I had heard that the majority of the BCS formula relies upon the voting of people. Why does everyone critcize the computers when it seems the people who vote in the BCS account for way more than the computer variables?
2006-11-15 07:58:23 · 8 answers · asked by Matt K 4 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
In otherwords, the AP and USA Today and Harris polls rely upon people voting, and these three polls make up the vast majority of the BCS. So really, is it the computers' fault?
2006-11-15 08:02:33 · update #1
The BCS formula isn't that consistent. The "VOTES" are part of the formula.
2006-11-15 08:02:34 · answer #1 · answered by jhornneon23 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the strength of schedule issue is not the all important factor that the bcs uses it as. there have been several games this season that teams have played particular games waaaaayyy out of their SoS. i think the bcs was brought in for a good reason, but it cannot account for the efforts in games affected by rivalry, weather, extraordinary play against a heavily favored opponent and such. what about comebacks? should a team be penalized for putting up a fight to win at the end instead of giving up and getting a loss? if they are to use computers to analyize rankings, why not put a few factors into the computations that give more game flavor to the ending results since there is likely to never be a playoff tournament. it would be crazy to try to compare all the teams that play in one year with schedules set so far in advance of play and relying on the SoS, that when it was set might have been a totally different picture than three years later when the game plays out.
2006-11-15 23:05:03 · answer #2 · answered by FLirishfan 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The AP is no longer a part of the BCS. That is why the Harris Poll was brought in.
The reason I hate the computers is because they vote but can't "watch" the game. So they don't know if it is a rivalry or see injuries or anything like that.
2006-11-15 08:06:47 · answer #3 · answered by juicetke 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah they are factored. But look at all of the years, we have had split titles. Because the BCS and the AP had different #1 and #2. So the computers still have their say.
2006-11-15 08:02:37 · answer #4 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
honestly interior the desktops Florida and Michigan have been #2. Florida performed harder communities, Michigan performed a million no longer undemanding team and a pair of first rate communities. Florida become the final interior the SEC and Michigan become 2d interior the enormous 10. i think of calling this nonsense is a sprint overboard. And on your first answer, They ended their schedule at #2, yet Florida become at #4 with 2 video games left. so which you think of that Florida's opposition sport and SEC Championship sport shouldn't count style?
2016-12-30 12:52:46 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
the computers were orginally 2/3rds of the vote I believe. So since they were so important at the start people keep blaming them.
2006-11-15 08:34:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it is more criticizing the system and not the parts of it (i.e. computers and voters). The problem is that there are too many teams that are too close together and we will never know who is better until they play eachother!
2006-11-15 08:06:38 · answer #7 · answered by Keif 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The computers are much more objective and knowledgable about a team;s strength of schedule.
2006-11-15 15:25:06 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