BCS and schedule strength

#1
lawgator1

lawgator1

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
73,059
Likes
43,097
#1
Before I ask my question, let me first say this thread is not a lobbying effort for the Gators. I don't think right now that they are good enough to play in the NT game.

Having said that, I am very confused by this week's BCS rankings as it relates to strength of schedule. I just reviewed a chart in the local paper that sets out 1 OSU, 2 Michigan, 3 USC, and 4 Florida, along with the other Top 12 BCS teams.

My impression was the SOS was taken out of the BCS calculation on the assumption that it was already accounted for in the computer polls. But that does not make sense when you look at the Top 4 teams.

According to the chart, Florida's SOS is 6th in the country. That compares to USC's, which is tied for 20th, Michigan's, which is 16th, and OSU's which is a (pitiful) tied for 67th.

Yet, Florida's computer rank is 6. USC's is 3rd or 4th. How can that be? Especially when Florida's loss was to a good Auburn team whereas USC lost to pitiful Oregon State. And them having beaten Arkansas cannot be the answer because, again, that was supposed to have been included in the SOS portion of the computer rankings.

I am starting to think that the SOS component of the computer rankings must be quite smallish and perhaps we need to put SOS back in as its own variable in the overall forumla. Agree or disagree?
 
#2
#2
I absolutely agree. Strength of schedule should be a major component if we are going to continue with this BCS sham.
 
#3
#3
So Saturday you were whining about your team saying that they were barely in the top 5 in the SEC. Now you are saying they are getting jipped by the BCS. If they are as bad as you said, why would you want them to screw a better team out of a NCG shot?
 
#4
#4
I hear what your saying and I have to agree. The Gators by far have the strongest schedule of the top 8 BCS teams. I think if you play a top 10-15 rated schedule based on SOS and you come out of it with no more than one loss there is no way you should be outside of a top 3 ranking. Does the SOS for the loss to Auburn go down each week after a loss like thiers to Georgia? Does that loss take away from UF ranking?
 
#5
#5
hvwarrior58 said:
So Saturday you were whining about your team saying that they were barely in the top 5 in the SEC. Now you are saying they are getting jipped by the BCS. If they are as bad as you said, why would you want them to screw a better team out of a NCG shot?
Click to expand...


See first paragraph of initial post. No, I don't think Florida is in the top two teams right now. Not at all. If they win out playing like they have and don't get in, I can't say they deserve it more than a one-loss USC team.

Rocky Top said:
I hear what your saying and I have to agree. The Gators by far have the strongest schedule of the top 8 BCS teams. I think if you play a top 10-15 rated schedule based on SOS and you come out of it with no more than one loss there is no way you should be outside of a top 3 ranking. Does the SOS for the loss to Auburn go down each week after a loss like thiers to Georgia? Does that loss take away from UF ranking?
Click to expand...

I assume it does. It should, anyway.
 
#6
#6
lawgator1 said:
I am starting to think that the SOS component of the computer rankings must be quite smallish and perhaps we need to put SOS back in as its own variable in the overall forumla. Agree or disagree?
Click to expand...

Your much better off playing in a weak conference where you have 1 or 2 tough games all year, because the SOS component is so small, the only statistic that matters is the win/loss record. Regardless if its wins against MTSU and LA Tech, or Auburn and LSU.
 
#7
#7
Removing SOS has also made conference championship games more of a negative. Just one more tough game that really won't improve the winner's BCS rating and will likely knock the loser out of an at-large BCS bid.
 
#8
#8
Could not agree more with the wins aspect. Then why do we schedule tough teams out of conf? If we want a title chance, why not play some cup-cakes like other programs? Not saying that we are anywhere near a title but if there is no reward for winning against tough programs, why play them?
 
#9
#9
oklavol said:
Your much better off playing in a weak conference where you have 1 or 2 tough games all year, because the SOS component is so small, the only statistic that matters is the win/loss record. Regardless if its wins against MTSU and LA Tech, or Auburn and LSU.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The BCS is in favor of teams like Louisville, West Virginia and this year Rutgers. Play no one in the preseason and then go undefeated in conference play. That'll put you in line for a NC shot every year. The Big 10 has been down this year with Penn State, Purdue, Iowa and Michigan State pulling thier annual choke job. That has cleared the way for UM and tOSU. The SEC and even Big 12 teams are at a huge disadvantage each year having to play at least 4 conference games against top 25 teams.

As far as the SOS goes I don't think if you beat a team when they are 7-0 and playing great ball it should hurt your SOS later in the season if they drop a few games. You played them and beat them when they was as good as anyone, not when they started crumbling.
 
#10
#10
lawgator1 said:
Before I ask my question, let me first say this thread is not a lobbying effort for the Gators. I don't think right now that they are good enough to play in the NT game.

Having said that, I am very confused by this week's BCS rankings as it relates to strength of schedule. I just reviewed a chart in the local paper that sets out 1 OSU, 2 Michigan, 3 USC, and 4 Florida, along with the other Top 12 BCS teams.

My impression was the SOS was taken out of the BCS calculation on the assumption that it was already accounted for in the computer polls. But that does not make sense when you look at the Top 4 teams.

According to the chart, Florida's SOS is 6th in the country. That compares to USC's, which is tied for 20th, Michigan's, which is 16th, and OSU's which is a (pitiful) tied for 67th.

Yet, Florida's computer rank is 6. USC's is 3rd or 4th. How can that be? Especially when Florida's loss was to a good Auburn team whereas USC lost to pitiful Oregon State. And them having beaten Arkansas cannot be the answer because, again, that was supposed to have been included in the SOS portion of the computer rankings.

I am starting to think that the SOS component of the computer rankings must be quite smallish and perhaps we need to put SOS back in as its own variable in the overall forumla. Agree or disagree?
Click to expand...
They have to download the new version of SOS, SOS version 6.7 for windows and that will solve the problem.:crazy:
 
#12
#12
As classless as it is a team has to blow everybody they out on the road and at home, Florida had chance for a last minute argument with FSU but now Florida is absolutely supposed to win and FSU is not even bowl eligible yet. Should strength of schedule matter, yes it should and there is no reason it should not but I am not the computer
 
#13
#13
lawgator1 said:
Before I ask my question, let me first say this thread is not a lobbying effort for the Gators. I don't think right now that they are good enough to play in the NT game.

Having said that, I am very confused by this week's BCS rankings as it relates to strength of schedule. I just reviewed a chart in the local paper that sets out 1 OSU, 2 Michigan, 3 USC, and 4 Florida, along with the other Top 12 BCS teams.

My impression was the SOS was taken out of the BCS calculation on the assumption that it was already accounted for in the computer polls. But that does not make sense when you look at the Top 4 teams.

According to the chart, Florida's SOS is 6th in the country. That compares to USC's, which is tied for 20th, Michigan's, which is 16th, and OSU's which is a (pitiful) tied for 67th.

Yet, Florida's computer rank is 6. USC's is 3rd or 4th. How can that be? Especially when Florida's loss was to a good Auburn team whereas USC lost to pitiful Oregon State. And them having beaten Arkansas cannot be the answer because, again, that was supposed to have been included in the SOS portion of the computer rankings.

I am starting to think that the SOS component of the computer rankings must be quite smallish and perhaps we need to put SOS back in as its own variable in the overall forumla. Agree or disagree?
Click to expand...

#1. The computer poll part of the BCS might as well be call Popularity Poll.It's bias against the SEC.
#2.Please allow us to share some of the luck you guys have.
#3.That said, the reason I think you guys might not go all the way is because of Marcus Thomas.His selfish character and the attitude of not being a team player,trying to be above the rules,is just plain pitiful.His ego is out of control IMO.
#4.All conferences need to have a play off system or not.Period.You guys may wind up as UT did a hwile back, and the SEC championship game can only hurt you.Can you imagine all the 1 loss teams pulling against the Gators in that game.
 
#14
#14
utfantilidie said:
#1. The computer poll part of the BCS might as well be call Popularity Poll.It's bias against the SEC.
Click to expand...

WHAT?!

Are you freaking kidding?

How can you say that a COMPUTER ALGORITHM has popularity. It is actually DEVOID of popularity. There are problems with the BCS computer system, but it's definitely NOT a popularity poll. IF ANYTHING, the coaches and Harris poll are popularity polls, as humans have natural biases and what not.

I think it's quite ridiculous to think that a computer system which doesn't recognize names like "Texas" or "Tennessee" can have some sort of bias. It's ... ridiculous.

Yes, the computers do have problems in that the SOS in each of them could be far more accurate with more work. Right now, it just doesn't go deep enough.

However, I can't get over the ridiculousness of your first point.
 
#15
#15
I don't understand the BCS, sometimes it could help, but when has the positive ever out weighed the negative. Because I don't know what is your opinion
 
#16
#16
SOS should count more and teams that don't play in conf, championship game should be penalized and if you lose your conf. champ you should be automatically dropped 5 spots.
 
