B1G mailbag: Is playoff worth it for Penn State if it means 'Bama?

Herbie Green wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

The other 13 teams in the Big Ten. If they win the Big Ten, they get in the CFP.

So MSU's odds were then 1/14 of making the final four.

Note that there are 16 teams in a region of the basketball tournament which you have to qualify for by being one of the top 64 out of 357 teams.

Your first statement is incredibly simplistic. But, let's use it for laughs.

Using your math:

One Big Ten team has a 1/14 chance of making the CFP. That = 7%.
Last year 7 Big Ten teams made the Tournament, so 7/68 = 10%.

NigelUno wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:

In effect, yes, on average.

For a Big Ten team the odds are better in football than in basketball. For a non-power 5 team the odds are better in basketball. Western Michigan is going to prove they had a zero percent chance of making the football final four.

Wut?

No. Again...you've lost your marbles.

Show me an example where the average odds of a team making the final four isn't exactly 4 divided by the # of teams.

NigelUno wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:

So MSU's odds were then 1/14 of making the final four.

Note that there are 16 teams in a region of the basketball tournament which you have to qualify for by being one of the top 64 out of 357 teams.

Your first statement is incredibly simplistic. But, let's use it for laughs.

Using your math:

One Big Ten team has a 1/14 chance of making the CFP. That = 7%.
Last year 7 Big Ten teams made the Tournament, so 7/68 = 10%.

I thought we were talking about making the final four. Obviously it is easier to make the basketball tournament than the football playoffs.

kingstonlake wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

If the MSU football team loses to 2-3 real opponents a year, they're not making the CFP.

And last year MSU played Oregon, UM, OSU, and Iowa.  Both OSU and Iowa were Top 4 when MSU played them.

If MSU Basketball loses to Arizona, Kentucky, and Duke...they still have a chance at the Final Four.  

And your second question has an implication of an expanded playoff for football.  If it was an 8 team playoff, or a 16 team playoff...would teams (other than the Top 4) have a better chance of making the CFP Final Four?

Thus proving how hard it is to actually make it to the final four.  You actually have to play 4 games against quality opponents to get into the final four.  You can't rely on a weak non conference schedule, play 2-3 real opponents, and get in.  The tournament is brutal.  You have 24 hours in 2 of the 4 games to put a game plan together to beat phenomenal teams.  Not seven days or in the case of the CFP, a month.

Your own words were that all State has to do is be better than the other 11 in the conference and theyre in. lol

NigelUno wrote:

The other 13 teams in the Big Ten. If they win the Big Ten, they get in the CFP.

Last year, UNC made the Final Four beating a 16, 9, 5, and 6 seed. Not exactly a gauntlet.

An undefeated or 1 loss Big Ten Champ is virtually guaranteed of making the CFP. And there are 14 teams. Not 12.

You think it's easier to win a Big Ten Championship in football than to make a Final Four in basketball (which you can get to by not even winning your conference)?

Two 2 seeds and a 10 seed made it last year. Teams like that have NO chance to make the CFP.

Do you think it would be easier for (more) teams to get to a final four in the CFP if it was expanded? Of course it would. How do you not understand that?

If it was 8 teams this year, would it be easier for teams (other than the Top 4 to win it)? If it was 16 teams? Of course.

That doesn't mean it's easy to win games. It means it's easier to get to a Final Four. A chance is better than no chance.

In basketball last year, 3 #1's didn't make it. That can't happen in football. It is easier for other teams to get to the Final Four in basketball, because it's a bigger tournament (among other things).

Herbie Green wrote:

Clarett's Folly wrote:

Are CFP and FF teams drawn from random out of the entire pool of participants?

In effect, yes, on average.

For a Big Ten team the odds are better in football than in basketball. For a non-power 5 team the odds are better in basketball. Western Michigan is going to prove they had a zero percent chance of making the football final four.

This discussion has gone straight off the rails. The question posed was whether it was harder to make the College Football Playoff or the Final Four now here we are talking about the odds of a B1G team making the playoff compared to WMU.
Get back to me when a team that has lost 30℅ of its games makes the College Football Playoff.

Herbie Green wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Your first statement is incredibly simplistic.  But, let's use it for laughs.

Using your math:

One Big Ten team has a 1/14 chance of making the CFP.  That = 7%.
Last year 7 Big Ten teams made the Tournament, so 7/68 = 10%.  

I thought we were talking about making the final four.  Obviously it is easier to make the basketball tournament than the football playoffs.

