Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: Bracketology 3.0

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    West Fargo
    Posts
    7,728

    Default Re: Bracketology 3.0

    Hell no they shouldn't, but they won't. 6-5 will end up taking them about 6 deep and they will all end up with similar resumes. So all or nine. The committee will think they are going safe and go none. Back to three teams.

    The committee is easy to figure out. Take the most logical result and walk it back.

    Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    St. Paul
    Posts
    19,094

    Default Re: Bracketology 3.0

    Quote Originally Posted by td577 View Post
    Hell no they shouldn't, but they won't. 6-5 will end up taking them about 6 deep and they will all end up with similar resumes. So all or nine. The committee will think they are going safe and go none. Back to three teams.

    The committee is easy to figure out. Take the most logical result and walk it back.

    Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk
    What is logical about not putting the best teams in the tournament?
    I have the honor to be Your Obedient Servant - B.Aud

    We all live in stories... It seems to me that a definition of any living vibrant society is that you constantly question those stories... The argument itself is freedom. It's not that you come to a conclusion about it. Through that argument you change your mind sometimes... That's how societies grow. When you can't retell for yourself the stories of your life then you live in a prison... Somebody else controls the story. - S. Rushdie

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    West Fargo
    Posts
    7,728

    Default Re: Bracketology 3.0

    Quote Originally Posted by bisonaudit View Post
    What is logical about not putting the best teams in the tournament?
    They do it every year. You tell me.

    NDSU and USD are in with at least 7 wins each.

    I have ISUr winning at least 7 with a win over WIU, for sure.

    SDSU plays NDSU, ISUr, and USD. They could easily be stuck at 6 wins. If they don't get to 7, they also don't have any signature wins.
    UNI has to beat USD or they can't get better than 6 wins. UNI beat SDSU for their best win.
    SIU doesn't look like a team that is going to win out to get to 7. They will probably get to 6. SIU beat ISUr for a good win.
    WIU has ISUb. They get to 6. WIU beat a FBS program. They might have the best SRS rating.
    YSU might still get to 6 if they win out over ISUb, SU, and MSU. YSU beat SDSU.

    All five have some bad losses. Without going through all the suspected math, I am guessing their SRS ratings are probably pretty close. Unless one of them pulls away, there is the potential for 5 teams to still be sitting at 6 wins and you have 5 big fluffy teams looking like maybe having a better shot at 7? Then somewhere between the Southern, CAA, and the Southland, there will be an extra 8 win team than normal that will take a at-large. There is going to be some playoff worthy teams not playing a month from now, as usual, and if there is a logjam in the valley at 6 wins, how does the Valley justify getting their normal allotment of schools in? Now show me where the committee has had a history of being blatantly pro-valley in the past. They have allowed a 6 win valley team in when they have had multiple signature wins and clearly separated from everyone below them in their own conference.

    What is logical is SDSU getting another win, having 4 valley schools with 7 or better in the win column, and the committee stopping with 4. Certainly not 8, even if 4 more are at 6 wins. Not even 5 because there will be really nothing differentiating the 4 six win schools from each other.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    St. Paul
    Posts
    19,094

    Default Re: Bracketology 3.0

    Quote Originally Posted by td577 View Post
    They do it every year. You tell me.

    NDSU and USD are in with at least 7 wins each.

    I have ISUr winning at least 7 with a win over WIU, for sure.

    SDSU plays NDSU, ISUr, and USD. They could easily be stuck at 6 wins. If they don't get to 7, they also don't have any signature wins.
    UNI has to beat USD or they can't get better than 6 wins. UNI beat SDSU for their best win.
    SIU doesn't look like a team that is going to win out to get to 7. They will probably get to 6. SIU beat ISUr for a good win.
    WIU has ISUb. They get to 6. WIU beat a FBS program. They might have the best SRS rating.
    YSU might still get to 6 if they win out over ISUb, SU, and MSU. YSU beat SDSU.

    All five have some bad losses. Without going through all the suspected math, I am guessing their SRS ratings are probably pretty close. Unless one of them pulls away, there is the potential for 5 teams to still be sitting at 6 wins and you have 5 big fluffy teams looking like maybe having a better shot at 7? Then somewhere between the Southern, CAA, and the Southland, there will be an extra 8 win team than normal that will take a at-large. There is going to be some playoff worthy teams not playing a month from now, as usual, and if there is a logjam in the valley at 6 wins, how does the Valley justify getting their normal allotment of schools in? Now show me where the committee has had a history of being blatantly pro-valley in the past. They have allowed a 6 win valley team in when they have had multiple signature wins and clearly separated from everyone below them in their own conference.

    What is logical is SDSU getting another win, having 4 valley schools with 7 or better in the win column, and the committee stopping with 4. Certainly not 8, even if 4 more are at 6 wins. Not even 5 because there will be really nothing differentiating the 4 six win schools from each other.
    As long as anyone keeps counting wins as the first criteria they will continue to reward the wrong teams at playoff time.
    I have the honor to be Your Obedient Servant - B.Aud

    We all live in stories... It seems to me that a definition of any living vibrant society is that you constantly question those stories... The argument itself is freedom. It's not that you come to a conclusion about it. Through that argument you change your mind sometimes... That's how societies grow. When you can't retell for yourself the stories of your life then you live in a prison... Somebody else controls the story. - S. Rushdie

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    West Fargo
    Posts
    7,728

    Default Re: Bracketology 3.0

    Quote Originally Posted by bisonaudit View Post
    As long as anyone keeps counting wins as the first criteria they will continue to reward the wrong teams at playoff time.
    Yes, I agree 150%. I think last year's in-season committee bracket showed how little those people watch football around the country. I think the committee is heavily based on the opinions of a few, skewed towards win totals, and if it wasn't for some tools like the SRS with the retooled SOS component, it would look much worse.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    10,744

    Default Re: Bracketology 3.0

    Didn’t they select a 6-5 WIU team instead of a F’Hawking 7-4 team a few years back?

