Yard Sale

For those of you who enjoying skiing, a ski accident that involves gear spread all over the slopes is known (some affectionately) as a “yard sale”.

College football is closing in on a yard sale of its own.

For years we’ve been approaching the day when a non-BCS school might compete for a BCS championship. Never mind the absurdity of that statement on its face (could a non-SEC school win an SEC championship?), that day looks to have “done approached”. If non-BCS signatories can play for the “title”, why stop there? James Madison? Anyone, anyone?

Normally fans of the BCS (of which I am not one) would root for Auburn and Oregon to merely win out, thus avoiding this deleterious fate. At least in the case of Oregon, that seems like a safe plan to follow.

As for Auburn, well, that seems to be another matter.

The Cam Newton “situation” is far from sorted out, but it appears at least plausible that Newton is an ineligible player.* Auburn also appears to have gone “all-in”, and will play Newton regardless (it’s reasonably to assume they have no chance of winning otherwise).

So we have the very real possibility that Auburn, should they win out, could be stripped of its wins at some later date. Newton, currently the Heisman favorite, may have to give up that award a-la Reggie Bush.**

So for those that want a clean and conclusive ending to this NCAA season, Auburn may not provide that. So root for Alabama, right?

Well, if ‘Bama wins, we are going to get TCU and/or Boise State against Oregon.

So this is where college football finds itself as of now –

- Oregon wins out all the way, and the BCS marches blithely on for another day, or,

- Auburn wins out, and the term “tainted title” takes on a whole new meaning, or,

- TCU/Boise State statute-of-liberty’s their way to a BCS title, despite not being a BCS team, and the whole BCS is forever changed.

For those of us who are non-BCS fans, grab your popcorn. This is going to be a doozy.

*Without getting exhaustive, it appears that someone soliciting benefits on behalf of a student-athlete is against NCAA rules, which Cecil Newton appears to have done. I’m not suggesting Auburn did anything wrong in the recruitment of Cam, just that Cam may be ineligible. (Think Reggie Bush, USC).

**The Bush incident stained the Heisman. Newton may befoul it totally.

BCS Watch

I did a post last week about how unlikely it is Boise State will play for the BCS title based on their rankings – both currently and prospectively – in the computer polls of the BCS.

Well we have another week “in the books”, and a new BCS. Let’s take a look at what we have now.

Boise State – No movement. The Bronco’s BCS average last week was .8898 for 3rd place. This week it’s .8846, and still in 3rd place. Conventional wisdom holds that Boise needs the teams ahead of them to lose, and I don’t totally disagree. Yet, with Oklahoma’s loss not only did Boise not move, they lost ground between themselves and the number 4 slot (now TCU).

Their problem continues to be the computer polls, which have them 6th this week (up 1 slot), but with the exact same .780 percentile.

Oregon – The Ducks are still 2nd in the BCS yet remain very curious, to say the least. Why? The computer polls hate them, with an 8th ranking and .740 percentile. As noted in my Power Rankings post, they have one of the worst SOS’s in the nation. If not for their extremely strong showings in the human polls (.9975 and .9919), they would be ranked far lower.

There is a fundamental difference here between the machines and the humans. The Duck’s schedule will improve, so one might expect their BCS standings to strengthen if they keep on winning.

Missouri – The Tigers of Missouri are the Rodney Dangerfield of the BCS – no respect. The computers have them a solid 2 overall, but the human pollsters drag them down all the way 6th in the BCS with 8th place rankings in both polls.

This highlights the flaws in human polls. Imagine if Texas was 7-0, having just come off a solid win against Oklahoma (the previous BCS number 1). Moreover, imagine if Texas had the 8th Toughest Schedule per the NCAA. Would poll voters be ranking them 8th?

Auburn – 3rd in both the human polls, but number 1 overall, with the computers to thank for it. Moreover, I agree. These Tigers have the 10th Toughest Schedule, and just defeated an unbeaten team. They should be number 1 (wait, who does that sound like? Well Missouri, that’s who!)

This is going to be a fascinating year for the BCS, probably leaving almost no one satisfied. Since my Gators are out of it, I look forward to the train wreck.

Is Boise State Screwed?

You say that like it’s a bad thing…

You’re hearing this here first – Boise State has virtually no chance to play for the BCS title.

And it doesn’t matter a bit what they do from here on out.

Let’s go with the facts we know so far:

Boise State is currently ranked 3^rd in the BCS standings. This is based on a 2^nd ranking in both the human polls (Coaches’ Poll and Harris Poll), and an average ranking of 7^th in the Computer Polls.

