I casually follow college football. Actually since I no longer own a television and the only thing I watch online regularly is football (The Ohio State Buckeyes), maybe it is a little more than casual. I have watched with some interest the various discussions as football continues to attempt to identify and implement some sort of play off system that takes into account the various conferences and level of play in each. No one, it seems, liked the former "BCS" system although it was in place for a lot longer than I realized. It sounded scientific and logical but it continued to make a lot of people unhappy.
Now we have the college football play off system which facilitates multiple games (2) since it is well known that nothing like the NCAA basketball playoff system could ever work for for football. And in an apparent rejection of the scientific and logical approach, we now have a 13 person 'seeding' panel. I just read an article today that described how the panel members regularly use the criteria 'controlling the game' - which sounds suspiciously to me like a focus on the 'quality' (how the game was played) rather than the quantity (how many points were scored; what was the spread) of the outcome. It is interesting to me, that given the level of mathematical and statistical sophistication that can be accomplished (quickly) on modern software that we are going back to what sounds to me an awful lot like a qualitative approach to assessment.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorI am Sheryl L. Chatfield, Ph.D, C.T.R.S. I am a member of the faculty in the College of Public Health at Kent State University. I also Co-coordinate the Graduate Certificate in Qualitative Research and I am a member of the Design Innovation Team at Kent State. Archives
February 2024
Categories
|