The BCS is a fraud that must go

[Scott4USC]

Sun Tzu

The coaches poll never had Michigan ranked in between CAL and Texas. The coaches poll had CAL then Texas. You claim coaches had Michigan ranked after CAL and before Texas. How do you know that? Second, if there were, there would have had to be many that had CAL, Michigan, then Texas. I highly doubt that but maybe you have some link to show that many coaches had CAL, Michigan, and Texas in that order before UM lost to OSU.

Texas gained votes after CAL destroyed rival Stanford and Texas being Idle. MICHIGAN was not ranked in between CAL/TEXAS and you are claiming most of those voters had Michigan ranked in between CAL and Texas. I highly doubt that.

Maybe I am missing something? You said

I found it odd how he didnt even bother responding after I proved to him that there wasnt some anti-Cal giant conspiracy

I also found more BS. OU coach STOOPS had Texas ranked #2 in the country. What kind of BS is that?

BTW, Tedford had Cal #4 and Texas #5. He also took a knee and did not run up the score and did not whine to the polls. Class guy.

 

[SALTY DOG]

I am confused....let me get this straight...the
Presidents of the University's are CONCERNED
about too many games interfering with academics,
you simply have to be shitting me...how many
basketball games in a season played DURING the
week....how many baseball games in a season
played DURING the week...hell, how many games
in these sports vs football games... :142lmao:

 

[Sun Tzu]

Scott you are clueless. Stoops vote isnt public, just some clown speculated that. We do know someone voted Cal #3. As for the rankings, it is based on points. It aint real hard to figure out. I am not going to do your homework for you, especially when you dont care to listen when you dont like it anyway. But I will give you an example. Presume there are 50 voters (for ease) with a 25, 24..1 scale. If everyone votes USC #1, then they have 1250 points. If they have 1249, we know 1 person voted them second. And so on. Same thing with #2, a team with 1201 we know got 49 seconds and 1 first (because we always without any work know how many number one votes each team got. If you know a teams points, all it takes is a simple computer program to figure out the breakdown of votes (which is why you know exactly how many people voted texas 8th or Cal 7th even though the coaches votes remain private) There is a simple program some computer geeks came up with.

So go to Cal at #4. If Cal under my ease of math had every number 4 vote (because we know that no one would vote them 1-3, except somehow someone in the last poll jumped them to 3, which you dont seem to mind) their max would be 1100. Say michigan got every 5 vote (1050 votes) , and texas every 6 (1000 points). If Michigan got beat, Cal won and Texas was idle, we could expect every voter moved Texas up, although some may jump them. Regardless, unless someone gets beat 1-3, Cal cannot gain a single point. Texas will gain on Cal every point they got from michigan - Cal isnt gaining anything from Michigan. Thus, the perception that Texas gained on Cal (or stole votes) when in fact no one dropped Cal. Throw Utah in the mix, and some folks ahving texas as low as 7, Texas can gain even more, while Cal had the vast majority of 4 votes. Cal gained votes mostly because they did rout Stanford and stole 4th palce votes from Utah. Again, the math doesnt lie.

I dont have the actual numbers right here, but when Michigan lost, BOTH Cal and Texas gained points - obviously because various voters had different combination of Texas, Cal, Michigan, Utah 4-7. I saw the breakdown at one time, but there were people with Michigan at 4 and so on. Those points go somewhere. Thus the reason Cal gains points, texas gains points, yet stay 4-5 (or 4-6 in polls) and yet Cal's BCS lead is shrunk. Where the teams were ranked is completely irrelevant - it is the points. And the team that is lower ranked can obviously gain much more easily. We also know from AP standings that many people have had Utah ahead of Texas. If one of those voters KEEPS Cal at 4, and flips texas and Utah, Texas gains BCS points on Cal.

Finally - last I checked there is plenty of whining coming from the left coast. If you also bothered checking facts, you would see that Cal gained points when idle even though texas won v AM "its rival". I guess under your theory that would be a conspiracy too. I also recall you posting that the computers are so relaible when it comes to Auburn - what do they say about Texas and Cal?

 

[Sun Tzu]

I ight add - the math shows that if EVERY person that voted Cal 6, 7, or 8 had voted them 4, they still would be in the Holiday Bowl. Thats how badly Cal gets killed by the vaunted computers. SO even if your bad math and conspiracy theory had any validity, it means NADA.

