Why do we have human polls?

[TopDawg]

There's a lot of griping about the computer polls, but I'm beginning to wonder why we even have human polls when they're this inconsistent. Set aside, for a moment, the disgust about voters who put us at #10 in their ballot. That can be chalked up to hatred, ignorance or any number of other things. But I imagine that those folks who rank us that low ALWAYS rank us lower than they should.

What I'm confused/upset about is the inconsistency.

Basically the human voters, collectively, sent us this message "Our opinions of the teams after roughly 98% of the games have been played is not really how we view those teams."

Last week they told us that Virginia Tech was a better team than LSU. But this week, after Virginia Tech wins by 14 over the team the voters ranked #12, and LSU wins by 7 over the team the voters ranked #14, Virginia Tech somehow became worse than LSU.

LSU got more rep for beating a worse team by fewer points.

There are plenty of teams that should be upset with the way things turned out (and I was plenty upset with the talk...or lack thereof...about OU's situation), but if I were a Va Tech fan, I'd be livid. That's ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.

If they are only going to put thought into the final ballot of the year, or if they are going to completely disregard any thought they've put into ballots throughout the year, why do we even have ballots before the final week?

Again, you've got your ridiculous outliers, who appear to put no thought into it at all, but this is what the collective body of voters told us this week. It makes no sense.

[Widescreen]

but if I were a Va Tech fan, I'd be livid.
I'd be livid if I had to be a Va Tech fan too. ;)

The other question is, why do we have computer polls? This is the same system that crunched numbers and decided Mizzou was better than us even though we beat them twice soundly. Their algorithms just indicated that Mizzou had lost twice to highly ranked teams so they must be better. There is no really good system other than a playoff which may never happen. Of course this year has more controversy than most because of all the upsets.

[Harry Beanbag]

Well, if all we had were computer polls we'd still be ranked behind Missouri. There has to be some sort of human common sense involved or it would be even worse than it already is.

[MamaMia]

Personally, I would be completely happy with a totally computerized system with all the fairly outlined basics programed into it by unbiased genius mathematical monks from the Himalayan mountain region.

[GoTigers]

Computers should play a larger role, but still some human input. Computers don't have agendas, and won't put you in the NCG based on the name on your jersey. That said, Mizzou being ranked ahead of OU at the end of the year is evidence that humans still need to be used, there's no way that Mizzou is better than OU. Maybe if the computers evaluated head to head more, that would work.

[Widescreen]

there's no way that Mizzou is better than OU.
What makes you so sure?

;)

[bluedogok]

Computers should play a larger role, but still some human input. Computers don't have agendas, and won't put you in the NCG based on the name on your jersey. That said, Mizzou being ranked ahead of OU at the end of the year is evidence that humans still need to be used, there's no way that Mizzou is better than OU. Maybe if the computers evaluated head to head more, that would work.
The computers may not have an agenda but the ones who program the formulas may and the BCS who gives them the instructions on how to tweak their formulas surely can. The computers were neutered after OU still going after losing to K-State in 03, all of the factors that sent OU to the game were taken out of the algorithm by the BCS, for the most part they are worthless now due to the BCS.

[Sooner_Havok]

I think we need more than one ballot in the final week, but we probably should wait to start the balloting until week 8 or 9. Look what is propping up LSU right now, wins over a ranked South Carolina, and a ranked Alabama, and a loss to a ranked Kentucky team. It is the same thing every year, the SEC gets inflated rankings that make the conference look uber tough, then the beat their cupcakes, and jump into conference play a week ahead of most other conferences. Then, they argu that they only have losses because they beat each other in conference play. Then, when no one is looking, they play another round of cupcakes to pad the old win column.

Bottom line, start ranking teams later in the season, and you won't have a team playing for a National title that has "big wins" over 6-6 teams.

[noobalicious]

Because the computer rankings blow.

[TopDawg]

Because the computer rankings blow.

So, since the human polls blow too, do we have human polls just to take some of the heat off of the computer polls?

Seriously...that LSU/Va Tech thing is just ridiculous.

It's also pretty ridiculous that Georgia dropped down, but at least I can see some way that can be justified. I don't see how you justify moving Team A below Team B after Team A beat a higher ranked opponent by more points.