Should Archie Manning be recused if MSU or TN is under playoff consideration?

[ShotgunDawg]

Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN 2m
.@CFBPlayoff committee recusals other than 5 current ADs: Gould (Air Force), Manning (Ole Miss), Osborne (Nebraska), Rice (Stanford)

I just saw this tweet by Brett McMurphy, and it says that Archie will be recused if Ole Miss is under playoff consideration. This is obviously to remove bias from the room. However, in light of this, I am curious if Archie can be completely unbiased if MSU or Tennessee is under consideration.

Should he be recused at that point?

[blacklistedbully]

I have heard that some here think Archie would screw us if we were up for consideration. Thoughts?

[starkvegasdawg]

That would be a douche bag move on his part if he did. I'v enever met him so I have no idea how douchey he is.

[ShotgunDawg]

I have heard that some here think Archie would screw us if we were up for consideration. Thoughts?

I honestly don't know. Archie seems like a pretty good guy, but I'd hate to just guess that he wouldn't be biased. The thing is, it may not be Archie wanting to be biased, but all his friends at Ole Miss will be pressuring him to be biased.

I think Archie is an honest guy, but humans are humans.

[TexasDawg]

No he should not. If you do it for Archie then you have to do it for everybody. If Stanford makes it this year then you would have to pull out Oliver Luck because Andrew played for Stanford. If Georgia were to make it then you have to pull out Dan Radakovich because he was the Georgia Tech AD. The list of possibilities goes on and on. Shit would just get too complicated if you started pulling people out because of rivals and family connections.

[Alldawg]

I honestly don't know. Archie seems like a pretty good guy, but I'd hate to just guess that he wouldn't be biased. The thing is, it may not be Archie wanting to be biased, but all his friends at Ole Miss will be pressuring him to be biased.

I think Archie is an honest guy, but humans are humans.

I agree. So are they going to give every member of the group a lie detector test to see if any of them are biased for another school.. You wont find one of them that don't have a favorite or a hated one.

[messageboardsuperhero]

I'm personally not crazy about the idea of a committee in general. If we're totally honest, the BCS rankings were usually pretty on point.

Yes a playoff will be good- but instead of a committee, I would have rather seen them just pick the top 4/8 teams in the BCS rankings. That would get rid of all the bias/agenda talk we'll be sure to get with this committee.

ETA: And BTW, I believe the committee is 15 or 16 people. It would be hard for any one particular person to have a biased opinion without their voice being drowned out by everyone else on the committee.

[SDDawg]

I'm probably in the minority, but I think Archie would give us a fair shake. I'd be a little worried about him pushing OM if they were on the bubble, but they clearly won't be if we're in the conversation so I don't think it will be an issue.

[deltadawg99]

I think Archie would be fair, but I don't like the idea of a committee.

It's hard for emotion not to take over

[blacklistedbully]

I think Archie would be fair, but I don't like the idea of a committee.

It's hard for emotion not to take over


Especially with the extreme amount of prejudice against the SEC from other conferences.

[gravedigger]

This is a pretty interesting topic.

People don't like the computer polls because they don't understand the method they use and sometimes they seem out of whack.

But people trust other humans even less due to the appearance of Self interest and bias.

So the question goes: would you rather Archie manning or Jeff Sagarin be the deciding vote to determine if Msu were to make the playoff this year?

[starkvegasdawg]

I don't know why they couldn't keep the BCS system but just take the top 4 teams instead of the top 2. Human bias will definitely come into play. If it comes down to the final spot and it is between us and Michigan or Notre Dame. Even if we were better team does anyone here realistically think we would be picked?

[jumbo]

Obviously the committee makes the decision, but I don't see how most of the time it won't be 4 conference champs. Now obviously there are 5 power conferences and only 4 spots so the real debate, IMO, will come for that 4th spot.

I think the SEC champ and Pac 12 champ get in based on the strength of the 2 conferences. So then the ACC, Big 12 and Big 10 fight it out for the other 2 spots. Last year for example the debate would have been who gets in between Oklahoma and Michigan St.

