EA: The Poll/BCS Ranking Logic is BROKE

[Buckeyes_Doc]

Quote: Originally Posted by ycbs

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]

Quote: Originally Posted by Buckeyes_Doc

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]

Quote: Originally Posted by ycbs

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]

Quote: Originally Posted by ycbs

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]

Quote: Originally Posted by ycbs

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]

Quote: Originally Posted by Buckeyes_Doc

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]

Here's the BCS formula for automatic qualifier status:

Quote:

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. 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. 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]

Quote: Originally Posted by Card-me

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.