šŸˆ Now We Wait To See Relevance Of Polls

  • Thread starter Thread starter CollegeFootballNews.com
  • Start date Start date
C

CollegeFootballNews.com

We have final couple of days where one can examine the college football polls as selected by sports journalists (the Associated Press) and college coaches (USA Today). Beginning Tuesday we get the expertise from 11 men and one woman who don’t live and breathe college football, but have pledged to do their best while having jobs that require them to do other things.

Although Alabama – owing to its brand as one of the nation’s best teams and having the nation’s best coach and having another good team – is probably in good shape regardless of the selection process, it is a nervous time.

The College Football Playoff Selection Committee will make known its first poll on Tuesday evening. How important is that? It will be televised.

What would really be worthwhile is the committee could give us the real reason Archie Manning resigned from the committee, because ā€œknee surgeryā€ is hard to believe.

What we may find out – but probably won’t until later – is how the members of this committee are thinking. Or being swayed.

Considering the polls – AP and Coaches – that have been doing the job very well, thank you, for decades have the same 25 teams this week, it is unlikely that the first selection committee poll will be much different.

What will really matter is what four teams are in the selection committee’s final poll following the conference championship games.

Today, the AP and Coaches have the same four teams in the same order, but that is going to change. Alabama is third in both polls and plays number one Mississippi State and number four Auburn in the final weeks of regular season play.

Obviously, unless something is very strange with the selection committee, Alabama can win its way to the inaugural four-team playoff for the national championship. But suppose the committee thinks that teams like Michigan State and Oregon andKansas State are worthy?

That will tell you that a majority of those on the committee either are not watching college football or do not know what they are seeing when they do watch it.

That won’t happen this week, though.

Here are the top four teams, in order, in the AP and Coaches polls:

1. Mississippi State, 2. Florida State, 3. Alabama, 4. Auburn.

Everyone knows it will not finish in that order. The Crimson Tide plays Mississippi State in three weeks and Auburn to end regular season play. It could be said that Bama is the spoiler. More than likely, though, Alabama will be expected to win both those games, which are in Tuscaloosa.

Mississippi State and FSU are both 7-0. Alabama is the nation’s highest ranked team with one loss. The Tide has a 7-1 record.

The Tide does not play this week. Alabama’s next game is Nov. 8 at LSU. LSU, by the way, is 16th in the AP and 17th in the Coaches after beating Ole Miss last weekend. The Rebels previously were ranked in the top four, but fell to seventh in the AP and ninth in the Coaches.

Also from the Southeastern Conference, Georgia is eighth in the Coaches and ninth in the AP, Missouri is not reanked but is getting votes in both polls, and Texas A&Mis getting one point – meaning one coach voted the Aggies 25th – in the Coaches.

Continue reading...
 
Stating the obvious; or maybe not so much.

A committee member has to have a starting point, right? Then they adjust rankings based on the results so far this season.

Here's the question; what's their starting point? It's going to be a poll, or computer ranking. The notion that these two systems don't have any bearing is without merit.
 
With a committee, as you said, TP, there has to be a starting point, whether polls or computer rankings, or personal views. I imagine that in their private deliberations they have been forming their own rankings as the season has progressed. As the season progresses toward the climax the 'eye' test becomes more and more significant.
 
It doesn't matter who they pick all this is is a prelude to an 8 team playoff. Archie didn't leave because of knee surgery. If anyone buys that they are naive. I'm with Tom Luginbill and believe this is going to be a train wreck of chaos and will make people a lot madder than the BCS ever did. I'm sure there will be people on the committee putting more value in conference champions than strength of schedule. I also don't doubt one bit that "sec bias" is in the minds of a few non-sec affiliated people as well. Leading them to be slanted more to ensuring two SEC teams aren't in the final playoff, even if they are deserving.
 
Personally I see a more politically correct slanted committee. Let's not forget why this format was chosen. 2011 LSU/Alabama fiasco. I would be very surprised if the first poll that came out included two SEC teams. But I've been wrong before. My guess is as follows:

1. Miss St
2. FSU
3. Oregon
4. Notre Dame or Michigan St.

Teams just outside the bubble:
5. Notre Dame
6. Kansas St or possibly TCU
7. Ole Miss
8. Alabama or possibly Auburn
 
It doesn't matter who they pick all this is is a prelude to an 8 team playoff. Archie didn't leave because of knee surgery. If anyone buys that they are naive. I'm with Tom Luginbill and believe this is going to be a train wreck of chaos and will make people a lot madder than the BCS ever did. I'm sure there will be people on the committee putting more value in conference champions than strength of schedule. I also don't doubt one bit that "sec bias" is in the minds of a few non-sec affiliated people as well. Leading them to be slanted more to ensuring two SEC teams aren't in the final playoff, even if they are deserving.

Won't go to 6 teams anytime soon. Won't go to 8 teams anytime EVER. Would put themselves out of business. NCAA rule mandates that NCAA administers any playoff of 8 or more teams.
 
Won't go to 6 teams anytime soon. Won't go to 8 teams anytime EVER. Would put themselves out of business. NCAA rule mandates that NCAA administers any playoff of 8 or more teams.

It could go to 6 pretty quickly, but you're right about 8. I think there should be a benefit to being 1 or 2 in a larger field. A bye while 3-6 slug it out would be acceptable.

RTR,

Tim
 
I would like to see an expansion to 6 playoff teams and for the Big 12 to be forced in to holding a conference championship game. You would then fill 5 slots with the Big 5 conference champions, and give an at-large bid to the highest ranking non-conference champion. The wildcard spot could go to Notre Dame, a Boise State type team, or one of the Big 5 conference championship game losers. This would eliminate the need for a section committee.
 
I would like to see an expansion to 6 playoff teams and for the Big 12 to be forced in to holding a conference championship game. You would then fill 5 slots with the Big 5 conference champions, and give an at-large bid to the highest ranking non-conference champion. The wildcard spot could go to Notre Dame, a Boise State type team, or one of the Big 5 conference championship game losers. This would eliminate the need for a section committee.

I believe it hurts the Big 12 to not have a championship game, but they have to add two more members to be eligible to hold a championship game. Regardless, I think a CC should be a consideration, but not an absolute. If an underdog division champ beats an undefeated favorite in the championship game, does the dog go? A four loss Pitt team remains in control of its own destiny to get to the ACC CG. We start looking a lot like basketball if we go that route.

I'm anxious to see if there are any oddball, wildcard considerations that diverge from conventional wisdom...

RTR,

Tim
 
Back
Top Bottom