[Saltydog]

sure would help us.

[drunkernhelldawg]

Archie seems to be Mister Integrity. I'm a fan, as I said in a recent thread. It's not a perfect system, but it seems to give us the best chance we've ever had to break through. It'll never be perfect. Humans aren't perfect. Computers aren't perfect.

[mstatefan91]

I've never met him so no idea realistically, but his public image is such that I wouldn't envision him intentionally hurting our chances.

[DownwardDawg]

I'm personally not crazy about the idea of a committee in general. If we're totally honest, the BCS rankings were usually pretty on point.

Yes a playoff will be good- but instead of a committee, I would have rather seen them just pick the top 4/8 teams in the BCS rankings. That would get rid of all the bias/agenda talk we'll be sure to get with this committee.

ETA: And BTW, I believe the committee is 15 or 16 people. It would be hard for any one particular person to have a biased opinion without their voice being drowned out by everyone else on the committee.

I hate this committee deal. I agree that the BCS top 4-8 should have been picked. I would prefer 8.

[Political Hack]

Would there be a million people in his ear talking down State if the situation presented itself?

the answer to that is "yes."

At that point his intentions to maintain integrity in the process are no longer relevant. His surrounding community will, without question, impact his thought process on the matter. For that reason alone, he should be recused.

[Johnson85]

No he should not. If you do it for Archie then you have to do it for everybody. If Stanford makes it this year then you would have to pull out Oliver Luck because Andrew played for Stanford. If Georgia were to make it then you have to pull out Dan Radakovich because he was the Georgia Tech AD. The list of possibilities goes on and on. Shit would just get too complicated if you started pulling people out because of rivals and family connections.

You should probably do it for everybody with respect to their arch rival. What are the chances that a representative of Alabama would cast the deciding vote to put Auburn int he playoff if there was a semi-legitimate argument for somebody else. I'm sure many would vote it straight, but it would be hard for a lot of people to not be swayed by the fact that they will be giving their arch rival a leg up. I'd like to think I would be able to vote straight up if I were in that position, but I would definitely not like seeing UM in a playoff, which means if it were ever a close call, I would never know whether I let some bias subconsiously affect me (or if I overcorrected if I recognized I was being biased). It usually won't be an issue, but if you have a 16 person committee, it seems like you could recuse people like that and still have a good cross section of voters.

[DownwardDawg]

I was pretty disappointed when I saw that Archie is on the committee. It won't matter if he is recused or not. His opinion carries so much weight with his peers. He'll never let us make it if we are on the bubble. I hope the committee is abolished before we reach the bubble. They are going to screw someone every year.

[ShotgunDawg]

Would there be a million people in his ear talking down State if the situation presented itself?

the answer to that is "yes."

At that point his intentions to maintain integrity in the process are no longer relevant. His surrounding community will, without question, impact his thought process on the matter. For that reason alone, he should be recused.

THIS

Not that we are anywhere near needing to worry about this, but this would be my concern if we were in contention. Again, I think Archie is an honest guy, but the community of people that will be in his ear, by human nature, will influence his opinion.

You can bet your ass, if MSU is under consideration, Archie will know and have thought about every reason MSU shouldn't be in it.

[Political Hack]

THIS

Not that we are anywhere near needing to worry about this, but this would be my concern if we were in contention. Again, I think Archie is an honest guy, but the community of people that will be in his ear, by human nature, will influence his opinion.

You can bet your ass, if MSU is under consideration, Archie will know and have thought about every reason MSU shouldn't be in it.

through no intention of his own he would be over informed of every single conceivable reason why MSU should not be included.

[ShotgunDawg]

through no intention of his own he would be over informed of every single conceivable reason why MSU should not be included.

Exactly, but I also understand that recusing him would open up a slippery slope of others having to be recused. It just sucks.

[blacklistedbully]

At 4 participants there's a damn good chance a deserving team get's left out. At 8 teams, I think you've pretty much got it covered enough.