Yes.  We are talking about the Final Four.  Using your Big Ten math (with the 1/14 example), a single team would have a 1/68 chance of making the Final Four.  Seven Big Ten teams made it.  7/68 are better odds than 1/14, correct?

Nigel your own words were "if MSU wins the big ten in football, they are in the CFP".

Simple question. If MSU wins the big ten basketball tournament, are they in the final four?

kingstonlake wrote:Nigel your own words were "if MSU wins the big ten in football, they are in the CFP".

Simple question. If MSU wins the big ten basketball tournament, are they in the final four?

I did say that, and I qualified it a bit later. I'm sure you read that also.

No team is guaranteed of making the Final Four if they win their conference tournament. You obviously know that. Are you seriously trying to compare winning the Big Ten in football with winning the Big Ten Tournament in basketball?

Any team can win the conference tournament and possibly get to the Final Four. That doesn't happen in football. Teams with losing records have won their conference tournaments to get in the basketball tournament. That can't happen in football.

Sidenote:

MSU Final Four 2015 - 7 seed
MSU Final Four 2010 - 5 seed
MSU Final Four 2009 - 2 seed
MSU Final Four 2005 - 5 seed

None of those teams would have had a (comparable) chance at making the CFP. They wouldn't have been in the Top 4.

fwiw, i don't think this is so cut and dry either way. i honestly think it all depends on the year, the bracket, and the conference strenght

It's fucking hard making the final four in any sport.

NigelUno wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:Nigel your own words were "if MSU wins the big ten in football, they are in the CFP".

Simple question. If MSU wins the big ten basketball tournament, are they in the final four?

I did say that, and I qualified it a bit later. I'm sure you read that also.

No team is guaranteed of making the Final Four if they win their conference tournament. You obviously know that. Are you seriously trying to compare winning the Big Ten in football with winning the Big Ten Tournament in basketball?

Any team can win the conference tournament and possibly get to the Final Four. That doesn't happen in football. Teams with losing records have won their conference tournaments to get in the basketball tournament. That can't happen in football.

Sidenote:

MSU Final Four 2015 - 7 seed
MSU Final Four 2010 - 5 seed
MSU Final Four 2009 - 2 seed
MSU Final Four 2005 - 5 seed

None of those teams would have had a (comparable) chance at making the CFP. They wouldn't have been in the Top 4.

Correct, any team can win the conference tournament. So let's go from there.

If Rutgers wins the B1G basketball tournament and has a 7-23 overall record........

Are they in the final four?

kingstonlake wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

I did say that, and I qualified it a bit later. I'm sure you read that also.

No team is guaranteed of making the Final Four if they win their conference tournament. You obviously know that. Are you seriously trying to compare winning the Big Ten in football with winning the Big Ten Tournament in basketball?

Any team can win the conference tournament and possibly get to the Final Four. That doesn't happen in football. Teams with losing records have won their conference tournaments to get in the basketball tournament. That can't happen in football.

Sidenote:

MSU Final Four 2015 - 7 seed
MSU Final Four 2010 - 5 seed
MSU Final Four 2009 - 2 seed
MSU Final Four 2005 - 5 seed

None of those teams would have had a (comparable) chance at making the CFP. They wouldn't have been in the Top 4.

Correct, any team can win the conference tournament. So let's go from there.

If Rutgers wins the B1G basketball tournament and has a 7-23 overall record........

Are they in the final four?

Seems rhetorical. I'll go with no.

Since 1985, these seeds have reached the Final Four (with number of times):

11 - 3
10 - 1
9 - 1
8 - 5
7 - 2
6 - 3
5 - 6
4 - 13
3 - 14
2 - 28

So, 76 times a team other than a 1 seed has made the Final Four (since 1985).

Those teams would have reached the CFP a grand total of ZERO times, because the CFP only has 4 teams.

76 marbles > 0 marbles.

NigelUno wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:Nigel your own words were "if MSU wins the big ten in football, they are in the CFP".

Simple question. If MSU wins the big ten basketball tournament, are they in the final four?

I did say that, and I qualified it a bit later. I'm sure you read that also.

No team is guaranteed of making the Final Four if they win their conference tournament. You obviously know that. Are you seriously trying to compare winning the Big Ten in football with winning the Big Ten Tournament in basketball?

Any team can win the conference tournament and possibly get to the Final Four. That doesn't happen in football. Teams with losing records have won their conference tournaments to get in the basketball tournament. That can't happen in football.

