Pollspeak: Humans vs. computers

2008-11-27T01:18:38-05:00

2008-11-24T15:18:58-05:00

2008-11-27T01:18:38-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/445/801/thumb/Miami_Logo.jpg 2 CA

SoCalCane

La Jolla 446241

37 Compounding the unfairness of the BCS system is the fact that there are PREseason rankings. The teams blessed with a top 5 preseason rankings have an inside track to the NC. It is not fair for the mid-major conference teams or the unranked teams in the major conferences. A team ranked in the preseason top 5 with a weak schedule can cruise to the NC. BYU could've done it easily this year. Only a playoff system will straighten it out. There shouldn't be any rankings until at least week 3. With respect to the conference arguments, I am a die hard Miami Hurricanes fan, but agree that the ACC is mediocre at best this year. The theme for all ACC teams has been inconsistency. Watch out for Miami and FSU next year. ...and I'm out. 3466156

2008-11-26T18:52:32-05:00

Jonny Utah

Salem 588428

36 I like that every one considers the Oklahoma dismantled TCU, as a sign of how weak the MWC is. Last time I checked only one team from the Big 12 fared any better than TCU. TCU held Ok to 436 yards, one more yard than Texas, and 35 points the same as Texas, and they played in Norman, not at a "neutral" field. Now I know everyone is going to say that Ok pulled are their starters and what not. But how many games did Ok leave the starters in for the full game in their Big 12 Schedule. I honestly don't know... but TCU played them a lot closer than most of the teams from the "dominant" Big 12 did. 3463378

2008-11-26T00:08:17-05:00

Sparky57

Independence 554081

35 Does the ACC have even one team that could even be remotely considered as a national title contender? Does it have even one team make it through a tough playoff schedule unscathed and play for the national championship? The answer to both questions is no. So why does anybody even care how strong the Big East or the ACC conferences are? There isn't a national title for the strongest conference the last time I looked. As a Buckeye fan, the strength of the teams at the bottom of the Big 10 is of no importance to me. All I know is, OSU had a poor year, even though they went 10-2. they aren't a top team, and don't deserve to be considered one. The season is a loss, no matter where they go in the BCS bowl series. I'm still a huge fan to the end, but I'm not going to go looking for some other bright spot just to make me feel good. This reminds me of the way kids sports are played today. Every kid gets a trophy. The ACC doesn't have one single top team, but maybe if they combine all the teams together we can find something to feel good about. Please!!!! 3452851

2008-11-25T23:40:12-05:00

Sparky57

Independence 554081

34 College football puts emphasis on some of the most ridiculous statistics. Nowhere else in sports is conference strength given anything more than just a passing curiosity, and for good reason. It isn't that important. Yes, I know that it has to be factored in in college football since we don't have a playoff system, but if anything that is just a little more ammunition for instituting a playoff. Factoring in the bottom feeders in determining the best conference is ridiculous, and just shows that the term "best conference" can mean whatever you want it to, depending on whatever skewed criteria you want to use to judge it. College football has become a battle of statistics for mathematicians. The actual games themselves have become far less important. 3452696

2008-11-25T15:24:36-05:00

goalielax

Atlanta 201573

I don't think you'd beat Cinci, Pitt, or WVU outside of Utah. The ACC champ, I'll give you.

32 ahahaha - i guess being a cuse fan has totally demented you 3447759

2008-11-25T22:34:07-05:00

181

CuseFanInSoCal

San Diego 190925

ahahaha - i guess being a cuse fan has totally demented you

33 No, I just know the Bearcats are actually pretty good all around (lots of good teams have been dismantled by Oklahoma), and LeSean McCoy and Pat White can move the ball on pretty much anybody. 3452194

2008-11-25T14:07:37-05:00

181

CuseFanInSoCal

San Diego 190925

Nice irrelevant article trying to paint a happy face on yet another ACC and Big East football season. Utah will beat whichever conference "champ" that the NCAA sends against them in the BCS.

