College Football - Early Season Fun

[Imran Siddiqui]

Guy, to be fair, you said:

Let's put it this way. There is a very small chance, but a chance nevertheless, that both Boise State and Oregon will go through the rest of the season without losing another game. Statistically--looking at strength of schedule, total margin of victory, offensive and defensive statistics, etc.--Oregon may very well end up as having a "better season" than Boise State. Boise State's complete domination of Oregon, head-to-head on the same field, would amount to nothing. Explain that.

It doesn't seem at all obvious that you were asking about Drake's rankings. It more appeared that you wanted him to explain why Boise would be ranked higher... which he did.

[Drake Tungsten]

The rankings I post here are based solely on quality (not résumé) and are meant mainly to spur discussion. I wouldn't use them to assign teams to BCS bowls; those teams should be assigned on the basis of their résumés and which teams "deserve" it more. The human polls do a relatively good job of that, as do the computer polls that ignore margin of victory.

[Drake Tungsten]

In case you're interested, "my" top-ten based on résumé is as follows...

1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Virginia Tech
4. Boise State
5. LSU
6. Oregon
7. Iowa
8. USC
9. Cincinnati
10. Miami

And "my" top-ten based on quality was, again...

1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Virginia Tech
4. USC
5. Nebraska
6. Oklahoma
7. Ohio State
8. Oregon
9. Boise State
10. Texas

[rah]

Well out of all the arguing here I have to agree with one thing. Unless a team was actually given a handicap before the game started (and I don't support this concept at all) losing by a couple of points on the road is still losing because like Ming said, a coach is just trying to win, not trying to cover the spread. Up by 2 with the ball in the closing minutes and just sitting on the ball when you could try to score doesn't make the other team any better. (unless you're pete rose)

[Drake Tungsten]

losing by a couple of points on the road is still losing

No one seriously disputed that. The dispute is over whether a team can lose by a couple of points on the road and still be the better team.

[Ming]

There is that "deserve" word again... My problem is with the definition of the word "deserve", and who are the ones making that "judgement" call. If a team from a mid conference goes undefeated, whose place is it to say they are more or less deserving than a team with one or more loss. They've done everything you can ask of them... And the argument that they should schedule tougher games isn't the best because sometimes, they simply can't. You can't really say for fact which team is bettter. Sure, there can be a concensus of the experts, but unless a team that hasn't been beaten doesn't get the chance to play somebody, there is no way they can prove it. The current BCS doesn't handle this situation well at all. And in most years, most people aren't happy with what the BCS serves up as their championship game. A true playoff system including more teams would be a far cry improvement over the arbitrary mess that is called the BCS.

Sure... the colleges will cry about lost money, but a system can be devised using the current bowl games to minimize any loss, and maybe bring in more money since bowl games are in decline since the start of the BCS. Maybe some of the those more meaningless bowl games can have some real meaning.

And the argument that it would destroy the regular season is a thin one at best. There would still be a limited number of teams in the playoffs... making the regular season, and the need to be a conference champion VERY important. Might it lessen it a little, probably, but destroy it... I don't think so. The playoff systems for other major sports don't destroy the regular season if they limit the number of teams involved. And that's what we would be talking about here... Not including every team like the NCAA basketball tournamnet may eventually do, but having more teams than just two... which would give MORE DESERVING teams a chance to be a champion.

[Ming]

losing by a couple of points on the road is still losing

No one seriously disputed that. The dispute is over whether a team can lose by a couple of points on the road and still be the better team.

If the home team is superior in all the other outside Data... and wins the game, even if by less than 3 points... YES!

[Imran Siddiqui]

My problem is with the definition of the word "deserve", and who are the ones making that "judgement" call.

Errr... like anyone in the world who is ranking teams?

[Ming]

And that's my point... It is the one sport that allows outsiders to determine their champion. And not only outsiders, but people who have far different opinions on the meaning of rank, deserving, resume, or whatever else you want to call it. Real sports leave it up to the battle on the field, not experts who aren't even part of the league or association. Even for March Madness, the teams are selected by the NCAA, not a bunch of fat rich old men who have nothing to do with the NCAA.

I'm not saying that polls/rankings are not based only on facts and statistics. But I am saying that I have a problem with the polls being used to determine the national championship, because there isn't even agreement on how to rank teams. I'm sure each pollster uses his own definitions, and some may even do it based on loyalities

[Ben Kenobi]

Is there a legitimate basis to assume that the home field advantage in college football is the same as in the pros?

[Drake Tungsten]

No.

[DanS]

It's pretty easy to calculate. Just set the handicap at the beginning of the year based on last year's results or the last 10 years' results or whatever.

Komi (handicap in go while playing white) has changed a few times over the decades.

[DanS]

And who will be the one to determine just how many points somebody gets, and how will they do it, and will it be acurate?

This is a big non-issue. The NCAA can set it based on simple calculations.

And what other professional sport provides such a handicap and why should college football be any different?

The number of games played by a college football team is small and the home-away is asymmetrical. I wish to fix the unfairness in the system while adhering to college football's traditions and realities.

[Ming]

I don't see how giving the away team 3 points to start is adhering to college footballs' traditions.

Each team usually has the same number of away and home games (or pretty close)... so each team has to live with it, and it does balance out in the end. Plus, most teams will schedule home and away contests that cover multiple years when contracting for non conference games.

Home field advantage is part of the game... always has been... it's tradition.
And again, it's not the only advantage. Why try to correct one and not the others.

[DanS]

Each team usually has the same number of away and home games (or pretty close)

I think that there are disparities here that need to be addressed.

Edited for neutral games...

Florida -- 7 home, 4 away, 1 neutral
Alabama -- 7 home, 4 away, 1 neutral
Texas -- 6 home, 5 away, 1 neutral
Va. Tech -- 6 home, 5 away, 1 neutral
Boise State -- 6 home, 6 away
USC -- 6 home, 6 away
Ohio State -- 7 home, 5 away
Cincy -- 6 home, 6 away
Miami -- 6 home, 6 away
LSU -- 7 home, 5 away