March Madness is heating up and everyone is debating and speculating which teams are in and where they will be ranked. In case you are not familiar with the complicated NCAA bracket selection process, ESPN recently published an outstanding article explaining it in great detail. The process is heavily set in the committee members’ opinions, views and personal philosophy on what makes one team superior to another.On the contrary, the college football BCS rankings (which ultimately decide who goes to the bowl games) is just as complicated but instead of relying on a committee, the BCS Standings, “include three components: USA Today Coaches Poll, Harris Interactive College Football Poll and an average of six computer rankings. Each component will count one-third of a team's overall BCS score in the BCS Standings.”
So why does a human committee defeat a human/computer selection process?
1. Late season injuries may not be properly interpreted. In the BCS, the computer portion takes into consideration various ranking systems most of which are based on statistics. If a team-altering injury occurs in the final game or late in the season, the computer statics cannot adequately interpret the implications. Granted, the human ranking element of the BCS can help off-set this, it cannot fully compensate for this shortcoming. Plus in a sport like basketball, (where only 5 men are on the court at a time, a superstar player could carry a team) an injury is potentially devastating for a team and should be fully considered. For example take Georgetown this year. The injury of Chris Wright during their game against Cincinnati on 2/23 led to 4 straight losses in a row ending their season. Georgetown claims Wright will be back for the NCAA tournament, but who really knows? The point is a committee can weigh that; a computer program cannot.
2. Coaches polls are not a valid decision maker. Why does it matter what the coaches (or as speculated not the head coach but perhaps assistant coach or worse) think? Let’s for a second assume the head coach is the one filling out the poll. Even so, they were selected as a coach because they can coach. Not because they can properly evaluate every college football teams’ worthiness for post-season play. The unreliable and frankly biased opinions of the coaches really do not have a place in this process, let alone one with such huge swaying power. The NCAA does provide the committee with 3 different polls (the AP poll, the coaches' poll, and a poll run by the National Association of Basketball Coaches), so if they are so inclined, they can weight those opinions as they see fit. Computers do not have that power and automatically assign the coaches poll 33% of the final decision.
3. Finally, a committee is more unpredictable, and therefore more fun. I am a fan of technology, however the human element of sports is what makes it unpredictable and fun to watch. I have written several articles about technology and sports and how there is a delicate balance between helpful and intrusive. While I have come around on soccer goal-line technology and even enjoyed watching Watson (the IBM computer) play my favorite Jeopardy! player Ken Jennings…I like the element of surprise that comes with a human selection committee. A team that gets hot late in the season or one who’s lost close games due to an insane strength of schedule should be thrown the proverbial bone and bubble into the tourney (even if the math does not support it). Technology has its place, and the wonderful computing power of statics should definitely be referenced by the committee. However at the end of the day people not computers should determine the post season. Ref. espn.com, collegefootballpoll.com, bcsknowhow.com
No comments:
Post a Comment