forums

JUSTICE

TheATLCane said:
That logic is severely flawed because one of ND's losses is to Miami. It works if ND didn't lose to Miami.

Comparing losses is one input. How about comparing wins?
Click to expand...
Another example is Illinois is ranked at 7-3 but Washington isn’t ranked at 7-3 despite beating Illinois. Now, Illinois blowout loss against IU is just a regular ole loss

IL lost to IU by 53; Wash by 17, and OSU by 17.

UWash: lost to OSU by 18, Wisconsin by 3, and UMich by 17

A close in conference loss is deemed that much worse than a blowout loss to a top team despite the H2H win lol. IL’s best win is against USC by two points; so they really pick and choose what matters to them and when it matters to them.



They don’t believe the 🐂 💩 they’re selling. Here’s how we know: 7-3 Texas is above 8-2 Michigan. Michigan has two good ranked losses. But one of those losses is to a team that Texas beat. Texas has a bad loss to UF.

The nonsense: Miami is above USC and Vandy. Obviously i believe we should be; however, if the committee is going to go by any type of principle; USC has losses to two ranked teams: IL and ND. Vandy has losses to two ranked teams: UTexas and Alabama. So in theory, if this is why we’re below Utah/BYU/ND/Alabama; the same should hold weight for USC + Vandy being above us too. And UMich but not Texas. But it doesn’t.
 
Advertisement
BigDikDaddyFromCincinnati said:
I was mocked by a few on this forum when I (sarcastically) mentioned “quality losses” would be used to justify $EC/B1G bias for playoffs.

If you’re not in those two conferences, getting in is significantly harder. The committee will say anything as “justification,” regardless of the lunacy.
Click to expand...
Yeah, people think I’m joking when I say things about quality losses.

Not anymore.

It’s just sad. ☹️
 
This year it's about winning, it's about who you're losing to.

Someone try to make it make sense.
 
Fart Keyhole said:
They call these tiers "comparison pools". The committee is asked to compare a cluster of teams and provide relative rankings. It's actually a reasonable enough algorithm in general. One problem introduced by competitive sports is that H2H is the most important tiebreaker, but it only works when the comparison pool has a size of two. So the committee is working with this analytics-informed comparison tool that is highly sensitive to the choice of pool size. The rumor going around is that the pool size is four, which (conveniently for ND, for the moment) prevents direct comparison of ND and UM. If UM wins out, they will be in a pool with ND, and thus be highly likely to be ranked above the Irish on Selection Sunday.
Click to expand...
However, i thought they first established the tiers based off the “eye test” in the first ranking run. Am I mistaken?
 
Lokest said:
If the roles were reversed and miami lost to notre dame and won out, we would be in the same spot and they would say miami hasn't beaten anyone and the one legit team they played they lost.
Click to expand...
If we only lost one game we’d be the ACC champs and get an auto bid
 
Fart Keyhole said:
They call these tiers "comparison pools". The committee is asked to compare a cluster of teams and provide relative rankings. It's actually a reasonable enough algorithm in general. One problem introduced by competitive sports is that H2H is the most important tiebreaker, but it only works when the comparison pool has a size of two. So the committee is working with this analytics-informed comparison tool that is highly sensitive to the choice of pool size. The rumor going around is that the pool size is four, which (conveniently for ND, for the moment) prevents direct comparison of ND and UM. If UM wins out, they will be in a pool with ND, and thus be highly likely to be ranked above the Irish on Selection Sunday.
Click to expand...
So it’s complex math used to disguise the buIIsh.it?
 
TomAce said:
However, i thought they first established the tiers based off the “eye test” in the first ranking run. Am I mistaken?
Click to expand...
Perhaps! But that means the comparison pool size changes for each cluster (yikes) and each week. Vamos a ver.
 
Advertisement
TheATLCane said:
That logic is severely flawed because one of ND's losses is to Miami. It works if ND didn't lose to Miami.

Comparing losses is one input. How about comparing wins?
Click to expand...
That was the logic the BCS used to keep us out in 2000.

Edit: meaning ND gets in over us because they had the “better loss” even though the loss was to us.
 
If we win out convincingly, we are in. Even the corrupt committee can’t make that go away. They will find a way to get us and ND in. Otherwise the whole system will be burned to the ground and they don’t want that.
 
Fart Keyhole said:
They call these tiers "comparison pools". The committee is asked to compare a cluster of teams and provide relative rankings. It's actually a reasonable enough algorithm in general. One problem introduced by competitive sports is that H2H is the most important tiebreaker, but it only works when the comparison pool has a size of two. So the committee is working with this analytics-informed comparison tool that is highly sensitive to the choice of pool size. The rumor going around is that the pool size is four, which (conveniently for ND, for the moment) prevents direct comparison of ND and UM. If UM wins out, they will be in a pool with ND, and thus be highly likely to be ranked above the Irish on Selection Sunday.
Click to expand...
It’s outlined here:

 
CDWright40 said:
Beating a bad VT and a Pitt team that just lost by 100 to ND isn’t going to be a positive to our resume. The committee stacked teams between ND and Miami so that they won’t be compared to each other and thus the head to head doesn’t come into play.

We need to jump 3 spots in 2 weeks and hope USCw and Vandy don’t pass us. It’s the longest of long shots.

The bigger question is how Miami and the ACC deal with this moving forward. First thing I do is cancel all non conference games against power conference teams. Quality wins don’t help your ranking so don’t take the chance. Gimme Savannah state Bethune cookman etc.
Click to expand...
Missouri over OU
Cincinnati over BYU
K State over Utah

Tenn will beat Vandy
Oregon beating USC knocks off ND “signature” win

Those are real possibilities

Having said all that I hope Miami and meathead learned their ******* lesson and bury teams in the future. Furthermore the ACC can **** off and I hope they get what they deserve in the way that they let the officials officiate Miami games. It’s blasphemy and they deserve it. I hope they lose a **** ton of money.
 
Advertisement
Brains said:
Just. *******. Win.
Click to expand...

^^^ this. You want to really impress these asshats? Do something we haven't done in a very long time. Win consistent football games in November.

Let it all play out. If we get screwed, we get screwed. Flat out worry about what you can control.

p.s. ACC Commissioner Jim Phillips needs to goto a sew on grow a set balls location, because he has none.
 
hcanes100 said:
^^^ this. You want to really impress these asshats? Do something we haven't done in a very long time. Win consistent football games in November.

Let it all play out. If we get screwed, we get screwed. Flat out worry about what you can control.

p.s. ACC Commissioner Jim Phillips needs to goto a sew on grow a set balls location, because he has none.
Click to expand...
Totally agree with your first point.

Regarding your p.s., what do you want Phillips to do? I just don't see what leverage he has at all regarding the committee.
 
I assume the winner of SMU/Louisville would be ranked in the next rankings. Will that actually boost our resume? lol
 
Back
Top