Opinion Polls

L

lonestarjacket

Dodd-Like
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
10,278
Reading the threads on Sagarin ratings and GT's omission from the polls brings up a sore point for me.

The consensus is "don't worry about the polls now, win and the rankings will come." That much is true but it is also true that how far you climb depends on where you are in the polls already. And that is the injustice of the poll system. Even with the BCS the human opinion polls matter more now with the misguided idea that human opinions are more reliable than automated ratings.

Inevitably when this computer rating or that has some team that makes no sense in our opinions do the "experts" start talking about how polls should count more (and now they do.) In fact, as long as the computers don't have human bias (SEC gets benefit of doubt in all cases, non-BCS must try twice as hard to get half as much) they are more reliable to me.

These same people ignore when human opinion polls are just as ridiculous as computer rankings (or the fact that the best computer ratings never make such mistakes). A team that is barely over .500 remains ranked and the only reason is "momentum". Because once you are ranked there is only so far you can fall in "opinion" regardless of performance.

Unfortunately, preseason rankings do matter still. All the teams can do is take of what they control. But let's not pretend that starting positions don't directly affect finishing positions.
 
lonestarjacket said:
Reading the threads on Sagarin ratings and GT's omission from the polls brings up a sore point for me.

The consensus is "don't worry about the polls now, win and the rankings will come." That much is true but it is also true that how far you climb depends on where you are in the polls already. And that is the injustice of the poll system. Even with the BCS the human opinion polls matter more now with the misguided idea that human opinions are more reliable than automated ratings.

Inevitably when this computer rating or that has some team that makes no sense in our opinions do the "experts" start talking about how polls should count more (and now they do.) In fact, as long as the computers don't have human bias (SEC gets benefit of doubt in all cases, non-BCS must try twice as hard to get half as much) they are more reliable to me.

These same people ignore when human opinion polls are just as ridiculous as computer rankings (or the fact that the best computer ratings never make such mistakes). A team that is barely over .500 remains ranked and the only reason is "momentum". Because once you are ranked there is only so far you can fall in "opinion" regardless of performance.

Unfortunately, preseason rankings do matter still. All the teams can do is take of what they control. But let's not pretend that starting positions don't directly affect finishing positions.
Click to expand...

They fight for the pole position in NASCAR for just that reason. Same applies in football.
 
It would matter for us to make the MNC game. But to make the BCS we will be fine if we win out.

Huge if. But too many teams ahead of us will play eachother to not get to the top 12 or so.

We will be a popular pick if we get close. We are generating a lot of buzz right now.
 
As far as Auburn goes, it's only a matter of time. They will play good teams and get exposed like they did last weekend. I'm more concerned about the schools like Boise State and Ball State who have play teams worse than Duke week in and week out (although Boise will have some decent teams to face). It's ridiculous for Auburn to be ranked right now but this doesn't even begin to make up for several years back when they went undefeated and were left out of the championship game so that we could all have a fun 20 minutes watching USC slaughter a severely overmatched Oklahoma team.
 
Regardless of starting positions or bias or what have you, there is no person or computer alive that could have selected between USC, Oklahoma and Auburn in 2004 without one of those three teams getting absolutely screwed.
 
Polls only matter to us if we have a shot at the championship. We currently do not, because we lost to a very pedestrian VT team.
 
Polls do matter for bowl selection to a degree. If we are ranked in the top 10, we would have a good shot at a BCS bowl. If we are in the top 20, we might not get passed over by the Peach or Charlotte bowl. Every bowl wants a ranked team playing. It means more TV viewers and more name recognition.

Regardless, we aren't likely to get ranked until we beat Clemson. I guess if we throttle GW and a whole lot of teams in the 18-25 range lose, we could sneak in before the Clemson game.
 
WracerX said:
Polls do matter for bowl selection to a degree. If we are ranked in the top 10, we would have a good shot at a BCS bowl. If we are in the top 20, we might not get passed over by the Peach or Charlotte bowl. Every bowl wants a ranked team playing. It means more TV viewers and more name recognition.

Regardless, we aren't likely to get ranked until we beat Clemson. I guess if we throttle GW and a whole lot of teams in the 18-25 range lose, we could sneak in before the Clemson game.
Click to expand...

If we are in the top 10 the BCS is near certain. For GT if we win out a BCS bowl is ours, I guarantee it. If we lose one or two our poor starting position will probably hurt us come bowl time as you point out.

Also as you mention, the 25th team is on the scroll during TV games and gets a recap every halftime on ESPN. A blurb in the papers as well The 26th team often gets nothing. We will be there if we beat Clemson and not if we don't. Simple and actually quite fair/deserving.
 
Honestly, none of this means a dang thing if we can't somehow leapfrog VT and get to the ACCCG.
 
00Burdell said:
Honestly, none of this means a dang thing if we can't somehow leapfrog VT and get to the ACCCG.
Click to expand...

Why?

Leapfrogging VT only matters to one of our goals, the ACC Championship goal.

We can make a BCS bowl without the ACCCG, assuming we win out. I don't think we will win out but I guarantee that if we win out we make the BCS. Even if we do not go to the ACCCG.

We will not play for the MNC, win out or not, ACCCG or not. It isn't a 0% chance but it is way out in the decimal points.
 
NATSman said:
Regardless of starting positions or bias or what have you, there is no person or computer alive that could have selected between USC, Oklahoma and Auburn in 2004 without one of those three teams getting absolutely screwed.
Click to expand...

True, which is why they need to cast the net a little wider than two teams. I won't say the "P" word.
 
My comments were more about the general situation with polls than how they affect GT this year. But lets play the game. If we started the year ranked, say 25, where would we be now?

I think we'd be somewhere in the teens.
 
There is an issue with abandoning preseason polls. Would ESPN really go for it if they lost the numbers in front of the teams on scores? In other words, they couldn't say it was a matchup of two top 10 teams or two top 25 teams.

Considering how casual viewers look for the "big" game of the week by rankings, I don't think the network would go for doing away with early season polls.
 
lonestarjacket said:
True, which is why they need to cast the net a little wider than two teams. I won't say the "P" word.
Click to expand...

Is the P word by any chance PLAYOFF?
Because that's THE ONLY answer, and there are no convincing arguments against it. Don't believe me? Ask every OTHER division of college football. I know our coach would love a playoff. He won a football playoff two years in a row.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top