Possible solution other than a playoff

[General Blackshirt]

Just because they use useless statistics when they put the percentages in, like strength of schedule. Even if a team isn't playing well the computer's don't know that. I have never understood them and never will. Most coaches will be honest and they can tell how team's are playing

These computer polls are designed by people a lot smarter than anyone on this board can probably understand, so maybe we're not supposed to understand why it does what it does. Going by the orignial proposed solution in this thread, a computer would rank the teams based on some algorithm. I'm sure there's plenty of Harvard math geeks out there willing to write an algorithm to objectively determine the best teams in football, and I'm sure it would be a heck of a lot better than a stupid coaches poll.

 

 

Yeah, noone knows football like a Harvard math whiz.

 

Exactly! The same minds who devised ingenious ways for Wall St. CEO's to fleece america's capitol while everyone else was losing their pensions.

 

That sounds like a fool proof plan!

Now that's pretty ignorant. The people who developed that stuff did scam Wall St., but, actually, that's just the point. Make themselves rich but the market and the rest of the people feel the pain. They still executed, didn't they?

 

Haven't any of you heard of sabermetrics? If people can dedicate their life to baseball statistics (and be right about determining what players/teams are better) then why can't the same be done for football?

[VA Husker Fan]

Computer ratings exist today, programs written by some pretty sharp guys, I'm sure. First question is, do you think they can really find someone better? And if so, why haven't they already done so since the computers have been an important component of the BCS for 10 years now.

 

Second question is, how have they done? Take a look at the last 10 years. Do you agree with their results more than what the polls or BCS has come out with? One difference I see is VaTech over Ohio St in 2007. Good or bad?

[VA Husker Fan]

Just because they use useless statistics when they put the percentages in, like strength of schedule. Even if a team isn't playing well the computer's don't know that. I have never understood them and never will. Most coaches will be honest and they can tell how team's are playing

These computer polls are designed by people a lot smarter than anyone on this board can probably understand, so maybe we're not supposed to understand why it does what it does. Going by the orignial proposed solution in this thread, a computer would rank the teams based on some algorithm. I'm sure there's plenty of Harvard math geeks out there willing to write an algorithm to objectively determine the best teams in football, and I'm sure it would be a heck of a lot better than a stupid coaches poll.

 

 

Yeah, noone knows football like a Harvard math whiz.

 

Exactly! The same minds who devised ingenious ways for Wall St. CEO's to fleece america's capitol while everyone else was losing their pensions.

 

That sounds like a fool proof plan!

Now that's pretty ignorant. The people who developed that stuff did scam Wall St., but, actually, that's just the point. Make themselves rich but the market and the rest of the people feel the pain. They still executed, didn't they?

 

Haven't any of you heard of sabermetrics? If people can dedicate their life to baseball statistics (and be right about determining what players/teams are better) then why can't the same be done for football?

I don't think you actually read the article closely, if at all. A math genius came up with a formula for Wall Street to use. It worked for awhile, but didn't consider everything, and it wound up failing, miserably.

 

Sabremetrics works because it's got a wealth of data to base projections from. Football has just 12 games to work with, which isn't a very good sampling.

[junior4949]

What I would like is for the College Football season to end on New Years Day like it did for 40 plus years. Why you may ask...

1. New Years Day is a great party day.

2. 4 or 5 great Bowl games lasting from 11:00 AM to well into the evening.

3. Lots of different ways for the final rankings to end up.

4. Lots to debate for the next few months.

5. All in all it was just a lot more fun.

T_O_B

 

Personally I prefer to settle it on the field rather than debate it for months or years like 1994 and 1997. The BCS gave us great games like Miami-Ohio State and USC-Texas that wouldn't have been possible in the old system. So sometimes there's controversy over who gets the #2 spot. That doesn't seem any worse than the manipulation and randomness of the old bowl assignments, and it guarantees that if there's a true #1 and #2, they will face it off on the field.

 

There's no guarantee that if there's a true #1 and #2 they will face it off on the field. If this were true, we'd never have co-NC's. We have had co-NC's with the BCS.

[VA Husker Fan]

What I would like is for the College Football season to end on New Years Day like it did for 40 plus years. Why you may ask...

1. New Years Day is a great party day.

2. 4 or 5 great Bowl games lasting from 11:00 AM to well into the evening.

3. Lots of different ways for the final rankings to end up.

4. Lots to debate for the next few months.

5. All in all it was just a lot more fun.

T_O_B

 

Personally I prefer to settle it on the field rather than debate it for months or years like 1994 and 1997. The BCS gave us great games like Miami-Ohio State and USC-Texas that wouldn't have been possible in the old system. So sometimes there's controversy over who gets the #2 spot. That doesn't seem any worse than the manipulation and randomness of the old bowl assignments, and it guarantees that if there's a true #1 and #2, they will face it off on the field.

 

There's no guarantee that if there's a true #1 and #2 they will face it off on the field. If this were true, we'd never have co-NC's. We have had co-NC's with the BCS.

"Clear #1 and #2" would've been a better way to word this than "true". If there's really no question going in which two teams deserve to play it off, that game should be played. Make sure Michigan plays Nebraska in 1997. That's my #1 criteria for a system, by far. The BCS guarantees it. A playoff might produce it. The old bowl system likely misses it because of all of the tie-ins.

 

I can live with the imperfections in the years where there are 3, 4 or more teams with a claim to be in the top 2. I know the old system gave a chance for more teams to finish #1, but it usually took some luck that teams above you would get knocked off. You might as well have a playoff, at least everyone controls their own destiny.

[junior4949]

The problem is that there have been far more years under the BCS that there isn't a clear #1 and clear #2 than there are years with a clear #1 and a clear #2. This is the reason some/a lot of people are screaming for a playoff.

[nepolo7]

I would like to see the BCS game choose conference champions. Then chose the highest ranked conference champs for the title game. Regualr season still counts and the significance of rankings slightly minimized.

[VA Husker Fan]

Fair enough (response to junior4949). A lot of people think that's the highest priority. I wouldn't object to a playoff as long as it was small enough and gave advantage to higher seeds with a first round bye or home field game to keep the regular season meaningful.

 

I do NOT want to return to the old system for the reasons I already stated.