Random BCS Facts: Polls vs. Computer Rankings

There were 2 years that a team made the BCS NCG without their poll average in the top 2. Name the years and team.

-Nebraska 2001 was 4 in both polls, Oregon was 2 and Colorado was 3.

-Oklahoma 2003 was No. 3 in both polls, USC was 1 in both

There have been 4 years when a team's computer score was not in the top 2 and made the BCS NCG, name the year and teams.

-Alabama 2011 finished No. 3, Oklahoma St. No. 2

-Texas 2009 was No. 3, Cincinatti No. 2

-Florida 2008 was No. 3, Texas No. 2

-Ohio State 2007 was No. 3, Virginia Tech No. 1


The point is, from 98-2003 the BCS formula put greater emphasis on the math and automation, vs. the polls. IMO 2001 scenerio was ridiculous with Nebraska failing to win its division and Oregon should have gone. 2003 was screwy but debatable. Since then, and 2/3 of years before, the polls had their way.

Since the automated formulas were de-emphasized starting in 2004, the computers have disagreed with voters half the time about who the top 2 teams should be. I have generally disliked that the voters have so much power, but 3/4 computer generated matchups would have been aweful--only 2011 was truly debatable. 2007=LSU/VT rematch, 2008 = OU/UT rematch, 2009=Alabama/Cincy?

I'm glad those matchups didn't happen and maybe there is more to the eyeball test then credit is given.