This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

1. Who are the retards who voted Texas #1 over USC?

2. How is Michigan ranked higher than ND?

3. How is ND ranked higher than MSU?

4. How is Iowa State still ranked behind Iowa?

Dumb, dumb, dumb.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

give it up dude.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

It's just such a pathetic system.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's just such a pathetic system.

[/ QUOTE ]

No more pathetic than the BCS forcing the computers to use the ELO method instead of the true predictor method.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]

4. How is Iowa State still ranked behind Iowa?


[/ QUOTE ]

Not for long...


Anways, I was listening to one of the ESPN Podcasts last week and they had a few media voters on the show with D.P.

D.P. was arguing that the polls should reflect what has already happened and EVERY ONE of the media voters was arguing that the polls should be predictive and not results oriented. So there's your answer.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
EVERY ONE of the media voters was arguing that the polls should be predictive and not results oriented. So there's your answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the most ridiculous idea ever. It's also a cop out as there are inequities such as these even in the final poll of the season. Just what are they predicting then? What would happen if everyone had a "redo"?

Besides, if that's the case, why play any games at all then? The thing is, that if their predictions are right, then the polls will end up as they want anyways, so all they do is screw the lower ranked teams when their predictions turn out to be wrong.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

Last week I did not agree with you. But these are pretty bad.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

What do you do if Mich beats MSU?

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's just such a pathetic system.

[/ QUOTE ]

No more pathetic than the BCS forcing the computers to use the ELO method instead of the true predictor method.

[/ QUOTE ]

Predictors have no place in deciding what teams play in the post-season. It should be entirely based on what has been done, not what's likely to happen. (Otherwise there's no point in playing the regular season games.)

FWIW, I don't know what the ELO method is.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

4. How is Iowa State still ranked behind Iowa?


[/ QUOTE ]

Not for long...


Anways, I was listening to one of the ESPN Podcasts last week and they had a few media voters on the show with D.P.

D.P. was arguing that the polls should reflect what has already happened and EVERY ONE of the media voters was arguing that the polls should be predictive and not results oriented. So there's your answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is insane to have a poll that awards any sort of a championship (the winner of the AP is considered to have won a share of the national championship) be predicitve. The rankings should be earned and not predictive. If the voters believe that there poll should be predictive, then this system may be so screwed up as to make the national championship chase not worth following at all.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

This kind of crap is probably the biggest reason why I have never become much of a college football fan.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's just such a pathetic system.

[/ QUOTE ]

No more pathetic than the BCS forcing the computers to use the ELO method instead of the true predictor method.

[/ QUOTE ]

Predictors have no place in deciding what teams play in the post-season. It should be entirely based on what has been done, not what's likely to happen. (Otherwise there's no point in playing the regular season games.)

FWIW, I don't know what the ELO method is.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that Jeff Sagarin summed it up best:

In ELO-CHESS, only winning and losing matters; the score margin is of no consequence, which makes it very "politically correct". However it is less accurate in its predictions for upcoming games than is the PURE POINTS, in which the score margin is the only thing that matters.
PURE POINTS is also known as PREDICTOR, BALLANTINE, RHEINGOLD, WHITE OWL and is the best single PREDICTOR of future games. The ELO-CHESS will be utilized by the Bowl Championship Series(BCS).

In Sagarin’s predictor formula, USC is ranked 1st. In the BCS mandated ELO system, they are ranked 7th, which is absurd.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

The polls are a ranking of the tops teams from first to 25th. The games played on the field are not the ultimate determination of these rankings, but just more data that gets weighed in the process.

If team A goes 11-1, and loses to team B, who goes 1-11... should team B be ranked ahead of team A?

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
The polls are a ranking of the tops teams from first to 25th. The games played on the field are not the ultimate determination of these rankings, but just more data that gets weighed in the process.

If team A goes 11-1, and loses to team B, who goes 1-11... should team B be ranked ahead of team A?

[/ QUOTE ]
Your example still shows team A being better because of what happened on the field. Nobody's saying the teams' head-to-head game is all that should matter(at least I hope that's not what they're saying).

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's just such a pathetic system.

[/ QUOTE ]

No more pathetic than the BCS forcing the computers to use the ELO method instead of the true predictor method.