The math adds up as follows –

The BCS uses percentage of total points to calculate a score. Right now Boise gets .9504 for the Harris Poll, .9390 for the Coaches Poll, and .780 for the Computer polls. Average is .8898, putting Boise in 3^rd.

Here is your top 5 –

1 Oklahoma .9215

2 Oregon .8921

3 Boise State .8898

4 Auburn .8641

5 TCU .8573  

Oklahoma gets the top spot by being 4^th in the Harris and 3^rd in the Coaches’ but 1^st in the Computers. If the same scoring system were utilized without computers we would have this –

1          Oregon .98315

2          Boise State       .9447

3          Oklahoma        .8922

4          TCU    .886

5          Auburn .8462

Not only is Oklahoma 3^rd, it’s a distant 3^rd.  In other words, the computers alone pull up the Sooners to first place on average.

The computers also crush Boise, taking .0549 off their average.

Why are the Broncos so low in the computer rankings? After all, Boise State currently has the 3^rd best Scoring Offense, and the 3^rd Best Scoring Defense, in the NCAA. Their margin of victory is a close second to Oregon’s. So their prolific scoring isn’t helping them in the computers.

No, there is only one reason the Broncos are 7^th overall – their lousy Strength of Schedule

Not all of the computer polls reveal (or perhaps even utilize) SOS. But in three that do the Broncos presently rank as follows –

Sagarin – 55^th

Anderson & Hester (A&H) – 49^th

Colley – 73^rd

Notably, this is the Broncos rankings AFTER the toughest part of their schedule is behind them. There are no teams left like Virginia Tech or Oregon State on their schedule.

The reason we are sure SOS is the main weakness of the Broncos in the computers is fleshed out by a comparison to the other teams ranked above or near them by the computers. The following grid shows the BCS computers top 9 ranked teams, their NCAA SOS, and their SOS in both A&H and Colley –

Computer	Team	NCAA SOS	A&H	Colley
Ranking		Current	SOS	SOS
1	Oklahoma	20	29	13
2	LSU	15	24	28
3	Auburn	31	27	33
4	Michigan State	29	43	53
5	TCU	61	65	77
6	Missouri	26	48	44
7	Boise State	73	49	73
8	Oregon	111	82	113
9	Oklahoma State	63	76	89

Clearly the various team’s SOSs lines up very nicely with their present computer rankings. (In A&H, for instance, LSU is their number 1, Auburn their number 2).

So what can we expect for their future SOS?

The following is going to be necessarily based on speculation, as most computer polls don’t reveal their methods of calculation. Moreover, we have to guess as to what the schedule strength of the remaining teams on Boise State’s schedule will be.

However we can make some solid estimates. For one, Boise is only remaining opponents are in their conference, the WAC. Boise’s remaining schedule is –

Oct 26 vs Louisiana Tech

Nov 6 vs Hawaii

Nov 12 @Idaho

Nov 19 vs Fresno State

Nov 26 @Nevada

Dec 4 vs Utah State

So what future SOS can we expect from this schedule?

Obviously, not a very high one.  But looking at Boise’s future SOS in a vacuum isn’t as helpful as looking at the SOS’s of their main competitors for a BCS title game – the 8 other undefeated FBS teams (still in the order of their current BCS computer rankings).

Computer	Team	NCAA SOS
Ranking		Future
1	Oklahoma	14
2	LSU	5
3	Auburn	6
4	Michigan State	42
5	TCU	68
6	Missouri	24
7	Boise State	55
8	Oregon	34
9	Oklahoma State	4

Almost every team here has a future schedule per the NCAA that is better than the present, with the exceptions of Michigan State and TCU. And with the exception of TCU, all of them are better than Boise’s. Everything else remaining stable, Boise State’s SOS standing in the computers should stay about the same by early December as it is now.

Of course, everything WON’T remain stable. We know that Oklahoma plays both Missouri and Oklahoma State, and LSU and Auburn face off this weekend. Can we predict what the BCS might look like come early December?

We can try. Before getting hung up on what the human and computer rankings are, we need to focus on how the BCS is formulated. Rather than an average of rankings, it is an average of calculations. The calculations are all based on a number derived from vote placement. For example, a 1^st place vote in the polls is worth 25, 2^nd place 24, and so on. These are added together and made into a percentage of a perfect score. In the case of Oregon, the 1^st place team in both human polls right now, this percentage is .9819 in the Harris Poll, meaning they have 98.19% of a “perfect” (all number 1 votes possible) score.

