Tnvolfan68
Senior Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2004
- Messages
- 441
- Likes
- 0
Sheck out their comment on the Polls::
Ivan
That's what we get when Editor Joe gets involved in coming up with the nagging questions. I thought it was a good idea, because no one nags better than an editor. But we get a question about BCS formulas, which I generally believe are as accurate as Tuesday's exit polls.
The question is better than what I suggested, though: Will Geno win the office pool before the end of the second Bush Administration?
My general belief is that at this stage of the season, polls are more accurate than the formula, because the computer formulas need data to be accurate, data that only comes with each week of games. However, when I study the polls and the standings as they stand this week, there's no dispute in my mind.
I am a firm believer that Utah is one of the six best teams in the nation -- a distinction created by the BCS, because if Utah makes the top six, it guarantees itself a bid to a BCS bowl -- so the standings look pretty good to me.
My attitude will change as the Utes begin to drop after facing three more Mountain West games, but for now, go with it, especially given the fiasco in the coaches' poll.
The ranking of Georgia at No. 5 and Tennessee at No. 11 is a zit on the face of college football, and it can't dry up fast enough for the game's credibility. It's embarrassing, doubly so because the coaches refuse to make their votes public.
The mere asking of this question points to one of the major flaws of College Football As We Know It. Traditional powers are assumed to be worthy of their spot in the polls. Of course, USC and Oklahoma should be 1-2. They were up there last season. They should be up there this season, and every season. Traditional ne'er-do-wells -- before Tedford, Cal had had two good seasons in my lifetime, and I'm officially middle-aged, although much, much younger than my friend to your right -- are assumed to be suspect. That goes for Cal and Utah.
What I am getting around to saying -- hey kids, here's an example of that journalistic phenomenon known as "Burying the Lead"; Don't try this in your homework -- is that the polls are not doing themselves proud these days.
Geno
This is why there's drug testing in the workplace:
Tennessee has one loss. Georgia has one loss. Tennessee beat Georgia at Georgia, 19-14. So naturally, the coaches poll has the Vols ranked No. 11 and the Bulldogs No. 5. Apparently the voting coaches didn't get their Sunday paper that weekend. Meanwhile, the media poll has Tennessee ninth and Georgia eighth. This makes sense how?
But my new best friend, the BCS standings, has Tennessee eighth and Georgia ninth.
Is Georgia a better team? Probably. Maybe. But on a Saturday in Athens it wasn't, so why not vote so?
I'm also trying to figure out how the poll voters have Texas ahead of Utah, or Cal ahead of Wisconsin. Say what you want about Utah's schedule, but the Longhorns have played exactly two teams who now have plus-.500 records -- Texas Tech and Oklahoma. And I know Cal is very good, but with the exception of No. 1 USC, I don't think anybody will be bronzing this season's Pac-10 lineup of teams. The Big Ten isn't any better, but until Wisconsin loses a game, I give the benefit of the doubt to the Badgers.
My only complaint with this week's BCS Standings: Michigan at No. 11 is much too low.
Ivan
That's what we get when Editor Joe gets involved in coming up with the nagging questions. I thought it was a good idea, because no one nags better than an editor. But we get a question about BCS formulas, which I generally believe are as accurate as Tuesday's exit polls.
The question is better than what I suggested, though: Will Geno win the office pool before the end of the second Bush Administration?
My general belief is that at this stage of the season, polls are more accurate than the formula, because the computer formulas need data to be accurate, data that only comes with each week of games. However, when I study the polls and the standings as they stand this week, there's no dispute in my mind.
I am a firm believer that Utah is one of the six best teams in the nation -- a distinction created by the BCS, because if Utah makes the top six, it guarantees itself a bid to a BCS bowl -- so the standings look pretty good to me.
My attitude will change as the Utes begin to drop after facing three more Mountain West games, but for now, go with it, especially given the fiasco in the coaches' poll.
The ranking of Georgia at No. 5 and Tennessee at No. 11 is a zit on the face of college football, and it can't dry up fast enough for the game's credibility. It's embarrassing, doubly so because the coaches refuse to make their votes public.
The mere asking of this question points to one of the major flaws of College Football As We Know It. Traditional powers are assumed to be worthy of their spot in the polls. Of course, USC and Oklahoma should be 1-2. They were up there last season. They should be up there this season, and every season. Traditional ne'er-do-wells -- before Tedford, Cal had had two good seasons in my lifetime, and I'm officially middle-aged, although much, much younger than my friend to your right -- are assumed to be suspect. That goes for Cal and Utah.
What I am getting around to saying -- hey kids, here's an example of that journalistic phenomenon known as "Burying the Lead"; Don't try this in your homework -- is that the polls are not doing themselves proud these days.
Geno
This is why there's drug testing in the workplace:
Tennessee has one loss. Georgia has one loss. Tennessee beat Georgia at Georgia, 19-14. So naturally, the coaches poll has the Vols ranked No. 11 and the Bulldogs No. 5. Apparently the voting coaches didn't get their Sunday paper that weekend. Meanwhile, the media poll has Tennessee ninth and Georgia eighth. This makes sense how?
But my new best friend, the BCS standings, has Tennessee eighth and Georgia ninth.
Is Georgia a better team? Probably. Maybe. But on a Saturday in Athens it wasn't, so why not vote so?
I'm also trying to figure out how the poll voters have Texas ahead of Utah, or Cal ahead of Wisconsin. Say what you want about Utah's schedule, but the Longhorns have played exactly two teams who now have plus-.500 records -- Texas Tech and Oklahoma. And I know Cal is very good, but with the exception of No. 1 USC, I don't think anybody will be bronzing this season's Pac-10 lineup of teams. The Big Ten isn't any better, but until Wisconsin loses a game, I give the benefit of the doubt to the Badgers.
My only complaint with this week's BCS Standings: Michigan at No. 11 is much too low.
