Coaches Poll 13 behind mighty UCF

[ifrog]

Coaches do not have time to watch games except for the videos of their next game. Usually their votes are based only on scores/previous years perceptions... or a surrogate on staff makes the vote, who also can't have that much time to watch or ready AP articles/etc data.

That’s no excuse. The coaches from some conferences have allegiance and will vote blindly for teams in their conference to make their wins look better . Others like Patterson will vote with an open mind. Either way this poll is [ Finebaum ]

 

[frog9999]

Polls are completely outdated. I’d rather have one computer formula where all the input are known and come directly from the games themselves, no human rankings, no weighted bias for different conferences. Not sure how to do that but I wish it existed.

Still suffers from the bias of the programmer. We need, at a minimum, an 8 team playoff

 

[hornedfrog86]

Just win out.

 

[asleep003]

Still suffers from the bias of the programmer. We need, at a minimum, an 8 team playoff

There is one sure fire way to make that happen. the B12/P12/invite the AAC(who regularly have 2-3 top 25 teams) to join us in a 4 team playoff with each league Champ and a wild card. The wild card could be the highest AP ranked team amongst the 3 conferences.

If the SEC/B10 and ACC want their own 4 team playoff Champ to challenge ours, then we've got that 8 team playoff. Before we get to that point ... sure the NCAA will convince the other P3 to compromise their resistance to 8. If not, then there will be 2 separate NCGs. Then in 1 to 3 years, 8 will come about anyway.

 

[asleep003]

That’s no excuse. The coaches from some conferences have allegiance and will vote blindly for teams in their conference to make their wins look better . Others like Patterson will vote with an open mind. Either way this poll is [ steaming pile of Orgeron ]

That's why "their previous years perceptions" was included.

 

[Frogs1983]

Glad this Poll has no bearing on playoffs other than probably influencing some CFP voting members. Totally ridiculous. Conference bias in the voting is very evident.

 

[TCUdirtbag]

Do we go to the Alamo Bowl if we lose to OU in Big 12-2 Championship game?

It depends. Let’s see what happens this week. NY6 or Alamo. Note the Alamo will most likely get the Pac-12 Champ game loser.

I think a more interesting question is, if we beat Baylor and then beat OU on a neutral field, do we pass OU in the rankings or not? Objectively we absolutely should—would we? I don’t know that the answer to that is “yes.”

 

[Hoosierfrog]

It depends. Let’s see what happens this week. NY6 or Alamo. Note the Alamo will most likely get the Pac-12 Champ game loser.

I think a more interesting question is, if we beat Baylor and then beat OU on a neutral field, do we pass OU in the rankings or not? Objectively we absolutely should—would we? I don’t know that the answer to that is “yes.”

In the unlikely event this scenario plays out, I think the rule is we are dropped 3 to 4 spots...

 

[SnoSki]

Still suffers from the bias of the programmer. We need, at a minimum, an 8 team playoff

Agreed. There’s no way to totally eliminate the inherit bias in the programmer but maybe you could reduce it. The old BCS formula was faulty because it highly valued the opinions of the AP and Harris Polls. I’d prefer one that giges more emphasis to record and other player-controlled inputs.

 

[GoFrog Yourself]

It depends. Let’s see what happens this week. NY6 or Alamo. Note the Alamo will most likely get the Pac-12 Champ game loser.

I think a more interesting question is, if we beat Baylor and then beat OU on a neutral field, do we pass OU in the rankings or not? Objectively we absolutely should—would we? I don’t know that the answer to that is “yes.”

We’d have a good argument but not many would listen. Beating them on a neutral field means more than a loss in Norman, IMO. But they did spank us pretty good up there

 

[frog9999]

I don't want it

 

[frog9999]

I don't want it, but a trip to the Alamo bowl wouldn't be all bad for me as my daughter lives in SA,

 

[Wexahu]

We’d have a good argument but not many would listen. Beating them on a neutral field means more than a loss in Norman, IMO. But they did spank us pretty good up there

If we beat them handily, we'd have a really good argument. If we win by a FG, it becomes a more difficult argument.

Just beat them how ever we can and then let the chips fall where they may.

 

[Wexahu]

Agreed. There’s no way to totally eliminate the inherit bias in the programmer but maybe you could reduce it. The old BCS formula was faulty because it highly valued the opinions of the AP and Harris Polls. I’d prefer one that giges more emphasis to record and other player-controlled inputs.

There are about 60 computer polls out there. In all but two of them, the highest we are is #9. Most have us in the #12-15 range.

We are #3 in one but that one also has Ohio State #2 and Missouri at #8 so not sure that one makes sense. We are #5 in another but that one has Wake Forest #10 and Notre Dame #22 so it has serious flaws too.

I really don't think letting computers handle the rankings would solve anything. We've done that in the past, and most everyone complained about it.

The current Massey rankings, which combines these +/- 60 polls.

1. Alabama
2. Wisconsin
3. Miami
4. Clemson
5. Georgia
6. Notre Dame
7. Oklahoma
8. Ohio State
9. Penn State
10. Auburn

I challenge someone to find even one poll of the 60 that you would be ok with and wouldn't spark universal outrage across college football if it was used.