[sandwolf]

I'm personally not crazy about the idea of a committee in general. If we're totally honest, the BCS rankings were usually pretty on point.

Yes a playoff will be good- but instead of a committee, I would have rather seen them just pick the top 4/8 teams in the BCS rankings. That would get rid of all the bias/agenda talk we'll be sure to get with this committee.

I will never understand why they went with a committee, when they could have all but removed bias from the equation by sticking with the BCS rankings.

[DownwardDawg]

At 4 participants there's a damn good chance a deserving team get's left out. At 8 teams, I think you've pretty much got it covered enough.

^^^This^^^^
I've always thought it should be an 8 team playoff. The Boise State's and Utah's of the world that go undefeated for 2-3 years in a row will NEVER get a chance with a 4 team playoff. Hell, never will MSU.

[War Machine Dawg]

I'm personally not crazy about the idea of a committee in general. If we're totally honest, the BCS rankings were usually pretty on point.

Yes a playoff will be good- but instead of a committee, I would have rather seen them just pick the top 4/8 teams in the BCS rankings. That would get rid of all the bias/agenda talk we'll be sure to get with this committee.

ETA: And BTW, I believe the committee is 15 or 16 people. It would be hard for any one particular person to have a biased opinion without their voice being drowned out by everyone else on the committee.

I said this for years. It seemed like the easiest, most simple solution ever. Take the BCS top 8, regardless of conference, and play it off. Committee are ridiculous and a wast of time and money.

[ShotgunDawg]

^^^This^^^^
I've always thought it should be an 8 team playoff. The Boise State's and Utah's of the world that go undefeated for 2-3 years in a row will NEVER get a chance with a 4 team playoff. Hell, never will MSU.

I disagree with this. We are in the SEC. If we go undefeated, we are in no matter what. Where it gets fuzzy is if we don't win the SEC title but only have 1 loss. I think that's where an Alabama or LSU will get in but we won't.

I think there is enough respect for the SEC champion nationally that the name on the front of the jersey doesn't matter if you win that.

[sleepy dawg]

I remember we used to have a system that would limit biasness... everyone hated it. Now we only have humans which are all biased.

We can't consider removing him though. Every single school out there will face biasness by someone... some with be positive biasness, some negative, but everyone will deal with it. BRING BACK THE G**D***ED COMPUTERS!

[blacklistedbully]

If we win the SEC, we will be in. Folks, however unlikely it may sound, if you believe we are good enough to contend in the SEC West, then you must believe we are good enough to win the SEC (West > East). If we are good enough to win the SEC, we are a NC playoff-worthy team. So, being good enough to compete in the SEC Western Division = being good enough to be in the playoff, and win!

We simply cannot be good enough to contend for the West without being a legit NC contender. They go hand-in-hand.

[sleepy dawg]

At 4 participants there's a damn good chance a deserving team get's left out. At 8 teams, I think you've pretty much got it covered enough.

This is the mindset that has us considering a ninety something team basketball playoff. You say 8 until your the #9 team, then we need 16 because that would make it fair.

[DownwardDawg]

This is the mindset that has us considering a ninety something team basketball playoff. You say 8 until your the #9 team, then we need 16 because that would make it fair.

I disagree. I think 64 is perfectly fine for basketball. Baseball is perfect as it is. Football needs 8. Set it at 8 and leave it at 8. And let the 8 come from the final BCS poll.

[blacklistedbully]

This is the mindset that has us considering a ninety something team basketball playoff. You say 8 until your the #9 team, then we need 16 because that would make it fair.

Not at all. The farther you get down the list, the less likely a team is as deserving as the ones at the top. Each year there are not more than 8 teams that legitimately can make a claim to be one of the 2 best teams in the country, but there can be more than 4. I believe by the time you get to #8, you're including teams that are dark horses at best. Unless you are a legit #2, you've got no reason to bitch,as the playoff isn't about determining who the top 8 are, rather it's about eventually figuring out who deserves to be in the NC game.