Sidenote:

MSU Final Four 2015 - 7 seed
MSU Final Four 2010 - 5 seed
MSU Final Four 2009 - 2 seed
MSU Final Four 2005 - 5 seed

None of those teams would have had a (comparable) chance at making the CFP. They wouldn't have been in the Top 4.

Here is a list of conference championships from Kansas: 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011,2012,2013,2014,2015,2016.

I will let you look up how many final fours they made it to in that timeframe.

kingstonlake wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

I did say that, and I qualified it a bit later. I'm sure you read that also.

No team is guaranteed of making the Final Four if they win their conference tournament. You obviously know that. Are you seriously trying to compare winning the Big Ten in football with winning the Big Ten Tournament in basketball?

Any team can win the conference tournament and possibly get to the Final Four. That doesn't happen in football. Teams with losing records have won their conference tournaments to get in the basketball tournament. That can't happen in football.

Sidenote:

MSU Final Four 2015 - 7 seed
MSU Final Four 2010 - 5 seed
MSU Final Four 2009 - 2 seed
MSU Final Four 2005 - 5 seed

None of those teams would have had a (comparable) chance at making the CFP. They wouldn't have been in the Top 4.

Correct, any team can win the conference tournament. So let's go from there.

If Rutgers wins the B1G basketball tournament and has a 7-23 overall record........

Are they in the final four?

MSU basketball won the Big Ten Tournament last year. Did we make the final four?

NigelUno wrote:Since 1985, these seeds have reached the Final Four (with number of times):

11 - 3
10 - 1
9 - 1
8 - 5
7 - 2
6 - 3
5 - 6
4 - 13
3 - 14
2 - 28

So, 76 times a team other than a 1 seed has made the Final Four (since 1985).

Those teams would have reached the CFP a grand total of ZERO times, because the CFP only has 4 teams.

76 marbles > 0 marbles.

How many times have the top 4 seeded teams not made the final four in the football playoffs? How many do you think will make it this year?

Herbie Green wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

I did say that, and I qualified it a bit later.  I'm sure you read that also.

No team is guaranteed of making the Final Four if they win their conference tournament.  You obviously know that.  Are you seriously trying to compare winning the Big Ten in football with winning the Big Ten Tournament in basketball?  

Any team can win the conference tournament and possibly get to the Final Four. That doesn't happen in football.  Teams with losing records have won their conference tournaments to get in the basketball tournament.  That can't happen in football.

Sidenote:

MSU Final Four 2015 - 7 seed
MSU Final Four 2010 - 5 seed
MSU Final Four 2009 - 2 seed
MSU Final Four 2005 - 5 seed

None of those teams would have had a (comparable) chance at making the CFP. They wouldn't have been in the Top 4.

 

Here is a list of conference championships from Kansas: 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011,2012,2013,2014,2015,2016.

I will let you look up how many final fours they made it to in that timeframe.

That's completely irrelevant.

But...just for laughs...

However many times they've made the Final Four in that timeframe is greater than the number of times they've finished in the Top 4 in their entire football history.

So, good point.  

Herbie Green wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:

Correct, any team can win the conference tournament. So let's go from there.

If Rutgers wins the B1G basketball tournament and has a 7-23 overall record........

Are they in the final four?

MSU basketball won the Big Ten Tournament last year. Did we make the final four?

No. And...that has no relevance.

You've lost your marbles again.

But Kansas is completely relevant because I think it illustrates what you are failing to grasp Nigel. This requirement of winning the conference in football that you are so hung up on has a very big flip side in basketball in that winning your conference in no way guarantees you a spot in the final four.

Every single non #1 seed you list in basketball that makes it to the final four means the #1 seeds in those regions did not make the final four. Exactly one team will make the final four from each region in the basketball tournament every single time. The average chance of each team in a 16 team region is 1/16 every single time so that when you add them all up it has to add up to exactly 1.0000. It doesn't matter if every team has a 1/16 chance or if one team has a 16/16 chance and every other team has a 0/16 chance or any combination in between.

Extend it to the entire field of college basketball at the beginning of the season and the average chance must be 4/351. For football it must be 4/128. I have tried to explain this numerous times and ways but this is not debatable as it is a mathematical given so lets move on.

We can argue whether a certain team or conference has a better chance in either sport. But I would think most everyone would already say that "the little guy" has a better chance in basketball.