[/ QUOTE ]

Predictors have no place in deciding what teams play in the post-season. It should be entirely based on what has been done, not what's likely to happen. (Otherwise there's no point in playing the regular season games.)

FWIW, I don't know what the ELO method is.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that Jeff Sagarin summed it up best:

In ELO-CHESS, only winning and losing matters; the score margin is of no consequence, which makes it very "politically correct". However it is less accurate in its predictions for upcoming games than is the PURE POINTS, in which the score margin is the only thing that matters.
PURE POINTS is also known as PREDICTOR, BALLANTINE, RHEINGOLD, WHITE OWL and is the best single PREDICTOR of future games. The ELO-CHESS will be utilized by the Bowl Championship Series(BCS).

In Sagarin’s predictor formula, USC is ranked 1st. In the BCS mandated ELO system, they are ranked 7th, which is absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank's for the info. I think that ELO-chess is a better formula to use to determine who makes the post season, because the idea is not to predict who will win, but who has earned it. If USC keeps winning, their ranking will get sufficently high before the end of the season. Ranking the seventh now is not so absurd, because they really haven't beaten anyone.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
The polls are a ranking of the tops teams from first to 25th. The games played on the field are not the ultimate determination of these rankings, but just more data that gets weighed in the process.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is obviously absurd.

[ QUOTE ]
If team A goes 11-1, and loses to team B, who goes 1-11... should team B be ranked ahead of team A?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well that would kind of be ignoring games that have actually been played. (That is the 11 games that team B lost).

All games that have been played, and only games that have been played should be considered when compiling rankings.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thank's for the info. I think that ELO-chess is a better formula to use to determine who makes the post season, because the idea is not to predict who will win, but who has earned it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The purpose is supposedly to rank the teams on their measured ability. If the BCS had not mandated the ELO system, then USC and LSU would have played for the national championship two years ago, after Oklahoma got their asses handed to them by Kansas State in the Big XII championship game.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

Let's say USC loses tonight. How far do they fall?

my prediction = 4

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

I'm tired of people complaining about the polls and the BCS. It is what it is. People bitch and moan all year....Notre Dame blah blah, then they lose. Its September!!

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

there should be no rankings until the end of the season. then, they can have a writers and coaches poll.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]

If team A goes 11-1, and loses to team B, who goes 1-11... should team B be ranked ahead of team A?

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The polls are a ranking of the tops teams from first to 25th. The games played on the field are not the ultimate determination of these rankings, but just more data that gets weighed in the process.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is obviously absurd.

[ QUOTE ]
If team A goes 11-1, and loses to team B, who goes 1-11... should team B be ranked ahead of team A?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well that would kind of be ignoring games that have actually been played. (That is the 11 games that team B lost).

All games that have been played, and only games that have been played should be considered when compiling rankings.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is really just for people bitching about early season polls. It's ridiculous to juggle teams out based on a few weeks, IMO. After 10 weeks it pretty much reflects the record anyway. You usually have the unbeaten teams, the 1-loss teams, the 2-loss teams, etc, all in a row.

Early on in the season, especially after say, 3 or 4 games, I don't think there's sufficient data to rank teams purely on W-L records.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]


Early on in the season, especially after say, 3 or 4 games, I don't think there's sufficient data to rank teams purely on W-L records.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is for the ones who have played head to head.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

this week's important poll

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
this week's important poll

[/ QUOTE ]

Penn State - #29.

Two more weeks, punk [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
this week's important poll

[/ QUOTE ]

Penn State - #29.

Two more weeks, punk [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

You'll have to get past the Mighty Golden Gophers first.

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
this week's important poll

[/ QUOTE ]

Penn State - #29.

Two more weeks, punk [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

You'll have to get past the Mighty Golden Gophers first.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude. We beat NORTHWESTERN. Minnesota who?

<font color="white"> /joke </font>

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]

2. How is Michigan ranked higher than ND?


[/ QUOTE ]

Michigan, my friend, isn't ranked in the 25. Notre Dame is.

So, what poll are you looking at?

Re: This week\'s ridiculous college football polls
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

2. How is Michigan ranked higher than ND?


[/ QUOTE ]

Michigan, my friend, isn't ranked in the 25. Notre Dame is.

So, what poll are you looking at?

[/ QUOTE ]

Check the dates on the posts, 54.