Bill Hancock Comment About 2014 TCU/Baylor

[Zubaz]

I can just see you at Thanksgiving taking every discussion that everyone agrees on and coming up with a lot of crap to tell them how wrong they are.

Sorry for responding to you. You asked, I answered.

Everyone doesn't agree, and even if they did an argument from popularity is hardly the most convincing.

You can come up with all the bullet points you want, but to the main argument there was no definitive reason to drop TCU in 14.

You should stop looking at it as a "drop", and look at it as "If you were starting from scratch, where would you rank the teams after the final week of the season?" The question is: Was there a reason to rank Ohio State (and Baylor) over TCU at the end of the season? Of course there was.

the same thing would have happened to Ohio State if the facts were reversed, or a Notre Dame, OU, Texas, er al. If that is what you believe then I think most here would agree you are delusional

I think this is a valid question. Like Ron, I have my suspicion that it might not....but until there is evidence that it wouldn't happen, I would have to give them the benefit of the doubt and say that it would.

 

[Ron Swanson]

But Bill Hancock said it was because TCU didn’t prove they were good in OOC play like Ohio St did

 

[hiphopfroggy]

The one thing I want explained is why the had to revote multiple times.

This, and has it happened since?

 

[Hoosierfrog]

Sorry for responding to you. You asked, I answered.

Everyone doesn't agree, and even if they did an argument from popularity is hardly the most convincing.


You should stop looking at it as a "drop", and look at it as "If you were starting from scratch, where would you rank the teams after the final week of the season?" The question is: Was there a reason to rank Ohio State (and Baylor) over TCU at the end of the season? Of course there was.


I think this is a valid question. Like Ron, I have my suspicion that it might not....but until there is evidence that it wouldn't happen, I would have to give them the benefit of the doubt and say that it would.

Such a beating.

We should start a poll to see the percentage of people agree and don’t.

Okay, I say black and you say...

 

[Hoosierfrog]

But Bill Hancock said it was because TCU didn’t prove they were good in OOC play like Ohio St did

Now that shows how equitable this is process is...

 

[Zubaz]

But Bill Hancock said it was because TCU didn’t prove they were good in OOC play like Ohio St did

I will concede that the different voices have been wildly inconsistent in what they SAY. There's no doubt about that.

 

[LSU Game Attendee]

Every time someone mentions how we NEED OU and UT to be good is making this very case.

UT and OU NEED to win OOC. Otherwise, they are free to Baylor themselves in conference.

 

[JogginFrog]

Noticed that ESPN Analytics' Seth Walder tweeted that in the history of the CFP, 11 of the 12 playoff teams have finished in the top 4 in "Strength of Record"--ESPN's objective measure of the accomplishment represented by achieving a particular record against a particular schedule.

(click link in the tweet below)



Guess what team was the odd team out? Yup. 2014 TCU, ranked 4th in SOR.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/playoffPicture/_/week/16/year/2014

The committee decided that Ohio State (ranked 6th in SOR) was more deserving. Objectively, Bill Hancock is wrong about schedule strength being the key element, as it is a component of SOR. Even the "extra data point" wasn't enough to overcome that.

The only possible rational explanation for the committee's action is that a team's best win is more important than its worst loss. But the committee continues to offer alternative explanations.

 

[ifrog]

Todd is the master contrarian. He would argue that the earth was flat.

 

[Zubaz]

Todd is the master contrarian. He would argue that the earth was flat.

I would not and here's nine different reasons why I wouldn't!

 

[Ron Swanson]

Noticed that ESPN Analytics' Seth Walder tweeted that in the history of the CFP, 11 of the 12 playoff teams have finished in the top 4 in "Strength of Record"--ESPN's objective measure of the accomplishment represented by achieving a particular record against a particular schedule.

(click link in the tweet below)



Guess what team was the odd team out? Yup. 2014 TCU, ranked 4th in SOR.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/playoffPicture/_/week/16/year/2014

The committee decided that Ohio State (ranked 6th in SOR) was more deserving. Objectively, Bill Hancock is wrong about schedule strength being the key element, as it is a component of SOR. Even the "extra data point" wasn't enough to overcome that.

The only possible rational explanation for the committee's action is that a team's best win is more important than its worst loss. But the committee continues to offer alternative explanations.

Yeah but they also played 1 more game than us, had a FAR worse lost than us, and against our mutual opponent did do nearly as well as we did. So clearly they deserved it more than we did.

I’ve been told it’s clear