30 Eh. Barring a huge upset, Utah is heading to the Fiesta vs. the #2 Big 12 team (probably Texas) or Sugar vs. the #2 SEC team (probably Alabama). I'd give Utah a better chance vs. Alabama than Texas, but I don't think you'd win either. Of course, I don't think you'd beat Cinci, Pitt, or WVU outside of Utah. The ACC champ, I'll give you. 3446030

2008-11-25T15:24:36-05:00

goalielax

Atlanta 201573

I don't think you'd beat Cinci, Pitt, or WVU outside of Utah. The ACC champ, I'll give you.

32 ahahaha - i guess being a cuse fan has totally demented you 3447759

2008-11-25T14:38:43-05:00

Red Sox County

Kaysville 581663

31 I agree that the BCS is mostly about money. The elite schools and conferences get most of the money, so I guess fairness is another issue. My question is this: What does the NCAA do with all the money they make off these BCS games and and their other numerous endorsements such as the Nike symbol on all the uniforms, etc. The BCS payout is just a fraction of the money made on these games. I understand that teams like Texas, Oklahoma, USC, and Florida take a significant amount of oversight because of their propensity to bend the rules to get the best players (not much of an issue with the MWC or WAC), but still, how big is the NCAA and how much money do they need. I have seen the quality of officials that they hire every year, can't image that a lot of money is spent there....hmmm???? 3446790

2008-11-25T11:16:09-05:00

Red Sox County

Kaysville 581663

23 Nice irrelevant article trying to paint a happy face on yet another ACC and Big East football season. Utah will beat whichever conference "champ" that the NCAA sends against them in the BCS. Just like they did Pitt in 04 and Georgia Tech in 05. Wasn't the BCS set up to ensure the best football teams play in the biggest games? Wasn't the BCS computer rankings set up to "correctly" list the top teams based on schedule, record, etc.?? Right now, Utah and Boise State are ranking in the top 10 of the BCS rankings so they will both get a BCS bid...right???....Wrong! ACC and Big East are "GUARANTEED" BCS games. So regardless of how dismal those two conferences are, they will each get a BCS game, because of obscure rules that ensure all the "elite" conferences are represented in the BCS series. Because isn't that what college football is all about....money....power.....hmmm??!! 3442973

2008-11-25T14:07:37-05:00

181

CuseFanInSoCal

San Diego 190925

Nice irrelevant article trying to paint a happy face on yet another ACC and Big East football season. Utah will beat whichever conference "champ" that the NCAA sends against them in the BCS.

2008-11-25T13:06:26-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/286/29/thumb/images.jpg 1672 CO

j11forbes: LCMD Playa

Denver 28709

The one matchup between a Mountain West team and a strong, quality appoponent from the other leagues was Oklahahoma's dismantling of TCU.

26 I would point out the Utah beat Oregon State, who is in line to win the Pac-10. I would consider them a quality opponent. And no one is arguing that TCU is better than Oklahoma or that the Big 12 is worse than the Mountain West. The Pac 10, Big East, and Big Ten might be, but certainly not the Big 12. 3444974

2008-11-25T14:01:19-05:00

181

CuseFanInSoCal

San Diego 190925

I would point out the Utah beat Oregon State, who is in line to win the Pac-10. I would consider them a quality opponent.

29 So would I, though I'd note that Utah beat Oregon State by a field goal, at home. BYU, which tied for second in the MWC, crushed UCLA, but only beat hapless Washington by one point in Seattle. 3445921

2008-11-25T13:06:26-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/286/29/thumb/images.jpg 1672 CO

j11forbes: LCMD Playa

Denver 28709

The one matchup between a Mountain West team and a strong, quality appoponent from the other leagues was Oklahahoma's dismantling of TCU.

2008-11-25T13:58:10-05:00

1595

Klee Irwin

Nome 582256

I would point out the Utah beat Oregon State, who is in line to win the Pac-10. I would consider them a quality opponent. And no one is arguing that TCU is better than Oklahoma or that the Big 12 is worse than the Mountain West. The Pac 10, Big East, and Big Ten might be, but certainly not the Big 12.

