On Saragin's ranking Texas has beat #5 OSU(#2 SOS) and USC has beat #7 ND (#4 SOS). Texas has #30 SOS and USC has #24 SOS. He has a home field advantage factor and he counts wins vs top 10 & top 30 teams with an additional factor. But since the computers can't use margin of victory the base info they use is SOS & W-L. He has Texas #2 a bit behind USC. The BCS sucks - a playoff is the only true way to settle who is #1. The computers I think are better than the human polls though because they "see" all the games and if the BCS didn't put restraints on them their results would be completely unbiased from the coaches & polsters who vote on watching 2-4 games a week and watching highlights on ESPN and reading the box score (I'm sure the coaches have a big bias toward their own conference because it benefits their own SOS!)
Alright, well Im glad I could be given some insight into the BSC computers that I have stayed pretty ignorant towards. Although I hate the system, I will stay respectful until they hopefully come up with a better overall method, which would not neccessarily have to be without the computers but with obviously some sort of playoff. Hell if it wasn't for the BCS, I don't think my team would have had a shot at the National Championship. I guess thats the nature of the beast, stay quiet when your doing good and it's working for you but moan and b**** when your not doing so hot and the slightest change happens. With all that I have said I can honestly say that I wish USC the worse but still hope that Texas can play them in the Rose and whip the living **** out of them.
A side note on Margin of Victory, the computer polls that had MOV taken out are less accurate than they were with MOV in them. Sagarin still publishes his original computer poll on his website as well the PC version used for the BCS, because he considers it more accurate. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt05.htm What's more important, PC or accuracy?
Wow!! I didn't know that 1 game had so much influence on our #1 ranking right now. I guess it had nothing to do with having the 2nd longest winning streak in the NCAA and being the only team with a top 10 ranked offense and defense. It's all because we beat Kansas?
Just curious. I traveled to BR for the LSU game vs. Florida a couple weeks ago (I'm a senior at UF). I thought the fans were real hospitable overall (there are always exceptions at any school), beautiful campus, and a real nice stadium. The new tiger habitat looks awesome also. Too bad we couldn't upset you guys at home.
Snicker all you want, but the logic is pretty easy to follow. Just as much as UT winning last year counts toward this year's initial rankings, so does UT's losses.
OK, so let me get this straight. UT should not be #1 because of a game last year but the computer rankings that are only using this years data now have UT #1. Very logical indeed.
I don't think he's saying they shouldn't be, but that they wouldn't be. However, I disagree. I believe that with the players coming back, UT still would've been ranked higher than Georgia or Viriginia Tech to start the season and would end up being in the same position now.
I'm saying the UT #1 computer ranking does not factor in last year at all - while in the beggining they use some of last years data by now it is deleted and only this years games effect the ranking.
Oh, I'm with you. I think his argument is that had we lost that Kansas game, the trickle down effect would've been we would not have started at #2 to begin the season. It's a bogus argument, IMO, because I still think we would've been ranked ahead of VaTech and Georgia in the preseason regardless.
My argument isn't that UT lost that Kansas game. UT won that Kansas game. Micah just likes putting words in my mouth, I guess he never read my earlier posts where we laid out the fact that we are dissecting a hypothetical scenario. However, IF UT had lost, they wouldn't have been ranked #2 going into the year. How can you not see that? UT would have probably ended up playing in the Cotton or Holiday bowl.. none of the Vince Young magic in the Rose Bowl would have happened, UT would not be front page national news going into 2005, period. They would have a much longer way to climb in the polls. The same holds true for every team, how you perform last year factors in very heavily to your initial rankings the next year. Would Georgia or VaTech or FSU or whoever have started out ranked higher than UT? Maybe, we'll never know though. I think VaTech would have been, at least.
I never said they would be #2 preseason, just that I don't think that had we lost to Kansas last year and subsequently not made it to the Rose Bowl, that we wouldn't be in our current position. IIRC, Texas has been ranked in the top 10 pre-season for the last few years, including coming off a horrible Holiday Bowl loss in 2003 to Washington State. All of this is r****ded though. Texas did beat Kansas, did go to the Rose Bowl and is currently sitting atop the BCS standings.
I booked my (refundable) flight for the Rose Bowl yesterday. Has anyone else done this? I'm still praying for a UT/LSU championship game, even though it means I won't be able to pull for UT.
It's possible, although not very likely. USC could lose, and I don't see an overrated VT team getting past BC, Miami and FSU. Without Shockley, Florida should be able to beat Georgia, and if LSU beats Alabama and then goes onto the SECCG and plays either Florida or Georgia, it would surely catapult them past Miami if somehow they win out, and could possibly move us past UCLA, however if they are the ones to beat USC it could complicate things unless they lose a game up to that point. Like I said, not very possible, but I like to think it still is.