Herbie Green wrote:But Kansas is completely relevant because I think it illustrates what you are failing to grasp Nigel. This requirement of winning the conference in football that you are so hung up on has a very big flip side in basketball in that winning your conference in no way guarantees you a spot in the final four.

If you HAD to win your conference in basketball to get to the Final Four, that would make it MORE difficult, correct?

I gave you 76 marbles that made the Final Four.
None of those would make the CFP.

76 > 0

That doesn't mean it's easy for any team to make the Final Four. It means it's easier for any team to make the Final Four than the CFP.

Herbie Green wrote:
We can argue whether a certain team or conference has a better chance in either sport. But I would think most everyone would already say that "the little guy" has a better chance in basketball.

The "little guy" has a better chance of making the Final Four (vs. the CFP) as does (virtually) every .500 team and above in any major conference...like Syracuse last year.

I think I am starting to come around to your line of thinking Nigel.

How many teams do you expect to make the final four in basketball this year? I am thinking 30-40 teams because it is so easy since you only need to be .500 in your conference and/or a 10 seed.

Not going to read this whole thing...but

Can't one of you math guys just combine the odds of 68/# of d1 basketball teams eligible to make it..then 4/68 as in the final 4...

compare that to

4/# of teams that can make the playoff.

Boom. Science wins. Whoever has already said this, I'm sure you guys have, you're right. You're welcome.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:Not going to read this whole thing...but

Can't one of you math guys just combine the odds of 68/# of d1 basketball teams eligible to make it..then 4/68 as in the final 4...

compare that to

4/# of teams that can make the playoff.

Boom. Science wins. Whoever has already said this, I'm sure you guys have, you're right. You're welcome.

Nah, because there's like a thousand different factors beyond the number of teams that makes them different from each other. Really the two of them are just comparing apples to oranges and pretending they are related to each other because they're both fruit. They're only still arguing because they e hate each other.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:Not going to read this whole thing...but

Can't one of you math guys just combine the odds of 68/# of d1 basketball teams eligible to make it..then 4/68 as in the final 4...

compare that to

4/# of teams that can make the playoff.

Boom. Science wins. Whoever has already said this, I'm sure you guys have, you're right. You're welcome.

I will take this as a victory

Here is what you could do:

Add up all the teams that made the final four in basketball in X # of years and divide that by the number of division 1 basketball teams

Add up all the teams that were ranked in the top 4 in the final college football poll in those X number of years and divide that by the number of division 1 college football teams

This will tell you whether it is harder to make the final four in basketball vs football

Or alternatively, you could look at my first post in this thread where I mentioned there are 128 D1 football teams and 351 D1 basketball teams.

DWags wrote:It's fucking hard making the final four in any sport.

This is the bottom line from an MSU perspective.  We have been spoiled by Izzo and now Dantonio.  But at our age we will be fortunate to see another final four in our lifetime.

Look at Gene Keady - 6 big ten titles and 17 NCAA appearances but zero final fours

In football we are optimistically back to a 1/14 chance.  I hope to live another 14 years.

Herbie Green wrote:

DWags wrote:It's fucking hard making the final four in any sport.

Look at Gene Keady - 6 big ten titles and 17 NCAA appearances but zero final fours

You're not the brightest guy.

You used Kansas as an example, and now Purdue?  

You think it's easier for Purdue to get to the CFP?  

Herbie Green wrote:

DWags wrote:It's fucking hard making the final four in any sport.

This is the bottom line from an MSU perspective.   We have been spoiled by Izzo and now Dantonio.  But at our age we will be fortunate to see another final four in our lifetime.

Interesting.

If you had to bet, Final Four or CFP...which one would we get to first?  And why?

NigelUno wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:


Look at Gene Keady - 6 big ten titles and 17 NCAA appearances but zero final fours

You're not the brightest guy.

You used Kansas as an example, and now Purdue?  

You think it's easier for Purdue to get to the CFP?  

But if basketball was run like football, Purdue would have been to six final fours.

No it is not easier for Purdue football specifically to get to the final four, but it is easier on average for a team to make the football playoff than the basketball playoff. In fact, it is exactly 4/128 compared to 4/351

NigelUno wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:

This is the bottom line from an MSU perspective.   We have been spoiled by Izzo and now Dantonio.  But at our age we will be fortunate to see another final four in our lifetime.

Interesting.

If you had to bet, Final Four or CFP...which one would we get to first?  And why?

