Why the human polls should have less say in who plays for the title

[therick]

The title didn't save for some reason.....It's supposed to read..

Why the human polls should have less say in who plays for the title

I was thinking today about the polls and how wrong the poll voters have been this year. I think they got more wrong in the pre-season polls than ever before. Does anyone else think the computer rankings should have more of a say in who plays for the title? And who gets into BCS bowl games?

Here's a list of teams that were ranked in the top 25 and their ranking to start the year that obviously shouldn't have been.

#5 Michigan
#9 Va Tech
#10 Louisville
#14 UCLA
#15 Tennessee
#18 Auburn
#20 Nebraska
#21 Arkansas
#22 TCU
#24 Boise State
#25 Texas A&M

and the teams that are still ranked this week, that should be ranked differently based on today's results

#3 Florida......are they really that good?

#9 Wisconsin....losing to Iowa as I write this
#10 Penn St.....obviously over rated
#12 South Carolina.......should still be ranked but certainly lower
#16 Alabama......That win over Arkansas wasn't all that good afterall
#18 Louisville......Should never have been ranked
#20 Texas A&M.....ditto
#24 Nebraska........ditto

Sure, the human polls are nice, but should they really have a say in who ends up in the title game? The computers need to come back along with strength of schedule. Let the human polls count for 1/3 and the computers for the rest.

[wrastler118]

I think the whole system is flawed. Could you imagine if in wrestling only a rankings poll decided whether you could go to state or nationals?

[Schlottke]

I totally agree.

[RYou]

Hell's bells gentlemen, please tell me how a computer is going to predict the upsets we've been seeing? It's a freakin' game and shiite happens. All that matters is that the two bests meet in the BCS and a computer that makes those selections is just as falliable as the human polls.

[RYou]

Even the BCS Standings which use both computer driven and human poll details mis-state the standings. It is still early in the season and the games are sorting out the talent levels. There is no question that there are teams playing way under and way over their abilities and driving the upsets we've seen in the past 3 weeks.

[LkwdSteve]

I have more of a problem with the preseason polls having a disproportionate (ie-lingering) effect on the actual season. You might hear (and have heard) comments during the 6th or 7th week, like "as long as the top ranked team won, even if unimpressive, they shouldn't move down out of the number one spot", forgetting that the only reason they had the top spot was due to a preseason poll.

That's where the human element is bad. Whatever preseason polls exist should be wiped off the board completely once the season starts, but they are not. Unless a team actually loses, there is really not much movement (there are exceptions to this generalization, but it's the norm for the most part).

[therick]

steve,

That's exactly what I was getting at. The poll voters are much less likely to move teams around based on who they've played. Once the pecking order is set, the teams don't move much. We have seen quite a bit of movement this year among unbeaten teams however. West Virginia has been jumped by two teams (Oklahoma and Florida) all while not losing a game. Oddly enough, Florida simply stayed where they were after struggling against Ole Miss this past weekend. It doesn't make sense. If you can rise in the polls by beating up on a nobody, then you should also fall for stuggling against a nobody. The random nature of the polls is why I can't stand them.

The BCS doesn't come out until almost half way through the season, because it's supposed to be less influenced by pre-season projection and more by what's actually gone on, on the field. However, since the human polls that make up the BCS are influenced by that pre-season hype, then so is the BCS. The computers aren't as influenced by what conference you come from, which team the media is hyping, sentimental crap like tradition and stuff like that.

The computers can take into account, who you beat, who they beat, where was the game, what was the point margin, among other things. The computer also doesn't care about protecting it's reputation by sticking with a team that it was sure was better than they've played.

Ryou, you're right the computers can't project the upsets. However, the computers do correct themselves much quicker based on those upsets.

Good point wrastler118....but it's worse than that. Imagine if the polls determined who got to wrestle in the finals. End the season ranked 1 or 2 and you get to wrestle for the title and all of the AA spots are GIVEN to the guys ranked in the top 8.

Only in D1A football to we allow some desk jockey writer to determine who deserves to play for the title. Man, do we need a playoff. Then again, I guess those millions that teams make for playing in bowls help to fund wrestling teams and other non-revenue sports.