This all seems just as arbitrary as the media polls because Rules #6-7 have no objective way of comparing record and strength of schedule. How you compare a 6-2 team with a 10 SoS with a 7-1 team with a 20 SoS is still just a judment call by your guys. So your system doesn't seem to be any more objective than the ballot system currently employed. You're still using all the loaded and meaningless words others do: "deserve" "body of work"
However, there are some absolute winners here for how the rest of the ballot casters should think. There should be no preseason ballots. All they do is bias the system for some teams and against others. Rule #4 is great but should be modified: a close win over a non-DI team should result in 'reverse style points' where you must walk about in shame and have the rest of your body of work called into question.
After a wonderful.. i think..Saturday, i have only had one cup of coffee to figure out what the hail , you guys are talking about. I think any system that could manupulate notre dame higer is the sort of thing i'd vote on.
Some good points, Tigers. I don't think any of intended to make an objective rankings system. The only way to do that would be to use a computer program that accepts quantifiable data as input.
But our system does avoid some of the blatant bias and/or absurd results that sometimes occur in the big media polls, such as teams moving up in the ranking in a bye-week and when teams ahead of them haven't lost.
Can a team drop despite winning? There is nothing I hate more than watching a team maintain its high preseason ranking while not playing well and escaping with victories against inferior competition.
Yes, teams can drop even if they win that week. For example:
Teams A and B both are both 5-0 heading into week 6. They both have 5 quality wins. Team A is ranked one spot higher than team B. In game 6, team B beats another quality team and team A beats a cupcake. Now team A has 5 quality wins and a cupcake win, while team B now has 6 quality wins. Team B will jump team A, even though team A won that week.
So, when Panda B touches said Panda in a bad place, that makes me a saaaaaaad Panda.
I agree with both GT and Luke: first, one simply has to choose between the subjective ballot system and the "objective" computer rankings. Lacking a playoff, one is always caught in the imperfection of that spectrum, which the current BCS system tries to straddle.
Second, in terms of rankings and bowl games, sub-par cupcakes should only hurt you. If you cover the spread, fine, but it doesn't count towards your win total/bowl eligibility or your "body of work". If you don't cover the spread then you should be lowered and if you actually lose, then you're done.
When you've got teams like Ohio State scheduling Akron, Youngstown St, and Kent State something has to be done to discourage that. Hitting people with bowl eligibility issues is the best way to do that, i.e. the pocketbook.
The OSU comment kind of reminds me that we play, Stanford, UNC, Washington, PITT, Navy and Syracuse. If that isn't a stellar schedule, I don't know what is.
Commenting by HaloScan
