Here is the latest AP votes for WVU. If you read you see that multiple people from ESPN are voting in this poll. Wouldn't this be a conflict of interest? How can you vote for/against teams that you are mandated by your employer to like/dislike. This is clear evidence of why these polls are bogus.

http://pollspeak.com/pollstalker/pollsta...16&w=3&r=T

The AP Poll isn't part of the BCS formula. It means nothing.

I just looked @ Pitts. It really doesn't make much sense to me. Pitt is ranked as high as 11 and most of the pollsters have Pitt unranked.

Exactly matt. The only way the AP would matter is if you're ranked in the Top 5. If you finish #1 in the AP but you don't finish #1 in the BCS then you get a national title (the AP's national title) which is a "legitimate" national title. But that will be rare because the AP will probably just vote along the same lines as the Coaches Polls.

Well, the fact that the coaches stuff their ballots with teams from their own conferences is evidence enough that the system is bogus.

I strongly disagree that this poll doesn't matter-where do you think the coaches and some other polls get there ideas from as to who should be ranked. The media also uses this poll when talking about who is ranked or not and where. This poll is very influential towards how BE teams are perceived nationally. They say no BE team is any good and before you know it no BE teams are ranked.

None of the polls matter at this point in the season...

There already was a conflict of interest. Columnists promote their knowledge of college football, propagate preseason polls (which are more predictions than valuations of actual talent), hold dear to their predictions and use them as a base to judge the individual week's events.

(09-14-2009 09:07 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  Here is the latest AP votes for WVU. If you read you see that multiple people from ESPN are voting in this poll. Wouldn't this be a conflict of interest? How can you vote for/against teams that you are mandated by your employer to like/dislike. This is clear evidence of why these polls are bogus.

http://pollspeak.com/pollstalker/pollsta...16&w=3&r=T

The most worn out complaint by all sports fans (whether college or pro) is that "ESPN is biased against my team/conference". EVERY person can pick out some quotes on ESPN, string them together, and make it appear as though there's some type of bias. Duke, Notre Dame, and Yankees fans complain constantly about how ESPN is supposedly biased against them because the network always makes them into the "enemy". Lakers fans think that ESPN has an anti-Kobe bias, while other NBA fans think that ESPN keeps pushing Kobe as the GOAT other than Michael Jordan. Big Ten fans complain about an SEC bias on ESPN, while SEC fans complain about a Big Ten bias on ESPN. All of the other conferences complain that ESPN is biased against them because of ESPN's huge contracts with the Big Ten and SEC.

Guess what - the people at ESPN are human as opposed to robots, just like the rest of us. Could they harbor some deep-seeded biases from childhood or college days? Maybe, but no more so than anyone else on this message board or any other media member that is voting in the AP Poll. I'd be much more suspect of media votes from any college town newspaper or even major newspapers with strong conference ties (i.e. LA Times with the Pac-10, Dallas Morning News with the Big 12, Atlanta Journal-Constitution with the SEC, etc.) than from ESPN. Look, I've got plenty of complaints about ESPN and many of their announcers (i.e. Dickie V, despite his good works outside of announcing). However, the fact is that pretty much every fan base in existence thinks that ESPN is screwing them, and as long as everyone thinks that way, then they actually must be doing something right on that front. ESPN is by far the single largest media entity covering sports, so it would be ridiculous to NOT have ESPN employees vote in the AP Poll.

(09-15-2009 06:56 AM)buckaineer Wrote:  I strongly disagree that this poll doesn't matter-where do you think the coaches and some other polls get there ideas from as to who should be ranked. The media also uses this poll when talking about who is ranked or not and where. This poll is very influential towards how BE teams are perceived nationally. They say no BE team is any good and before you know it no BE teams are ranked.

I'll agree with you here. Maybe we believe that they SHOULDN'T matter. However, we can say that all day but the reality is that they matter a LOT. It's like the US News Rankings - university presidents talk all year that those rankings don't matter, but then as soon as those rankings come out, all of those same university presidents will trumpet how well they performed if they ended up with a high ranking (along with commensurate press releases and splashes on the school website). Why? Because those rankings DO matter to the general public, whether it's fair or not.

Likewise, there's a wide gulf between being ranked and unranked. If you're ranked, your score gets mentioned on most of the newscasts and is in a more visible portion of newspapers across the entire country. If you're not ranked, then your score is buried in the papers and likely not mentioned at all outside of your local TV newscast. Your upcoming games receive more analysis on ESPN and other networks during the week if you're ranked. If you're unranked but playing against a conference opponent that's ranked, you get the residual benefit of having your game being analyzed, as well (so the conference overall receives more exposure and coverage). If you're Average Joe Sports Fan flipping through the channels on a Saturday afternoon, which game are you more likely to stop on - a game between 2 ranked opponents or one without any ranked opponents? You can tell the general public all you want that they shouldn't care about something, but that doesn't make it true. Perception is reality, as they always say.