[deltadawg99]

He may not necessarily go out of his way to help us, but I really don't think he would go out of his way to screw us.

Yes there would be OM people coming out of the woodwork to get in his ear, but keep in mind this is the same guy that let Peyton choose to go to UT and didn't hand deliver him to OM like they expected. Just my opinon

[Pokerdawg44]

Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN 2m
.@CFBPlayoff committee recusals other than 5 current ADs: Gould (Air Force), Manning (Ole Miss), Osborne (Nebraska), Rice (Stanford)

I just saw this tweet by Brett McMurphy, and it says that Archie will be recused if Ole Miss is under playoff consideration. This is obviously to remove bias from the room. However, in light of this, I am curious if Archie can be completely unbiased if MSU or Tennessee is under consideration.

Should he be recused at that point?

Oh if we go 11-1 and barely lose to bama on the road and miss out on Atlanta and then have our playoff hope up to a committee with Archie in it, I wouldn't like our chances. Our ooc schedule would probably be their reason to justify not putting us in. Id lose it

[Alldawg]

He may not necessarily go out of his way to help us, but I really don't think he would go out of his way to screw us.

Yes there would be OM people coming out of the woodwork to get in his ear, but keep in mind this is the same guy that let Peyton choose to go to UT and didn't hand deliver him to OM like they expected. Just my opinon

This>>>>> Let the black helicopters return to base<<<<<<<<<<

[thf24]

Oh if we go 11-1 and barely lose to bama on the road and miss out on Atlanta and then have our playoff hope up to a committee with Archie in it, I wouldn't like our chances. Our ooc schedule would probably be their reason to justify not putting us in. Id lose it

I wouldn't like our chances with anyone other than someone biased in our favor in that situation. No one not named Bama or LSU is going to get a shot at the big game without winning the conference championship.

[Political Hack]

This>>>>> Let the black helicopters return to base<<<<<<<<<<

youve got to be kidding. not worthy of conversation, huh???

[EAVdog]

He should recuse himself. It would hard for him not to be biased. He may lean too much in our favor for fear of looking like he was trying to be "fair to MSU" and not appear biased against us. Or he may still hate us for the licks some of our LB's put on Eli. Either way it would create controversy therefore removing himself from the committee would probably be the best option.

[coastdoglover]

I would have concerns but I also know he told numerous people I know in New Orleans that Dak was one of the two best qb's at the Manning Passing Academy. All of this could be solved with having 4 major conferences with 16 teams each, two divisions, and the winners play a championship game each year. The top 4 would then play it off.

[Political Hack]

I would have concerns but I also know he told numerous people I know in New Orleans that Dak was one of the two best qb's at the Manning Passing Academy. All of this could be solved with having 4 major conferences with 16 teams each, two divisions, and the winners play a championship game each year. The top 4 would then play it off.

I hope that's where it's headed. that or even 5 with 20 teams.

[Pokerdawg44]

I would have concerns but I also know he told numerous people I know in New Orleans that Dak was one of the two best qb's at the Manning Passing Academy. All of this could be solved with having 4 major conferences with 16 teams each, two divisions, and the winners play a championship game each year. The top 4 would then play it off.

Just don't see this happening. I could see 6 team playoff w top 2 seeds getting a buy or an 8 team playoff.

[Todd4State]

I think he should be recused.

I think Archie is probably a good person overall, but I also think that he would have some bias against us. Bias doesn't make you a "bad" person.

As far as the committee and him getting a public black eye should he show bias- I highly, highly doubt that the committee conversations are going to be made public. Just like it's not for basketball or baseball. We have no idea what is said in those meetings. That means he could rip us apart and no one is ever going to know outside the committee.

Personally, I'm more worried about what would happen when it comes down to us getting into a playoff vs. a non-playoff bowl and his bias coming in.

