Louisville's playoff chances

[zipp]

He is right. Two data points make a line; three a trend.

The problem you and other UL fans have is you believe UL is heads and shoulders better than Washington, Michigan, Alabama, God and everyone and everything else...

I can't speak for everyone, but you haven't been reading my posts closely enough. You won't see me calling U of L "head and shoulders better" than anyone.

My contention is that you can't form any significant conclusions at this juncture about what's going to happen in less two months. Way too much football to be played and too many variables baked into an analysis of the "four best teams".

U of L's chances are just about as good as any other Top Ten teams. And there are no solid data otherwise...

 

[cantmissprospect]

All I know is UK controls it's own destiny. Beat Tennessee and then it's a 1 game play off with Alabama for all the marbles

 

[Section 12 Jerk]

He is right. Two data points make a line; three a trend.

The problem you and other UL fans have is you believe UL is heads and shoulders better than Washington, Michigan, Alabama, God and everyone and everything else. The rest of the world doesn't see it that way. To everyone outside of Jefferson County, they see 12-1 Washington and 11-1 UL and see two fairly weak schedules and view them similarly. So, one was conference champion and the other was divisional loser and the distinction gets pretty easy to draw.

Louisville (and everyone else in a similar boat) will not make the playoffs as a division loser over a one-loss conference winner of a P5 conference. Not going to happen and I cannot think of a soul outside Jefferson County who thinks it will.

Here you go again, spouting stuff that is not true. No one here is saying U of L is heads and shoulders better, we only have you making the false statement that we are making the claim.

I'll also take you up on your claim that not a soul outside Jefferson County thinks a division loser will make the playoffs over a one loss P5 conference winner. Lets just look at Vegas odds for winning the NC.

http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/i...hip-futures-odds-westgate-las-vegas-superbook
http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/i...hip-futures-odds-westgate-las-vegas-superbook
Based on your previous posts, I'll go ahead and predict that you will struggle with this analysis, but sometimes I like to humor myself, so I'll give you a shot anyway. Let's go ahead and theoretically say Ohio St wins the B10, Bama the SEC, and Clemson the ACC. They are currently the top 3 choices (odds wise). Ok and Baylor are both 30-1, meaning Vegas is not giving the B12 much of a chance. That leaves Washington, the lone P12 option, currently at 6-1, even with Clemson, with zero losses. Michigan is currently 7-1 and Louisville 8-1. I'm no bookie, but if Washington were to lose a game, they would probably drop from 6-1, cause if Vegas felt like they could drop a game and still make the playoffs, their odds would be much lower than 6-1 right now.

In fact, this gives you the opportunity to put your money where your mouth is. You should be betting the farm on Washington at 6-1, since they are lock. Or maybe really gamble and split some of that up with Ok and/or Baylor, since you can get 30-1. Good luck!

 

[CardLaw]

I can't speak for everyone, but you haven't been reading my posts closely enough. You won't see me calling U of L "head and shoulders better" than anyone.

My contention is that you can't form any significant conclusions at this juncture about what's going to happen in less two months. Way too much football to be played and too many variables baked into an analysis of the "four best teams".

U of L's chances are just about as good as any other Top Ten teams. And there are no solid data otherwise...

We agree on your general point. The number of possible outcomes on December 4th are enormous. Calculable, but enormous. My perception is that Topdeck is arguing, and you are refuting, that UL is dead in the water short of a 2-loss Clemson or total chaos. My argument, and I perceive Topdeck's, is that if UL finishes 11-1 and there are four P5 conference winners with one or fewer losses, UL has zero chance at the playoffs. If my conception of your argument is wrong, so be it, and my apologies.

 

[CardLaw]

Here you go again, spouting stuff that is not true. No one here is saying U of L is heads and shoulders better, we only have you making the false statement that we are making the claim.

I'll also take you up on your claim that not a soul outside Jefferson County thinks a division loser will make the playoffs over a one loss P5 conference winner. Lets just look at Vegas odds for winning the NC.

http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/i...hip-futures-odds-westgate-las-vegas-superbook
Based on your previous posts, I'll go ahead and predict that you will struggle with this analysis, but sometimes I like to humor myself, so I'll give you a shot anyway. Let's go ahead and theoretically say Ohio St wins the B10, Bama the SEC, and Clemson the ACC. They are currently the top 3 choices (odds wise). Ok and Baylor are both 30-1, meaning Vegas is not giving the B12 much of a chance. That leaves Washington, the lone P12 option, currently at 6-1, even with Clemson, with zero losses. Michigan is currently 7-1 and Louisville 8-1. I'm no bookie, but if Washington were to lose a game, they would probably drop from 6-1, cause if Vegas felt like they could drop a game and still make the playoffs, their odds would be much lower than 6-1 right now.