 

[Master Capper]

Cal got killed in most computer with the exception of Sagarin due to the fact taht they played a very weak schedule in comparison to Texas and the weakness of the Pac 10 was the main reason. If you want to single out one poll that hurt them the most it was Richard Billingsley, whom had them ranked at 8th in the country. Also, Wes Colley and Wolfe also had Cal ranked out of the top five as Colley had Cal at number eight and again these polls utilize SOS as a high criteria in their rankings and in both other that Utah no one in the top ten played a weaker schedule than Cal.

 

[Sun Tzu]

While I dont have the ability to figure out exactly the vote breakdown (it;s probably on the net somewhere as well) we do know with just a little math that something funny happened in the voting. I do know someone voted Cal 3. A story came out that Stoops voted texas 2, which he has in fact denied and the votes are private so unless he said it no one would know. But, in any event, the max number of points for ranking 1-2-3 is 4392. Auburn, OU and USC accounted for 4384. So that means 8 points went to other teams. Those would include the Cal vote, and it was known there were some 3rd place Utah votes. The week before the number was 4386 - so there was just a change of 2. Since we know that someone voted Cal 3, at MOST there could have been a change where Texas was put at 3, not 2.

The November 30 poll, you know the one AFTER Brown did his whining and pleading and whatever else you called it, when Cal and utah were off and texas beat its rival, by covering the spread and doubling them in yardage, Cal went from 1299 to 1314, Texas went from 1260-1266, and Utah went from 1246 to 1222. In Cal's off week it gained on Texas, and stole votes from Utah.

 

[Scott4USC]

Master Capper

FYI the BCS computers had Big 12 #1 and Pac 10 #2. That is why Texas edged out CAL. NOT because the Pac 10 was weak. YOU may think the Pac 10 was weak, but the BCS computers strongly disagree with you. Remember, the best and worst computer ranking is thrown out. So don't know why you involved them in your analysis. All 6 BCS computers combined had Big 12 #1 and Pac 10 #2. Maybe that angers you? :cursin: That is why Texas edged CAL in the computers, because they play in the Big 12 and the BIG 12 rated higher than the Pac 10 by one slot. That margin was slightly larger than the voting margin in both polls. If CAL didn't lose a certain amount of votes, CAL would be in Rose Bowl (I forgot the # but I think they couldn't lose 5-10 votes). Both polls combined carry more weight than the computers. CAL was ahead of Texas in the 2nd to last week despite computers having Texas ahead of CAL. Speak the truth MC.


Cal, Texas vote breakdown

First # is this week, the 2nd # is last week. The final 2 weeks of the Coaches Poll.

California

2nd 0 0
3rd 1 0
4th 27 39
5th 17 16
6th 10 6
7th 4 0
8th 2 0

Texas

2nd 1 1
3rd 3 1
4th 18 8
5th 23 33
6th 8 10
7th 5 6
8th 3 2

Texas received 1 2nd while CAL had ZERO (thanks to Stoops) (Texas better than 2 of USC/OU/AU?)

Texas had 3 3rd place votes while CAL had 1. (3 people had UT ahead of either USC/OU/AU????)

Cal lost 12 4th place votes while Texas gained 10!!!! (WOW)

CAL gained 1 5th while Texas lost 10 5th placed votes (WOW)

Then CAL gained 4 6th, 4 7th, and 2 8th while having ZERO votes at ANY of those rankings the previous week.

Texas lost 2 6th, lost 1 7th, and gained 1 8th.

HOW DID CAL LOSE VOTES AT THE #4 POSITION when they travelled across the country and beat a team by double digits without their WR corps AND took a knee at the end of the game???? CAL LOSES HIGH PLACE VOTES AND GAINED LOW PLACE VOTES. BS!

HOW THE HELL DID TEXAS GAIN VOTES???? TEXAS HAS NOT PLAYED ANYBODY SINCE NOV. 22nd????

I brought statistical DATA to back up my claim. I am not using my own math or asumptions on who voted what and what would/could happen. This is what happened! Sun Tzu your post makes sense and you explained it very well. Unfortunately you have nothing to back up your claim. Take a look at my "factual" #'s and.....

DEFEND THAT!

