Human Polls should be eliminated

[Don Toro]

Take a look at this:

Fresno State 3-1

def. Weber State (2-4, DI-AA)

def. Toledo (4-1)

def. New Mexico State (0-6)

lost to Oregon (5-1)

 Ok, how in the world is Fresno State getting 42,and 34 votes in the AP and USA Today polls respectively?  All the commentators talk about is how "weak" the Big East is but nobody notices how these polls make no sense at all? So many sports reporters out there and nobody cares to question this?  This is just ridiculous.  It is not the BE fault that the idiots that vote don't know what they are doing. USF,WVU, and even UCON(4-1), should be getting the votes that teams like Fresno are getting.

 

[Apis Bull]

Michigan is still getting votes.   ???

[USFPDiddy]

Well, human voters vote based on who they think are the top 25 teams based on what they've seen...the wins and losses are only a part of that.

This, however, allows for obvious subjective bias.  I find it extremely ignorant to waive off computer rankings in favor of human opinion, which has historically cause trouble in EVERY facet of life .

This is exactly why we still need a playoff...that way these rankings would mean less.  The only other solution would be to play more games, and we all know how likely that is.

[lotsofbull99]

You don't judge!

[bulls96go]

the coaches poll for sure should be axed

how do you destroy the #9 team in the country and not get one token vote from coaches who should best be able appreciate the effort?

hell one of our BE brethren should have given us a vote if only for the "****s and grins" effect

[USFPDiddy]

You don't judge!

I have never seen a case made about human polls that makes them better than computers.  Usually the computers simply scares people who don't understand how they work.  If that isn't the case, then they argue what should or shouldn't get considered in the computer polls.

But guess what?  Each HUMAN voter also decides what should or shouldn't get considered in the polls just the same...in the end creating similar effects.

The only complaint is when a "noname" school shows up high in computer polls that wouldnt otherwise.  This happens for 2 reasons: 1.  They belong there or 2. The wrong things were considered.

No poll, computer or human, has captured everything without making a mistake, so judgment needs to be cast heavily.  They need to improve, while at the same time having their impact decreased.  Polls are crappy...USF has no votes while 6-7 schools that we have beaten and lost to better teams than are ahead of us.

[Don Toro]

But guess what?  Each HUMAN voter also decides what should or shouldn't get considered in the polls just the same...in the end creating similar effects.

   I see.  The problem with the computer polls is when they include the human polls as part of the ranking formula which can defeat the whole purpose of the computer poll to begin with.  So going back to my point, take away any reference to a human poll and the computer polls will be superior.

[Guest]

   I see.  The problem with the computer polls is when they include the human polls as part of the ranking formula which can defeat the whole purpose of the computer poll to begin with.  So going back to my point, take away any reference to a human poll and the computer polls will be superior.

Moises... I think Diddy was saying that since humans have to program the formula for the computer polls, that introduces human bias into the system.  Since human bias is always present, there is no way to know for certain that the computers are better than the human polls.

I can say that computer polls are usually complicated mathematical formulae that take a number of items into account in an attempt to provide some kind of commonality against which teams can be ranked.

Who can say whether Fresno State or USF is the better team? We have no common opponents. We have few (if any) common opponents to our opponents.  It becomes quite the challenge to compare these teams.  Thus, the complicated computer polls.

It is obvious that Diddy is correct when he says there is human bias in a computer poll -- otherwise, how could there be different results? Wouldn't the rankings be the same for every computer?  Since they are not the same, then there are differences in the forumlae that are deliberate choices made by the programmers.

[Don Toro]

It is obvious that Diddy is correct when he says there is human bias in a computer poll -- otherwise, how could there be different results? Wouldn't the rankings be the same for every computer?  Since they are not the same, then there are differences in the forumlae that are deliberate choices made by the programmers.

 Simple, different formulas give different weight to objective criteria, and add to that the fact that some polls may use the human polls as part of the formula.  Another good thing in favor of computer rankings is that they can't have in its equation the "reputation" of a team, its perceived greatness, the reputation of a coach (hence UTEP getting votes in human polls), and other highly subjective criteria that reporters and coaches use.  It is no coincidence that most computer polls give USF a better ranking than the human ones.  Is just not possible for a voter to analyze and compare stats from 119 teams, and match them against each team like a computer can. Yes the programmer creates the formula but is designed to calculate stats not to calculate notions, ideas, and opinions.