In fact, this gives you the opportunity to put your money where your mouth is. You should be betting the farm on Washington at 6-1, since they are lock. Or maybe really gamble and split some of that up with Ok and/or Baylor, since you can get 30-1. Good luck!

Vegas odds are not football analysis. Vegas does not care who wins or loses. Odds are based on an even split of the money. Vegas makes its money on the juice. In 2007 USC was a 39 point favorite over Stanford. Stanford won 24-23. The books in Vegas made money on the deal. You do not understand football and you do not understand point spreads or win odds. You any good at crochet? Or are potato chips your limit?

 

[cross_ova]

All I know is UK controls it's own destiny. Beat Tennessee and then it's a 1 game play off with Alabama for all the marbles

Hilarious, LOL can't stop laughing. Gave me a good laugh today. What's more effed up is it's technically true.

 

[Section 12 Jerk]

Vegas odds are not football analysis. Vegas does not care who wins or loses. Odds are based on an even split of the money. Vegas makes its money on the juice. In 2007 USC was a 39 point favorite over Stanford. Stanford won 24-23. The books in Vegas made money on the deal. You do not understand football and you do not understand point spreads or win odds. You any good at crochet? Or are potato chips your limit?

I don't understand point spreads or Vegas win odds? What do point spreads have to do with this discussion? Nothing. Keep posting, cause you're showing us how smart you really are. You did nothing but prove my point. LMFAO

 

[KerryRhodes]

All I know is UK controls it's own destiny. Beat Tennessee and then it's a 1 game play off with Alabama for all the marbles

I bet your blewbies have a shot at beating Tennessee. I mean ya'll done it once
in the last 34 tries..................

 

[CardVille]

A 1-loss Louisville would get in over a 2-loss Clemson but I dont see them losing two unless its FSU and CCG.

 

[zipp]

You don't have to be a bettor for Vegas odds to be relevant--unless bettors for some reason are not representative of the general population in terms of analysis and opinions. Odds and lines should reflect the sentiments of the general public as to winners and losers and confidence about those outcomes. I look at betting probabilities all of the time, and I almost never gamble.

I would argue that the right betting information is also the right information to gauge for the CFP. We understand this week that Vegas shows Louisville to currently be the third betting choice nationally behind Bama and tOSU in a head-to-head game on a neutral field. If you're tasked with finding the four best teams in college football, that is EXACTLY the type of info you would like to have. Because a lot of people may use that information to gamble doesn't make it irrelevant or off-limits to the CFP committee. (Understandably, their website doesn't say that's among their criteria.)

AGAIN, THE FOUR BEST TEAMS. That's their mandate, and actual data are far too limited to conclusively say that's not what they're doing. If those happen to be conference champions, that doesn't go against their mandate. It's not exactly a coincidence, but it's not driving the process...

 

[gocds]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. We MUST take care of our business and I mean by kicking some serious ass. Plus we need to have Washington get beat. Further, I don't give a big rat's ass what $ec wonks like CL think . . . the ACC is superior, at this point, to the $ec in 2016. A one loss Louisville gets in the CFP so long as Washington takes a loss. That means one $ec school, one BIG school and TWO ACC schools so long as Clemson finishes undefeated. If Clemson loses then all bets are off unless they win the ACC title game then they get in by virtue of being the ACC champ.

GO CARDS - BEAT EVERYBODY!!! God Bless America!!!

 

[Morgantown Card]

Washington

Worshington

 

[Morgantown Card]

We understand this week that Vegas shows Louisville to currently be the third betting choice nationally behind Bama and tOSU in a head-to-head game on a neutral field. If you're tasked with finding the four best teams in college football, that is EXACTLY the type of info you would like to have.

If that data is good enough to get all those pyramids & water fountains to be built in the middle of no where in the 110+ degree desert, then it's good enough for me.

 

[Mike'sMarbles]

We agree on your general point. The number of possible outcomes on December 4th are enormous. Calculable, but enormous. My perception is that Topdeck is arguing, and you are refuting, that UL is dead in the water short of a 2-loss Clemson or total chaos. My argument, and I perceive Topdeck's, is that if UL finishes 11-1 and there are four P5 conference winners with one or fewer losses, UL has zero chance at the playoffs. If my conception of your argument is wrong, so be it, and my apologies.

If I were a gambler, I'd put my money on Chaos. Week 7 last year, the Top 4 in AP Poll were:

1. Ohio State
2. Baylor
3. TCU
4. Utah

2015 Playoff teams were:

1. Clemson
2. Alabama
3. Michigan State
4. Oklahoma

I'm not seeing a lot of matches between Week 7 (our current week of the season) and the 2015 Playoffs.

Maybe this will be the year Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State/Michigan winner and Washington run away and hide. But I'm not counting on it!

