LSU needs to try and schedule a team that is usually one of the top teams, like Miami. But if the teams back out then what can LSU do, Its not their fault!! Playing Virginia Tech would have been a huge game for LSU this year, and how were we supposed to know Arizona was gonna be horrible this season, I think the SOS is just a bunch of BULL if you ask me and should not be a factor in the BCS poll. :geaux: :lsug:
What else would you use to determine the better teams? IF OU stumbles along the way, we could have 6-8 one loss teams ... how do you figure out the best 2?
I agree with having SOS in the formula, but it doesn't give a definitive answer to who is the best/second best. It only gives which team has done the most to prove it. And furthermore, that's not even completely accurate without a margin of victory consideration. Ohio State's squeaker over Penn State counts as much as our thrashing of an equal record Mississippi State team.
If you don't factor in the SOS, what incentive does a team have to play anyone of merit? Without strength of schedule, you could just schedule 4-5 weak sisters, which might be enough to get a team into the playoffs/bowls, thus resulting in a poor-quality product. You can rest assured that the NCAA realizes that ..........
100% agree I 100% agree. 8 Superconferences with conference title games. I guarentee maximum only one undefeated team a year, and only 1 1 loss team a year. Then just add a bowl the NC bowl on the 3rd of Jan. The polls can sort out the rest. IMHO
well i didnt mean that it shouldnt be a factor at all, i meant it more like it is TOO big of a factor
There are many problems with the BCS formula. If you are going to use more than just the two polls and use computer ratings, you must take into account the statistical integrity of the system. (I'm not saying that you should use computer ratings, just that if you do, the system should be internally consistent and statistically sound.) It makes no sense to factor in either SOS or "quality wins". Both of these are already factored into the polls (on a "subjective" basis by the voter) and the computer ratings (on an "objective" basis through its comparing of teams' records against all other teams, common opponents, etc.). By giving extra weight to these two factors, the results are skewed. For example, I don't think a voter in either of the two polls or any decent computer rating service would count Bowling Green's SOS on a par with LSU's. Yet, that is the case with the BCS. There are many other statisitcal problems which ar even more boring to consider. But, you would think that associations (conferences) affilitated with insititutions of higher learning could at least develop a formula that has some internal consistency and logic, realizing that there still be room to argue over the different factors chosen and the "weight" given to each factor.