[Joliet Jake]

While yes, Archie would be subject to an influx of commentary by the Ole Miss fanbase, as mentioned above he has already proven that he is willing to not let their opinion dictate how he makes decisions with how he handled the Peyton recruitment, which involved a great deal more pressure for him than us potentially making the playoff. The other thing that hasn't been discussed is that he has maintained a great reputation throughout the country and in all college football circles due to the way he carries himself. Someone like that isn't going to take a position like this and jeopardize his legacy in these circles by doing something stupid like letting a rivalry dictate his decision making. Most people appointed to a position like this take pride in such an appointment and take it serious to the point where they only recuse themselves for the schools that give the greatest perception of bias, such as those they would be pulling for.

With that being said, I can't stand the idea of a committee. They are supposed to be taking into account many of the same things the computers processed but there is no way they go through all the information necessary to make a truly educated decision. I'm less concerned with bias than I am the likelihood that many of these committee members will not be fully informed. They will favor teams, not because of bias, but because that team plays in a conference they know better so they favor what they know over what they don't know as much about, or can be influenced by things like media coverage.

[Todd4State]

While yes, Archie would be subject to an influx of commentary by the Ole Miss fanbase, as mentioned above he has already proven that he is willing to not let their opinion dictate how he makes decisions with how he handled the Peyton recruitment, which involved a great deal more pressure for him than us potentially making the playoff. The other thing that hasn't been discussed is that he has maintained a great reputation throughout the country and in all college football circles due to the way he carries himself. Someone like that isn't going to take a position like this and jeopardize his legacy in these circles by doing something stupid like letting a rivalry dictate his decision making. Most people appointed to a position like this take pride in such an appointment and take it serious to the point where they only recuse themselves for the schools that give the greatest perception of bias, such as those they would be pulling for.

With that being said, I can't stand the idea of a committee. They are supposed to be taking into account many of the same things the computers processed but there is no way they go through all the information necessary to make a truly educated decision. I'm less concerned with bias than I am the likelihood that many of these committee members will not be fully informed. They will favor teams, not because of bias, but because that team plays in a conference they know better so they favor what they know over what they don't know as much about, or can be influenced by things like media coverage.

1. I honestly don't think Archie expected to get so much backlash for Peyton choosing UT. I certainly don't think he expected to be burned in effigy when Peyton chose UT. They went completely nuts, and he is should be thankful that was pre-Internet recruiting.

2. Ole Miss was on probation. Or about to be. There were rumors of the death penalty, and they did get hit pretty hard.

[smootness]

Not at all. The farther you get down the list, the less likely a team is as deserving as the ones at the top. Each year there are not more than 8 teams that legitimately can make a claim to be one of the 2 best teams in the country, but there can be more than 4. I believe by the time you get to #8, you're including teams that are dark horses at best. Unless you are a legit #2, you've got no reason to bitch,as the playoff isn't about determining who the top 8 are, rather it's about eventually figuring out who deserves to be in the NC game.

This argument is flawed, and reality bears this out. Because the argument doesn't end up being about whether or not the #9 team can legitimately claim to be one of the two best teams in the country; it ends up being whether or not the #9 team can legitimately claim to be more deserving than the #8 team. Because 8 is in and 9 isn't. Especially once the #8 team wins the title, then they'll absolutely expand. It happens every time anyone creates a tournament. The NCAA tournament wasn't always 64, and now they keep slowly increasing that number. And before long they'll hit 96 or 100+. It's just the way it is.

Does anyone honestly believe the bubble teams in college basketball can legitimately claim to be one of the best 2 or 3 teams in the country? Of course not, but that's not what the tournament is. It's the 'best' (obviously not, but it's the idea) 68 teams in the country. So the debate becomes about whether those last 3 out belong in that group. It's just the way humans work, and it won't ever change.

2 was good enough in football for a while, then people started buying into the argument of, 'Well, how can we know these are the 2 best? Let's decide it on the field!', so now we're at 4. Soon the discussion will be that we can't know 4 is better than 5, so let's do 8. Then we can't know 8 is better than 9, so 16. And so on. Until it just becomes completely logistically impossible.