This is why the BCS is a joke

No, but they've had better (read: undefeated) seasons than us.

What you should be angry about is the 13 point lead blown at Kentucky.

 

Isn't this just the Sagarin rankings?

 

Shhh....it could get very interesting. :grin:

 

Last week Saragin had:

BC
LSU
OSU
Kansas
ASU

So you can see how much our opponents losing hurt us.

 

Computers were never meant to be part of football.

 

I disagree that LSU still controls its destiny for the MNC. It's quite apparent that that ship sailed at UK.

 

Computers can and should be a very important component to which teams play for the NC. Computers are able to judge all teams evenly without bias or influence. The best human voters are unable to evenly judge every game of the entire season and each game's changing relevance as the season unfolds.

Unfortunately, the BCS limits computers by forcing them to minimize the impact of SoS. I also believe some of the computer ratings the BCS uses are not very well designed.

 

The point I was making is that you cant rely on an equation and computer to accurately rank teams.

 

LSU controls its destiny as much as any SEC team possibly can. If you don't buy that, just take a look at the SEC East standings. My position is that first and foremost on the agenda is WINNING THE SEC, and that is entirely within LSU's power. Anything beyond that is lagniappe.

The undefeated teams benefit more from a weak conference schedule than are hurt by it, since that 0 in the L column is the single greatest factor with computers and polls alike. At this point, I still believe we will see several undefeateds fall by the wayside (I'm looking at Kansas, ASU, and possibly OSU). But this year, pollsters may finally have to answer the question of whether a 1-loss SEC champion deserves to be in the BCSCG more than an undefeated champion from a weak conference (Big 10, Big 12, or Big East).

 

Sometimes it's clear that a team does not perform up to its talent level or loses a game to another very good team by a very small margin. In most computer ratings, teams can go undefeated against mediocre teams and be ranked higher than great teams that are seriously tested by other great teams.

I don't think any of the current computer models would be taken seriously by themselves. Most of the time when they are cited specifically is when certain teams who are considered by most people to be pretenders or have played weak competition point at the computer rankings which have them at #1 or #2 or some garbage like that.