How do you think a Penn State fan would bet right now?

gHost Spartan wrote:It's much easier to make it to the NCAA Final Four than to the CFP, there is absolutely no dispute. First, a non-P5 team can go undefeated and not even sniff the playoff. For a large number of D1 teams there is literally no chance whatsoever - before the season even begins - to make the CFP. That simply isn't the case in hoops. In hoops, everyone is invited to what are essentially the playoffs and, as we've seen in the past, many Cindarellas like George Mason have made it to the Final Four. I really don't see the argument here. NCAA basketball is much more inclusive and provides an equal platform for teams to advance. In hoops you also don't need as many "good" players to get to the Final Four. A mid-major could have a couple of late bloomers who weren't heavily recruited on their team as seniors and that may be all it takes, whereas in football that's simply not the case.

These are all good points ghost.

Basketball has 5 starters. Football has 22. It's also easier from that perspective.

gHost Spartan wrote:It's much easier to make it to the NCAA Final Four than to the CFP, there is absolutely no dispute. First, a non-P5 team can go undefeated and not even sniff the playoff. For a large number of D1 teams there is literally no chance whatsoever - before the season even begins - to make the CFP. That simply isn't the case in hoops. In hoops, everyone is invited to what are essentially the playoffs and, as we've seen in the past, many Cindarellas like George Mason have made it to the Final Four. I really don't see the argument here. NCAA basketball is much more inclusive and provides an equal platform for teams to advance. In hoops you also don't need as many "good" players to get to the Final Four. A mid-major could have a couple of late bloomers who weren't heavily recruited on their team as seniors and that may be all it takes, whereas in football that's simply not the case.

So really the power 5 conferences are the only ones getting in, which narrows the field even further, and it harder to make the final four in football?

NigelUno wrote:

gHost Spartan wrote:It's much easier to make it to the NCAA Final Four than to the CFP, there is absolutely no dispute. First, a non-P5 team can go undefeated and not even sniff the playoff. For a large number of D1 teams there is literally no chance whatsoever - before the season even begins - to make the CFP. That simply isn't the case in hoops. In hoops, everyone is invited to what are essentially the playoffs and, as we've seen in the past, many Cindarellas like George Mason have made it to the Final Four. I really don't see the argument here. NCAA basketball is much more inclusive and provides an equal platform for teams to advance. In hoops you also don't need as many "good" players to get to the Final Four. A mid-major could have a couple of late bloomers who weren't heavily recruited on their team as seniors and that may be all it takes, whereas in football that's simply not the case.

These are all good points ghost.

Basketball has 5 starters. Football has 22. It's also easier from that perspective.

You saw what happened when msu was without their best football player last year. They went into Columbus and won. How was msu without valentine last year?

kingstonlake wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

These are all good points ghost.

Basketball has 5 starters. Football has 22. It's also easier from that perspective.

You saw what happened when msu was without their best football player last year. They went into Columbus and won. How was msu without valentine last year?

You should post on tBob

NigelUno wrote:

gHost Spartan wrote:It's much easier to make it to the NCAA Final Four than to the CFP, there is absolutely no dispute. First, a non-P5 team can go undefeated and not even sniff the playoff. For a large number of D1 teams there is literally no chance whatsoever - before the season even begins - to make the CFP. That simply isn't the case in hoops. In hoops, everyone is invited to what are essentially the playoffs and, as we've seen in the past, many Cindarellas like George Mason have made it to the Final Four. I really don't see the argument here. NCAA basketball is much more inclusive and provides an equal platform for teams to advance. In hoops you also don't need as many "good" players to get to the Final Four. A mid-major could have a couple of late bloomers who weren't heavily recruited on their team as seniors and that may be all it takes, whereas in football that's simply not the case.

These are all good points ghost.

Basketball has 5 starters. Football has 22. It's also easier from that perspective.

So how many bonus final four teams do you think this will all yield? You might have to reduce it a little because basketball is played indoors and you don't have the weather as a potential neautralizer.

It's fucking hard to get to the final four in either sport. I can't imagine one school ever getting to both in one calendar year.

DWags wrote:It's fucking hard to get to the final four in either sport. I can't imagine one school ever getting to both in one calendar year.

optimist. We suck at everything now. Join reality!

kingstonlake wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

These are all good points ghost.

Basketball has 5 starters. Football has 22. It's also easier from that perspective.

You saw what happened when msu was without their best football player last year. They went into Columbus and won. How was msu without valentine last year?

I'm pretty sure Conklin played in that game.