Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Interesting observation about the BCS Rankings


rbmcdonald
 Share

Recommended Posts

The big 5 Conferences, have the following number of teams ranked in the top 25 of the BCS:

 

ACC – 4

Big 10 – 5

Big 12 – 3

PAC 10 – 3

SEC – 5

 

In the case of all eight teams from the Big 10 and Big 12, the Human Polls have the teams ranked lower, than the computer polls.

 

In the case of all 5 of the SEC teams, the human polls have the teams ranked higher than the computer polls.

 

In the case of the ACC & PAC 10 the results are mixed.

 

Since clearly the Big 10 & Big 12 are based in the middle of the country, while the other conferences all have something of an East Coast or West Coast presence, I wonder if this is an indication of a “built in bias” by the media or public perception for the East/West Coast?

 

Just a question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the Big Ten or Big 12 are any good. I love Big Ten Football, but they are strictly in spoiler and pride mode now, with no national title contender. Big 12 has Texas who appear to be on cruiser control, as they could probably win the rest of the Big 12 games with their scout team.

 

I trust the human polls more than the computers. Computers are what put Oklahoma in the last two mythical national championship games. Last year, arguablly legitamately, but 2 years ago, very questionable considering the #1 team in both polls didn't make it. I'm not saying human polls are without corruption, but they do a much better job than the computer polls. Just my opinion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May want to make a correction, Texas is #2 in human and computer polls

1136406[/snapback]

 

That is not correct. According to the BCS website, in the last BCS poll, Texas was first in 5 of the 6 computer polls, and second in the the sixth. USC was First in one, Second in three and Third in two.

 

http://www.bcsfootball.org/files/wk4-2005-long.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I trust the human polls more than the computers. Computers are what put Oklahoma in the last two mythical national championship games.

 

1136367[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

That is not correct. The human polls had more to do with Auburn being 3rd in the BCS, then the computers did. I think that Auburn started out below 15 in the human polls (why the hell do we even have a poll before the first 4 or 5 weeks?).

 

If you go back and look at the last BCS poll from last year, and you replace Oklahoma's computer poll score, with UT's (the fourth team in the last BCS poll of 2004), Oklahoma still would have been ranked 2nd in the BCS, due to thier strength in the human polls. In the last two years, the human polls are 2/3 of the formula and the computer polls are 1/3. The only under the current system that the computer polls have any effect, is if the human polls are split on who is two/three. As for two years ago it was a different issue, as the had a more complicated BCS formula with strength of schedule and quality win points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information