Blog Entry

Analyzing the polls

Posted on: September 8, 2009 4:22 pm
Edited on: September 8, 2009 4:32 pm
 

Thoughts on the first regular-season polls of the season:

If the BCS bowls started today (based on compilation of the polls and Jerry Palm’s collegebcs.com)

BCS title game: Alabama vs. USC
Rose Bowl: Ohio State vs. Cal
Fiesta Bowl: Texas vs. BYU
Sugar Bowl: Florida vs. Oklahoma State
Orange Bowl: Cincinnati vs. Virginia Tech

Top 10 in the BCS (Only a few of the computers are available so this is very preliminary but still interesting. These are Palm's standings from collegebcs.com.)

1. USC
2. Alabama
3. Florida
4. Texas
5. Oklahoma State
6. Ohio State
7. BYU
8. Boise State
9. Penn State
10.  LSU


Strange

Florida lost two first-place votes in the AP poll (from 58 to 56) and gained three votes in the coaches poll (53 to 56).


Biggest gainers, most slippage

Brigham Young, up 12 spots in coaches (from No. 24 to No. 12)
Oklahoma down 11 spots in coaches (from No. 3 to No. 14)


Game of the week

No. 3 USC and No. 8/7 Ohio State remains a top 10 game. Ohio State has lost its last five against top five teams. That’s the second-longest streak in school history.


The penalty for playing Charleston Southern

Florida’s first-place margin shrank in both polls  -- from 74 points to 69 in AP and from 80 to 65 points in coaches.


Barely Out

Oregon State No. 26 in AP. Michigan State No. 26 in coaches

New to the AP: Missouri, Cincinnati, Miami. New to coaches: Kansas, Cincinnati, Miami.



Another take

SI's Andy Staples weighs in

Comments

Since: Jan 24, 2007
Posted on: September 11, 2009 2:50 pm
 

Analyzing the polls

Sew some oats.  BSU has only been on the map for the last 5 years.  If BSU were in any kind of conference they may not look so good.  Playing cupcakes keeps the team healthy, no travel (When was the last time BSU left the 50 mile radius of that pond?) and increases media attention.  Play somebody then talk smack about other conferences.



Since: Oct 2, 2006
Posted on: September 9, 2009 10:49 pm
 

Analyzing the polls

Yea Nitro, and they got crushed.  I know you Buckeye fans are fanatical just like the rest of us Big 10 peeps but OSU got smoked. The game sucked. You can call out all the victories in 07 you want but it was a total mismatch. Look, I root for all Big ten teams except when they play MSU but there is no way your going to make me believe OSU deserved to be in that title game in 07 regardless of the record.



Since: Dec 4, 2007
Posted on: September 9, 2009 7:39 pm
 

Analyzing the polls

You make salient points but I dont know of a single other sport where the lack of a clear champion is considered a good thing.
I would say that's because you buy into this "if you don't have a playoff, you don't have a real champion" business. The rules are clear, the system is in place, the players (coaches, schools, conferences, etc.) are all signatories to that system, and what comes out of it is ... a CLEAR CHAMPION. There might be lots of people who disagree, but so what? There's still people smoking over the 6-loss NYGiants just getting the chance to beat the unbeaten NEPats in that league's system for choosing a champ. The Giants are still the clear champ.

There simply wouldnt be as much argument and I think thats a good thing. 
On that point, I have to disagree. Playoff seedings and bracketology will always cause arguments. There's oodles of examples of a) the two best teams ending up in the same half of a bracket, b) one team avoiding the best team in the playoffs because they were were upset in the other half of the bracket, etc etc. And no, a playoff winner doesn't beat everybody in the tournament; they don't play more than half of them on the way to the title. Who knows if that champ could beat everybody, and if you shuffled the bracket, whether they would end up your "clear champ"? 

Playoffs did not hurt college basketball nor its popularity.
No, all a "million-team" March Madness did to CBB is push all meaningful games from the regular season to the postseason. That's all ...

If you really love the politicking and arguing then we are better off getting rid of the BCS and going back to the old polls-determine-the-national champion-system.  The BCS system has actually created new, much more boring arguments that ignore tradition and reward large conference TV contracts.  Read the posts on here lately, they are mostly about the mid-major vs. power conference debate rather than the tradition of the individual schools.  Even the new Pac-10 commissioner stated that his goal was to improve the overall status of the conference in football as he knows that is the key to getting into the BCS games rather than the strength of USC (remember that USC got left out of at least one title game because the pac-10 was considered a lesser conference). 
A lotta truth there. I wouldn't have any problems going back to the previous poll-based system. At least that way, the regular season continues to really mean something on an individual game basis.

To distill, the BCS has changed the arguments from being about tradition to being about money.  In other words, the college game that we know and love is already dead, it is time for a change.
Sorry to pop your bubble, but big-time CFB has always been about money. At least, in part. The "tradition" schools built up CFB into the business that it is currently, and that's in part why they resist a playoff that would give WAC, MWC, etc., schools a chance at doing a 2007 NYGiants thing and getting hot or lucky (which is what it would take) and winning the NC. Mind you, it's not fear. The Bamas, USCs, LSUs, Ohio States of the world aren't afraid of playing anybody. It's a matter of having EARNED the right to play for all the marbles.



