Creative Writing

College Football Playoff Griping

Description
At CollegeFootballWinning.com, we focus solely on college football betting analysis, primarily from a quantitative-algorithmic perspective.
Published
of 2
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
Share
Transcript
  College Football Playoff Griping Using quantities for our  college football picks  helps our analysis stay objective and free from human biases. This article is a rare departure from our norm, and a moment for us to offer a completely subjective opinion on an issue of importance affecting the  college football  world: the new College Football Playoff. Our concern is not with the idea of a having a college football playoff, but with how   the four teams (out of 128 candidates) are selected. The BCS Postmortem The Bowl Championship Series (BCS) was instituted in 1998 with the sole purpose of playing-off the two best college football teams to determine the National Championship. The “formula” for selecting those two teams consisted of three equal parts: 1)   The USA Today Coaches Poll 2)   The Harris Interactive Poll 3)   The average of six “computer” rankings  One of the most oft- cited complaints about the BCS was that “computers” should not be picking the two best teams. The response to that charge should have been simple: The Coaches Poll is comprised of current college football coaches (people, not computers), and the Harris Interactive Poll is comprised of former college football players, coaches, administrators and former college football media (again, all people). That means that two-thirds of the BCS was purely human and not computer-driven. The Pendulum Swings In response to all the BCS vitriol, it was decided that the selection of the four teams to play-off (not just two, as with the BCS)) would be decided by a selection committee (all humans). That decision has been left to 13 individuals- all people with human biases. We no longer have ANY objective component to the selection of the four best teams; the process is entirely subjective. How is that an improvement? Sure, most college football fans wanted to see a playoff, but were they hoping for the most subjective way of determining the four best teams? The Subjects The so- called “Recusal Policy” should be the sole focus of volumes of criticism, so for this brief discussion, we focus on the individuals who have been selected to be the Selection Committee. For this section, keep in mind the following: Reportedly, CONFERENCES will receive an additional $6,000,000 each year for each team it places in the College Football Playoff.  Why then, would a sitting athletic director be allowed on this committee? No matter what the recusal policy, his conference (and therefore, his school) stands to profit if ANY team from his conference is selected as one of the privileged four. There are simply too many conflicts of interest, yet 5 of the 13 members (38.46%) are athletic directors. With former Nebraska head coach and athletic director Tom Osborne continuing to be compensated by the University of Nebraska, he should be placed in the same  conflict-of-interest category. We can all be grateful to Lt. General Mike Gould for his service to our country, but what on earth is he doing on a college football selection committee? With former Secretary of State, former Stanford Provost, and current Stanford professor Condoleezza Rice on the Committee, we get someone who is, at once, unqualified to preside over any part of college football AND a person with a conflict of interest. With just that simple portrait, 8 out of 13 members (61.54%) of the College Football Playoff Selection Committee have no business presiding over teams whose schools and conferences (therefore, schools again) will receive additional compensation for their participation in the College Football Playoff. It might take some time, but we believe that college football fans will eventually clamor for some un-conflicted, unbiased, objective quantitative (yes, computer-related) components to this selection process. © CollegeFootballWinning.com

HW4ETS2221C

Jul 23, 2017
Search
Tags
Related Search
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks