All you need to know about polls today

The Seer · Post by **The Seer** » Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:15 pm

USA Today rankings:

Cal - 19

Ore - 25

----------------------------------------------------

PSU - 13

Iowa - 17

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:20 pm

That's downright maddening.

TheJON · Post by **TheJON** » Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:48 pm

Iowa is a couple spots ahead of PSU in the other poll. I believe Okie State is still ahead of Houston too and that's a joke. isn't Houston the Big-12 South champs!!?

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:52 pm

Oklahoma State ahead of or behind Georgia?
Why is USC ahead of Washington?

Polls are fucking stupid, nothign short of a playoff will fix college football

TheJON · Post by **TheJON** » Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:58 pm

SoCalTrjn wrote:Oklahoma State ahead of or behind Georgia?
Why is USC ahead of Washington?

Polls are fucking stupid, nothign short of a playoff will fix college football

How does a playoff change the fact that the polls are a joke? If we ever have a playoff, the teams selected will be based on their rankings in the polls.

USC should be well ahead of U-Dub even though they lost to them. U-Dub has 2 losses and USC has a good road victory. I just have a problem with teams with equal or better records than an opponent they beat being ranked behind that opponent.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Sun Sep 27, 2009 9:44 pm

TheJON wrote:
SoCalTrjn wrote:Oklahoma State ahead of or behind Georgia?
Why is USC ahead of Washington?

Polls are fucking stupid, nothign short of a playoff will fix college football
How does a playoff change the fact that the polls are a joke? If we ever have a playoff, the teams selected will be based on their rankings in the polls.

USC should be well ahead of U-Dub even though they lost to them. U-Dub has 2 losses and USC has a good road victory. I just have a problem with teams with equal or better records than an opponent they beat being ranked behind that opponent.

Win your conference you're in the playoffs, don't win your conference, you're not. get rid of the polls

TheJON · Post by **TheJON** » Sun Sep 27, 2009 9:55 pm

There should be the top 3 in the rankings, and then nobody else in the top 10. Nobody else is deserving.

Last year there were a handful of teams that had an argument.

Besides, how do you have a 3 team playoff? #1 gets a 1st round bye?

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:46 pm

The playoffs should be based on the top eight highest ranked teams at season's end, regardless of conference affiliation. If that means some conferences get no entrants while others receive multiple entrants, so be it.

At the same time, no polls should even come out until after Week 6 has been completed.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:53 pm

then take 8 conferences and allow the top 2 of each of those conferences to go in to the playoffs, theres no way a thrid place team in a conference should be given a shot at the title.

get rid of the polls, youre allowing biased opinions to decide what should be decided on the field

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:59 pm

SoCalTrjn wrote:theres no way a thrid place team in a conference should be given a shot at the title.

Why not you jello brained dumbfuck? It shouldn't be about conferences it should be about individual teams. What if the 3rd best team in a given conference is better than a 2nd or 1st place team from another conference? Yes, in any given year, certain conferences are stronger than others. Teams 1-3 from each major conference are not necessarily competitive equals across the board.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:13 pm

B-t-H, the reason for the change is obvious. The current system is leaving us with more than three teams with arguments by season's end, and in your conference's case it's also leaving us with no clear conference champion.

Last year saw Texas being left out, while the team they beat from their own conference got in. The Big XII is too stupid to adopt the easy and logical fix to that three-way tie-breaker deal (drop the lowest ranked team, then decide the winner by the head-to-head result between the two highest ranked teams) so OU was just plain selected over an equally deserving Texas to play Florida.

That was a perfect situation in which more than one team from a conference would've needed to have been included in any national playoffs.

The USC connection you're implying is also valid, of course. No way in hell USC should've been excluded every single year in which they didn't run the table, and yet they were, automatically.

So, there you go. Let more than just the conference champions in, if necessary, if we go to an eight team playoffs. Just pick the best eight teams, regardless.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:15 pm

Believe the Heupel wrote:USC fan in 2003: No team that doesn't win its conference should be considered for the national title.
USC fan in 2009: No team that's not in the top 2 in its conference should be considered for the national title.

Wonder why the change?

The change was to keep the douche bags on here crying about the perception that some conferences are better than others happy. It was USC fan that said that if you dont win your conference you dont go tot he playoffs and fans of other schools crying that teams that dont win should still get a chance.
way to kick your own ass.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:16 pm

Jsc810 wrote:I was talking about the poll today. It seems there are three really good teams this year, at least as of now. They deserve their 1 2 3 rankings.

Nobody else has shown that they deserve to be in the top 10.

Based on what? Neither Florida nor Texas have have played anybody yet - especially Florida - so who cares what their records are? They don't 'deserve' anything yet. A whole lotta teams would have Florida's record right now if they'd played Florida's schedule.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:42 pm

Top eight teams, period. Simple.

MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan · Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:00 am

Here's the fairest & best playoff scenario I've been able to come up with:

Take the 6 highest-ranked conference champions at the end of the season (not just BCS conferences, but all conferences) and 2 wild cards. If Notre Dame, Navy, or Army finishes in the Top 8, they're automatically in and the 6th highest-ranked conference champ is out (although they'd still be eligible for one of the 2 wild cards).

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:12 am

Mike, I don't want the six highest ranked conference winners, not if it means a Texas from last year doesn't get in.

I don't care about conferences. A playoffs should be about teams, not conferences.

TheJON · Post by **TheJON** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:16 am

For the life of me I can't quite figure out why CFB fans waste their time arguing what playoff set-up is the best. Who gives a rip? Not one of us will see the day where CFB has any type of playoff game, except MAYBE a plus-one by 2015. There's no point in arguing how many teams should get in a playoff system that will never happen. Just enjoy the bowl games and the illegitimate national titles we have every year. It's all we'll ever have.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:17 am

B-t-H wrote:Oh, don't get me wrong. I'm not actually in favor of a playoff and I've given my reasons for that several times.

And those reasons begin and end with this: The Big XII and OU in particular always manage to benefit from the current system!

The Seer · Post by **The Seer** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:19 am

For a side by side comparison on how much credibility polls should receive, someone do a history on the NCAA hoops tourney....how many times have the top 2 teams played for the championship?...and they have many more games to use as field analysis...

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:22 am

Bama, or UCLA? What about Mizzou, or Houston, or Michigan?

Cincy actually looks pretty good so far.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:24 am

Believe the Heupel wrote:
SoCalTrjn wrote:
Believe the Heupel wrote:USC fan in 2003: No team that doesn't win its conference should be considered for the national title.
USC fan in 2009: No team that's not in the top 2 in its conference should be considered for the national title.

Wonder why the change?
The change was to keep the douche bags on here crying about the perception that some conferences are better than others happy. It was USC fan that said that if you dont win your conference you dont go tot he playoffs and fans of other schools crying that teams that dont win should still get a chance.
way to kick your own ass.
Son, I'm not sure you actually understand the English language.

Thats funny, earlier in this post i said that if you dont win your conference you dont go to the playoffs, I guess you missed that post.

Believe the Heupel wrote:What's my own ass? You and every other USC fan have been crying since 2003 that teams that don't win their conference don't deserve a shot at the national title. Now that your team doesn't have a yellow brick road to a conference championship, you've given that position up pretty quickly.

No I didnt, I said that if you dont win your conference you dont get a playoff ticket, I conceded that the second place team could get in after supporters from other programs cried that some conferences were tougher than others just to get them to shut the fuck up, if they cant win their conference they're not going to win a BCS title.
I wont even aknowlege the stuff about my sons other to say that you must have moved to Alabama or something because youre starting to obsess about screwing your sons like an Auburn fan around here, I can only hope that neither of you ever wind up with sons because due to your obsessions about their assholes there is no doubt that both of you would be fucking them in ass every night you had a chance to.

Win your conference and you get a shot at the playoffs, dont win your conference and you dont and save your bullshit about how some conferences are weaker than others, last time Choklahoma got a chance vs USC they scab dicked it worse than any team has scab dicked a BCS title game before or since.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:42 am

No, but it means USC would've been there too, which is the last thing OU needs.

:twisted:

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:45 am

Hey, that's all they need!

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 am

Believe the Heupel wrote:
Van wrote:
B-t-H wrote:Oh, don't get me wrong. I'm not actually in favor of a playoff and I've given my reasons for that several times.
And those reasons begin and end with this: The Big XII and OU in particular always manage to benefit from the current system!

Which is suspiciously like the reason USC fan cries about the current system.

I guess OU fans should just be upset that no matter how much bleeding pussies change the rules, OU manages to be in the top 2 a bunch of the time. You should probably check your numbers, by the way-based on your "Top 8" formula, OU would have been in the playoffs every year but 2005 this century. Doesn't seem like that'd take a whole lot away from us.

Yeah they may have made the playoffs but they would have shit all over themselves in the first round so we wouldnt have had to watch them do it in the title game.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 1:48 am

The Lakers occasionally lose to the Clippers too. Does it really matter, come playoffs time?

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 2:30 am

Fortunately for them, they never do. Were there a playoffs in CF then USC's losses also wouldn't be frequent enough to keep them out of the party, at which point the occasional loss to Washington would be long forgotten.

Go Coogs' · Post by **Go Coogs'** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 2:36 am

Wetzel's plan is still the best I've seen. Everyone gets a chance.

H4ever · Post by **H4ever** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:43 am

The Seer wrote:USA Today rankings:

Cal - 19

Ore - 25

----------------------------------------------------

PSU - 13

Iowa - 17

AP rankings:

Virginia Tech- 6

Nebraska- 23

ponderous. Last I knew, V-tek got beat in Blacksburg until a last minute touchdown Jesus-esque bullshit happened. Had we been given at least one of the TD receptions the game wasn't even close. Not trying to go Mtool here but fuck!!!!

The rankings have always been a joke this time of year.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:03 am

Guess what, B-t-H...

What we have now is not a two team playoff, otherwise Florida and their loss at home to Ole Miss wouldn't have been invited either.

Killian · Post by **Killian** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 2:43 pm

I personally like the fact that ND was #18 when they lost to UofM on a last second play, and have proceeded to drop every week in the rankings if you look at the "also receiving votes" section. That makes sense.

SunCoastSooner · Post by **SunCoastSooner** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:23 pm

TheJON wrote: isn't Houston the Big-12 South champs!!?

For beating the perennial 3rd and 5th best team in the division?

SunCoastSooner · Post by **SunCoastSooner** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:42 pm

I am a proponent for an 8 team playoff... it doesn't benefit or detract from my alma mater and that has no bearing on my though process regardless. I just feel it is the best way to decide the national champion.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:32 pm

B-t-H, my version of a playoff eliminates your Chargers-Patriots scenario. Nobody automatically gets in just by winning a crap conference.

An eight team playoff comprised of the top eight ranked teams at season's end is a playoff. Teams have to win do-or-die games against other teams facing the same situation in order to advance to the next round. That's a playoff.

What we have now is a beauty pageant, whereby teams from the two favored conferences are nearly always deemed to be the most beautiful, right from the start; then they receive every benefit of the doubt the rest of the way, and especially during the final selection process.

It's not a two team playoff; no way, no how.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:03 pm

At least the eventual winner had to beat someone other than their own overrated conference opponent just to play in the title game.

'Body of work'??

What was Florida's body of work? Who'd they beat last year? Bama. That's it. Who'd Bama beat last year? Nobody. Bama played two tough games the whole year, neither of which were during the regular season, and they lost them both. Oh, and they both played overrated Georgia too, who went on to do nothing.

What will Florida's body of work include this year?

Nothing. They play nobody this year, except LSU. Florida has a one game season, just to get into the CCG. Florida can lose that one game, and they'll still get into the CCG, so they'll still get into the title game.

The way Florida's schedule is lined up, and with the way they've already won the beauty pageant before any of the other chicks even finished taping their tits to their bikini tops, it will take a train wreck of a season to keep Florida out of the title game.

The whole thing is rigged. Before a national champion is declared it ought to be set up in such a way as to make teams have to beat good OOC teams, away from home.

Eight team playoffs. No conference tie-ins.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:13 pm

Van's still on about this?

:shocker:

Not that Sagarin is the end-all, be-all, but what the strictly number-crunching system does do well is remove any and all beauty-contest-subjectivity, and allow you to formulate your own opinions based on concrete statistical evidence. SoS plays a huge part of the Sagarins (probably too much, which is its big flaw).

But, as of this week, based strictly on the numbers, Sagarin's Evil Machination now has Florida at #1, for the first time this season (takes a few weeks for the "interconnectivity" to bear out).

Iowa is #5 BTW. USC 6, Oregon at 7.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:32 pm

Jsc810 wrote: It will be interesting to see what SoS does to Boise's Sagarin ranking as the season continues.

Oh, it'll continue to drop.

The computer won't be too kind after BSU's matchup with #139 (and likely dropping) UC Davis, 1AA.

The only thing that will help them is a continuation of Oregon's rise. Fresno St might climb a little when they start mopping up their conference slate.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:41 pm

Upon what statistical basis can Florida rightly be called #1 right now?

-They played a home game against a bad D1-AA team.

-They followed that up with a home game against a bad Sun Belt team.

-They followed that up with a home game against a bad Tennessee team.

-They followed that up with a road game against a bad Kentucky team.

There must be at least thirty teams out there right now with stronger resumes than Florida's.

I have no problem with ranking Florida highly, but it's not due to anything that can be measured statistically through the first four games of this season, which is supposed to be the Sagarin Method.

What the hell formula is Sagarin using? With Florida #1, Boise #2, Iowa #5, USC #6 and Oregon #7 there doesn't appear to be any rhyme or reason to it. He seems to be vacillating between reputation/potential and actual performance during games played on the field.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:49 pm

Van wrote:He seems to be vacillating between reputation/potential and actual performance during games played on the field.

For a smart dude, you're sure a dumbass.

Since there's no interconnectivity at the onset, it does use rankings. And when this was the case, guess what? Florida was a long way from #1. Now that it switches to strictly-statistical analysis, Florida TOOK OVER #1 (even with the #95 SoS).

Because the Sagarins weight margin of victory. If you're supposed to blow out a team, you're expected to actually blow out that team. If a team covers its expected margin of victory for a given game, it gets rewarded, if it squeaks by a cupcake, it's punished.

And Florida continues to grossly exceed its projected results.

How hard is that to understand?

You want to eliminate the "beauty contest," but when someone does, you still whine about it?

Don't like his methodology (that he's been refining for over 20 years)? Write your own.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 7:39 pm

Did Florida do what was expected of them in their only 'marquee' game so far this season?

Nope. They somewhat scabdicked at home against a Tennessee team who were +28.

Based on Sagarin's method and what you're saying about it I'd have both Bama and Texas above Florida, since they've both played tougher competition, and they've both lived up to expectations in each game.

As to the idea of my coming up with some new rankings formula, well, in case you haven't noticed I'm far too busy overhauling every other aspect of BTPCF. I'll get to the ranking methods eventually, but before I turn my attention there I first want to sort out this ridiculous scheduling, then I want to institute a proper playoffs system; but only after I first institute a complete re-alignment of all the conferences.

Gotta lotta shit on my plate already, is the point. I'll get to the rankings once I've emptied my In Box.

SunCoastSooner · Post by **SunCoastSooner** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:49 pm

Sargain has to do a major revamp of his system when the BCS required that SOS be taken out of the computers so that it wasn't "double Jepordy" on the SOS factor and isn't nearly the defining tool it once was before it and all the other comp ratings became part of the BCS points system.