(09-15-2009 05:58 AM)CatsClaw Wrote:  Exactly matt. The only way the AP would matter is if you're ranked in the Top 5. If you finish #1 in the AP but you don't finish #1 in the BCS then you get a national title (the AP's national title) which is a "legitimate" national title.

I don't think so. Since the BCS schools started crowning a national champ, it's all about the crystal football. The AP title means nothing.

Beyond that, of course these polls are ridiculous (including the coaches and BCS polls) and should count for nothing but ***** and giggles. Football titles should be earned on the field, not voted on. I hope that's not controversial.

(09-15-2009 01:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-15-2009 05:58 AM)CatsClaw Wrote:  Exactly matt. The only way the AP would matter is if you're ranked in the Top 5. If you finish #1 in the AP but you don't finish #1 in the BCS then you get a national title (the AP's national title) which is a "legitimate" national title.

I don't think so. Since the BCS schools started crowning a national champ, it's all about the crystal football. The AP title means nothing.

However, I think that most people (and definitely the media) credit USC with a national title in 2003 and refer to that season as a "split national title" year despite the BCS being in place. So, the AP title definitely carries weight if it differs from the BCS title.

Of course, the BCS rankings were changed after that season where the human poll component is given much more weight, which reduces the likelihood of there ever being a disagreement between the AP and BCS for the top 2 spots. (Even though the BCS doesn't use the AP Poll, the Harris Poll takes its cues from the AP Poll.)

The irony is that part of the reason why the BCS was created was to supposedly emphasize "objective" criteria such as computer rankings and strength of schedule as opposed to the polls. Yet, when the very first time that the "objective" criteria happened to differ from the human polls, the BCS changed everything around so that the human polls would trump all.

(09-15-2009 02:41 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-15-2009 01:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-15-2009 05:58 AM)CatsClaw Wrote:  Exactly matt. The only way the AP would matter is if you're ranked in the Top 5. If you finish #1 in the AP but you don't finish #1 in the BCS then you get a national title (the AP's national title) which is a "legitimate" national title.

I don't think so. Since the BCS schools started crowning a national champ, it's all about the crystal football. The AP title means nothing.

However, I think that most people (and definitely the media) credit USC with a national title in 2003 and refer to that season as a "split national title" year despite the BCS being in place. So, the AP title definitely carries weight if it differs from the BCS title.

Of course, the BCS rankings were changed after that season where the human poll component is given much more weight, which reduces the likelihood of there ever being a disagreement between the AP and BCS for the top 2 spots. (Even though the BCS doesn't use the AP Poll, the Harris Poll takes its cues from the AP Poll.)

The irony is that part of the reason why the BCS was created was to supposedly emphasize "objective" criteria such as computer rankings and strength of schedule as opposed to the polls. Yet, when the very first time that the "objective" criteria happened to differ from the human polls, the BCS changed everything around so that the human polls would trump all.

I agree it still carries some weight, particularly with the media (gee, no conflict there, eh?), but IMO there's little doubt that if you asked coaches, players, fans, etc. which one you would want to win, if you could only win one, that 9/10 would pick the BCS title. It's the 'official' title of the BCS member schools, after all.

And yeah, the various modifications to the formula, in response to public 'outrage' over polls, computers, etc. has been ironic. Just reveals the 'corrupt' nature of trying to vote on a champion, IMO.

(09-15-2009 12:00 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-14-2009 09:07 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  Here is the latest AP votes for WVU. If you read you see that multiple people from ESPN are voting in this poll. Wouldn't this be a conflict of interest? How can you vote for/against teams that you are mandated by your employer to like/dislike. This is clear evidence of why these polls are bogus.

http://pollspeak.com/pollstalker/pollsta...16&w=3&r=T

The most worn out complaint by all sports fans (whether college or pro) is that "ESPN is biased against my team/conference". EVERY person can pick out some quotes on ESPN, string them together, and make it appear as though there's some type of bias. Duke, Notre Dame, and Yankees fans complain constantly about how ESPN is supposedly biased against them because the network always makes them into the "enemy". Lakers fans think that ESPN has an anti-Kobe bias, while other NBA fans think that ESPN keeps pushing Kobe as the GOAT other than Michael Jordan. Big Ten fans complain about an SEC bias on ESPN, while SEC fans complain about a Big Ten bias on ESPN. All of the other conferences complain that ESPN is biased against them because of ESPN's huge contracts with the Big Ten and SEC.

