my computer poll - thoughts?

#1
ukvols

ukvols

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
13,886
Likes
1,237
#1
It measures performance against SOS.

1-LSU 1.350107
2-S. Florida 1.324419
3-UK 1.16589
4-Ohio St. 1.055441
5-S. Carolina 1.051898
6-Kansas St. .92524
7-BC .908056
8-WVU .896671
9-Missouri .877071
10-UF .864632
11-Auburn .837703
12-Oregon .825364
13-Va. Tech .78601
14-Arizona St. .761585
15-Oklahoma .755662
16-UT .739062
17-Illinois .694972
18-Maryland .666289
19-BYU .631078
20-Cal .599031
21-Virginia .588134
22-Kansas .57258
23-Colorado .562328
24-UGA .554929
25-Ga. Tech .544971
 
#2
#2
UK being ranked ahead of SC is a little tough to justify.
 
#3
#3
GAVol said:
UK being ranked ahead of SC is a little tough to justify.
Click to expand...

UK beat the #1 team, and the game with SC was at SC. And, UK has a higher SOS so far. That's the best I can offer. But, just looking at H2H, I agree. K. State is pretty high too, but their SOS includes Auburn, Texas, Kansas, and Colorado.
 
#4
#4
Yeah, Oklahoma being six places behind a team they beat 5 days ago computes. It computes to why they should completely remove computers from the BCS process.
 
#5
#5
hatvol96 said:
Yeah, Oklahoma being six places behind a team they beat 5 days ago computes. It computes to why they should completely remove computers from the BCS process.
Click to expand...

From what I have seen you aren't high on media folk either.
 
#7
#7
OU's SOS was absolutely awful for the first few games, with games against some of the worst teams in D-1 (N. Texas, Utah St.). Tulsa is ok, but Miami has completely tanked. I had them at #25 before they lost to Colorado. They then fell to about #40 and have been climbing bigtime ever since. If they keep winning, they will keep making big jumps as their SOS improves.
 
#8
#8
Thanks for the comment, Hat, but removing the computers would leave it up to the geniuses that voted UGA over UT the day after that game.
 
#10
#10
IMO, strength of schedule formulae are tenuous at best; especially in a year like this one where parity is the rule.
 
#11
#11
ukvols said:
Thanks for the comment, Hat, but removing the computers would leave it up to the geniuses that voted UGA over UT the day after that game.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I like the idea of guys like Jerry Palm, who couldn't tell you if a football is stuffed or filled with glucose, puching numbers into a computer. It would obviously just be too hard to eliminate idiots like the former coach at Colorado who admitted he hasn't seen South Florida play and have a panel that pays attention. That would be too much to ask.
 
#12
#12
allvol123 said:
So what do you want the BCS poll comprised of?
Click to expand...

I say use even more human polls and involve even more voters. The sheer numbers would dictate a consensus. I just don't like the idea that a formula has so much weight.
 
#13
#13
GAVol said:
IMO, strength of schedule formulae are tenuous at best; especially in a year like this one where parity is the rule.
Click to expand...
God forbid, we put together a panel of former coaches and the few responsible members of the media who take their job seriously. That would be too revolutionary.
 
#14
#14
hatvol96 said:
God forbid, we put together a panel of former coaches and the few responsible members of the media who take their job seriously. That would be too revolutionary.
Click to expand...

I'd go with that as well. It either needs to be done via selection committee or with a large number of pollsters.
 
#17
#17
Isn't the problem though that what you end up with is an objective analysis of what is actually a subjective question?
 
#23
#23
hatvol96 said:
God forbid, we put together a panel of former coaches and the few responsible members of the media who take their job seriously. That would be too revolutionary.
Click to expand...

There would still be, even if there wasn't, a possible bias. Which no matter what there will always be a bias.
 
#24
#24
hatvol96 said:
God forbid, we put together a panel of former coaches and the few responsible members of the media who take their job seriously. That would be too revolutionary.
Click to expand...

That is the key. Current coaches' votes shouldn't impact the polls. Way too much bias and self-interest to be objective.
 
#25
#25
GAVol said:
Isn't the problem though that what you end up with is an objective analysis of what is actually a subjective question?
Click to expand...
good point. i remember a year or two ago, the game day guys were discussing their methods for voting in the AP poll, basically, how they came up with who was ranked where.....and it really was a mixed bag....head to head had something to do with it obviously, but i was surprised to hear how many of them used the "who would i think would win a game between x and y on neutral feild" and vote that way.....really odd to me. it basically took away what the team actually accomplished and based it solely on what they think might happen in a game that won't ever take place????

weird.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top