- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
What has been most accurate in ranking the best teams: Polls, Computers or BCS?
Posted on 12/16/12 at 10:57 am
Posted on 12/16/12 at 10:57 am
Final rankings for every year
1998
Polls
1. Tennessee
2. Florida State
3. Ohio State
4. Kansas State
Computers
1. Tennessee
2. Florida State
3. Kansas State
4. UCLA
BCS
1. Tennessee
2. Florida State
3. Kansas State
4. Ohio State
1999
Polls
1. Florida State
2. Virginia Tech
3. Nebraska
4. Wisconsin
Computers
1. Florida State
2. Virginia Tech
3. Nebraska
4. Alabama
BCS
1. Florida State
2. Virginia Tech
3. Nebraska
4. Alabama
2000
Polls
1. Oklahoma
2. Miami
3. Florida State
4. Washington
Computers
1. Florida State
2. Oklahoma
3. Miami
4. Virginia Tech
BCS
1. Oklahoma
2. Florida State
3. Miami
4. Washington
2001
Polls
1. Miami
2. Oregon
3. Colorado
4. Nebraska
Computers
1. Miami
2. Nebraska
3. Colorado
4. Oregon
BCS
1. Miami
2. Nebraska
3. Colorado
4. Oregon
2002
Polls
1. Miami
2. Ohio State
3. Iowa
4. Georgia
Computers
1. Miami
2. Ohio State
3. Georgia
4. USC
BCS
1. Miami
2. Ohio State
3. Georgia
4. USC
2003
Polls
1. USC
2. LSU
3. Oklahoma
4. Michigan
Computers
1. Oklahoma
2. LSU
3. USC
4. Michigan
BCS
1. Oklahoma
2. LSU
3. USC
4. Michigan
2004
Polls
1. USC
2. Oklahoma
3. Auburn
4. California
Computers
1. Oklahoma
2. USC
3. Auburn
4. Texas
BCS
1. USC
2. Oklahoma
3. Auburn
4. Texas
2005
Polls
1. USC
2. Texas
3. Penn State
4. Ohio State
Computers
1. Texas
2. USC
3. Penn State
4. Ohio State
BCS
1. USC
2. Texas
3. Penn State
4. Ohio State
2006
Polls
1. Ohio State
2. Florida
3. Michigan
4. LSU
Computers
1. Ohio State
T-2. Florida
T-2. Michigan
4. USC
BCS
1. Ohio State
2. Florida
3. Michigan
4. LSU
2007
Polls
1. Ohio State
2. LSU
3. Oklahoma
4. Georgia
Computers
1. Virginia Tech
2. LSU
3. Ohio State
4. Missouri
BCS
1. Ohio State
2. LSU
3. Virginia Tech
4. Oklahoma
2008
Polls
1. Florida
2. Oklahoma
3. Texas
4. Alabama
Computers
1. Oklahoma
2. Texas
3. Florida
4. Texas Tech
BCS
1. Oklahoma
2. Florida
3. Texas
4. Alabama
2009
Polls
1. Alabama
2. Texas
3. TCU
4. Cincinnati
Computers
1. Alabama
2. Cincinnati
3. Texas
4. Florida
BCS
1. Alabama
2. Texas
3. Cincinnati
4. TCU
2010
Polls
1. Auburn
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Wisconsin
Computers
1. Auburn
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Oklahoma
BCS
1. Auburn
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Stanford
2011
Polls
1. LSU
2. Alabama
3. Oklahoma State
4. Stanford
Computers
1. LSU
2. Oklahoma State
3. Alabama
4. Kansas State
BCS
1. LSU
2. Alabama
3. Oklahoma State
4. Stanford
2012
Polls
1. Notre Dame
2. Alabama
3. Oregon
4. Florida
Computers
1. Notre Dame
2. Florida
3. Alabama
T-4. Kansas State
T-4. Stanford
BCS
1. Notre Dame
2. Alabama
3. Florida
4. Oregon
My rankings
1. Polls- Would have gotten the best 1 vs. 2 matchups by a mile (Oklahoma vs. Miami in 2000, Miami vs. Oregon in 2001, LSU vs. USC in 2003)
2. BCS- I really don't think their rankings have been that bad after a rough beginning.
3. Computers- Rankings have been pretty atrocious overall. One-loss Florida State ranked over Oklahoma in 2000, putting Colorado AND Nebraska over Oregon in 2001, would possibly have had TWO rematches in the NCG, Virginia Tech ranked ahead of LSU despite losing to LSU by 41 points earlier in the season, Cincinnati ranked over Texas in 2009, etc.....