    Sometimes they get it right.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Hail the BISON!!!

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    St. Paul
    Posts
    19,094

    Default Re: Bracketology 3.0

    Quote Originally Posted by td577 View Post
    Yes, I agree 150%. I think last year's in-season committee bracket showed how little those people watch football around the country. I think the committee is heavily based on the opinions of a few, skewed towards win totals, and if it wasn't for some tools like the SRS with the retooled SOS component, it would look much worse.
    When the chairman was making the radio rounds after last year’s fiasco he said they only used the SRS to evaluate the quality of a team’s wins and losses. These guys are so bad at this that they go to the trouble of developing their own tool for objectively evaluating the criteria that matter to them and then they don’t even know how to use it. They spent 2 years building it and they have no idea what they’re looking at.
    I have the honor to be Your Obedient Servant - B.Aud

    We all live in stories... It seems to me that a definition of any living vibrant society is that you constantly question those stories... The argument itself is freedom. It's not that you come to a conclusion about it. Through that argument you change your mind sometimes... That's how societies grow. When you can't retell for yourself the stories of your life then you live in a prison... Somebody else controls the story. - S. Rushdie

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    West Fargo
    Posts
    7,728

    Default Re: Bracketology 3.0

    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Moen View Post
    Didn’t they select a 6-5 WIU team instead of a F’Hawking 7-4 team a few years back?

    Sometimes they get it right.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Yes. That was what I was referring to when I typed this: "They have allowed a 6 win valley team in when they have had multiple signature wins and clearly separated from everyone below them in their own conference." WIU was the clear point of separation. The Big Fluffy that year had SUU at 8-4 with autobid, PSU at 9-3 and Montana 8-5 with at large. Montana was the clear cut-off with 5 teams at 7-4 or 6-5. That was a good year for the MVFC. 5 teams with 8 or better wins and then WIU with 6. After that, it was all losing records. WIU beat EIU, SIU, NIU, and SDSU (and Dayton) which were all playoff teams. Every single one of their losses were to playoff teams or FBS. UN_ beat Wyoming and PSU and 2 of their 4 losses were to playoff teams but with a combined score of 76-25. And they lost to Idaho State, whose only 2 wins on the season were over Black Hills State and UN_.

    That was a year the committee got it right.

  9. #19
    oldmantutters is offline Senior Member Gets their mail at the West Parking Lot
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Fargo
    Posts
    4,544

    Default Re: Bracketology 3.0

    Quote Originally Posted by td577 View Post
    Yes. That was what I was referring to when I typed this: "They have allowed a 6 win valley team in when they have had multiple signature wins and clearly separated from everyone below them in their own conference." WIU was the clear point of separation. The Big Fluffy that year had SUU at 8-4 with autobid, PSU at 9-3 and Montana 8-5 with at large. Montana was the clear cut-off with 5 teams at 7-4 or 6-5. That was a good year for the MVFC. 5 teams with 8 or better wins and then WIU with 6. After that, it was all losing records. WIU beat EIU, SIU, NIU, and SDSU (and Dayton) which were all playoff teams. Every single one of their losses were to playoff teams or FBS. UN_ beat Wyoming and PSU and 2 of their 4 losses were to playoff teams but with a combined score of 76-25. And they lost to Idaho State, whose only 2 wins on the season were over Black Hills State and UN_.

    That was a year the committee got it right.
    Taking it a step further I believe the info got out that EIU was the team that got in ahead of un_. The last in, last out situation if you will, even though WIU was the team out of those three with the worst record.

    Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    West Fargo
    Posts
    7,728

    Default Re: Bracketology 3.0

    Quote Originally Posted by bisonaudit View Post
    When the chairman was making the radio rounds after last year’s fiasco he said they only used the SRS to evaluate the quality of a team’s wins and losses. These guys are so bad at this that they go to the trouble of developing their own tool for objectively evaluating the criteria that matter to them and then they don’t even know how to use it. They spent 2 years building it and they have no idea what they’re looking at.
    I remember that now. I really don't think they were using the SRS when they said they were. I remember looking at a couple of years and some of it was before their SOS revamp and taking out the Ivy League schools and adjusting for the auto-bids, the playoff rankings and SRS was about 90% identical. So around 12 to 13 of the 14 at large bids were pretty close over a couple of seasons. I don't think you go from that to being so freaking illogical so quickly using the same tool. Unless those seasons where the SRS and the brackets being more similar was coincidental. Even without knowing the exact weight of the SOS or exactly how that part was calculated but knowing the rest of the Simple Rating System, I remember putting together a couple of brackets that were pretty close without using any other factor because I do think there were a couple of years they relied very heavily on SRS when they said it was only a deciding factor between two schools. Maybe at that exact moment last year, the SOS portion wasn't as well defined.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •