blungld said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I can't blame him for loyally advocating for his team. I wish our coaches had the same passion.

---

Sure. Advocate. But maybe don't speak for "everyone" and at least acknowledge the other well-deserving teams and the pros and cons of your team rather than just declaring your team the best.

---

southseasbear said:

---

blungld said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

I can't blame him for loyally advocating for his team. I wish our coaches had the same passion.

---

Sure. Advocate. But maybe don't speak for "everyone" and at least acknowledge the other well-deserving teams and the pros and cons of your team rather than just declaring your team the best.

---

I think that is consistent with what Saban said.

---

blungld said:

---

Saban argues that everyone wants the "best teams" in the championship. No, not everyone wants the best teams, because there is no such thing as a best team. There are only teams that show they are the best by beating other teams. His team lost two games and did not win their conference. So they did not show they are the best team, he just thinks his team is better than other teams. That is an opinion.

All of that aside, let me tell Nick that no, we don't want the so-called best teams as decided by him and the old boys club SEC/NCAA collusion eye test. What everyone wants is a system where teams QUALIFY for the playoffs. And right now that qualification is having the best record, beating good teams, and winning your conference. You effed up Nick. You don't have the best record, other teams have equal or better wins, and they won (or at least played for) their conference title.

Nick also defined what he means by best team. Who the bookies would favor to win (subjective opinion that has nothing to do with past results) AND who is playing well right now. So Nick, your team lost its last game and didn't play today. How do you argue you are playing well right now when your team is at home still licking their wounds from a loss?

If Bama gets in, I quit college football.

---

blungld said:

---

Saban argues that everyone wants the "best teams" in the championship. No, not everyone wants the best teams, because there is no such thing as a best team. There are only teams that show they are the best by beating other teams. His team lost two games and did not win their conference. So they did not show they are the best team, he just thinks his team is better than other teams. That is an opinion.

All of that aside, let me tell Nick that no, we don't want the so-called best teams as decided by him and the old boys club SEC/NCAA collusion eye test. What everyone wants is a system where teams QUALIFY for the playoffs. And right now that qualification is having the best record, beating good teams, and winning your conference. You effed up Nick. You don't have the best record, other teams have equal or better wins, and they won (or at least played for) their conference title.

Nick also defined what he means by best team. Who the bookies would favor to win (subjective opinion that has nothing to do with past results) AND who is playing well right now. So Nick, your team lost its last game and didn't play today. How do you argue you are playing well right now when your team is at home still licking their wounds from a loss?

If Bama gets in, I quit college football.

---

79 Bear said:

---

I didn't have a problem with Saban advocating for his team. What I found problematic was Fox giving him that platform during a nationally broadcast game. The tOSU coaches didn't get that opportunity and you can bet the tOSU fan base was going ape crazy about that. TCU is probably in but Sonny probably would've appreciated the chance to make his pitch as well just to be sure. Even Lincoln Riley could've had a basis to make his claim since SC had a better regular season record and then lost while playing an extra game with an injured QB.

---

Nofado said:

---

Two words: Mack Brown

---

Strykur said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Tedford had class.

---

No one gives a ******* about a classy loser in this world.

---

Nofado said:

---

Two words: Mack Brown

---

bluehenbear said:

---

Nofado said:

---

Two words: Mack Brown

---

Mack ****ing Brown was not "advocating" for his team. He was actively lobbying poll participants in such a way as to manipulate the results.

---

72CalBear said:

---

Strykur said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Tedford had class.

---

No one gives a ******* about a classy loser in this world.

---

Fresno State just won the MW Conf Championship. Loser??

---

HoopDreams said:

---

blungld said:

---

Saban argues that everyone wants the "best teams" in the championship. No, not everyone wants the best teams, because there is no such thing as a best team. There are only teams that show they are the best by beating other teams. His team lost two games and did not win their conference. So they did not show they are the best team, he just thinks his team is better than other teams. That is an opinion.

All of that aside, let me tell Nick that no, we don't want the so-called best teams as decided by him and the old boys club SEC/NCAA collusion eye test. What everyone wants is a system where teams QUALIFY for the playoffs. And right now that qualification is having the best record, beating good teams, and winning your conference. You effed up Nick. You don't have the best record, other teams have equal or better wins, and they won (or at least played for) their conference title.

Nick also defined what he means by best team. Who the bookies would favor to win (subjective opinion that has nothing to do with past results) AND who is playing well right now. So Nick, your team lost its last game and didn't play today. How do you argue you are playing well right now when your team is at home still licking their wounds from a loss?

If Bama gets in, I quit college football.