#17
#17
volmanjr said:
SOS should count more and teams that don't play in conf, championship game should be penalized and if you lose your conf. champ you should be automatically dropped 5 spots.
Click to expand...

I agree Notre Dame, Pac-10, and Big East all have a easier ticket than most other BCS conferences
 
#18
#18
utfantilidie said:
#1. The computer poll part of the BCS might as well be call Popularity Poll.It's bias against the SEC.
#2.Please allow us to share some of the luck you guys have.
#3.That said, the reason I think you guys might not go all the way is because of Marcus Thomas.His selfish character and the attitude of not being a team player,trying to be above the rules,is just plain pitiful.His ego is out of control IMO.
#4.All conferences need to have a play off system or not.Period.You guys may wind up as UT did a hwile back, and the SEC championship game can only hurt you.Can you imagine all the 1 loss teams pulling against the Gators in that game.
Click to expand...

Assuming USC loses, a Gator win over Arkansas in the SECCG may become Florida's best argument to get into the NT game over undefeated Rutgers and once-defeated Notre Dame.
 
#19
#19
I think SOS should be counted...but then we'd hear all the schools that dont play in the sec, big 10, and big 12 whine.


I was very surprised that UF wasnt third. But the computers have "loved" usc all year, and if they win out (beating cali and nd) I would be surprised if they werent the closest to the loser of the mich-tosu game.
 
#20
#20
TravisHenryCBlockedMe said:
I think SOS should be counted...but then we'd hear all the schools that dont play in the sec, big 10, and big 12 whine.


I was very surprised that UF wasnt third. But the computers have "loved" usc all year, and if they win out (beating cali and nd) I would be surprised if they werent the closest to the loser of the mich-tosu game.
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly (which I may not) strength of schedule was not great for the SEC either. It also depends on the way they count strength of schedule, by ranks, or by records, or by home/away. If it goes by records, we could actually be favoring a conference with on real powerhouse, and a lot of 6-5 or 7-4 teams.
 
#21
#21
VolinArizona said:
WHAT?!

Are you freaking kidding?

How can you say that a COMPUTER ALGORITHM has popularity. It is actually DEVOID of popularity. There are problems with the BCS computer system, but it's definitely NOT a popularity poll. IF ANYTHING, the coaches and Harris poll are popularity polls, as humans have natural biases and what not.

I think it's quite ridiculous to think that a computer system which doesn't recognize names like "Texas" or "Tennessee" can have some sort of bias. It's ... ridiculous.

Yes, the computers do have problems in that the SOS in each of them could be far more accurate with more work. Right now, it just doesn't go deep enough.

However, I can't get over the ridiculousness of your first point.
Click to expand...
I'm beyond cutting people down on this board.That said, you mean to tell me California being ahead of Tennessee in the BCS earlier in the year was justified?That's my factual point VA.
 
#22
#22
The good thing about having 3 losses is that I don't have to worry about my team getting screwed by the BCS anymore.
 
#23
#23
VIA,

I'm with you on this one. I mess around with my own computer polling, and this week is the first time in a month that Louisville hasn't been #1.

I have a tough time seeing people saying that computers are biased one way or another. The formula may be biased (and I believe that Sagarin's USA Today rankings display that), but in the meantime it's a matter of putting wins and losses into a computer and it runs the math. It's like saying a calculator hates the SEC or Tennessee.
 
#24
#24
Well, it seems to me that the computers must have some built in bias because what at least subjectively seems inaccurate to most of the sane world (i.e. Louisville never was #1 and Rutgers isn't right now #2) is not reflected in them. The output is only as good as the input.

As I remember the "old" version of the BCS, they gave you your points and then multiplied by a fraction representing your schedule strength. To the extent that it made SOS redundant with how the pollsters voted, I guess one could argue its unfair. But the computers putting Rutgers at #2? That's nuts and has to be discounted by SOS, IMO
 
#25
#25
If your a Louisville fan and you write a computer program to rank NCAA teams are you gonna weigh SOS highly and are you gonna weigh margin of victory or take it out?

All these polls are inherently biased. People write computer programs and they weigh in their polls what they think is important. People who vote in polls have their own personal biases. The only way to get around this is to decide the champion on the field and in a tournament.

And the regular season is not the same as a tourament. IT is not fair that SEC teams play a harder schedule then 75% of the other teams in the NCAA. If teams are given a schedule of approximately equal difficulty then that argument makes sense. Otherwise teams from tougher conferences are given a much tougher road to the NC game.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top