EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

[youALREADYknow]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

The problem has been and will continue to be that EA only seems to use their poll logic to determine BCS rankings.

In the real world, computer polls actually matter which means that strength of schedule and quality wins actually have an impact on the formula.

Since we're essentially playing a computer game I have no idea why EA refuses to include the computer poll logic or at least make an effort to simulate the logic of the many formulas out there for ranking college sports teams (see Sagarin, etc).

I have little faith that EA will ever perfect the art of mimicking human polls since they have obviously decided to cater to the notion that every school deserves to play a title game.

[georgiafan]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

Unless you win all your games and dont make the title game then you have no reason to complain. They won all there games and you didn't it's as simple as that. Also how old is the OP?

Im sure your schedule was tougher then that. But strength of schedule isnt a factor in the BCS and its why you are seeing more and more top teams play crappy non conf games bc they can still make it in the title game.

[ycbs]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

Very true. I do agree with the Bama poster on Nevada though. Nevada was behind Bama in the BCS rankings, he beats a #15 Florida squad, and Nevada jumps a slot? And the fact Nevada was idle that week makes it more of a stretch, unless something happened and all Nevada's opponents won that week, too. Really would like to know what happened with Nevada's and Bama's opponents as a whole that CCG week. Might shed some light on why Nevada jumped Bama, but no, it's not completely unrealistic, but odd that they switched rankings.

I don't care what any other teams did that might have boosted Nevada's SOS. If Alabama was ahead of Nevada going into the week, and Bama beats UF in the SEC title game and Nevada is idle, there is no way in hell Nevada should jump Bama in any poll on Earth. So, I'm with the OP on this. Now, if Nevada was ahead of Bama going into the week, I wouldn't have a problem with them staying ahead. The key to this scenario is that Nevada was behind Bama. Bama wins (a HUGE win, BTW) and Nevada is idle. Nevada shouldn't get rewarded for and Bama should get punished for Nevada being idle.

However, undefeated WVU should definitely be ahead of 1-loss Bama, due to the fact that they're a BCS conference team (even though they are in, by far, the weakest BCS conference).

[Buckeyes_Doc]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

I don't care what any other teams did that might have boosted Nevada's SOS. If Alabama was ahead of Nevada going into the week, and Bama beats UF in the SEC title game and Nevada is idle, there is no way in hell Nevada should jump Bama in any poll on Earth. So, I'm with the OP on this.

However, undefeated WVU should definitely be ahead of 1-loss Bama, due to the fact that they're a BCS conference team (even though they are in, by far, the weakest BCS conference).

I'm not saying the Big East is a powerful conference, but by far the weakest? I do not think that is accurate.

The Big East is 17-6 in bowl games since 2006.

[ycbs]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

I'm not saying the Big East is a powerful conference, but by far the weakest? I do not think that is accurate.

Which BCS conference do you think is worse than the Big East? Heck, personally, I'd rank the new MWC conference ahead of the Big East.

[PrettyT11]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

Which BCS conference do you think is worse than the Big East? Heck, personally, I'd rank the new MWC conference ahead of the Big East.

Not with Utah and BYU leaving. If they both leave the Big East is better and it's not even close. Aside from Boise and TCU I would take Pitt,WVU,Cinncy,Rutgers, Louisville, and UConn over every team in the MWC.

[Mtneer08]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

I don't care what any other teams did that might have boosted Nevada's SOS. If Alabama was ahead of Nevada going into the week, and Bama beats UF in the SEC title game and Nevada is idle, there is no way in hell Nevada should jump Bama in any poll on Earth. So, I'm with the OP on this. Now, if Nevada was ahead of Bama going into the week, I wouldn't have a problem with them staying ahead. The key to this scenario is that Nevada was behind Bama. Bama wins (a HUGE win, BTW) and Nevada is idle. Nevada shouldn't get rewarded for and Bama should get punished for Nevada being idle.

However, undefeated WVU should definitely be ahead of 1-loss Bama, due to the fact that they're a BCS conference team (even though they are in, by far, the weakest BCS conference).

They wont be this year but for 2-3 years over the last 5 they have been better than the ACC. So no way are they by far the worst.

[Buckeyes_Doc]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

Which BCS conference do you think is worse than the Big East? Heck, personally, I'd rank the new MWC conference ahead of the Big East.

The ACC has been the worst conference. This year the ACC will be much better though. And the new MWC looks good, but with BYU and Utah leaving..not so much.

[Card-me]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

The ACC has been the worst conference. This year the ACC will be much better though. And the new MWC looks good, but with BYU and Utah leaving..not so much.

I completely agree with this. The Big East will be down this year and the ACC will be good with UNC, Miami, Florida State, etc. But over the last 3 or 4 seasons, I think the Big East has clearly been better. At least if you go by bowls, which is all you really have to go by when comparing conferences. WVU losing to Florida State kinda hurt last year, but that's one game in how many? Not to mention it was Bobby Bowden's last game and it was in Florida.

What hurts the Big East is two things: 1)only eight teams, and 2)lack of large/passionate fanbases due to being mostly basketball schools. Those lead to the perception that the Big East is weak. Plus, the 06 an 07 seasons really hurt. If Louisville beats Rutgers in 06, they probably go to the NC and have a good chance at beating tOSU, or at least be competitive. If WVU doesn't do.... whatever that Pitt game was... I think they go the NC and have a good shot as well. All of a sudden, the conference is in a completely different position. But it's hard to argue the what-ifs (although it's not like the ACC made it to the championship game lately either... the last time one of their teams made it was Miami who was still in the Big East).

