SST rumor

[tiger88 934]

Charlie mack on sst said that he had heard a RUMOR from several pretty credible sources that mike stoops had voted AU as low as 11th to help his brother out.

Also, no one had voted cal lower than sixth but in the final vote several coaches had them as low as 8th.

Can you say playoff?

Sorry if this has been posted.

[AUesquire 1]

Okay, that brings up something that gripes my a$$ about the whole process. Sorry if this thought has been posted too. Stoops is votong to help his brother and he probably knows squat about Auburn. I heard a clip from Joe Pa this afternoon and he said he knows nothing about the other teams around the country because he's only concerned with his own team and the teams they play.

EXACTLY. Is that not what EVERY COACH says when asked? Then why allow them to vote? If they ADMIT that they don't follow other teams, how can they be allowed to have a say in something that important?

Mike Stoops is a tool and so is big brother.

[tiger88 934]

It's even bigger than that. On talk radio this morning they were going on about how most writers who vote are beat writers for the local university and due to deadlines and such rarely get the chance to check out much football outside of their own conference.

Worst case scenario we need to make coaches votes public, writers too if they're not already.

[PChamp119 96]

Someone, probably Brown or Stoops - voted Texas #2 in their poll and someone voted Cal #3. 2 other coaches voted Texas #3. Four coaches moved the Bears down to No. 7, two to No. 8, when last week none had them below No. 6.

I wrote a post a couple weeks ago - the coaches poll has to go.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

I don't think the coaches poll has to go per se, it just needs to have some accountability. If coaches are unwilling to take the heat for their votes by making them public, they don't deserve to have a say in the process. The current way of doing it is too self-serving and too easily manipulated with no consequences for doing so.

I think the NCAA needs to step in and mandate that all polls that are part of the BCS formula must make their votes public. If it's a computer poll, they have to show not just a final number, but a general idea of how they are coming up with the ranking, like showing how they are rating a team's schedule, etc.

Otherwise, it's too easy to manipulate the votes to achieve a desired result.

[autigeremt 6,677]

I think Mike Stoops should be considered a conflict of interest!

[AuNuma1 1]

11th?? An undefeated SEC team, he votes them 11th?? Good God I hope that's not true.

And I thought American politics were bad.

[Tigermike 3,053]

Yeah and then his brother Ole Honest Bob calls up CTT to offer condolences.

[AUloggerhead 2,253]

I don't think the coaches poll has to go per se, it just needs to have some accountability.  If coaches are unwilling to take the heat for their votes by making them public, they don't deserve to have a say in the process.  The current way of doing it is too self-serving and too easily manipulated with no consequences for doing so.

I think the NCAA needs to step in and mandate that all polls that are part of the BCS formula must make their votes public.  If it's a computer poll, they have to show not just a final number, but a general idea of how they are coming up with the ranking, like showing how they are rating a team's schedule, etc.

Otherwise, it's too easy to manipulate the votes to achieve a desired result.

130367[/snapback]

No. No. No. God NO! I respectfully disagree. The problem all along has been VOTING! We need to eliminate the polls & computer rankings as a means of determing the best teams. Voting is based on a person's perception which means their opinion. It doesn't matter if the voting is done by sportswriters, coaches or fans or whomever. Making the coaches' votes public so that they can "feel the heat" won't make their votes any more objective than they are now. It will just make them all the more susceptable to their loudest critics. Do we really want a coach voting according to an avalanche of critical e-mail? Similarly, making the AP writers wait 5 or 6 weeks from issuing their first poll won't remove the inherent bias they already possess. Take this year for example: if a sportwriter had it in his mind before the season started that SC & OU would be the #1 & #2 teams, what would change his mind 5 or 6 weeks later if these two teams were undefeated like they were?

I tell you, ... there's a lot I don't care for about the pro game. But, I have to admit their playoff system beats the college football system of polls/rankings hands down. The team that makes it through the playoffs & wins the Super Bowl is deserving of the title of Champion.

Voting: bad. Playoff: good. WDE 12-0

[cadillacattack 0]

Making the Coaches votes public will simply result in most of them mirroring their votes along whatever AP voters are suggesting. The Coaches poll is supposed to be the "check-balance" that provides independent validation.

It's clear that the Coaches poll has outlived it's usefulness, IMO.

The current methods are woefully inadequate and must be improved.

[quietfan 233]

Whether or not any of this is actually true or merely rumor, it still spotlights why I don't like the human polls: Humans can be biased and vote their personal agendas.

Of course, some of the computer polls are so convoluted in their process that they don't make sense either.

That's why I support a ranking system that simply awards points for each victory, points for each victory by a defeated opponent, and points for each victory by teams those opponents defeat. Then it becomes a simple mathematical process based on win-loss records, opponent's win/lose records, and their opponents' win/loss records. And those teams that play in major conferences--SEC, Big 10, etc.--would naturally gravitate to the top based on the strength of their opponents and their opponents' opponents. And beating Georgia's, Texas A&M's and Cal's will mean more than beating up on Stanford's, Cincinnati's and Temple's.

[kingfish 73]

Votes should be made public. I do not believe anyone would have voted AU 11th if votes were made public. This would not make an imperfect system perfect, but it should definitely improve the system over what we now have.

[AUloggerhead 2,253]

Votes should be made public.  I do not believe anyone would have voted AU 11th if votes were made public.  This would not make an imperfect system perfect, but it should definitely improve the system over what we now have.

130404[/snapback]

"make an imperfect system perfect." By definition, that would be impossible. Even a "new and improved" imperfect system still leaves you with an imperfect system at the end of the day. I've got an idea: let's strive for a fair & unbiased system. That would elimiate any combination of voting, polls, computer rankings, etc. --- anything that could be influenced by bias. It's football. Let the teams decide who's the best on the field. Voting: bad. Playoff: good. WDE 12-0