 

[Sun Tzu]

Lmao whatever Scott Ignore the facts you dont like. Like I said, even if your conspracy was changed, Cal would still be in the Holiday Bowl. Spin it all you want - that is the only fact that matters. Your bias makes this not worth my time any longer. Regardless, only you think the So Miss win was good. One could easily decide with a straight face Texas should be ranked ahead of Cal (like every computer) or vice versa. Strabgely, you dont have any complaint with folks voting Texas 7th and 8th, but to do so for Cal is a travesty? Texas ADDING a 7th place vote is ok? Bottom line is a fes people switched texas -CAl - that would be all those coaches whose only Cal game they got to watch was So Miss. A few may have dropped them below unbeaten Utah. SoOme people jumped up Louisville and Boise, thus hurting Texas and Cal on those ballots. Whatever ... you dont care anyway. When all your arguments get shot down in flames you just throw new ones at the wall.

And By the way - Texas played Novemeber 26 - so your entire premise is wrong. After winning that game,by DD, as I poinbted out, Texas LOST ground on idle Cal. Again, apparently that is ok with you as integrity in your arguments is not a criteria.

Like I said, just to make you happy, there should be a Cal-Az STate rematch and the winner plays USC, at the Rose Bowl, for the national championship. Anyone saying anything differently is an idiot. All Pac 10 teams should get a bowl bid, regardless of record, because the conference is just too tough. Pete Carroll is the greatest coach in the history of college football. Did I forget anything?

 

[Scott4USC]

Sun Tzu

I think you are becoming too sensitive with my comments/arguments. I never said Texas was not deserving. I have said before you could make a valid argument for Texas to go over CAL. I don't believe it but I do respect that argument because it is valid. I think Texas deserves a BCS bowl game, just not the Rose Bowl over CAL. That is my opinion/argument.

And By the way dumbass - Texas played Novemeber 26 - so your entire premise is wrong. After winning that game,by DD, as I poinbted out, Texas LOST ground on idle Cal. Again, apparently that is ok with you as integrity in your arguments is not a criteria.

Thanks for showing your maturity level calling me a dumbass. I don't believe I called you any names for disagreeing with me. Sorry I was 4 dates off. I must have misread it. Doesn't change the argument.

Lmao whatever Scott Ignore the facts you dont like. Like I said, even if your conspracy was changed, Cal would still be in the Holiday Bowl. Spin it all you want - that is the only fact that matters.

What have I ignored? You are making an accusation against me that I am not aware of. I still have not seen an concrete data supporting your opinion of CAL not getting into the Rose Bowl if the votes were changed. You laid a nice example, but no hard data supporting it. I know for a fact that if VOTES were not changed CAL would be in the Rose Bowl. Cal only could afford to lose a small amount of votes and stay ahead of Texas. Remember, AP/Coaches poll carries more weight than computers (who has texas ahead of CAL)

I do think that people who ranked Texas below 5th was bogus. I never said I agreed with them. But as I have shown with "my" hard concrete data, CAL got the worse end of it. Why do I need to argue Texas? It is a given that Texas got screwed on some votes as well, but CAL without question got the worse end of it. That my firend is my argument.

Like I said, just to make you happy, there should be a Cal-Az STate rematch and the winner plays USC, at the Rose Bowl, for the national championship. Anyone saying anything differently is an idiot. All Pac 10 teams should get a bowl bid, regardless of record, because the conference is just too tough. Pete Carroll is the greatest coach in the history of college football. Did I forget anything?

What is this mumbo jumbo about? Why do you take offense to somebody who expresses their opinion and backs it up? I never argued for any of these pts.

I don't believe I called anybody an idiot or any names for that matter. Why is it so difficult to have a mature discussion?

In conclusion, both CAL and Texas are great teams who had great years. Both teams have 1 loss and they were against the 2 teams playing in the BCS NC game. Both teams deserve and should be playing in a BCS bowl game. My gripe is the way the coaches poll handled its votes and I have shown why. Agree or disagree with me, but it does not change the fact that I laid it all out in front of you to see my argument. My argument is based on concrete facts.

 

[Sun Tzu]

It only took 4 poll points from the previous week for Texas to pass Cal. That means just two people flipping Texas and Cal (pretty justifiable from the So miss game). Texas was only .0013 behing going into the last polls, and the computer numbers didnt change. Fact is, they didnt even need one flip. There was one AP guy in Alabama voting Texas 9th to try and help Auburn who moved them to 5th, still behind Cal. That change alone was enough. You can complain about all the other voters all you want, that is just gravy.

 

[Master Capper]

Scott,

there is no BCS computer it is a combination of six computers. Just ingrain it in your mind that if Auburn wins there is a tainted national title.

 

[Master Capper]

UNC -0.1