Re: Selection Committee Top 10
I would have no problem agreeing with your statement if the committee admitted to any sort of process. What is interesting about all of this is they admitted to no process and even further, no use of the same parameters they will use when the actual seeding takes place. They released a junk ranking using no parameters they will use later and have placed themselves in a box because they will have to explain how they are either defying logic later by defending their decision they made now or defying logic now by saying today's ranking doesn't matter because of a different process later. Then why release one at all? The bottom line is the committee chair has publicly stated the process will be different later, so that implies the ranking today means absolutely nothing, again questioning the need for a ranking by the committee today. If what the chair is saying is true, then all that is learned by an early ranking is where their decisions are biased. They are relying on some sort of feel test with big ass chopper mittens on. This shouldn't be a concern for the schools who are ranked lower than what logic says, it should be a concern for everyone. No one still has any idea where they stand. Again, for the third time, the ranking by the committee was a waste of time. If this was an attempt to generate interest in the FCS product, they did it at the expense of their integrity.Originally Posted by unbison
Put the time in, use the same parameters that will be used during the seeding process, and have a true ranking system where schools do know where they stand today. Otherwise, just wait.
Reply With Quote
