Buckeyes: Beloved by humans, hated by computers.::AP

By Hugh Falk, Pollspeak.com

The BCS standings are finally out.  That means we can stop debating how each team is going to be ranked in the BCS and start debating how each team is actually ranked in the BCS.  Many people only care about No. 1 and No. 2 since those are the teams that will be playing in the championship game.  As expected, those teams this week are Florida and Alabama.  However, if they continue to win, they'll meet in the SEC championship game, which will likely knock one of them out of contention.  So fans really need to look at who is No. 3.  Right now that is Texas.  If the Longhorns win out, they should end up in the BCS title game.

The teams on the outside, still hoping for a shot are Boise State, Cincinnati, Iowa, USC and TCU.  However, none of those teams have the strength of schedule remaining to overtake Texas.  So a Texas loss would be necessary.  Of course, if USC didn't have the one loss already, they would be fighting it out with Texas (likely ahead of Texas right now), but as it is, the Trojans are a dark horse for the title game.  If Texas does falter, it will likely be a toss-up between Iowa and Cincinnati who are currently separated by one-thousandth of a point.  Either one could jump Boise State in the BCS depending on how the human voters rank one over the other in the final week.  The best chance the Broncos have of becoming the first BCS title-game buster is for Oregon to go undefeated (taking care of USC in the process), and for a few of the teams listed above to stumble.  Even then the chances for Boise State are slimmer than seeing an anorexic snapping into a Slim Jim.

Obviously the BCS computers can make a difference when things are close, but the human element weighs far more heavily into the BCS formula.  For evidence, look no further than Ohio State, which is ranked No. 19 in the BCS due almost completely to the Buckeyes' No. 17 rankings in both human polls.  No computer ranking below No. 25 counts toward the BCS formula, and Ohio State only received two rankings from computers…both No. 25, and one of those gets dropped by the formula.  Likewise, Kansas is ranked No. 25 in the BCS based mainly on its No. 21 rankings in the human polls.  Only one of the six computers ranked the Jayhawks, which again gets dropped by the formula.  So teams on the bubble really need the human voters to smile upon them.

On the other hand, there are Wisconsin and Arizona who are both ranked in the BCS (No. 21 and No. 22 respectively) even though they aren't ranked in the top 25 by either human poll.    The computer average for both teams is No. 14, which definitely helped them get ranked.  So why did I just say that humans have a much stronger say in the BCS?  Well these teams demonstrate another "trick" the BCS uses to give humans more pull.  Computer rankings don't count at all when they rank a team below No. 25.  However, when humans rank a team below No. 25, they still get some points.  Wisconsin was ranked No. 38 by Harris Interactive and No. 31 by the Coaches' Poll.  Arizona was ranked No. 37 by Harris Interactive and No. 40 by the Coaches' Poll.   The small amount of points they received from a minority of voters, coupled with high computer rankings were enough to get them into the BCS.

Looking at the human polls, Harris Interactive was the only poll not to rank South Carolina in the top 25.  Meanwhile the coaches have Iowa (No. 8) and Oregon (No. 14) lower than any other BCS component and the AP.  Likewise, they have Mississippi (No. 25) and Oklahoma State (No. 12) highest.

The biggest news in the AP Poll is that Alabama claimed the No.1 spot over Florida after the Gator's narrow victory against Arkansas.  Again, it doesn't really matter for the AP championship since they would meet first in the SEC title game.  However, it does mean that Florida won't earn the elusive wire-to-wire No. 1 in the AP.  That has only been accomplished twice in AP history:  FSU in 1999 and USC in 2004.

Last week, there were a lot of fan comments about whether the media has a pro-Notre Dame or anti-Notre Dame bias.  Using this-week's AP as an example, there weren't many voters ranking either Notre Dame or Michigan (who has a better record and beat the Irish.)  However, of those who did vote for one, 14 of 23 ranked Notre Dame higher.  In fact the Irish were ranked high enough to check in at number 26 in the AP Poll.  However, in defense of the media, most computers also rank Notre Dame higher than Michigan, and two of them have the Irish in the top 25.

Four voters have Mississippi over South Carolina even though the Gamecocks have a better record and beat the Rebels in the head to head matchup.  No poll or computer agrees with these four "rebel" voters.

Two voters, led by Chris Fowler, have Oregon ranked over undefeated Boise State.  Again no poll or computer agrees with them, but if enough like-minded voters exist in the BCS polls, it will kill what little chance the Broncos have of making it to the BCS title game.  It might sound silly, but a marketing campaign (similar to what schools already do for Heisman hopefuls), might actually help teams on the BCS bubble.  Weather the ads really works or not, I wouldn't be surprised to see them as long as voters get to call the shots.   So someday we'll see commercials like: "Boise:  Just Blue It." and "Only you can prevent potato fires" and maybe even "Please don't squeeze the Broncos (out of the BCS title game.)"

 Bonus Slogans:

 "Broncos, the other white meat."

"Where do you want to go today?" (to the BCS title game)

 "The best part of waking up…is Broncos in your bowl."

Feel free to suggest more…