 

[cantmissprospect]

I bet your blewbies have a shot at beating Tennessee. I mean ya'll done it once
in the last 34 tries..................

UK was just disinterest most of the time. Now we have an SEC title to play for.

 

[topdecktiger]

That's TWO data points. About the analysis I expected from you. Congrats...

And your data points................................

Exactly.

If I were a gambler, I'd put my money on Chaos. Week 7 last year, the Top 4 in AP Poll were:

1. Ohio State
2. Baylor
3. TCU
4. Utah

2015 Playoff teams were:

1. Clemson
2. Alabama
3. Michigan State
4. Oklahoma

I'm not seeing a lot of matches between Week 7 (our current week of the season) and the 2015 Playoffs.

Maybe this will be the year Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State/Michigan winner and Washington run away and hide. But I'm not counting on it!

That really doesn't change much, regarding this discussion. For one, you are quoting the AP poll, not the CFP poll. Two, you ended up with the scenario that has been put forth so far, 4 conference champs (all with 0 or 1 loss) made the CFP. Really not too much chaos there. You just ended up with different teams from each league than was expected. Last year, Oklahoma, at 11-1, got in ahead of 12-1 Iowa and 11-1 Ohio St. As I've said, it's going to be hard for a team that didn't win its conference to be considered one of the 4 best.

 

[CardLaw]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. We MUST take care of our business and I mean by kicking some serious ass. Plus we need to have Washington get beat. Further, I don't give a big rat's ass what $ec wonks like CL think . . . the ACC is superior, at this point, to the $ec in 2016. A one loss Louisville gets in the CFP so long as Washington takes a loss. That means one $ec school, one BIG school and TWO ACC schools so long as Clemson finishes undefeated. If Clemson loses then all bets are off unless they win the ACC title game then they get in by virtue of being the ACC champ.

GO CARDS - BEAT EVERYBODY!!! God Bless America!!!

This is why I say many of you are pinning your hopes on your perception that UL is heads and shoulders better than Washington. That is the only way you can place an 11-1 division loser over a 12-1 P5 conference champion. If they are more-or-less equal, then based on the committee's stated criteria, conference championship is a deciding factor.

 

[CardLaw]

You don't have to be a bettor for Vegas odds to be relevant--unless bettors for some reason are not representative of the general population in terms of analysis and opinions. Odds and lines should reflect the sentiments of the general public as to winners and losers and confidence about those outcomes. I look at betting probabilities all of the time, and I almost never gamble.

I would argue that the right betting information is also the right information to gauge for the CFP. We understand this week that Vegas shows Louisville to currently be the third betting choice nationally behind Bama and tOSU in a head-to-head game on a neutral field. If you're tasked with finding the four best teams in college football, that is EXACTLY the type of info you would like to have. Because a lot of people may use that information to gamble doesn't make it irrelevant or off-limits to the CFP committee. (Understandably, their website doesn't say that's among their criteria.)

AGAIN, THE FOUR BEST TEAMS. That's their mandate, and actual data are far too limited to conclusively say that's not what they're doing. If those happen to be conference champions, that doesn't go against their mandate. It's not exactly a coincidence, but it's not driving the process...

No, you don't have to be a bettor for them to have relevance. But, like what's-his-face Jerk, you don't understand how lines are made or their purpose.

When books in Vegas set a line, be it on a game or to win the NC or anything else, they are essentially doing the same thing Battaglia does with the early morning lines at Churchill. They are simply predicting where the money is going to come in. The difference is the early lines in horseracing have nothing to do with the odds you get on a given horse in a given race. In Vegas, it is locked. So if you bet an opening line of 6-1, that's what you get no matter what happens afterward.

The goal for the Vegas book is to split the money. You want enough money coming in on everyone else to payoff if a given team wins. So, if you think the betting public will split 20-80 on a given team, you make the line 4-1. If that team does win, then the winners are paid off with the losers' money and Vegas keeps the juice. It makes no difference whether you or anyone else thinks that team has a 20% chance of winning; all that matters is being right about that being how the money will come in. You also don't care how much comes from who. The line gets adjusted if too much comes in one way or the other. No one's opinion on the game has to change at all - it is just about calculating the payoffs against what is coming in.

I am reasonably certain the playoff committee doesn't give a damn about the public's feelings or beliefs. It is about who they as a committee think are the four best teams - not who has the most money bet on them by the public. Vegas does not announce how many bettors bet how much. One bettor can move the numbers. Should the committee just ask him?

 

[Mike'sMarbles]

That really doesn't change much, regarding this discussion. For one, you are quoting the AP poll, not the CFP poll. Two, you ended up with the scenario that has been put forth so far, 4 conference champs (all with 0 or 1 loss) made the CFP. Really not too much chaos there. You just ended up with different teams from each league than was expected. Last year, Oklahoma, at 11-1, got in ahead of 12-1 Iowa and 11-1 Ohio St. As I've said, it's going to be hard for a team that didn't win its conference to be considered one of the 4 best.

