A better ranking than the BCS?

Posted on by

BCS-logo-150.gifThe usual hue and cry met this week’s first Bowl Championship Series rankings of the 2006 college football season. I must admit that it’s pretty difficult to understand how Auburn, which was plastered at home a couple of weeks ago by 13th-ranked Arkansas, could be ranked fourth, five places ahead of Texas, which has manhandled 22nd-ranked Oklahoma and lost only to top-ranked Ohio State.
At any rate, there is a better way. Las Vegas Sports Consultants is the leading consultant for Nevada sports books and, last year, they began publishing their own OddsMakers Top 25. Inasmuch as the firm’s four college football oddsmakers were already preparing ratings for all 119 Division I-A teams, they decided to submit ballots and calculate the results for use in their radio shows. They rank teams based on such criteria as injuries, performance, skill and game location, not on won-loss record and not on which teams will draw the greatest or least betting action (that’s for the bookies) Their poll is gaining traction in betting markets and is now published every Monday in the Las Vegas Review-Journal.
For my money, this ranking — which is based on the profit motive (LVSC is attempting to attract betting customers through the accuracy of its research) — is a more accurate way to rank teams than the way in which voters of widely-varying interest rank teams in the more traditional polls. The following is this week’s Oddsmakers Top 25 poll with the team record and BCS ranking in parentheses.
1. Ohio State (7-0) (1)
2. Texas (6-1) (9)
3. Michigan (7-0) (3)
4. California (6-1) (10)
5. Louisiana State (5-2) (18)
6. Southern Cal (6-0) (2)
7. Florida (6-1) (6)
8. Tennessee (5-1) (11)
9. Louisville (6-0) (7)
10. Notre Dame (5-1) (8)
11. Clemson (6-1) (12)
12. Wisconsin (6-1) (21)
13. Oregon (5-1) (14)
14. West Virginia (6-0) (5)
15. Auburn (6-1) (4)
16. Nebraska (6-1) (17)
17. Oklahoma (4-2) (22)
18. Boise State (7-0) (15)
19. Georgia Tech (5-1) (19)
20. Miami (4-2) (NR)
21. Pittsburgh (6-1) (NR)
22. Penn State (4-3) (NR)
23. Arkansas (5-1) (13)
24. Florida State (4-2) (NR)
25. Missouri (6-1) (24)
My sense is that Horns’ fans are already sold on this poll over the BCS ranking.

2 thoughts on “A better ranking than the BCS?”

  1. You got some publicity on 610AM this morning for your posting of this alternative to the BCS. While I am a Longhorn fan, I would have to say that I’m not so sure that this ranking would be better, if the folks doing the ranking are simply looking at how well a team does against the spread (since you can beat the spread and still lose). Having LSU at number 5, with two losses, shows that this poll has some problems as well.
    I would venture to say that until D1A has a playoff system in place (when ever, or if ever that will happen is a whole different question) there will never be a real way to determine a true national champion.

    Reply ↓

  2. I must admit that it’s pretty difficult to understand how Auburn, which was plastered at home a couple of weeks ago by 13th-ranked Arkansas, could be ranked fourth, five places ahead of Texas, which has manhandled 22nd-ranked Oklahoma and lost only to top-ranked Ohio State.
    As perceptions go, the Big 12 is a very mediocre power conference this year, whereas the SEC is not.
    But it’s not like the BCS is the only screwy ranking system. Just look at the NCAA basketball tourney last year, and the perceived strength of Missouri Valley teams, largely a result of some very clever scheduling strategies that effectively “gamed” the RPI system (another set of computer rankings).
    What are ya gonna do?

    Reply ↓

Leave a Reply