And to argue that the MWC is better than the Big East is an absolute joke. The've got a couple good teams at the top, but the bottom is a mess compared to the bottom of the Big East.

[Jeff George]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

Here's the BCS formula for automatic qualifier status:

1. The conference must finish among the top six in a listing of the average of each conference's highest ranked team at the end of each regular season.
2. The conference must finish among the top six in a listing of the average computer rankings of every conference's full roster of teams at the end of each regular season.
3. The conference must accumulate a score of at least 50 percent of the highest ranking conference's score in the Adjusted Top-25 Performance Ranking, which measures how many teams each conference placed in the BCS top 25 and adjusts for conference size.

Automatic Qualifying Formula Breakdown For 2008-09


Prong 1
1. Big 12 (1.5)
1. SEC (1.5)
3. Mountain West (5)
4. Pac-10 (6)
5. Big East (7.5)
6. WAC (7.5)
7. Big Ten (9)
8. ACC (11.5)


Prong 2
1. SEC (38.63)
2. ACC (40.34)
3. Big East (42.69)
4. Big 12 (46.38)
5. Pac-10 (49.85)
6. Big Ten (50.91)
7. Mountain West (58.61)
8. WAC (72.28)


Prong 3
1. SEC (22, 100 percent)
2. Big Ten (20.25, 92 percent)
3. Big 12 (20, 90.9 percent)
3. MWC (20, 90.9 percent)
5. Pac-10 (15.75, 71.6 percent)
6. Big East (15, 68.2 percent)
7. ACC (12, 54.5 percent)
8. WAC (8.75, 39.8 percent)

So basically what those criteria show is that for the last few years, the Mountain West's best teams are ranked among the best, but the conference as a whole lacks depth. Once you get past those top three teams, there's a steep drop-off in quality.

The Big East and ACC show the opposite. Generally, they don't have as many ranked teams, and the teams that are ranked aren't ranked highly. But the conferences as a whole have much more depth, such as the Big East sending 6 of 8 teams to bowl games the last two years, and the ACC sending 10 of 12 teams to bowl games in 2008.

[Jeff George]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

At least if you go by bowls, which is all you really have to go by when comparing conferences.

There are a lot more regular-season non-conference games than there are bowl games.

[youALREADYknow]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

The Mountain West got screwed over by Utah leaving. It's truly a shame that Utah sold out, especially after all of the damn complaining (and litigation) in 2008/9 about the BCS monopoly.

If the MWC could have kept Utah and rid itself of one of the bottom feeders then they could have had a chance. Not only would they have had a chance, but they would have arguably been the 3rd best conference behind the SEC and Big XII.

[ycbs]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

Wow, didn't know my anti-Big East comment would start such a firestorm. Good discussion, though. I wasn't aware of the Big East's bowl record of late. It's pretty impressive. That said, I guess most of my opinion on the Big East is perception-based. With the exception of WVU, I just don't have any fear whatsoever of any other Big East team. I don't see a sustained level of excellence from any other program. Sure, teams like Cincinnati, Rutgers, and Pitt have had a good season or two here and there, but it never lasts and it seems like they always choke when they finally make it to a big game against against other BCS conference teams. I'm not talking about the Meineke Bowl, or all those other meaningless bowls, but the BCS bowls.

Several people have said the ACC's the worst BCS conference, but I just think the top 6-8 teams in the ACC would do exceptionally well with a Big East conference schedule. If I were to do a fantasy draft of teams from the Big East and ACC (and keep in mind this isn't based on any team's one particular season or how I think this season will play out record-wise), I would take Virginia Tech, Miami, Georgia Tech, UNC, Florida State and Clemson before I would take the first Big East school (WVU).

[Mtneer08]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

Several people have said the ACC's the worst BCS conference, but I just think the top 6-8 teams in the ACC would do exceptionally well with a Big East conference schedule. If I were to do a fantasy draft of teams from the Big East and ACC (and keep in mind this isn't based on any team's one particular season or how I think this season will play out record-wise), I would take Virginia Tech, Miami, Georgia Tech, UNC, Florida State and Clemson before I would take the first Big East school (WVU).

You say your not but obviously you are going by what you expect of those teams this year or you havent been following college football much over last 7 years. WVU has been better than all of those teams over that time span with the exception of MAYBE Virginia Tech. WVU even beat UNC and Geogia Tech in bowl games over that time(and Oklahoma and Georgia). I dont want to argue over conferences but I dont understand what you are going by with picking all those teams over any big east team. Hype? Popularity?

[Buckeyes_Doc]

Re: EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

It has to be popularity and perception. The Big East is probably the least popular BCS conference in college football. The Big East is a small conference made up of mainly basketball schools. Also the Big East doesn't have that major team in the conference with a big fanbase and a lot of tradition.

The Big Ten has Ohio State and Michigan
SEC has Alabama and Florida
PAC 10 has USC
Big 12 Oklahoma and Texas
ACC Florida State and Miami

The Big East fails to have a team that can compare with the teams above. Pittsburgh has history but nothing that compares to the power schools.

This causes people to believe the Big East is weak because it doesn't have a lot of history and doesn't have that big football program in it. But the Big East has proven to be stronger and better then people give them credit for. Going 17-6 in Bowl Games since 2006 is phenomenal, including wins over BCS schools. It is just perception, lack of tradition, and fanbase that hurts the Big East, not really the play on the field.

The ACC has been pretty bad in recent years, with multiple teams losing to FCS opponents and a poor bowl record. The ACC should be strong this year though.