28 you gotta be kidding. Ohio St and Penn St would have rolled through the Mountain West this year. If Utah actually played a Big Ten schedule, they wouldn't be undefeated, they would have at least 2-3 losses if not more. 3445883

<div class="photo_container image_right"> <div class="photo"><img src="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/images/11/24/sam-bradford-swp.jpg" alt="Double Click to select a Photo" /></div> <div class="photo_attributes" style="text-align:right;">Despite losing to the Longhorns, everyone voted OU over Texas.</div> <div class="photo_attributes" style="text-align:right;">AP</div> </div> <p><em>By Hugh Falk, <a href="http://www.pollspeak.com/" target="_blank">Pollspeak.com</a></em><br /><br />The ACC is No. 1? It is according to Sagarin's conference ratings. How can a league that doesn't have a dominating team or a national title contender be the top conference? The answer lies not at the top, but at the bottom. N.C. State is the ACC's lowest ranked team at No. 56 (using standard Sagarin Ratings). Meanwhile, other BCS leagues have several teams ranked lower:</p> <p><strong>SEC:</strong> Auburn (No. 69), Tennessee (No. 73), Arkansas (No. 81) and Mississippi State (No. 97).</p> <p><strong>Big East: </strong>Louisville (No. 88) and Syracuse (No. 102).</p> <p><strong>Big 10:</strong> Illinois (No. 58), Minnesota (No. 64), Purdue (No. 72), Michigan (No. 86) and Indiana (No. 112).</p> <p><strong>Big 12:</strong> Baylor (No. 67), Colorado (No. 74), Kansas State (No. 77), Texas A&M (No. 94) and Iowa State (No. 117).</p> <p><strong>PAC-10:</strong> Stanford (No. 63), Arizona State (No. 76), UCLA (No. 91), Washington (No. 147) and Washington State (No. 154).</p> <p>Notre Dame is ranked No. 59.</p> <p>The ACC has three top 20 teams according to Sagarin (Georgia Tech, Boston College and Florida State), but no top 10 team. So, looking at the mean, median or whatever formula you like to find the general strength of a league, the ACC may be the best. However, is this really a good measure of conference strength? Wouldn't teams like Alabama, Florida, Texas, Oklahoma or USC run through the ACC without a loss? If this were war, wouldn't the strongest side be the one with people left standing at the end? Unfortunately that is a question that can only be answered in bars and video games. Regardless, it seems some computers believe parity is more important than dominance -- as long as it reflects parity of strong teams and not weak ones.</p> <p>Parity in the ACC is demonstrated by the fact that neither division will be determined until this week's games are played. Also, a lot will be revealed about the comparative strength of the ACC on Saturday with several key games against SEC opponents (Florida at FSU, Vanderbilt at Wake Forest, South Carolina at Clemson and Georgia Tech at Georgia).</p> <p>Conventional wisdom would have the ACC losing most if not all of these games. However, this weekend will be a good test of human conventional wisdom vs. computer math.</p> <p>Enough talk about the ACC and computers. Let's look at the Big 12 South and humans. Now that there is a three-way tie of one-loss teams at the top, how did voters handle the situation? As usual, we'll look at the AP Poll (<a href="http://pollspeak.com/petition.html" target="_blank">the only poll with public ballots</a>) as an example:</p> <p>No surprise -- after last week's shellacking, everybody ranks <a href="http://pollspeak.com/pollstalker/pollstalker.php?s=5&p=9&t1=96&t2=75&v=0&w=14&r=T&o1=diff" target="_blank">Oklahoma over Texas Tech</a>.</p> <p>More surprising -- everybody also has <a href="http://pollspeak.com/pollstalker/pollstalker.php?s=5&p=9&t1=96&t2=94&v=0&w=14&r=T&o1=diff" target="_blank">Texas over Texas Tech</a>, even though the Red Raiders won the head-to-head. I expected most people to vote as they did, but I didn't expect it to be unanimous.</p> <p><a href="http://pollspeak.com/pollstalker/pollstalker.php?s=5&p=9&t1=94&t2=75&v=0&w=14&r=T&o1=diff" target="_blank">The last comparison</a> is where it gets messy -- 37 of 65 voters rank Texas over Oklahoma. That's only a bit more than half.</p> <p>In retrospect, I really wish Texas Tech were able to keep the game close with Oklahoma. It could have given us a good idea of how much weight voters put on "what have you done for me lately?" However, the Sooners' domination of the Red Raiders really does give them a clear advantage in the three way tie, and I wouldn't be surprised to see <a href="http://pollspeak.com/pollstalker/pollstalker.php?s=5&p=9&t1=75&v=33&w=14&r=T" target="_blank">Oklahoma</a> with the edge in the human polls if it wins next week. However, it is good to see the computers pulling some weight in the BCS this week.</p> <p><a href="http://pollspeak.com/pollstalker/pollstalker.php?s=5&p=8&t1=75&t2=94&v=0&w=14&r=T&o1=diff" target="_blank">Here is the comparison</a>: Oklahoma is ranked higher in both the Coaches' and Harris Interactive Polls. Texas is ranked over Oklahoma in four out of the six computer polls (including two No. 1 votes). So in total, there are four BCS components with Texas on top and four with Oklahoma on top (including both human polls). Yet the official BCS standings puts Texas at No. 2 and Oklahoma at No. 3. Of course, next week Oklahoma plays Oklahoma State.</p> <p>If all three teams win next week, the BCS won't just decide the national champion, it will also decide the Big 12 South champion. Tie-breaker rule No. 5 for the Big 12 is, "The highest-ranked team in the first Bowl Championship Series Poll following the completion of Big 12 regular-season conference play shall be the representative." Once again, we call for the BCS to recognize its power and <a href="http://pollspeak.com/football_2008_SaveTheBCS.htm" target="_blank">address its flaws</a>. There is a lot more at stake than the fate of two teams. The BCS also affects most teams' TV coverage, recruiting and now conference championships, too.</p> <p>For more poll analysis, go to <a href="http://www.pollspeak.com/" target="_blank">pollspeak.com</a>.</p>

The SI Staff

New York City 21244 26364 <div class="photo_container image_right"> <div class="photo"><img src="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/images/11/24/sam-bradford-swp.jpg" alt="Double Click to select a Photo" /></div> <div class="photo_attributes" style="text-align:right;">Despite losing to the Longhorns, everyone voted OU over Texas.</div> <div class="photo_attributes" style="text-align:right;">AP</div> </div> <p><em>By Hugh Falk, <a href="http://www.pollspeak.com/" target="_blank">Pollspeak.com</a></em><br /><br />The ACC is No. 1? It is according to Sagarin's conference ratings. How can a league that doesn't have a dominating team or a national title contender be the top conference? The answer lies not at the top, but at the bottom. N.C. State is the ACC's lowest ranked team at No. 56 (using standard Sagarin Ratings). Meanwhile, other BCS leagues have several teams ranked lower:</p> <p><strong>SEC:</strong> Auburn (No. 69), Tennessee (No. 73), Arkansas (No. 81) and Mississippi State (No. 97).</p> <p><strong>Big East: </strong>Louisville (No. 88) and Syracuse (No. 102).</p> <p><strong>Big 10:</strong> Illinois (No. 58), Minnesota (No. 64), Purdue (No. 72), Michigan (No. 86) and Indiana (No. 112).</p> <p><strong>Big 12:</strong> Baylor (No. 67), Colorado (No. 74), Kansas State (No. 77), Texas A&M (No. 94) and Iowa State (No. 117).</p> <p><strong>PAC-10:</strong> Stanford (No. 63), Arizona State (No. 76), UCLA (No. 91), Washington (No. 147) and Washington State (No. 154).</p> <p>Notre Dame is ranked No. 59.</p>