Problems with BCS Rankings, Polls, etc.

When Division I-A elects to have a playoff, it will also have to choose a system to select teams for the playoffs.  In order to be fair, any system chosen by Division I-A must at a minimum do three things: (1) reward teams for the right reasons, (2) be easy to understand, and (3) the results must make sense.  Unlike Crabtree's College Football Rankings, most of the current methods for ranking teams fail one or more of these three criteria as summarized below.   
 
Problems with the Polls

All polls, including the AP and USA Today/ESPN polls, fail the above criteria because of the limitations normally inherent in polls.  Polls are not scientific, but are determined by a large number of people who, without spending much time actually analyzing most of the 117 teams they are reviewing, are then asked to give their opinion as to who the top 25 teams are.  As a result, polls generally favor well known teams and virtually ignore good teams from small conferences.  Additionally, polls reward teams for running up scores on other teams and pay very little attention to each team's strength of schedule.  For these reasons, polls should not be used by Division I-A to select teams for a playoff.  The big six conferences were well aware of these deficiencies in the polls, and tried to overcome them by creating the complicated and confusing BCS Rankings.     
 
Problems with the BCS Rankings

In 1998 the big six conferences were unable to agree on a system for selecting the top two teams in the country.  Therefore, they decided by default to lump together a bunch of polls, computer rankings and other measurements (all of which individually have flaws), in the hope that by averaging all of these flawed systems together the top two teams in the country will end up on the top.  Thus, the controversial BCS Rankings were born.  However, this system has never been accepted by the majority of college football fans, and the big six conferences have publicly acknowledged its shortcomings by continuing to change and modify the BCS Rankings each year.   

 

The BCS Rankings fail to reward teams for the right reasons in part because it relies too heavily on the two main polls.  Additionally, the BCS Rankings use a complex and confusing system to rank teams that makes it virtually impossible for anyone to understand exactly what a team needs to do to be ranked high in the BCS Rankings.  Lastly, the results of the BCS Rankings often do not make any sense.  For example, the 2002 final BCS Rankings had Kansas State ranked 8th and Texas ranked 10th.  However, Texas (10-2) had a better record than Kansas State (8-2) against Division I-A competition, Texas (53.5%) played a tougher schedule than Kansas State (51.6%), and Texas beat Kansas State at Kansas State (17-14).  So why was Kansas State ranked above Texas in the BCS Rankings?  Don't worry, the BCS doesn't know either.  For these reasons, the BCS Rankings should not be used by Division I-A to select teams for a playoff.   

Problems with Other Computer Rankings

There are many computer ranking systems out there, which generally fall into two different categories.  The first category are computer rankings that are developed to predict what teams are going to win each week and by how much.  These computer rankings are generally used for betting purposes and usually use margin of victory in their calculations.  For example, last year some of these computer rankings had Kansas State and/or USC ranked above the undefeated Miami and Ohio State, solely because Kansas State and USC had higher margins of victory than Miami and Ohio State.  This type of system clearly does not work when trying to fairly select the top 16 teams for a playoff. 

 

The second category of computer rankings generally try to rank teams based solely on how they performed throughout the year.  However, other than Crabtree's College Football Rankings, all of the computer rankings that I am aware of fail one or more of the three criteria.  They fail these criteria because they reward teams for the wrong reasons such as margin of victory, use very complicated mathematical formulas which are virtually impossible for the average person to understand, and their results don't make any sense.  For these reasons, the other computer rankings should not be used by Division I-A to select teams for a playoff.

 

Problems with Using a Selection Committee   

When all else fails, some college sports use a selection committee to choose some or all of the teams for a playoff.  However, using a selection committee is very flawed in that it puts a lot of power in the hands of a few people who, like all of us, have their own individual biases.  Additionally, a selection committee is biased like a poll in that there are no objective criteria for determining who makes the playoffs, just these people's opinions.  For these reasons, it is virtually guaranteed that a selection committee's decisions will be very controversial each year, and that the majority of college football fans will not endorse using a selection committee.  Therefore, a selection committee should not be used by Division I-A to select teams for a playoff.

Problems with Giving Guaranteed Playoff Spots for Conference Champions

When Division I-A adopts a playoff, many people will argue for giving guaranteed playoff spots to the champions of certain conferences.  However, it is difficult to determine which conferences should get guaranteed playoff spots because conferences currently vary greatly in both size and quality.  Additionally, conferences can vary greatly from one year to the next because teams are leaving conferences and joining new conferences, and the strength of individual teams in each conference can also change greatly each year. 

The only reason to give a guaranteed playoff spot to a conference champion is if the particular conference fears that their conference champion will not be ranked as one of the top 16 teams in the country, in which case they shouldn't be in the playoffs anyways.  Also, these guaranteed playoff spots are unfair because they can result in a stronger team being excluded from the playoffs in order to include a weaker team who won their conference championship.  For these reasons, I do not believe that Division I-A should give guaranteed playoff spots to conference champions.

 
Summary

All of the current methods for ranking teams have demonstrated that they reward teams for the wrong reasons, are too complex to understand, or their results don't make any sense.  Therefore, I believe that Crabtree's College Football Rankings should be used by Divisions I-A to select teams for its playoff.