Sunday, November 14, 2010

Comparing the BCS humans to computers

http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1152891

It is intriguing to compare the difference between the computer and "human" scores in the BCS rankings. The computer scores are prohibited from including margin of victory in their score calculations. A commanding 30 point road win counts as much as a last-second hail-Mary for a one point home victory.

From that, we can compare the rankings of the top 9 teams. These all conveniently have the same rankings in both human polls used. They also have no agreement between computers and humans.

This season, Oregon and Boise have been dominating just about everyone they've played. Unfortunately, a lot of their opponents have had fairly mediocre records. Thus, it would make sense to see the humans give them a boost that they computers can't.
LSU and Auburn, on the other hand, have beat a number of highly-touted teams. However, many of their victories have been less than impressive. (LSU only beat a mediocre Tennessee team because the Volunteers had 13 men on the field for the final play.) It makes sense to see these teams docked by the humans.

TCU is a little more difficult to explain. They have played dominated a schedule of "ok" teams. The domination would seem to imply a preference in the human polls. However, the computers slightly favor them. This may be do to the poor performance against a poorly-perceived San Diego State team, coupled with Notre Dame's victory over Utah. (TCU's previous marquee win.) Though perhaps the computers get this right in spite of their limitations. San Diego State's previous two losses can be at least partially attributed to late-game blown calls. The 5-point loss to TCU was their biggest loss of the season. This week Baylor, Utah and Oregon State all loss, hurting the ranking with the computers. However, even last week, the humans had them lower than the computers.

Stanford is another odd case. They are 5th in the computers, yet 8th in the human polls. Most wins have been of the impressive-domination variety. They were also ahead for a good portion of their loss to #1 Oregon. They recently destroyed a ranked Arizona team. Their close victories were over a ranked USC team and against Arizona State in Tempe.

The Stanford rankings are especially baffling when compared to Wisconsin. The Badgers also had a narrow win over ASU (though that game was in Madison). They also squeaked out a victory over the ranked Iowa team. They have had a few blowout wins over mediocre teams. They also had a nice victory over a ranked Ohio State, and a loss to a one-loss Michigan State. The top of the resume seems fairly comparable to Stanford's. At the bottom, however, you have 1-win San Jose State, and 2 win UNLV, Minnesota, and FCS Austin Peay. Stanford has 2 win Washington State and Wake Forest, as well as 6-4 FCS Sacramento State at the bottom. The computers seem to have things right. You have to wonder why the pollsters love Wisconsin so much.

Ohio State also gets the Wisconsin treatment, with a human ranking much higher than the computer ranking. In this case the name is the big factor. After all, the are Ohio State.

The 'name recognition' of Ohio State may also be what gives Nebraska the lower computer ranking. That, and the fact that Texas has shown itself to be really, really bad. Nebraska seems to be pulling the anti-Cal, putting up its worst performances at home.

Team Harris Coaches Comp. SOS
1. Oregon (1) 1st 1st 2nd T-87th
2. Auburn (2) 2nd 2nd 1st 12th
3. TCU (3) 4th 4th T-3rd 55th
4. Boise St. (4) 3rd 3rd T-6th T-87th
5. LSU (5) 6th 6th T-3rd T-8th
6. Stanford (6) 8th 8th 5th T-65th
7. Wisconsin (7) 5th 5th 12th 75th
8. Nebraska (8) 9th 9th 8th T-57th
9. Ohio State (9) 7th 7th 13th T-70th

No comments:

Post a Comment