---

100%

I think the most deserving team is more important than the best team

if you are the best team, it should be no problem for you to also be the most deserving team in the games

one of the thing that makes the NCAA basketball tournament great, is the winner is decided in the games, not in the minds of the 'experts'

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

blungld said:

---

Saban argues that everyone wants the "best teams" in the championship. No, not everyone wants the best teams, because there is no such thing as a best team. There are only teams that show they are the best by beating other teams. His team lost two games and did not win their conference. So they did not show they are the best team, he just thinks his team is better than other teams. That is an opinion.

All of that aside, let me tell Nick that no, we don't want the so-called best teams as decided by him and the old boys club SEC/NCAA collusion eye test. What everyone wants is a system where teams QUALIFY for the playoffs. And right now that qualification is having the best record, beating good teams, and winning your conference. You effed up Nick. You don't have the best record, other teams have equal or better wins, and they won (or at least played for) their conference title.

Nick also defined what he means by best team. Who the bookies would favor to win (subjective opinion that has nothing to do with past results) AND who is playing well right now. So Nick, your team lost its last game and didn't play today. How do you argue you are playing well right now when your team is at home still licking their wounds from a loss?

If Bama gets in, I quit college football.

---

100%

I think the most deserving team is more important than the best team

if you are the best team, it should be no problem for you to also be the most deserving team in the games

one of the thing that makes the NCAA basketball tournament great, is the winner is decided in the games, not in the minds of the 'experts'

---

Way back when. I was in the group of CFB fans that argued for ignoring who was "the Best" team that year and that CFB leave the regional bowl game structure unchanged. This way fans of many colleges could spend the off season arguing that their particular team was The Best.

But so many pundits and schools and TV moguls convinced the rest of the CFB world that it was important to determine which school was truly and unquestionably The Best.

League Championship games were added to CFB schedules where they had not been needed before in part because leagues go so big that the teams in that league did not play all the other teams in that league

Then a 2-team national championship game was added. Then a 4-team championship schedule was added. That number has grown and will continue to grow to 6. To 12. Why not 60. Why not 120? All in search for the mystical and mythical "The Best" or even "The Best Deserving".

Are we (CFB and it's fans) really any better off. Are are we all happier than we were at the start when we had regional bowl games.

Now we have evolved into super leagues that span across the nation. Much of that is driven by our obsession to be mystical and mythical "The Best".

That drive will probably in the not too distant future leave CFB in a pathetic wreck from what it once was.
At least way back then. Half of the teams that played in those regional bowl games(I.e the winners) could feel good about their teams and the ir fans could argue how their team should be The Best.

The drive to determine The Best has failed in its task and is destroying CFB in its wake.

There is a large group of us who can sadly say "we told you so."

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Let's be clear. Pre-season polls provide the foundation for all subsequent polling.
Because of the intimate way that rankings affect playoffs, the fact that
SEC teams are routinely over-rated in pre-season polls means they have an unfair advantage throughout the year and at the end. There are also biases for other teams/conferences, but not as frequent. The placement of SEC teams in the pre-season top 25 is a consistent, ongoing and chronic disease impacting college football.
I have also noticed that SEC teams suffer less when losing, moving back in the polls much less than other teams. They also move up much more quickly.

Because of this, it is a self full-filling prophecy that the SEC is the best conference. Often 2 undeserving top 25 teams play each other in an SEC conference game. The winner gets elevated because they beat a ranked team and the loser does not drop because they lost to a ranked team. Having a disproportionate number of teams in the rankings assures that SEC teams will remain ranked.

I have a solution for this problem that will never be adopted because the NCAA is about TV ratings not fairness or parity. But this is how I do it:

• Teams that have beaten a P5 team that is also a winning team on the road get 2 points per win
• Teams that have beaten all other winning teams on the road get 1 points per win
• Teams that have beaten a P5 team that is also a a winning team at home get 1 point, 2 points if it is one of the top teams in the country
• Teams that have lost at home get -1 point unless it is a top team or a winning team.
• Teams that lose to a bad team on the road get -1 point
• Teams that lose to a bad team at home get -2 points
• All other scenarios net 0 points

I add up the points and it becomes pretty clear who is better. I have used this ranking system for years and it has become a good predictor for the season. For example, it was clear to me early on that Tennessee was the real deal and could beat Alabama this season. Actually it is to Alabama's credit that they made the game close.
It was also clear that Michigan St. was over-rated. Several SEC schools were over-rated as usual, including Texas A&M and Auburn

If Oregon St. had been in the SEC, they probably would have been a top 25 team all season long.

The point is, if anything, Saban is unfairly advantaged already, regardless of what happens this year.
I will say that the rankings do give credit for historical excellence and Saban has earned that credit.

I should add that the way to do a fair pre-season poll is to base it on the number of players that are highly touted on the roster, whether that be out of high school or because of prior performance, with a greater emphasis on experience and performance. IOW, you have to do a detailed roster analysis. In the SEC, since the rosters are very volatile from year to year, you cannot rely on the prior year to indicate the present year. Teams like Texas A&M, LSU, Florida, Auburn, Arkansas etc. are going to be different teams every year. And when you go from having a 5th year senior at QB to a true freshman, you should not be ranked the same way.