1998
Polls
1. Tennessee
2. Florida State
3. Ohio State
4. Kansas State
Computers
1. Tennessee
2. Florida State
3. Kansas State
4. UCLA
BCS
1. Tennessee
2. Florida State
3. Kansas State
4. Ohio State
1999
Polls
1. Florida State
2. Virginia Tech
3. Nebraska
4. Wisconsin
Computers
1. Florida State
2. Virginia Tech
3. Nebraska
4. Alabama
BCS
1. Florida State
2. Virginia Tech
3. Nebraska
4. Alabama
2000
Polls
1. Oklahoma
2. Miami
3. Florida State
4. Washington
Computers
1. Florida State
2. Oklahoma
3. Miami
4. Virginia Tech
BCS
1. Oklahoma
2. Florida State
3. Miami
4. Washington
2001
Polls
1. Miami
2. Oregon
3. Colorado
4. Nebraska
Computers
1. Miami
2. Nebraska
3. Colorado
4. Oregon
BCS
1. Miami
2. Nebraska
3. Colorado
4. Oregon
2002
Polls
1. Miami
2. Ohio State
3. Iowa
4. Georgia
Computers
1. Miami
2. Ohio State
3. Georgia
4. USC
BCS
1. Miami
2. Ohio State
3. Georgia
4. USC
2003
Polls
1. USC
2. LSU
3. Oklahoma
4. Michigan
Computers
1. Oklahoma
2. LSU
3. USC
4. Michigan
BCS
1. Oklahoma
2. LSU
3. USC
4. Michigan
2004
Polls
1. USC
2. Oklahoma
3. Auburn
4. California
Computers
1. Oklahoma
2. USC
3. Auburn
4. Texas
BCS
1. USC
2. Oklahoma
3. Auburn
4. Texas
2005
Polls
1. USC
2. Texas
3. Penn State
4. Ohio State
Computers
1. Texas
2. USC
3. Penn State
4. Ohio State
BCS
1. USC
2. Texas
3. Penn State
4. Ohio State
2006
Polls
1. Ohio State
2. Florida
3. Michigan
4. LSU
Computers
1. Ohio State
T-2. Florida
T-2. Michigan
4. USC
BCS
1. Ohio State
2. Florida
3. Michigan
4. LSU
2007
Polls
1. Ohio State
2. LSU
3. Oklahoma
4. Georgia
Computers
1. Virginia Tech
2. LSU
3. Ohio State
4. Missouri
BCS
1. Ohio State
2. LSU
3. Virginia Tech
4. Oklahoma
2008
Polls
1. Florida
2. Oklahoma
3. Texas
4. Alabama
Computers
1. Oklahoma
2. Texas
3. Florida
4. Texas Tech
BCS
1. Oklahoma
2. Florida
3. Texas
4. Alabama
2009
Polls
1. Alabama
2. Texas
3. TCU
4. Cincinnati
Computers
1. Alabama
2. Cincinnati
3. Texas
4. Florida
BCS
1. Alabama
2. Texas
3. Cincinnati
4. TCU
2010
Polls
1. Auburn
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Wisconsin
Computers
1. Auburn
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Oklahoma
BCS
1. Auburn
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Stanford
2011
Polls
1. LSU
2. Alabama
3. Oklahoma State
4. Stanford
Computers
1. LSU
2. Oklahoma State
3. Alabama
4. Kansas State
BCS
1. LSU
2. Alabama
3. Oklahoma State
4. Stanford
2012
Polls
1. Notre Dame
2. Alabama
3. Oregon
4. Florida
Computers
1. Notre Dame
2. Florida
3. Alabama
T-4. Kansas State
T-4. Stanford
BCS
1. Notre Dame
2. Alabama
3. Florida
4. Oregon
My rankings
1. Polls- Would have gotten the best 1 vs. 2 matchups by a mile (Oklahoma vs. Miami in 2000, Miami vs. Oregon in 2001, LSU vs. USC in 2003)
2. BCS- I really don't think their rankings have been that bad after a rough beginning.
3. Computers- Rankings have been pretty atrocious overall. One-loss Florida State ranked over Oklahoma in 2000, putting Colorado AND Nebraska over Oregon in 2001, would possibly have had TWO rematches in the NCG, Virginia Tech ranked ahead of LSU despite losing to LSU by 41 points earlier in the season, Cincinnati ranked over Texas in 2009, etc.....
This post was edited on 12/16/12 at 10:59 am
6
Posted on 12/16/12 at 11:11 am to Bench McElroy
"If you ain't first, you're last." - Ricky Bobby
"2 is not a winner and three nobody remembers." - Nelly
"2 is not a winner and three nobody remembers." - Nelly
Posted on 12/16/12 at 11:13 am to Bench McElroy
Obviously the computers are merit based.
What do you want? The teams that deserve to be there, the best teams, or the best matchups? Because each are different. It all depends what you think is fair.
What do you want? The teams that deserve to be there, the best teams, or the best matchups? Because each are different. It all depends what you think is fair.
Posted on 12/16/12 at 11:38 am to Bench McElroy
Are you taking these rankings from after the bowls or before the bowls?
