Sagarin Predictor rulezzz!

[Dudd]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not sure how anyone could favor a method other than figuring out who is the best team if it can't be determined on the field.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since the object of football is to win, that is all that should be considered when awarding championships. The fact that Team A won by 100, and team B won by 1 may indicate that Team A would be more likely to win if these two teams were to play head to head, but it shouldn't give them more claim to a championship. (Both teams met their goal of winning the game).

If you want to use points, then I would recomend setting confenence standings based on net points, not wins and losses. Also there should be no stigma toward running up the score (in fact it should be aplauded).

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, clearly if one team has zero losses and another team has one loss, and they both played comparable schedules, the zero loss team should make the championship game regardless of how close their games are. But, if three teams are undefeated, with similar schedules, and two teams blow everyone out and another team keeps most of their games within one score, I don't see how margin of victory isn't important in that sense. Of course, this all assumes a flawed BCS style championship game, not a true playoff which actually decides it on the field, which I am completely in support of.

[DougOzzzz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not sure how anyone could favor a method other than figuring out who is the best team if it can't be determined on the field.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since the object of football is to win, that is all that should be considered when awarding championships. The fact that Team A won by 100, and team B won by 1 may indicate that Team A would be more likely to win if these two teams were to play head to head, but it shouldn't give them more claim to a championship. (Both teams met their goal of winning the game).

If you want to use points, then I would recomend setting confenence standings based on net points, not wins and losses. Also there should be no stigma toward running up the score (in fact it should be aplauded).

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, clearly if one team has zero losses and another team has one loss, and they both played comparable schedules, the zero loss team should make the championship game regardless of how close their games are. But, if three teams are undefeated, with similar schedules, and two teams blow everyone out and another team keeps most of their games within one score, I don't see how margin of victory isn't important in that sense. Of course, this all assumes a flawed BCS style championship game, not a true playoff which actually decides it on the field, which I am completely in support of.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. Which is why the computer rankings used as a tiebreaker only would make sense. Actually, humans DO use this information to vote in the polls, but they are biased towards teams that they "think" are better. The main problem I see with the polls is that there is not enough movement when comparably ranked teams both win. Almost always a highly ranked team will at the very least maintain their current ranking with a win. Sometimes they deserve to drop a spot or two if a closely ranked team defeated a much stronger opponent.

Anyway, I believe the following:

1. Strength of schedule and won-lost record should be the primary consideration in determining who makes the championship game.

2. In all but extreme cases, MOV should not cause a team with a stronger SOS/W-L combo to lose a spot in the championship game.

3. If SOS/W-L is relatively equal, MOV should be used to determine who goes on to the championship game. Preferrably, every game should be evaluated by humans to determine whether or not the MOV was caused by running up the score or resting starters.

4. MOV is extremely important in determining the "best" team. However, it is less important in determining what team deserves to play in the national championship game. Computers aren't perfect and it is of course better for a human to determine a more appropriate MOV for each game. This is why the Sagarin predictor will never be as good as the best human handicappers for predicting future outcomes.

[lastchance]

Because the Pollsters are idiots, and a committee is actually forced to think about it for a while.

LSU #3? Nuff said.

Sagarin is not as good as the best human handicappers, but Sagarin is far better than the pollsters.