I'm not trying to refute that argument though. The topic of the thread is "Louisville's playoff chances", and that was what I was addressing.

The scenario of "Louisville wins out and doesn't win the conference" is one scenario but there are many other possibilities.

Another possibility is that Louisville wins out, Clemson loses twice, and Louisville wins the ACC and goes to the Playoff with 1-loss.

Another is that Louisville loses to Duke, ending the conversation.

My point is that the polls are very volatile at this stage and I think the chances of Alabama, Clemson, Wisconsin and the winner of Michigan-OSU that we see in Week 7 is very, very unlikely to be how things end up. It's possible, but there are a great many other possibilities, and there are a lot of other Top 15 teams that could move up.

I'm not able to post a CFP Poll from Week 7 of last year because I don't think that poll exists. If I'm wrong and such a poll exists please post it. Again, my point in comparing the Week 7 poll to the 4 playoff teams is that the polls are more likely to have major flux than to settle to the current status-quo for the remainder of the season.

 

[CardLaw]

I'm not trying to refute that argument though. The topic of the thread is "Louisville's playoff chances", and that was what I was addressing.

The scenario of "Louisville wins out and doesn't win the conference" is one scenario but there are many other possibilities.

Another possibility is that Louisville wins out, Clemson loses twice, and Louisville wins the ACC and goes to the Playoff with 1-loss.

Another is that Louisville loses to Duke, ending the conversation.

My point is that the polls are very volatile at this stage and I think the chances of Alabama, Clemson, Wisconsin and the winner of Michigan-OSU that we see in Week 7 is very, very unlikely to be how things end up. It's possible, but there are a great many other possibilities, and there are a lot of other Top 15 teams that could move up.

I'm not able to post a CFP Poll from Week 7 of last year because I don't think that poll exists. If I'm wrong and such a poll exists please post it. Again, my point in comparing the Week 7 poll to the 4 playoff teams is that the polls are more likely to have major flux than to settle to the current status-quo for the remainder of the season.

I agree with your two posts entirely. It would be easy now to predict the CFP will be Alabama, Clemson, OSU and Washington. But, I bet it is not.

 

[Section 12 Jerk]

No, you don't have to be a bettor for them to have relevance. But, like what's-his-face Jerk, you don't understand how lines are made or their purpose.

When books in Vegas set a line, be it on a game or to win the NC or anything else, they are essentially doing the same thing Battaglia does with the early morning lines at Churchill. They are simply predicting where the money is going to come in. The difference is the early lines in horseracing have nothing to do with the odds you get on a given horse in a given race. In Vegas, it is locked. So if you bet an opening line of 6-1, that's what you get no matter what happens afterward.

The goal for the Vegas book is to split the money. You want enough money coming in on everyone else to payoff if a given team wins. So, if you think the betting public will split 20-80 on a given team, you make the line 4-1. If that team does win, then the winners are paid off with the losers' money and Vegas keeps the juice. It makes no difference whether you or anyone else thinks that team has a 20% chance of winning; all that matters is being right about that being how the money will come in. You also don't care how much comes from who. The line gets adjusted if too much comes in one way or the other. No one's opinion on the game has to change at all - it is just about calculating the payoffs against what is coming in.

I am reasonably certain the playoff committee doesn't give a damn about the public's feelings or beliefs. It is about who they as a committee think are the four best teams - not who has the most money bet on them by the public. Vegas does not announce how many bettors bet how much. One bettor can move the numbers. Should the committee just ask him?

Wait, so previously you said everyone outside of Jefferson County sees 12-1 Washington and 11-1 Louisville similarly. I just pointed out to you that based on Vegas odds, a zero loss Washington team and a one loss Louisville team are viewed similarly. If we use your expert logic here (again not sure what setting a point spread has to do with odds for winning the NC), Vegas is setting these odds to "split the money". So doesn't that mean per your logic, the "Vegas" public currently sees these teams about equal, and Washington hasn't lost yet, while Louisville has? You've moved on to spouting off about how the committee doesn't care about the public's feelings or beliefs. Again you are just shooting from the hip, trying to support your flawed agenda. Keep trying, cause I've almost matched your "like" count, and all I'm doing is challenging you to use some better logic.

