BCS Computer Analysis
I took a look at the BCS computers and their accuracy in predicting this year's bowl games in an attempt to gauge their validity. Results were underwhelming.
over 1 year ago
The Splintah
4 comments
0 recs |
Comments
Small Correction
The BCS computers can’t use site of game as part of their algorithm. Sagarin’s "real" ratings do, but I’m pretty sure that BCS rules forbid doing that (see here). So in fact the various algorithms are even MORE constrained than your initial guess.
the problem with margin of victory is
that it promotes unsportsmanlike play calling. Why beat Middle Tennessee State (or for that matter, Tennessee) 48-13 when you can score two more times and make it 62-13 and up your ranking? It’s unsportsmanlike. That’s the short answer. Don’t get me wrong, I loathe all that is the BCS, however adding mov just incentivizes coaches being bigger douchebags than they already are. Remember the outcry against Wisconsin when they beat Indiana 83-20? Under a system that takes MOV into account, that’s encouraged. Is the system perfect? No. It needs reform, ideally a play-off. However, taking MOV into account is not the solution.
by SEC Supremacist on Jan 18, 2011 8:23 AM PST reply actions
MOV
Just cut off MOV at 3 or 4 TDs to avoid running up. If playing Middle Tennessee State, other stats will also show blowout, but there must be a way to show blowout of good teams.
If you just say other stats will show dominance against good teams, I’d say not always. If many of your scores are from outside the red-zone, they don’t show up in that stat. If you hold teams to 3s while you get 6s, rush yardage, pass yardage, first downs, third down converts, forth down converts, TOP, etc. may actually show a close (or a “should have lost”) game. The object of a football game is to score points, so how can you leave points out an evaluation?
Speed Endurance Talent is how Track Town USA plays football. WWWWWWWWWWWWin The Day
















