|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Oct 24, 2023 9:01:24 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Oct 24, 2023 11:02:28 GMT -8
I think they should just throw out the 6+6 model to the CFP. Top 12 ranked teams get in, period.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 24, 2023 11:10:05 GMT -8
I'd be good with 11/1 or 10/2. There should always be at least 1 or 2 G5 teams present in the playoffs simply because a very good G5 team could be penalized in the polls simply because of scheduling perceptions.
|
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Oct 24, 2023 12:05:10 GMT -8
I'd be good with 11/1 or 10/2. There should always be at least 1 or 2 G5 teams present in the playoffs simply because a very good G5 team could be penalized in the polls simply because of scheduling perceptions. I get your point but the 6/6 = 6 conference champs, next 6 highest ranked teams; 5/7 = 5 conference champs (P4 + highest G5) and next 7 highest ranked. 11/1 and 10/2... there are not 10 or 11 conference champs?! And, if the they go (12) highest ranked, you're right the G5 is screwed. Depending on what the lawsuit and OSU/WSU do there will still be a P5. But, the CFP committee can take away the Pac2's auto bid with unanimous vote which might be a good negotiation tool to retain full CFP money. For the last two years of the contract I'd love to see a 4+1/7 arrangement. The remaining "full" P5 conferences get auto bid, the highest ranked team not in a full P5 or in a G5 conference, then the next 7 highest ranked teams. |
|
|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Oct 24, 2023 12:19:21 GMT -8
interesting 2024 scheduling tidbit.. I guess interesting to me as I had been thinking about how we fill out a schedule for next season and this late in the game...
Utah & BYU + Arizona & K-State previously had non-conf games planned for next year - those presumably now become B-12 league games, meaning all 4 need to fill a slot. So I suppose that's another potential option in creating a 2024 schedule.
Or we go to South Bend and beat up Notre Dame. Looks like they still have an open date and only 11 games on the schedule.
We currently have Idaho St, at Boise St & Purdue on the schedule for next year (as far as I know).
|
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Oct 24, 2023 12:40:59 GMT -8
The interesting thing between the lines here is that the Yahoo article seems to suggest that OSU/WSU collectively are on the verge of prevailing in their battle against the t10 for control of the conference. |
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Oct 24, 2023 13:17:05 GMT -8
I see the biggest problem selecting the four and next year the twelve is that there's no criteria for the selection. It's literally done by a committee with a huge SEC and east bias. It's as if the committee is a guy from Texas, another from Louisiana, then guys from Mississippi, Georgia, Florida and Alabama. Then to represent the north you have three members from Pennsylvania, Michigan and Illinois. Finally throw in a Stanford graduate.
If they went back to a computer model that factors margin of victory it would be a great step for fairness and a blow to corruption.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 24, 2023 13:30:39 GMT -8
I'd be good with 11/1 or 10/2. There should always be at least 1 or 2 G5 teams present in the playoffs simply because a very good G5 team could be penalized in the polls simply because of scheduling perceptions. I get your point but the 6/6 = 6 conference champs, next 6 highest ranked teams; 5/7 = 5 conference champs (P4 + highest G5) and next 7 highest ranked. 11/1 and 10/2... there are not 10 or 11 conference champs?! And, if the they go (12) highest ranked, you're right the G5 is screwed. Depending on what the lawsuit and OSU/WSU do there will still be a P5. But, the CFP committee can take away the Pac2's auto bid with unanimous vote which might be a good negotiation tool to retain full CFP money. For the last two years of the contract I'd love to see a 4+1/7 arrangement. The remaining "full" P5 conferences get auto bid, the highest ranked team not in a full P5 or in a G5 conference, then the next 7 highest ranked teams. I tererestingly enough, there a fairly good chance the Big 12 wouldn't have a representative this season under my scenario. I doubt there is a "right" way to do it. |
|
|
|
Post by 93beav on Oct 24, 2023 13:39:44 GMT -8
I get your point but the 6/6 = 6 conference champs, next 6 highest ranked teams; 5/7 = 5 conference champs (P4 + highest G5) and next 7 highest ranked. 11/1 and 10/2... there are not 10 or 11 conference champs?! And, if the they go (12) highest ranked, you're right the G5 is screwed. Depending on what the lawsuit and OSU/WSU do there will still be a P5. But, the CFP committee can take away the Pac2's auto bid with unanimous vote which might be a good negotiation tool to retain full CFP money. For the last two years of the contract I'd love to see a 4+1/7 arrangement. The remaining "full" P5 conferences get auto bid, the highest ranked team not in a full P5 or in a G5 conference, then the next 7 highest ranked teams. I tererestingly enough, there a fairly good chance the Big 12 wouldn't have a representative this season under my scenario. I doubt there is a "right" way to do it. The only "right" way to do it is to have advanced computer algorithms look at strength of schedule, non conference schedules, and about ten other factors and then let me look them over and I'll announce who the computer picked as the playoff contenders. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Oct 24, 2023 14:53:08 GMT -8