So all 1^st place rankings aren’t created equal.

We have no way of knowing what the percentages will look like come December. But we can look at the average ratios for the rankings based on past polls. Here is the average percentages by ranking (top 10) in the human polls for the past 5 year’s final poll –

1	0.9922
2	0.9486
3	0.9129
4	0.8569
5	0.8269
6	0.7987
7	0.7495
8	0.7261
9	0.6741
10	0.6409

Oregon, the number one in the human polls, has an average of 0.9832 right now (human polls only). This is lower than average, but even in the chaos of 2007 Ohio State had the same 0.9832 human poll average.

So, recognizing Boise will likely never have a great computer poll percentage , what do they need by the humans to overcome this?

Right now the Bronco’s computer percentage is 0.780. If we give them the benefit of the doubt and give them a 1^st place ranking in December based on historical averages (a VERY generous scenario) and today’s computer ratio we get –

Average of (0.9922, 0.9922, 0.7800) = 0.9215

Where would a 0.9215 have landed a team in the last 5 BCS final (pre-Title game) polls?

2009 – 3^rd

2008 – 4^th

2007 – 3^rd

2006 – 4^th

2005 – 3^rd

In other words, a team with a very high ranking (and percentage) in both human polls but a 7^th or so ranking in the computers probably doesn’t play in the title game.

The 0.780 final computer percentage for Boise isn't necessarily far fetched. Historically, we have a comparison – and that’s the 2009 Boise team. In the first BCS standings of ’09, Boise State had a BCS computer percentage of 0.0840, or 5^th overall. Much like this year, Boise had played the “meat” of their schedule already, including a win over eventual 10-3 Oregon. By the end of the regular season Boise’s BCS computer percentage was 0.7800, or 6^th overall. This was after playing their weaker conference schedule. Notably, their record then (and presumably, this year) was undefeated at all times.  Looking at this, a final of 0.7800 this season may be too high.

Now, quite obviously, there is a lot of speculation involved in these calculations. A total chaos scenario that has all the BCS conference teams with one loss probably gets Boise high enough in the computers to slip in. That said, the calculations I used to get the 0.9215 final average were VERY generous to Boise on the human poll side. To get that high a human poll ranking/percentage, Oregon is going to have to lose a game. (The team I saw last night (Thursday) didn’t look like it will.) Moreover, with virtually all the other contenders standing to strengthen their computer standings, (not to mention at least one 1-loss team jumping Boise in the computer polls eventually, and probably more) Boise is in a serious predicament at this point in time. And if there are 2 undefeated BCS conference teams, they haven’t got a chance in Hades, regardless of human rankings.

So to the defenders of the current BCS and BCS conference teams – thank the machines. In this case they are going to keep the humans in check.

Somebody Stop this Crazy (Polling) Train

Yesterday morning I was listening to ESPN analyst Robert Smith opine that, based on the current poll positioning, Boise State is in position to play for the BCS if they run the table.

This seems to be a pretty uniform opinion among the sports chattering classes. It’s also totally asinine.

The following is the current top 25 in the Coaches’ Poll with the remaining strength of schedule (games yet to be played). The SOS is broken down into a percentage of wins and losses of teams yet to be played on each team’s schedule. It is arranged by best to worst.

Boise’s remaining schedule is the 2nd worst among top 25 teams, behind only Nevada’s (they are, after all, in the same conference). The Bronco’s rank 87th in the nation by this metric, as their remaining opponents have a record of only 10-18. Notably, 4 of those 10 wins belong to Nevada.

This is the essence of the idiotic inflexibility of traditional poll voting. What the current poll is saying is that teams like Missouri and Oklahoma State – both currently unbeaten – have no chance to play for the BCS title if they would win all their remaining games, even though their opponents have winning records more than twice as good as the teams Boise plays (0.7916 and 0.7857 to 0.3571).

Not to mention the following –

Nevada – 5th best Scoring Offense, 38th best Scoring Defense, 4-0 record.

Boise State – 13th best Scoring Offense, 49th best Scoring Defense, 3-0 record

Yet Boise is ranked 3rd, and Nevada 25th, per the Coaches. Where is the logic in that?

Some adult needs to step up and stop this crazy train before it trashes this season.

The Wrong Cinderella?

The sports media has focused on Boise State this year as perhaps the ultimate “BCS buster” – the team that may finally break through from a non-BCS conference to play for the BCS title.