Since: Sep 28, 2007
Posted on: September 9, 2009 6:47 pm
 

Analyzing the polls

I am as sentimental as the next person and absolutely love the history and tradition of college football.  That being said, I just cannot get behind the "chaos is fun" theory that so many espouse.  You make salient points but I dont know of a single other sport where the lack of a clear champion is considered a good thing.  There will always be plenty to argue about even with a playoff system, e.g. what teams got leaft out, what teams would have played better if so-and-so hadnt been injured or suspended, which team got the benefit of the whistles, even the order of the seedings and the matchups.  There simply wouldnt be as much argument and I think thats a good thing.  Playoffs did not hurt college basketball nor its popularity.  If you really love the politicking and arguing then we are better off getting rid of the BCS and going back to the old polls-determine-the-national champion-system.  The BCS system has actually created new, much more boring arguments that ignore tradition and reward large conference TV contracts.  Read the posts on here lately, they are mostly about the mid-major vs. power conference debate rather than the tradition of the individual schools.  Even the new Pac-10 commissioner stated that his goal was to improve the overall status of the conference in football as he knows that is the key to getting into the BCS games rather than the strength of USC (remember that USC got left out of at least one title game because the pac-10 was considered a lesser conference).  To distill, the BCS has changed the arguments from being about tradition to being about money.  In other words, the college game that we know and love is already dead, it is time for a change.



Since: Nov 22, 2006
Posted on: September 9, 2009 6:00 pm
 

Analyzing the polls

Crap!!!



Since: Dec 4, 2007
Posted on: September 9, 2009 4:06 pm
 

Analyzing the polls

Go read this UGA fan's comments and tell me that CFB's regular season is ANYTHING like any other sport's regular season.




One loss on opening day vs. Okie St. and this guys is saying, "No way are we winning anything this year, we are already out of it." Now that might or might be true when all the games are played. But just think about the meaning of that ONE GAME to that Dawg fan. Put in a playoff system and that aspect of CFB as we know it goes away ...



Since: Dec 4, 2007
Posted on: September 9, 2009 3:43 pm
 

Analyzing the polls

There is a lot wrong with your argument.  Remember LSU winning it all with 2 losses?

So if 2-loss LSU would have won a playoff tournament, how would those 2 losses be any different?

Or Nebraska sneaking into the NC game after losing to Colorador by 4 touchdowns?

Followed the rules, got in. Your question is about what?

A playoff is still the only way to determine a champion.

False. Crystal football trophies say "Champion" on them. Lots of different ways to "determine a champion." You and your pro-playoff buddies are the ones who are attempting to re-define what "champion" means. It is, by definition, ANY way that a set of rules determines its Top Dog. ANY way ...

The playoff system hasn't exactly hurt college basketball,...

False. Hardly anybody pays attention to the CBB regular season, and certainly would give a hoot about ANY GIVEN GAME because, individually, they almost never mean anything.

...nor eliminated arguments about which team or conference is better.
I thought you guys say that a playoff doesn't determine which team is "better" or best. I thought it was just about "determining a true champion." Nothing about best or better or any of that stuff.

But we can all forget about a playoff, it won't happen.


It was worth the reading time ... we finally got to something you said that was true.



Since: Jan 17, 2007
Posted on: September 9, 2009 2:47 pm
 

Analyzing the polls

There is a lot wrong with your argument.  Remember LSU winning it all with 2 losses? Or Nebraska sneaking into the NC game after losing to Colorador by 4 touchdowns?  A playoff is still the only way to determine a champion.  The playoff system hasn't exactly hurt college basketball, nor eliminated arguments about which team or conference is better.  But we can all forget about a playoff, it won't happen.



Since: Sep 29, 2006
Posted on: September 9, 2009 2:17 pm
 

Analyzing the polls

Oh yeah!

If Dodd could majically make these teams play for the BCS right now, without six wins, then I could say that if the Big 12 regular season were over then A&M would finish in the Big 12 south higher than Oklahoma. What if the Big 12 were to called after one non-confrence game?

What if the media started calling health care reform by it's true name "Socialism".

I see the kind of what if crap people that write or say for news these days and I think; What if we had some journalist that were worth a crap in this country.

The media in the USA is worse than media in a third world muslim country. Why? Because in a third world muslim country the media is told what to say. In the USA our media is free to come up with this kind of crap on their own.

Anybody see Obama let the third grader ask why we don't have universal health care in this country? Our media let it be shown of TV without blasting Obama for rigging the questions.

Anybody remember Sadam Hussein's Baby Milk factory on the news where the workers actually had coveralls with the words "Baby Milk" printed on them. Baby Milk? Come on.

Obama's question asking grade school subject and Saddam's Baby Milk ploy are the same kind of journalism -POOR! Just like Dodd's article.



Since: Sep 29, 2006
Posted on: September 9, 2009 2:03 pm
 

Analyzing the polls

Based on NCAA rules you are all wet!

You have to have 6 wins to play in a Bowl Game.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com