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

I think it IS the mission of the CFP a committee to pick the 4 best teams. Now how we determine who is best…

---

ninetyfourbear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Let's be clear. Pre-season polls provide the foundation for all subsequent polling.
Because of the intimate way that rankings affect playoffs, the fact that
SEC teams are routinely over-rated in pre-season polls means they have an unfair advantage throughout the year and at the end. There are also biases for other teams/conferences, but not as frequent. The placement of SEC teams in the pre-season top 25 is a consistent, ongoing and chronic disease impacting college football.
I have also noticed that SEC teams suffer less when losing, moving back in the polls much less than other teams. They also move up much more quickly.

Because of this, it is a self full-filling prophecy that the SEC is the best conference. Often 2 undeserving top 25 teams play each other in an SEC conference game. The winner gets elevated because they beat a ranked team and the loser does not drop because they lost to a ranked team. Having a disproportionate number of teams in the rankings assures that SEC teams will remain ranked.

I have a solution for this problem that will never be adopted because the NCAA is about TV ratings not fairness or parity. But this is how I do it:

• Teams that have beaten a P5 team that is also a winning team on the road get 2 points per win
• Teams that have beaten all other winning teams on the road get 1 points per win
• Teams that have beaten a P5 team that is also a a winning team at home get 1 point, 2 points if it is one of the top teams in the country
• Teams that have lost at home get -1 point unless it is a top team or a winning team.
• Teams that lose to a bad team on the road get -1 point
• Teams that lose to a bad team at home get -2 points
• All other scenarios net 0 points

I add up the points and it becomes pretty clear who is better. I have used this ranking system for years and it has become a good predictor for the season. For example, it was clear to me early on that Tennessee was the real deal and could beat Alabama this season. Actually it is to Alabama's credit that they made the game close.
It was also clear that Michigan St. was over-rated. Several SEC schools were over-rated as usual, including Texas A&M and Auburn

If Oregon St. had been in the SEC, they probably would have been a top 25 team all season long.

The point is, if anything, Saban is unfairly advantaged already, regardless of what happens this year.
I will say that the rankings do give credit for historical excellence and Saban has earned that credit.

I should add that the way to do a fair pre-season poll is to base it on the number of players that are highly touted on the roster, whether that be out of high school or because of prior performance, with a greater emphasis on experience and performance. IOW, you have to do a detailed roster analysis. In the SEC, since the rosters are very volatile from year to year, you cannot rely on the prior year to indicate the present year. Teams like Texas A&M, LSU, Florida, Auburn, Arkansas etc. are going to be different teams every year. And when you go from having a 5th year senior at QB to a true freshman, you should not be ranked the same way.

---

The SEC also plays only eight conference games. Most of the schools schedule home game cupcakes so they're all 4-0 or 3-1 outside of conference play. Eleven of their fourteen teams are bowl eligible. The other three are 5-7. It is smart scheduling and the Pac 12 should do the same.

Edited to add: In your points counting, I'd deduct points from teams that play more home games than road games.

---

blungld said:

---

Saban argues that everyone wants the "best teams" in the championship. No, not everyone wants the best teams, because there is no such thing as a best team. There are only teams that show they are the best by beating other teams. His team lost two games and did not win their conference. So they did not show they are the best team, he just thinks his team is better than other teams. That is an opinion.

All of that aside, let me tell Nick that no, we don't want the so-called best teams as decided by him and the old boys club SEC/NCAA collusion eye test. What everyone wants is a system where teams QUALIFY for the playoffs. And right now that qualification is having the best record, beating good teams, and winning your conference. You effed up Nick. You don't have the best record, other teams have equal or better wins, and they won (or at least played for) their conference title.

Nick also defined what he means by best team. Who the bookies would favor to win (subjective opinion that has nothing to do with past results) AND who is playing well right now. So Nick, your team lost its last game and didn't play today. How do you argue you are playing well right now when your team is at home still licking their wounds from a loss?

If Bama gets in, I quit college football.

---

Big Dog said:

---

Huh? The mission of the CFP committee clearly says "best teams". It is the Committee's job to pick the 4 best teams following their guidelines. The fact that 'best' can't possibly be defined by us is irrelevant; teh committee defines "best" 4.

Personally, I think Saban did a good job advocating -- call it "begging" if you want -- for his team. There are a lot of dollars at stake, so he would be remiss if he did not. So yes, he raised the only point he could in asking if Alabama be favored over TCU in a neutral site match up?

But I agree, that it is not the bookies' job to determine 'best"; its the Committee's.

---