Coach Osborne to be on playoff selection committee!

Mr. Accountability said:
StPaulHusker said:
The only issues I see with the list is for me I would rather not see a sitting AD as the chairman. They have a team AND conference in the discussion and that shouldn't be right.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I thought the same thing. But at least the Big10 has one of em.
Click to expand...
All of the major conferences have one active AD on the committee. I doubt the chairman has any more pull than the others.

Also, I think in the basketball selection committee, if there is an AD from a school that is under discussion, that AD will take themselves out of the room/discussion to not have biases.

 
StPaulHusker said:
The only issues I see with the list is for me I would rather not see a sitting AD as the chairman. They have a team AND conference in the discussion and that shouldn't be right.
Click to expand...
I agree. I guess the precedence is that the basketball tourney committee has the same thing. Not the same thing IMO. Making a field of 67 or 198 or however big that tourney is now is not the same as narrowing it down to 4. I think I've heard that an AD on the committee leaves the room when his team is being discussed, but if he comes back and sees his team in a sweet spot you think he might return the favor to another committee member?

 
So what we're saying is, Nebraska is guaranteed to make it every year??
default_biggrin.png


 
Wow. I am actually pretty shocked by this list.

Sitting ADs, a woman (no offense to women, but they don't play football), politicians, reporters, a guy from the armed forces, etc.

How in the hell is this ever gonna be fair? Is it rotating every year? Who holds the most power? How do they decide 2 teams from the same conference w identical records if the conference doesn't have a championship game (glaring at you B12)? Etc etc

Seems very corruptible. Unless they go to like 8 teams in the next yr or two.

Someone must have some BIG plans for CFB, cuz this looks whack. Yeah, whack.

 
ColoradoHusk said:
StPaulHusker said:
The only issues I see with the list is for me I would rather not see a sitting AD as the chairman. They have a team AND conference in the discussion and that shouldn't be right.
Click to expand...
It happens all the time with the NCAA Basketball Tournament selection committee, but this is slightly different with only 4 teams in the "playoff".
Click to expand...
Exactly. It's the only picking 4 part that makes me not like it. Maybe the chairman doesn't have any more pull than anyone else but I think that it should be someone not so closely associated with a program/conference.

We will know soon enough if it makes a difference.

Also, wouldn't it be good if before the final BCS rankings came out, this commission got together and picked the 4 for this year and see if it matches up with the BCS?

 
StPaulHusker said:
ColoradoHusk said:
StPaulHusker said:
The only issues I see with the list is for me I would rather not see a sitting AD as the chairman. They have a team AND conference in the discussion and that shouldn't be right.
Click to expand...
It happens all the time with the NCAA Basketball Tournament selection committee, but this is slightly different with only 4 teams in the "playoff".
Click to expand...
Exactly. It's the only picking 4 part that makes me not like it. Maybe the chairman doesn't have any more pull than anyone else but I think that it should be someone not so closely associated with a program/conference.

We will know soon enough if it makes a difference.

Also, wouldn't it be good if before the final BCS rankings came out, this commission got together and picked the 4 for this year and see if it matches up with the BCS?
Click to expand...
Great idea. See their acumen

 
mrandyk said:
Condalezza Rice? What?
Click to expand...
I would say she has at least as much of a spot - and maybe more - than the general and Archie Manning.

I'd heard her name before so that wasn't really a surprise. No idea what the general's story was and Manning would seem to be a lot more interested in the NFL than college football at the present time. I guess as long as they're going to put in the time, I have no problem. Just curious at the reasoning.

 
Let's be real here too. Archie manning is on here because of his sons.

I mean, the only person not to hold a higher position than "player" and it's Manning?

Was Rudy Rudiger not available?

 
StPaulHusker said:
Let's be real here too. Archie manning is on here because of his sons.

I mean, the only person not to hold a higher position than "player" and it's Manning?

Was Rudy Rudiger not available?
Click to expand...
Yeah, because Archie Manning totally sucked as a player at Ole Miss.
default_insertsarcasm.gif


 
Would be much happier if "Former" was tagged in front of all the participants. That said, still a pretty good group I'm thinking.

 
This whole thing is a horrifically bad idea. We need fewer subjective aspects, not more.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
JTrain said:
This whole thing is a horrifically bad idea. We need fewer subjective aspects, not more.
Click to expand...
Eh, I think the NCAA Basketball Selection committee is a pretty good model. They'll have all the same info to work with as the BCS but can make some logical adjustments.

And I'd much rather be arguing over who is #4 and #5 versus arguing over who is #2 and #3. Of course, if I had my way we'd only be arguing over who's #8 and #9 but that's another story.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top