Home› Hardcore Husky Board

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register
Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options

SI: Takeaways on first playoff rankings

DerekJohnsonDerekJohnson Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 60,087
First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
Founders Club
in Hardcore Husky Board
si.com/college-football/video/2016/11/01/biggest-takeaways-first-college-football-playoff-rankings
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
«1

Comments

  • Options
    Stinky_HankeyStinky_Hankey Member Posts: 82
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes Name Dropper 5 Up Votes
    edited November 2016
    The problem is the committee. There should be no fucking committee. Win your conference and you are in. Nuf said on that.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    Combo Breaker 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Anniversary
    Stinky_Hankey said:

    The problem is the committee. There should be no fucking committee. Win your conference and you are in. Nuf said on that.

    There's the dumbest thing I will read all day.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    PurpleJPurpleJ Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 36,528
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    Swaye said:

    It sucks playing in this dreck league. It sucks worse scheduling nobody in non-conference. Can we get out of any of these bullshit schedules and get somebody real on there in the next couple years?

    We should join the SEC.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    EwaDawgEwaDawg Member Posts: 3,992
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    Swaye said:

    It sucks playing in this dreck league. It sucks worse scheduling nobody in non-conference. Can we get out of any of these bullshit schedules and get somebody real on there in the next couple years?

    Disagree. Well, kinda.


    Committee was quoted as saying that a T m had four wins against teams with winning records (included S Carolina at 4-4). UW has two.


    All four of UW's remaining games are against teams with winning records. Five if you count the P12 championship game.


    The schedule has been pathetic (so far) but it gets better. As far as being hurt by a bad conference - it is a zero sum game ( Ws = Ls). It just depends who you miss.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    SpoonieLuvSpoonieLuv Member Posts: 5,437
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Combo Breaker
    PM to Andy Staples; Cool cardigan.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    dhdawgdhdawg Member Posts: 13,326
    5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker First Anniversary
    UWhuskytskeet said:

    Goes to show how the nine-game conference schedule gives us no help at all.

    A&M scheduled UCLA and plays 3 absolute dreck teams, actually worse than our OOC schedule...but in reality UCLA is equivalent to whatever P12 team we play for that 9th game. If we had an 8 game P12 schedule we could have added a shit P5 team and we'd be getting jerked off right now.

    Cohen needs to drop all FCS teams from future schedules and add a mid-tier G5 team. This could easily boost our OOC SOS 30 places. I'd prefer a marquee game each year, but until we start our series with Michigan, BYU will be good enough to at least avoid this conversation.

    bingo. extremely simplistic to look at UW's OOC and A&M's OOC and say A&M's is better because UCLA is on their schedule. It's basically the equivalent of the extra conference game UW plays.
    Plus UW isn't scheduling shit games in november

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    AIRWOLFAIRWOLF Member Posts: 1,840
    5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Anniversary First Comment
    EwaDawg said:

    Committee was quoted as saying that a T m had four wins against teams with winning records (included S Carolina at 4-4). UW has two.

    Highlights how fucking stupid it is to consider strength of schedule but to specifically prohibit considering margin of victory. Both pieces matter a great deal to any decent analysis. Using just one is probably worse than going strictly off the "eye test".

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    AIRWOLF said:

    EwaDawg said:

    Committee was quoted as saying that a T m had four wins against teams with winning records (included S Carolina at 4-4). UW has two.

    Highlights how fucking stupid it is to consider strength of schedule but to specifically prohibit considering margin of victory. Both pieces matter a great deal to any decent analysis. Using just one is probably worse than going strictly off the "eye test".

    I haven't paid attention to the playoff committee bullshit (probably because we weren't close to relevant) but is this for serious? They don't consider margin of victory? If that's true it's amazing they even got three of the four teams right. Holy shit.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    PassionPassion Member Posts: 4,622
    5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Anniversary First Comment
    AIRWOLF said:

    EwaDawg said:

    Committee was quoted as saying that a T m had four wins against teams with winning records (included S Carolina at 4-4). UW has two.

    Highlights how fucking stupid it is to consider strength of schedule but to specifically prohibit considering margin of victory. Both pieces matter a great deal to any decent analysis. Using just one is probably worse than going strictly off the "eye test".

    This is so fucking stupid. Destroying oregon state is apparently no better than squeaking one out. What sense does that make?

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    AIRWOLFAIRWOLF Member Posts: 1,840
    5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Anniversary First Comment
    edited November 2016
    It actually started back in the BCS era. Some of the computer rating sthat were available at the time were a part of the formula. They clearly considered margin of victory, because it is essential information. I think they might have used them as-is at first, but then decided it provided incentive to run up the score and they couldn't have that. Nevermind that the human polls clearly react to margins of victory as well. So the BCS jackasses forced any computer ratings that would be included in the BCS formula to explicitly not make use of margin of victory. Which pretty much made the computer rankings crappy and useless. And so when people caught on to the fact they were crappy and useless the coaches, public and especially sports writers complained about them incessantly. So when they were setting up this new system they decided to exclude the computers.

    And somehow not considering margin of victory was passed along to this process.

    I think there is also some bullshit about individual committee members not being allowed to consider any "unapproved" metrics or data. So things like SOS-adjusted net yards per play isn't something they are "allowed" to look at.

    It is all pretty comical. For now. If a deserving Husky team gets left out b/c of any of the above bullshit I will probably lose perspective and not take a walk around the block to cool off.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    NEsnake12NEsnake12 Member Posts: 3,791
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes First Comment 5 Up Votes
    The issue with including margin of victory as a factor in the computer polls is that you have assholes like Harbaugh purposely running up the score against shit teams like Rutgers. It should definitely be taken into consideration with this new committee though, given that anyone with half a brain can see the difference between when a team had the game won at half and hit the brakes, versus running up the score.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    AIRWOLFAIRWOLF Member Posts: 1,840
    5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Anniversary First Comment
    NEsnake12 said:

    The issue with including margin of victory as a factor in the computer polls is that you have assholes like Harbaugh purposely running up the score against shit teams like Rutgers. It should definitely be taken into consideration with this new committee though, given that anyone with half a brain can see the difference between when a team had the game won at half and hit the brakes, versus running up the score.

    It's really not a problem. You simply cap the point at which incremental scores make a difference at a differential of like 35 points and an absolute score cap of 59 points.

    The better computer systems already do something like that.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    Combo Breaker 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Anniversary
    NEsnake12 said:

    The issue with including margin of victory as a factor in the computer polls is that you have assholes like Harbaugh purposely running up the score against shit teams like Rutgers. It should definitely be taken into consideration with this new committee though, given that anyone with half a brain can see the difference between when a team had the game won at half and hit the brakes, versus running up the score.

    Harbaugh didn't run that score up.

    Rutgers is THAT BAD.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    Stinky_HankeyStinky_Hankey Member Posts: 82
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes Name Dropper 5 Up Votes
    TierbsHsotBoobs said:

    Stinky_Hankey said:

    The problem is the committee. There should be no fucking committee. Win your conference and you are in. Nuf said on that.

    There's the dumbest thing I will read all day.
    You have got to be kidding. You're ok with *our Husky's fate being in the hands of Condy and TWFS? Really? Its time to take all the subjective bullshit out of the equation. Win and you're in. Its almost too simple.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    MisterEmMisterEm Member Posts: 6,685
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    TierbsHsotBoobs said:

    NEsnake12 said:

    The issue with including margin of victory as a factor in the computer polls is that you have assholes like Harbaugh purposely running up the score against shit teams like Rutgers. It should definitely be taken into consideration with this new committee though, given that anyone with half a brain can see the difference between when a team had the game won at half and hit the brakes, versus running up the score.

    Harbaugh didn't run that score up.

    Rutgers is THAT BAD.
    Rutgers is indeed bad, but Harbaugh still had starters in the 4th up 60.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    Mad_SonMad_Son Member Posts: 10,093
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    AIRWOLF said:

    NEsnake12 said:

    The issue with including margin of victory as a factor in the computer polls is that you have assholes like Harbaugh purposely running up the score against shit teams like Rutgers. It should definitely be taken into consideration with this new committee though, given that anyone with half a brain can see the difference between when a team had the game won at half and hit the brakes, versus running up the score.

    It's really not a problem. You simply cap the point at which incremental scores make a difference at a differential of like 35 points and an absolute score cap of 59 points.

    The better computer systems already do something like that.
    Correct.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.