Guess what - the people at ESPN are human as opposed to robots, just like the rest of us. Could they harbor some deep-seeded biases from childhood or college days? Maybe, but no more so than anyone else on this message board or any other media member that is voting in the AP Poll. I'd be much more suspect of media votes from any college town newspaper or even major newspapers with strong conference ties (i.e. LA Times with the Pac-10, Dallas Morning News with the Big 12, Atlanta Journal-Constitution with the SEC, etc.) than from ESPN. Look, I've got plenty of complaints about ESPN and many of their announcers (i.e. Dickie V, despite his good works outside of announcing). However, the fact is that pretty much every fan base in existence thinks that ESPN is screwing them, and as long as everyone thinks that way, then they actually must be doing something right on that front. ESPN is by far the single largest media entity covering sports, so it would be ridiculous to NOT have ESPN employees vote in the AP Poll.

I am not sure how anyone can claim there isn't bias with these media pundits. How many times have I read or heard from their own mouths on tv and radio "--x team doesn't deserve a high ranking or deserve to play for the national championship because they aren't a traditional team that I feel deserves to do this". That is clearly bias and these people are the ones deciding which games are on television, which games and teams are discussed, who is ranked and where, etc.

Just today the pundits on tv had discussion after discussion about ND for example. The same ND that hasn't been a good team for years yet was somehow ranked to start the season only to fall out when they lost to an average team. They aren't ranked and are 1-1 with no wins in a long time against any strong teams yet are still being discussed. At the same time many undefeated teams aren't sniffing the rankings and aren't being discussed. This is bias and affects the rankings and the future well being of such programs.

(09-15-2009 04:29 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  I am not sure how anyone can claim there isn't bias with these media pundits. How many times have I read or heard from their own mouths on tv and radio "--x team doesn't deserve a high ranking or deserve to play for the national championship because they aren't a traditional team that I feel deserves to do this". That is clearly bias and these people are the ones deciding which games are on television, which games and teams are discussed, who is ranked and where, etc.

Just today the pundits on tv had discussion after discussion about ND for example. The same ND that hasn't been a good team for years yet was somehow ranked to start the season only to fall out when they lost to an average team. They aren't ranked and are 1-1 with no wins in a long time against any strong teams yet are still being discussed. At the same time many undefeated teams aren't sniffing the rankings and aren't being discussed. This is bias and affects the rankings and the future well being of such programs.

How is that different than the columnist in the LA Times that slobbers over USC or the writer at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that thinks that the BCS should just proclaim the winner of the SEC Championship Game as the national champion? Those people as well as the commentators at ESPN might very well be biased, but if you were to remove every single person from the AP Poll that's supposedly biased, then there would be no one available to vote. The best that you can do is draw from a large enough cross-section of the country to obtain something that looks close to rational in the aggregate (just as you would for any type of poll for any issue). We're putting too much emphasis on individual voters here - while some individuals might be crazy, if you have a large enough sample size, the impact of those outliers is minimized.

My issue is that too many fans complain ad nauseum that there's some type of ESPN conspiracy against their favorite team or conference, which I don't believe that's the case. ESPN doesn't talk about ND because it is biased in favor of that school or has lots of alums working there. Otherwise, this week's Northwestern-Syracuse game would be hyped up more than Ohio State-USC since those two schools happen to be the two largest feeder schools to ESPN. The network talks about ND because the general public that doesn't have an attachment to any particular college football team finds news about ND interesting, just as they find news about the Yankees, Lakers, and Cowboys more interesting than news about the Royals, Clippers, and Jaguars.

The only bias that ESPN has is towards its own pocketbook. ND and some other high profile schools may serve that purpose, so yes, they get more coverage. Always remember that the vast majority of people that are watching ESPN at any given moment don't give a crap about the teams that any of us cheer for. It's a national network that has to be programmed for a national audience. So, if you're a programming director at ESPN whose job is to draw ratings, you're going to spend a whole lot more time talking about those particular teams that draw national interest than those that don't. They have zero duty or obligation to have some type of "affirmative action" policy to prop up less popular teams at the expense of ratings. That's not "bias" (at least in the sense that it's thrown around on blogs and message boards, where people argue that ESPN is somehow cheering ND and other particular teams on from an emotional standpoint) - that's simply a rational business decision.