I tererestingly enough, there a fairly good chance the Big 12 wouldn't have a representative this season under my scenario. I doubt there is a "right" way to do it. The only "right" way to do it is to have advanced computer algorithms look at strength of schedule, non conference schedules, and about ten other factors and then let me look them over and I'll announce who the computer picked as the playoff contenders. I say co-announce from a whisky bar, and small audience all enjoying their favorite pour. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike84 on Oct 24, 2023 15:16:15 GMT -8
I tererestingly enough, there a fairly good chance the Big 12 wouldn't have a representative this season under my scenario. I doubt there is a "right" way to do it. The only "right" way to do it is to have advanced computer algorithms look at strength of schedule, non conference schedules, and about ten other factors and then let me look them over and I'll announce who the computer picked as the playoff contenders. Some fans like to go absolutely crazy when things are left up to a computer. If the computer, theoretically being unbiased, doesn't agree with the fan/media bias, then the computer program is ridiculous and dumb and wrong and unacceptable. |
|
|
|
Post by vhalum92 on Oct 24, 2023 15:23:25 GMT -8
interesting 2024 scheduling tidbit.. I guess interesting to me as I had been thinking about how we fill out a schedule for next season and this late in the game... Utah & BYU + Arizona & K-State previously had non-conf games planned for next year - those presumably now become B-12 league games, meaning all 4 need to fill a slot. So I suppose that's another potential option in creating a 2024 schedule. Or we go to South Bend and beat up Notre Dame. Looks like they still have an open date and only 11 games on the schedule. We currently have Idaho St, at Boise St & Purdue on the schedule for next year (as far as I know). Facts like this matched with some MWC scheduling have me getting more optimistic. Bring on Notre Dame as well. We like beating those guys... we just need home and home 24/25! We are starting to see at least a path for 2 years in hopes of further options. With the CFP format only locked down for 3 more years... it seems likely more shakeups are on the horizon based on changes to the CFP. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Oct 24, 2023 15:55:10 GMT -8
interesting 2024 scheduling tidbit.. I guess interesting to me as I had been thinking about how we fill out a schedule for next season and this late in the game... Utah & BYU + Arizona & K-State previously had non-conf games planned for next year - those presumably now become B-12 league games, meaning all 4 need to fill a slot. So I suppose that's another potential option in creating a 2024 schedule. Or we go to South Bend and beat up Notre Dame. Looks like they still have an open date and only 11 games on the schedule. We currently have Idaho St, at Boise St & Purdue on the schedule for next year (as far as I know). Notre Dame's 2024 schedule is full. The 12th game will be a home game against Miami in either October or November. But the date has not been locked in yet. Unless Oregon State is in a conference for football next year, Oregon State likely has a fourth game in Wazzu. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike84 on Oct 24, 2023 16:34:54 GMT -8
interesting 2024 scheduling tidbit.. I guess interesting to me as I had been thinking about how we fill out a schedule for next season and this late in the game... Utah & BYU + Arizona & K-State previously had non-conf games planned for next year - those presumably now become B-12 league games, meaning all 4 need to fill a slot. So I suppose that's another potential option in creating a 2024 schedule. Or we go to South Bend and beat up Notre Dame. Looks like they still have an open date and only 11 games on the schedule. We currently have Idaho St, at Boise St & Purdue on the schedule for next year (as far as I know). Facts like this matched with some MWC scheduling have me getting more optimistic. Bring on Notre Dame as well. We like beating those guys... we just need home and home 24/25! We are starting to see at least a path for 2 years in hopes of further options. With the CFP format only locked down for 3 more years... it seems likely more shakeups are on the horizon based on changes to the CFP. I think it's a pretty safe bet that Notre Dame will NEVER schedule OSU. I mean it is 110% sure they will never come to Corvallis, but I think it is 99.9999% sure that they will never even invite the Beavers to play in South Bend. |
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Oct 25, 2023 8:18:39 GMT -8
The only "right" way to do it is to have advanced computer algorithms look at strength of schedule, non conference schedules, and about ten other factors and then let me look them over and I'll announce who the computer picked as the playoff contenders. Some fans like to go absolutely crazy when things are left up to a computer. If the computer, theoretically being unbiased, doesn't agree with the fan/media bias, then the computer program is ridiculous and dumb and wrong and unacceptable. Whatever happened to Jeff Sagarin's rankings? I looked them up and see they still exist, but they're no longer really given the credence that they used to be. |
|