 

[CardLaw]

Wait, so previously you said everyone outside of Jefferson County sees 12-1 Washington and 11-1 Louisville similarly. I just pointed out to you that based on Vegas odds, a zero loss Washington team and a one loss Louisville team are viewed similarly. If we use your expert logic here (again not sure what setting a point spread has to do with odds for winning the NC), Vegas is setting these odds to "split the money". So doesn't that mean per your logic, the "Vegas" public currently sees these teams about equal, and Washington hasn't lost yet, while Louisville has? You've moved on to spouting off about how the committee doesn't care about the public's feelings or beliefs. Again you are just shooting from the hip, trying to support your flawed agenda. Keep trying, cause I've almost matched your "like" count, and all I'm doing is challenging you to use some better logic.

You cannot define "logic". Proud of you for using a two-syllable word though.

This is not rocket science. If it were basic math you would still struggle I see. Let me make it simple so even a jerk like you could figure it out.

Let's say you bet $100 dollars on team "A" to win a game and I bet $100 on team "B". Depending on the house, we would both be charged $10 or so for the bet. So, Vegas takes in $220 dollars. One team or the other is going to win. So, the house pays one of us $200 and pockets the $20.

On a single game, Vegas may figure there are too many idiots like you who like "A", so they set the line at -3.5 (as an example). The goal is to get all the "yous" to bet $100 for each one of "mes" who say there is no damn way. If they get it right, they pay out the $200 and pocket the $20.

On odds to win a championship, again, it is the same deal. If six people are going to bet $100 on everyone else, to every one person to bet $100 on your team, they win. They pay out $700 to one guy or $116 to everyone else, and they pocket the juice. The fact that one team has a loss or not is irrelevant. They are just betting on what the spread of the money will be. What gamblers take into account is irrelevant. It may be that some assume UW won't lose. Or, some assume UL will. Doesn't matter. Vegas bookies are very good at reading which way money will go. They could not care less why or who is right. All they care about is taking in an even split on both sides of the equation.

For anyone with an IQ above room temperature, this is pretty easy stuff. Still struggling to understand?

 

[teamcanada]

You cannot define "logic". Proud of you for using a two-syllable word though.

This is not rocket science. If it were basic math you would still struggle I see. Let me make it simple so even a jerk like you could figure it out.

Let's say you bet $100 dollars on team "A" to win a game and I bet $100 on team "B". Depending on the house, we would both be charged $10 or so for the bet. So, Vegas takes in $220 dollars. One team or the other is going to win. So, the house pays one of us $200 and pockets the $20.

On a single game, Vegas may figure there are too many idiots like you who like "A", so they set the line at -3.5 (as an example). The goal is to get all the "yous" to bet $100 for each one of "mes" who say there is no damn way. If they get it right, they pay out the $200 and pocket the $20.

On odds to win a championship, again, it is the same deal. If six people are going to bet $100 on everyone else, to every one person to bet $100 on your team, they win. They pay out $700 to one guy or $116 to everyone else, and they pocket the juice. The fact that one team has a loss or not is irrelevant. They are just betting on what the spread of the money will be. What gamblers take into account is irrelevant. It may be that some assume UW won't lose. Or, some assume UL will. Doesn't matter. Vegas bookies are very good at reading which way money will go. They could not care less why or who is right. All they care about is taking in an even split on both sides of the equation.

For anyone with an IQ above room temperature, this is pretty easy stuff. Still struggling to understand?

Nice wrong explanation how the line works. Vegas doesn't try to get 50% on each side . Read the attached article. It takes a special kind of idiot to call people names when they don't know what they are talking about http://mobile.nytimes.com/2006/02/05/magazine/dissecting-the-line.html?_r=0

 

[Section 12 Jerk]

You cannot define "logic". Proud of you for using a two-syllable word though.

This is not rocket science. If it were basic math you would still struggle I see. Let me make it simple so even a jerk like you could figure it out.

Let's say you bet $100 dollars on team "A" to win a game and I bet $100 on team "B". Depending on the house, we would both be charged $10 or so for the bet. So, Vegas takes in $220 dollars. One team or the other is going to win. So, the house pays one of us $200 and pockets the $20.

On a single game, Vegas may figure there are too many idiots like you who like "A", so they set the line at -3.5 (as an example). The goal is to get all the "yous" to bet $100 for each one of "mes" who say there is no damn way. If they get it right, they pay out the $200 and pocket the $20.

On odds to win a championship, again, it is the same deal. If six people are going to bet $100 on everyone else, to every one person to bet $100 on your team, they win. They pay out $700 to one guy or $116 to everyone else, and they pocket the juice. The fact that one team has a loss or not is irrelevant. They are just betting on what the spread of the money will be. What gamblers take into account is irrelevant. It may be that some assume UW won't lose. Or, some assume UL will. Doesn't matter. Vegas bookies are very good at reading which way money will go. They could not care less why or who is right. All they care about is taking in an even split on both sides of the equation.

For anyone with an IQ above room temperature, this is pretty easy stuff. Still struggling to understand?

You're focusing on the spread, which isn't relavent to this conversation about NC odds, and you can't even get that right? I think all the name calling shows everyone which one of us is struggling in this conversation.

 

[CardLaw]

Nice wrong explanation how the line works. Vegas doesn't try to get 50% on each side . Read the attached article. It takes a special kind of idiot to call people names when they don't know what they are talking about http://mobile.nytimes.com/2006/02/05/magazine/dissecting-the-line.html?_r=0

From the article:

"The most certain way for a bookmaker to turn a profit is to balance his book -- that is, to set a point spread that produces an equal number of dollars wagered on both sides of the line."

Point made.

 

[zipp]

And your data points................................

Exactly...

My evidence is the CFP protocol which says the "four best teams"...

 

[zipp]

No, you don't have to be a bettor for them to have relevance. But, like what's-his-face Jerk, you don't understand how lines are made or their purpose...

You're too far into the weeds. We don't need numerical odds; the relative favorites are what's relevant. Third behind Bama and tOSU is what's been communicated. I don't really care whether that's 10-to-1 or 100-to-1. I just know that our odds are shorter than the 4th place team. You wanna be 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th--that's all that matters.

Gambling odds and stats are simply sentiment indicators. And the CFP committee better for damn sure understand what the prevailing sentiment is as far as the four best teams. This process is supposed to lead to LESS controversy in the determination of a national champion. Start using arbitrary benchmarks to do that, and the process is no better than the BCS...

 

[topdecktiger]

I'm not trying to refute that argument though. The topic of the thread is "Louisville's playoff chances", and that was what I was addressing.

The scenario of "Louisville wins out and doesn't win the conference" is one scenario but there are many other possibilities.

Another possibility is that Louisville wins out, Clemson loses twice, and Louisville wins the ACC and goes to the Playoff with 1-loss.

Another is that Louisville loses to Duke, ending the conversation.

My point is that the polls are very volatile at this stage and I think the chances of Alabama, Clemson, Wisconsin and the winner of Michigan-OSU that we see in Week 7 is very, very unlikely to be how things end up. It's possible, but there are a great many other possibilities, and there are a lot of other Top 15 teams that could move up.

I'm not able to post a CFP Poll from Week 7 of last year because I don't think that poll exists. If I'm wrong and such a poll exists please post it. Again, my point in comparing the Week 7 poll to the 4 playoff teams is that the polls are more likely to have major flux than to settle to the current status-quo for the remainder of the season.

Yeah, and that is exactly my point. You are too hung up on the particular school. What is more relevant, especially in the case of Louisville making the playoffs, is where these teams are coming from. If you have an SEC champ who is 12-1, that team is likely making the playoffs, thus taking up a slot. If you have Big Ten champ who is 12-1, that team is also likely making the playoffs. It doesn't matter if it's Alabama or Texas A&M. That's a spot taken either way.

Let's just hypothetically say at the end of the season, you have 12-1 Tennessee (SEC champ) vs. 11-1 Michigan (non-champ). The odds are, Tennessee gets in over Michigan. If you have 12-1 Ohio St (Big Ten champs) vs. 11-1 Louisville (non-champ), again the odds favor Ohio St getting in instead.

As is stands now you have several P5 teams that have a chance to win their conference with 0/1 loss:

ACC: Clemson
Big 12: Baylor, West Virginia
Big Ten: Michigan, Ohio St, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Pac 12: Washington, Arizona St, Utah
SEC: Alabama, Texas A&M, Tennessee

 

[zipp]

I remember an old adage... "There goes a brown dog; therefore, all dogs are brown."

Reminds me of the conference champion proponents...

 

[topdecktiger]

My evidence is the CFP protocol which says the "four best teams"...

Right, and so far, none of the "four best teams" has been a team that didn't win its conference. In the same link that you posted, it specifically mentions one of the factors taken into consideration is championships won.

By the way, why do you actually read what the CFP link says:

Proposed Selection Process:
Establish a committee that will be instructed to place an emphasis on winning conference championships, strength of schedule and head-to-head competition when comparing teams with similar records and pedigree (treat final determination like a tie-breaker; apply specific guidelines).

I remember an old adage... "There goes a brown dog; therefore, all dogs are brown."

Reminds me of the conference champion proponents...

No. It's just people having enough common sense to realize that the odds of the committee picking an "at large" team over a P5 champ with the same record is very slim.

 

[Section 12 Jerk]

You are too stupid to understand you actually have a better argument. Since you are clueless on both football and gambling, your best argument is just sitting there like low hanging fruit and you can't see it.

That is probably why in a week in which UL has an argument for the playoffs, a Heisman Trophy and even a national title, and UL fans want their football program to be taken seriously, local media is spending 90% of its time talking about what? ... BASKETBALL. It is not even b-ball season for Christ's sake. But all the local sports radio talk shows can talk about is basketball. Seriously?

