MavGrad99 5,128 Posted January 13 Author Share Posted January 13 You say “Power 5.” That’s not balancing out anything. You balance it out by completely separating the “P5” or you give the other 5 access to the exclusive championship tournament which would in return somewhat balance out recruiting inequities and give the G5 a punchers chance Link to post Share on other sites
DB2point0 1,652 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 2 hours ago, trashyhound said: That's why I actually like the human committee deciding who goes. They can factor those things into their decision. And they can’t be biased? Link to post Share on other sites
trashyhound 669 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 6 minutes ago, DB2point0 said: And they can’t be biased? Absolutely they can, but you can't have 250+ teams with identical or fair schedules. Therefore you only take the best records and encourage everyone to play cupcakes or you add a committee to weigh those things out and give us the best teams. I think ncaa basketball selection committee usually does pretty good. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
DB2point0 1,652 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 19 minutes ago, trashyhound said: Absolutely they can, but you can't have 250+ teams with identical or fair schedules. Therefore you only take the best records and encourage everyone to play cupcakes or you add a committee to weigh those things out and give us the best teams. I think ncaa basketball selection committee usually does pretty good. There’s not 250 teams. There’s about 115 I think. I liked the bcs and the metrics that it used to rank teams. It took strength of schedule and other things into consideration. 5 p5 champs, top ranked g5 champ then fill the 2 at large spots with the bcs rankings Link to post Share on other sites
trashyhound 669 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 Just now, DB2point0 said: There’s not 250 teams. There’s about 115 I think. I liked the bcs and the metrics that it used to rank teams. It took strength of schedule and other things into consideration. 5 p5 champs, top ranked g5 champ then fill the 2 at large spots with the bcs rankings 250 was fcs and fbs combined. You are correct about 119 big boys. I like your formula Link to post Share on other sites
DB2point0 1,652 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 1 minute ago, trashyhound said: 250 was fcs and fbs combined. You are correct about 119 big boys. I like your formula Leave fcs as is. Any g5 team doesn’t like it they can drop down. Link to post Share on other sites
LOL 4,482 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 13 hours ago, trashyhound said: Absolutely they can, but you can't have 250+ teams with identical or fair schedules. Therefore you only take the best records and encourage everyone to play cupcakes or you add a committee to weigh those things out and give us the best teams. I think ncaa basketball selection committee usually does pretty good. Yes! This is an overlooked point. Like for real, when's the last time there was a major scandal over a team being left out of March Madness? I'm sure it's happened occasionally, but the tourney is structured in such a way as to mitigate the possibility of a worthy competitor being omitted. I honestly believe that if we take all conference champs plus a few high-ranked "wildcards," we'll have something far superior to what we have now. Will it be perfect? Of course not. But it'll be a damn sight better than the current system. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.gif.d32a082376edea7c95799613e316e118.gif)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now