Read the debate intro and Bleacher Fan’s argument that computers are better for evaluating college football teams.
The Bowl Championship Series (BCS) reeks of controversy and has since its inception in 1998. The powers that be have tinkered with the formula almost on an annual basis. It is maddening to most people, me included. If you are looking for a serious headache, go to the BCS page on Wikipedia. The explanation of the role of the computer in the BCS is a head scratcher. I have yet to be convinced that the words “mathematicians” and “algorithms” belong anywhere in any BCS conversation. What does belong in these types of conversations is the voice of humans. Humans actually watch the game. Computers may pull up gamecasts and box scores but they do not “watch” the games like humans. Computers are not able to read the intangibles that a human can see. Therefore, an eyeball test by college football experts is absolutely the best way to determine the nation’s best college football team.
I am not as convinced that the media plays a huge role in getting the teams it wants in certain bowls. Some in SEC corners agree that the conference lets Florida and Alabama, to a lesser extent, get away with more in light of all the officiating errors of late. That is ludicrous, by the way. Let’s take a closer look at the Associated Press poll. A quick look at those who vote in the AP poll shows voters from all over the country. Voters are not just in SEC country. Voters are not just in Big 12 country. Voters are spread out all over this great nation. The same goes for the Harris Poll and the USA Today/Coaches Poll. It is pretty difficult, in my opinion, to come up with some type of voting conspiracy. In addition, all three of these polls are voted on by ACTUAL people. I know we live in the 21st Century and today’s “Internet-age” generation wants a computer to tell them all the answers. But, call me old school if you want, do we not trust what the human eye sees?
As Sports Geek touched on in the intro, we all saw how the Iowa Hawkeyes flirted with disaster much of the season. There was the scare the first week of the season against Northern Iowa. Then there was the come from behind win against Michigan State. Let’s not forget the win over Indiana in which they overcame a big deficit. Yet, for all of these near losses, Iowa was, until losing Saturday, fourth in the BCS. The computer rankings had Iowa as the second best team in the nation, ahead of Texas and Alabama. One component of the computer rankings had Iowa as the number one team in the land. Can that be serious? The humans, on the other hand, were not as quick to support Iowa, as last week Iowa was sixth in the coach’s poll and seventh in the Harris poll. The computers obviously overrated the Hawkeyes, and that was confirmed with the loss this past weekend.
Computers just do not tell the whole story. They take a set of numbers that are drawn in from strength of schedule, quality victories, etc., and spit out a ranking. What a computer cannot read is the circumstances regarding the victory. Humans, as a group (not individually) should be able to look at teams objectively. With that in mind, eyeballs are able to choose the best overall teams.