Let me give you a hint: If you thought a team had a 20% probability of winning, would you bet them at 4-1? UL's current betting probability is 14.3%. I bet you get this wrong. Only a fool would, but I have confidence in you.

You're not even very good at name calling. You really should be better at this message board thing with over 11k of posts. I proved my point long ago in this thread, with an argument you have yet to properly refute. Actually, with your claim that I'm so clueless, and your hint, you appear to be getting much closer to agreeing with me.

 

[Section 12 Jerk]

From the article:

"The most certain way for a bookmaker to turn a profit is to balance his book -- that is, to set a point spread that produces an equal number of dollars wagered on both sides of the line."

Point made. Idiot.

You might want to read some more of that article.

 

[zipp]

Right, and so far...

So far = two years. You're still in diapers.

...By the way, why do you actually read what the CFP link says:

Proposed Selection Process:
Establish a committee that will be instructed to place an emphasis on winning conference championships, strength of schedule and head-to-head competition when comparing teams with similar records and pedigree (treat final determination like a tie-breaker; apply specific guidelines).

And why do you boldface and obsess on one in a list of considerations?

No. It's just people having enough common sense to realize...

"Common sense" in whose mind? My eyes read FOUR BEST TEAMS...

 

[gocds]

This is why I say many of you are pinning your hopes on your perception that UL is heads and shoulders better than Washington. That is the only way you can place an 11-1 division loser over a 12-1 P5 conference champion. If they are more-or-less equal, then based on the committee's stated criteria, conference championship is a deciding factor.

Hmmmmmmm . . . where and when did I say that UofL was head and shoulders above anyone? It appears to me that you are putting far too much emphasis on being a P5 conference champion. The PAC is an awful conference and a 11-1 Washington will get left out of the CFP conference champion or not. Now if they are undefeated then that changes the whole ball game. Perhaps you are guilty of wishful thinking in that you continue to reduce UofL's chance because of one loss since you obviously have an anti UofL bias. We are all surmising here and we'll know far more on November 1st when the first official CFP rankings come out.

GO CARDS - BEAT EVERYBODY!!! God Bless America!!!

 

[topdecktiger]

So far = two years. You're still in diapers.

And again, you base your opinion on.............nothing.

And why do you boldface and obsess on one in a list of considerations?

Because it proves my point.

"Common sense" in whose mind? My eyes read FOUR BEST TEAMS...

In the minds of the committee for one. Your eyes also missed a lot of other information in the link:

Proposed Selection Process:
Establish a committee that will be instructed to place an emphasis on winning conference championships, strength of schedule and head-to-head competition when comparing teams with similar records and pedigree (treat final determination like a tie-breaker; apply specific guidelines).

The criteria to be provided to the selection committee must be aligned with the ideals of the commissioners, presidents, athletic directors and coaches to honor regular season success while at the same time providing enough flexibility and discretion to select a non-champion or independent under circumstances where that particular non-champion or independent is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country.

When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered:

• 
  
• Championships won
• Strength of schedule
• Head-to-head competition (if it occurred)
• Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)

We believe that a committee of experts properly instructed (based on beliefs that the regular season is unique and must be preserved; and that championships won on the field and strength of schedule are important values that must be incorporated into the selection process) has very strong support throughout the college football community.

Under the current construct, polls (although well-intended) have not expressed these values; particularly at the margins where teams that have won head-to-head competition and championships are sometimes ranked behind non-champions and teams that have lost in head-to-head competition. Nuanced mathematical formulas ignore some teams who “deserve” to be selected.

As we expand from two teams to four teams we want to establish a human selection committee that: (1) will be provided a clear set of guidelines; (2) will be expected to take the facts of each case and specifically apply the guidelines; and (3) will be led by a Chairperson who will be expected to explain publicly the committee’s decisions.

Some of the guidelines and protocols expected to be established to guide the committee would include, but not be limited to, the following:

• While it is understood that committee members will take into consideration all kinds of data including polls, committee members will be required to discredit polls wherein initial rankings are established before competition has occurred;
• Any polls that are taken into consideration by the selection committee must be completely open and transparent to the public;
• Strength of schedule, head-to-head competition and championships won must be specifically applied as tie-breakers between teams that look similar;
• Committee members associated with any team under consideration during the selection process will be required to recuse themselves from any deliberations associated with that team;

We would expect this same set of principles to be applied, particularly at the margins (teams 10-11-12).

The bottom line is, the selection process simply doesn't work the way you think it does. Conference championships (along with SOS etc.) are part of determining the four best teams.

