Started By
Message
re: As I said last night, OSU is going to end up #2 in all the computers
Posted on 11/21/11 at 1:47 am to bmy
Posted on 11/21/11 at 1:47 am to bmy
quote:
It seems like you think the voters are stupid, as I touched on above.
I think most of the voters vote based on who they think is best. You're painting a picture where they're hopelessly corrupt. Your argument revolves around coaches and Harris poll voters being so anti rematch they'll conspire to get a team they believe is inferior in. They want to see a team that couldn't beat Iowa State get crushed by LSU. West Coast voters will vote Stanford lower to screw Bama. Everyone will do everything possible to keep Bama out. It makes no sense at a certain point. If OU had beaten Baylor and OSU, then they'd possibly be in for the reasons you mention. The gap is going to be too big and that Iowa State loss was too bad.
I think voters are going to have integrity for the most part.
1
Posted on 11/21/11 at 1:57 am to arwicklu
quote:
I think most of the voters vote based on who they think is best. You're painting a picture where they're hopelessly corrupt. Your argument revolves around coaches and Harris poll voters being so anti rematch they'll conspire to get a team they believe is inferior in.
Almost right. I feel that there are more than 25% of the voters (which is enough to bounce Alabama out in the right situation) who are anti-rematch OR anti-SEC.
quote:
West Coast voters will vote Stanford lower to screw Bama. Everyone will do everything possible to keep Bama out. It makes no sense at a certain point. If OU had beaten Baylor and OSU, then they'd possibly be in for the reasons you mention. The gap is going to be too big and that Iowa State loss was too bad.
I think voters are going to have integrity for the most part.
Do you remember Kansas State beating Oklahoma (2003) 35-7 in the conference championship game.. and them getting into the national championship?
Was that them voting on the best team? They got blown the frick out and walked on in to the BCSCG.
This post was edited on 11/21/11 at 2:01 am
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:04 am to bmy
Because everybody voted for them, or because they were still so far ahead in the computers?
This post was edited on 11/21/11 at 2:05 am
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:07 am to Kingpin
quote:
Because everybody voted for them, or because they were still so far ahead in the computers?
Computers + enough votes to edge out USC.
This post was edited on 11/21/11 at 2:08 am
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:09 am to bmy
quote:
Do you remember Kansas State beating Oklahoma 35-7 in the conference championship game.. and them getting into the national championship?
They were third in the human polls and first in the computers. The voters did punish OU. That was the debacle that made them completely revise the BCS formula. The human voters did the right thing but the BCS formula was awful. It isn't the same formula now. The formula is still dumb though but playoff is a dirty word.
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:10 am to arwicklu
quote:
They were third in the human polls and first in the computers. The voters did punish OU. That was the debacle that made them completely revise the BCS formula. The human voters did the right thing but the BCS formula was awful. It isn't the same formula now. The formula is still dumb though but playoff is a dirty word.
The voters dropped them to #3 knowing full-well what the end result would be. Anyone with a simple spread sheet could have told you what the results were going to be if Oklahoma got X% of votes. They were either irresponsible or voting with an agenda.
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:12 am to bmy
If you recalculate the standing based on the new BCS formula, then USC was 1 and LSU 2. That would have been fun to watch.
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:16 am to bmy
quote:It isn't the voters job to engineer the answer based on the BCS formula. OU was one of three one loss teams. The voters ranked them 3 out of 3. The voters did their job. They voted the 3rd best team at number 3. They did the exact opposite of what you suggested they would do and rank OU below some 2 loss teams to ensure USC would get in. It wasn't the voters fault that the BCS formula was bad. They voted properly.
The voters dropped them to #3 knowing full-well what the end result would be. Anyone with a simple spread sheet could have told you what the results were going to be if Oklahoma got X% of votes. They were either irresponsible or voting with an agenda.
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:19 am to bmy
If the bad old voters screwed USC, why does Wikipedia say this?
quote:
Supporters of USC and the media in general criticized the fact that human polls were not weighted more heavily than computer rankings and this criticism led to the new algorithm.
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:20 am to arwicklu
quote:
It isn't the voters job to engineer the answer based on the BCS formula. OU was one of three one loss teams. The voters ranked them 3 out of 3. The voters did their job. They voted the 3rd best team at number 3. They did the exact opposite of what you suggested they would do and rank OU below some 2 loss teams to ensure USC would get in. It wasn't the voters fault that the BCS formula was bad. They voted properly.
A vote for OU at #3 was a vote for them to play in the championship game. I knew it back then and I was in like 8th grade. It's simple division.
What about 2006?
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:20 am to bmy
quote:
Computers + enough votes to edge out USC.
You may not remember but strength of schedule and quality win points were part of the goofy equation back then. It wasnt the voters faults at all.
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:21 am to Kingpin
quote:
If the bad old voters screwed USC, why does Wikipedia say this?
because it can be edited by anyone?
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:22 am to bmy
Why would anyone want to falsify that?
Is that part of the 2011 voter conspiracy?
Is that part of the 2011 voter conspiracy?
This post was edited on 11/21/11 at 2:23 am
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:23 am to arwicklu
quote:
It would pretty much be a conspiracy because voters would have to band together and decide to stop voting the team you've been voting at number 2
then you must think there was a conspiracy in the opinion polls in 2007... because there were major readjustments in the last opinion polls when some highly ranked teams fell
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:23 am to arwicklu
quote:
You may not remember but strength of schedule and quality win points were part of the goofy equation back then. It wasnt the voters faults at all.
so it was the formulas fault? last i checked the voters are data that the formula uses. the voters were irresponsible or had an agenda -- not all of them -- but enough. just like a nightmare scenariio for this year.
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:24 am to bmy
quote:
A vote for OU at #3 was a vote for them to play in the championship game. I knew it back then and I was in like 8th grade. It's simple division.
It isn't the voters jobs to reverse engineer the answer based on their knowledge of the formula. Their job is to rank teams based on where the feel they are. LSU and USC were higher. The formula was bad. The voters were right. If the voters have equal integrity this time, then OSU has no shot.
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:24 am to Kingpin
quote:
Why would anyone want to falsify that?
Is that part of the 2011 voter conspiracy?
it is one persons opinion and nothing more. thats all i was trying to say.
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:25 am to arwicklu
quote:
It isn't the voters jobs to reverse engineer the answer based on their knowledge of the formula. Their job is to rank teams based on where the feel they are. LSU and USC were higher. The formula was bad. The voters were right. If the voters have equal integrity this time, then OSU has no shot.
if 26% of the voters think that ok st is #2, it keeps alabama out. any voter who wants a rematch has the responsibility to drop OkSt to #4 or further.
This post was edited on 11/21/11 at 2:26 am
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:26 am to molsusports
2007 was a clusterfrick, though.
Posted on 11/21/11 at 2:26 am to molsusports
quote:
then you must think there was a conspiracy in the opinion polls in 2007... because there were major readjustments in the last opinion polls when some highly ranked teams fell
I have no problems with changes due to losses. He's suggesting voters will just rig it if nobody loses.
Page 7 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News