In line with this thinking the Broncos were a preseason 5th in the Coaches’ Poll, and 3rd on the AP ballot. (One wonders if the media voters might be more encouraged to create a “BCS buster” than the Coaches.).

TCU, although positioned nearly as favorably as Boise State (7th Coaches’, 6th AP), has pretty much been an afterthought.

Based on the evidence three games into the season, that thinking needs to change.

Here’s the Horned Frog’s schedule -

09/04/10 Oregon St. 30-21
09/11/10 Tennessee Tech 62-7
09/18/10 Baylor 45-10
09/24/10 SMU
10/02/10 Colorado St.
10/09/10 Wyoming
10/16/10 BYU
10/23/10 Air Force
10/30/10 UNLV
11/06/10 Utah
11/13/10 San Diego St.
11/27/10 New Mexico

Not only do the Frogs play Oregon State and Wyoming, like the Broncos, they have Baylor, BYU, Air Force and Utah.

Now here’s the Bronco’s lineup -

09/06/10 Virginia Tech 33-30
09/18/10 Wyoming 51-6
09/25/10 Oregon St.
10/02/10 New Mexico St.
10/09/10 Toledo
10/16/10 San Jose St.
10/26/10 Louisiana Tech
11/06/10 Hawaii
11/12/10 Idaho
11/19/10 Fresno St.
11/26/10 Nevada
12/04/10 Utah St.

We now know that Virginia Tech is, well awful, and won’t be ranked again this year. After the game against the Beavers this weekend, what does Boise face? Nevada? I don’t see much meat on this schedule.

Sure BYU, Air Force and Utah aren’t an SEC schedule, but they are pretty decent teams, especially compared to Boise’s slate.

After 3 weeks in the season, TCU has the 6th ranked Scoring Offense (to Boise’s 15th ranked), and 9th ranked Scoring Defense (Boise is 34th).

To the credit of the BlogPoll voters they seem to get this. In the BlogPoll TCU is 4th, one spot ahead of Boise.

It will be interesting to see how Boise handles the Beavers. But to my thinking, so far, TCU looks better to the eye test if the BCS needs busting.

Dear Boise

Your raison d'être was just extinguished by James Madison.

The (non-BCS) Foxes in the Hen House

There has been much hand wringing and angst about Boise State’s presence at 3rd in the AP Poll, as well as 5th in the Coaches Poll.


On one side you have the “give the little guy a chance" camp, that cites Utah’s win over Alabama in the Sugar Bowl 2 years ago and Boise’s own epic win over Oklahoma as evidence the non-BCS schools deserve a shot.


On the other side you have the “traditionalists” who think that, absent a schedule of sufficient merit, the Boise States of the world never deserve a shot at the BCS title.

I’m looking at it a little differently – as in its time to resolve this nonsense once and for all.

Anyone who has read my writing before knows I’m not a big fan of the BCS. College football is the only sport where approximately ½ of its teams are eliminated from “national” title contention prior to the first kickoff. Sure the mid-majors don’t play the schedules the “big boys” do, but the BCS conference teams seem to have no problem counting both the wins against them and the gaudy statistics that result from those wins. For instance, imagine if you took away all the touchdowns Tim Tebow had against non-BCS teams in his Florida career (he wouldn’t have that rushing TD title, for one.) Somehow it is fundamentally unfair that BCS teams count the stats and wins against these teams yet shut them out of title contention.


What I would like to see this season is the evolution of the journey that began with Boise’s win over Oklahoma come to a conclusion. I want Boise, or TCU, to play in the BCS title game.


Here’s my thinking – there can be really only two possible outcomes if a non-BCS team gets at “national” title shot:

1. They acquit themselves admirably by either keeping it close, or winning.


2. They get totally destroyed.


How I would like to see it happen would be a team like Boise plays a one-loss major conference team. If scenario 1 occurs, it is pretty clear that current opinion about how non-BCS teams fit into the overall title picture is due for rethinking.

And if scenario 2 occurs, as far as I am concerned that-is-that. The question is answered, and the non-BCS teams role as perpetual homecoming opponents can be cemented for at least a decade.

Is scenario 2 necessarily fair? No, it’s not, but the current system is about as unfair as conceptually possible. It’s a mighty burden to place on a Boise State or TCU – one game for the future of the non-BCS conferences. But it was a burden that was going to exist regardless (and already has), and it’s time to get some resolution to this issue.

So step up Boise or TCU, and let’s find out what you really have.