Hmmmmmmm . . . where and when did I say that UofL was head and shoulders above anyone? It appears to me that you are putting far too much emphasis on being a P5 conference champion. The PAC is an awful conference and a 11-1 Washington will get left out of the CFP conference champion or not. Now if they are undefeated then that changes the whole ball game. Perhaps you are guilty of wishful thinking in that you continue to reduce UofL's chance because of one loss since you obviously have an anti UofL bias. We are all surmising here and we'll know far more on November 1st when the first official CFP rankings come out.

GO CARDS - BEAT EVERYBODY!!! God Bless America!!!

He's not putting too much emphasis on conference championships. I've just posted the CFP outline of the selection process. Clearly, conference championships are a factor in the selection process. The process states that a non champion must be unequivocally better than competing teams. There is simply no way a non champion is going to be deemed unequivocally better than a 12-1 Washington.

 

[gocds]

Well opinions are like noses. We all have one. What you posted said an emphasis on winning conference titles, difficulty of schedule, head to head competition, etc. The PAC sucks and everybody, but you of course, understands that. The ACC is better and more competitive than the PAC and THAT will be taken into consideration. If Washington is undefeated then, like you, I believe they'll be selected. Otherwise, a 11-1 UofL will be selected so long as we win by the margins expected. Hey we are all playing the "ifin" game and we may just be blowing smoke.

GO CARDS - BEAT EVERYBODY!!! God Bless America!!!

 

[zipp]

In truth, the conference champion enthusiasts have no proof that the CFP committee even considered that criterion the first two years. Simply because that was the result could have been coincidental unless we were told that they applied that specific tie-breaker.

On face value--and the CFP committee would likely agree--I'd argue they simply picked the four best teams, like they're supposed to do. Cherry-picking words from their protocol as proof of something is delusional...

 

[topdecktiger]

Well opinions are like noses. We all have one. What you posted said an emphasis on winning conference titles, difficulty of schedule, head to head competition, etc. The PAC sucks and everybody, but you of course, understands that. The ACC is better and more competitive than the PAC and THAT will be taken into consideration. If Washington is undefeated then, like you, I believe they'll be selected. Otherwise, a 11-1 UofL will be selected so long as we win by the margins expected. Hey we are all playing the "ifin" game and we may just be blowing smoke.

GO CARDS - BEAT EVERYBODY!!! God Bless America!!!

If you are going to go with the "everybody has an opinion" card, then you can't say your opinion is any more valid. The committee has stated that they don't judge conferences. They do judge strength of schedule, along with conference championships. You are trying to convince yourself that somehow conference championships is going to be thrown out the window. It isn't.

By the way, winning by the margins expected isn't a factor. The committee guidelines specifically state margin of victory is not a consideration.

 

[topdecktiger]

In truth, the conference champion enthusiasts have no proof that the CFP committee even considered that criterion the first two years. Simply because that was the result could have been coincidental unless we were told that they applied that specific tie-breaker.

On face value--and the CFP committee would likely agree--I'd argue they simply picked the four best teams, like they're supposed to do. Cherry-picking words from their protocol as proof of something is delusional...

It's not cherrypicking, and it's not coincidental. Conference championships are a factor in determining the four best teams. It's painfully obvious to anyone who doesn't have their head in the sand.

 

[Mike'sMarbles]

Yeah, and that is exactly my point. You are too hung up on the particular school. What is more relevant, especially in the case of Louisville making the playoffs, is where these teams are coming from. If you have an SEC champ who is 12-1, that team is likely making the playoffs, thus taking up a slot. If you have Big Ten champ who is 12-1, that team is also likely making the playoffs. It doesn't matter if it's Alabama or Texas A&M. That's a spot taken either way.

Let's just hypothetically say at the end of the season, you have 12-1 Tennessee (SEC champ) vs. 11-1 Michigan (non-champ). The odds are, Tennessee gets in over Michigan. If you have 12-1 Ohio St (Big Ten champs) vs. 11-1 Louisville (non-champ), again the odds favor Ohio St getting in instead.

As is stands now you have several P5 teams that have a chance to win their conference with 0/1 loss:

ACC: Clemson
Big 12: Baylor, West Virginia
Big Ten: Michigan, Ohio St, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Pac 12: Washington, Arizona St, Utah
SEC: Alabama, Texas A&M, Tennessee

I don't understand what you and I are debating here. I don't really have an opinion about the "conference champ" vs. "non-conference champ" argument.

My whole point is that I suspect the chances of chaos at the top of the polls is greater than the likelihood that everything will stay as-is with the only variable is OSU/Michigan winner. And I'm hopeful my team will take advantage of the chaos rather than turning into another one of its victims.

I also think my team, Louisville, is still alive for everything, including winning the conference championship. It may sound crazy to anyone who's into the status quo argument, but I can visualize Clemson losing 2 games and Louisville winning the division with 1-loss. All of that could be moot in a few hours!