectivity?"

From one of my earlier posts in this thread:

We've had many threads over the many years about what sort of reforms are needed to improve the game. I've always replied with the same proposal: make the conditions of postseason participation more objective and normative. The NFL does this well. Every team knows what they must do (and not do) to survive. No need for a cabal to "manage" outcomes. The power is with each team to determine its destiny.

It's not "my definition." Objective simply means not influenced by individual preferences, opinions, whims, etc. I'm advocating for the play-off criteria to be predetermined, like written down in a rule book or something, haha. And for people to keep their hands off the process and let rules, not a committee's opinions, determine who goes to the playoff. I'm not reinventing the wheel, here. Simply copy the NFL's play off system in some way.

 

[TUSKtimes]

That's not what subjective means.

It does if you with prejudice and bias decided to leave out my main point in summation. That would be a subjective view. I thought we talked about this?

I didn't ignore that. I already expressed in this thread I don't support expanding to 8 teams. So we don't differ enough to warrant a response.

Although since you're pressing me, I will admit I thought initially that including Ohio St in 2014 was a mistake. I never expected their 3rd string QB to do what he did to us.

That's a start. And it's why I value the human eye test. Even if the Buckeyes hadn't made it, you wouldn't know it and they wouldn't know it. It's not an exact science and it never will be.

I don't let my general satisfaction with something prevent me from critiquing it further. We should always want something better than the status quo, right? I'm with Saban in that I tend to focus more on things which can be improved regardless of how well they may be at present.

I wasn't mad that you said it, just pointing out the fallacy of the argument in my opinion. No harm.

 

[Sgt. Lincoln Osiris]

Russillo also laying some smackdown on the Bama haters in the media...

 

[TUSKtimes]

I truly have zero respect for skippy but this is cool if you haven't seen it.

 

[musso]

It does if you with prejudice and bias decided to leave out my main point in summation. That would be a subjective view. I thought we talked about this?

One is not obligated to reply to each and every particular point made by another. That's not being subjective; that's being selective. I usually only respond to claims with which I take issue. That's how debates usually go. As I just told you, I don't claim to know when/if the play off has ever failed to produce a satisfactory outcome. I am only claiming that it would be preferable to (1) reduce the power of committees to determine a season's outcome and (2) put play-off eligibility rules down on paper for everyone to understand before the season.

And it's why I value the human eye test.

There is no "eye." There are only eyes, on each and every human head. You can keep saying that, but all you're effectively saying is that you value the eyes of a privileged committee more than the actions and performances of teams. How much more pride would fans have in their team when they know they earned everything by their own effort rather than by the lucky favoritism from those on high?

 

[JoseyWalesTheOutlaw]

4 best teams ...Period

JMO ..if the barn had won then the SEC would have a 2 loss Champ team in the playoffs. That might have given the committee the open door to put another 2 loss Champ in over Bama.

 

[BAMAneck]

Has anyone mentioned , that three teams bring pretty much the exact same market ?

If it was for ratings USC or OSU would have gotten in.

 

[TUSKtimes]

One is not obligated to reply to each and every particular point made by another. That's not being subjective; that's being selective. I usually only respond to claims with which I take issue. That's how debates usually go. As I just told you, I don't claim to know when/if the play off has ever failed to produce a satisfactory outcome. I am only claiming that it would be preferable to (1) reduce the power of committees to determine a season's outcome and (2) put play-off eligibility rules down on paper for everyone to understand before the season.



There is no "eye." There are only eyes, on each and every human head. You can keep saying that, but all you're effectively saying is that you value the eyes of a privileged committee more than the actions and performances of teams. How much more pride would fans have in their team when they know they earned everything by their own effort rather than by the lucky favoritism from those on high?

You know @musso for a guy that likes to pick his spots and come on here and give your controversial views, why are you now spending so much time on semantics with me, as if that was ever the point? Just go for the last thought.

I grew up in an era of football were everything was politics. The BCS was light years ahead of that beauty contest and the playoff is much better than the BCS. Suppose that's as good as it gets?

 

[Sgt. Lincoln Osiris]

Yeah, @TerryP

Looks like the new "car" is having trouble embedding tweets.

 

[Tidestalker]

4 best teams ...Period

JMO ..if the barn had won then the SEC would have a 2 loss Champ team in the playoffs. That might have given the committee the open door to put another 2 loss Champ in over Bama.

Heard something funny on JOX today... I think Brown made the point that Auburn should have declined the SECCG invite. Let Bama/Georgia battle it out. IMO They would have done enough to get in (Beat 2 #1 teams and early loss to another #1 would've been enough to overcome a road loss to LSU)

Weird system we have. I couldn't be happier to leave Urban and Aubie out in the cold... But I'd be really disgruntled if wearing the other shoe. ROLL MF'N TIDE THO

 

[TerryP]

Yeah, @TerryP

Looks like the new "car" is having trouble embedding tweets.

It's there...haven't turned that switch on yet. TFM Girls on Twitter

 

[TerryP]

https://twitter.com/TFMgirls/status/937557185495752704