Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="topdecktiger" data-source="post: 129281495" data-attributes="member: 1459051">You don't understand what I'm saying. I'm not arguing that since Team A was ranked #10, then Team A is really the #10 team in the country. I understand that the rankings are subjective.What I'm saying is, using that consistent set of rankings, Florida St, Oregon, Alabama, and Ohio St had a better resume than Baylor or TCU. Here's the difference. Let's say the committee counted wins for Florida St against teams who were ranked at the time, and only counted teams ranked at the end of the season for TCU. That would be a completely unfair metric. However, if you keep the metric the same for everybody, (for example, only teams ranked at the end of the year) then that's a more reasonable comparison.The point I'm trying to illustrate is that the committee didn't just pull names out of a hat, as some people are trying to insist. The committee had a method. Was it subjective? Yes it was. If teams are selected, then by definition it's subjective. My point is that the selection was reasonable, given the criteria that was in place.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="topdecktiger, post: 129281495, member: 1459051"] You don't understand what I'm saying. I'm not arguing that since Team A was ranked #10, then Team A is [I]really[/I] the #10 team in the country. I understand that the rankings are subjective. What I'm saying is, using that consistent set of rankings, Florida St, Oregon, Alabama, and Ohio St had a better resume than Baylor or TCU. Here's the difference. Let's say the committee counted wins for Florida St against teams who were ranked at the time, and only counted teams ranked at the end of the season for TCU. That would be a completely unfair metric. However, if you keep the metric the same for everybody, (for example, only teams ranked at the end of the year) then that's a more reasonable comparison. The point I'm trying to illustrate is that the committee didn't just pull names out of a hat, as some people are trying to insist. The committee had a method. Was it subjective? Yes it was. If teams are selected, then by definition it's subjective. My point is that the selection was reasonable, given the criteria that was in place. [/QUOTE]

Name