And what measure are you using to determine the "best" team?
And what measure are you using to determine the "best" team?
Posted on 12/16/12 at 11:43 am to Bench McElroy
quote:
Computers
Computers are excellent at ranking teams when they aren't handcuffed with nonsensical restrictions on the data they're allowed to use.
The computer rankings used in the BCS formula are not allowed to take MOV into consideration. Which is complete nonsense, and defeats the whole purpose of having a computer rankings.
I'll take a human poll over the computer rankings used in the BCS formula.
I'll take a good computer ranking over a human poll.
Posted on 12/16/12 at 11:46 am to Sophandros
quote:
And what measure are you using to determine the "best" team?
I'm not him, but there is only one suitable metric by which to jduge the best team. Namely: which team would be favored on a neutral field. Every other metric is simply a means to the end of answering that question.
Posted on 12/16/12 at 11:47 am to Sophandros
quote:
Are you taking these rankings from after the bowls or before the bowls?
Good question
Posted on 12/16/12 at 11:53 am to Sophandros
quote:
Are you taking these rankings from after the bowls or before the bowls?
Before the bowls of course. When has the BCS and the computers ever released their rankings after the bowl season?
Posted on 12/16/12 at 11:58 am to bobbyray21
That's still not a purely objective measure.
That said, I don't believe that there is a way to have a 100% objective determination of which team is the "best" team.
That said, I don't believe that there is a way to have a 100% objective determination of which team is the "best" team.
Posted on 12/16/12 at 12:00 pm to Bench McElroy
So you're essentially asking which of these three made the best prediction of the final outcome? Or are you sincerely asking which if those is closest to each of our opinions at the end of the day?
Posted on 12/16/12 at 12:15 pm to Sophandros
quote:
That said, I don't believe that there is a way to have a 100% objective determination of which team is the "best" team.
Well, it's "my" team of course.
Posted on 12/16/12 at 12:50 pm to Bench McElroy
4. The system got it right in 06 and 08. 
Posted on 12/16/12 at 1:48 pm to SwaggerCopter
quote:
"If you ain't first, you're last." - Ricky Bobby
"2 is not a winner and three nobody remembers." - Nelly
Says the guy whose team appears in the top 4 a total of 0 times in the BCS era.
Posted on 12/16/12 at 1:54 pm to hookem7
Kind of a pointless comparison, since the BCS is just throwing the polls and computers together.
You also can't really judge by the outcomes of games because all pollsters and most computers will rank an undefeated AQ team ahead of a team with one loss. If 2 then beats 1 in the title game, that doesn't prove the rankings were wrong.
You also can't really judge by the outcomes of games because all pollsters and most computers will rank an undefeated AQ team ahead of a team with one loss. If 2 then beats 1 in the title game, that doesn't prove the rankings were wrong.
Posted on 12/16/12 at 1:58 pm to bobbyray21
quote:
The computer rankings used in the BCS formula are not allowed to take MOV into consideration. Which is complete nonsense, and defeats the whole purpose of having a computer rankings.
The disaster that was 2003 (Oklahoma getting beaten by 28 points in the Big 12 title game and still being #1) was a direct result of the computers using margin of victory, which was why it was removed from the equation.
Posted on 12/16/12 at 2:10 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
The disaster that was 2003 (Oklahoma getting beaten by 28 points in the Big 12 title game and still being #1) was a direct result of the computers using margin of victory, which was why it was removed from the equation.
I thought the issue was SOS. They took the quality win bonus out of the formula.
Plus the real controversy was that a media darling got left out, and the pollsters were butthurt about it so they arranged it for the voters to override objective data.
Posted on 12/16/12 at 2:44 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
Plus the real controversy was that a media darling got left out, and the pollsters were butthurt about it so they arranged it for the voters to override objective data.
USC may well have whipped LSU in the dome that year. They were, in the words of Les Miles, undefeated in regulation. The computers are flawed, and always have been. It's the primary reason that the BCS is being shelved, and rightfully so.
Posted on 12/16/12 at 5:08 pm to loweralabamatrojan
quote:
USC may well have whipped LSU in the dome that year.
According to the same pundits who thought Oklahoma was the best team ever? Or who just two years later thought the condoms were better than the sips?
quote:
The computers are flawed, and always have been.
Pollsters are every bit as flawed. And they're even worse than the computers because they don't apply a consistent set of standards. The "rules" change depending on the brand names involved.
Posted on 12/17/12 at 2:12 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:Maybe like the pundits who just knew that OU was going to blow USC's doors off.
According to the same pundits who thought Oklahoma was the best team ever? Or who just two years later thought the condoms were better than the sips?
Posted on 12/17/12 at 2:25 pm to loweralabamatrojan
None of this matters, everything is now based on ESPN's Eye Test, as we learned last year, when one team had a far superior résumé than the second team selected to play in the BCSNCG.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News