Voter Bias May Doom NIU's BCS Quest

Are the voters still holding last season's Orange Bowl against Northern Illinois?

That certainly appears to be the case. While the Huskies have continued their unbeaten run this season, their position in the polls seems to be stuck in neutral.

In contrast, their main competitor for the non-AQ BCS spot, Fresno State, has made much more significant gains in the polls. The Bulldogs now have a commanding lead in the latest BCS standings, even though at No. 14, they're just one spot ahead of Northern Illinois.

Fresno State's lead is built entirely on the polls, as the two teams—both 9-0—are in a dead heat in the computer rankings. But since the polls account for two thirds of the BCS standings, voter preference most likely will decide which team gets the coveted BCS bowl slot (and a bonus in excess of $10 million to that team's conference).

To qualify for the berth, likely in the Fiesta Bowl, Fresno or NIU must finish in the top 16 of the final BCS standings and ahead one of the current AQ conference champion, or in the top 12. And only the highest-ranked team will earn the BCS berth even if both meet the qualification.

Since the Harris Poll was released in Week 7, here's the progression of both teams in the two polls:

(FULL ARTICLE @ BLEACHER REPORT)

How BCS Works, and Why It's Going Away

After 16 years of existence, the Bowl Championship Series will be ushered into the ash heap of history following the completion of this season. The College Football Playoff will replace the BCS starting next season, discarding almost the entire infrastructure of the old system.

But for one last time, we still must contend with BCS's rules and protocols. For the past nine years, the setup has been actually quite consistent and without any significant changes. As a result, the process is fairly easy to understand and there is a decent degree of transparency.

The first piece, of course, is the BCS standings. The formula was altered in 2004 and has remain unchanged other than in 2005 the Harris Interactive Poll replaced the AP Poll in the standings. The 2004 remake shifted the weight of the standings to the human voters to such a degree that at least for the purpose of creating the BCS championship matchups, the computers have been rendered irrelevant.

The Coaches Poll and Harris Poll each account for one-third of the standings and then the computers the other one-third. The poll numbers are tabulated not by the teams' actual rankings but by the percentage of vote shares. The computer score comes from the average of six computer rankings—with margin of victory forbidden to be used as a component—after the highest and lowest rankings are thrown out.

Since the adoption of the current formula in 2004, every team that finished either first or second in the polls have played in the BCS title game because of the preponderance of human polls. Alabama finished third in the computer rankings in both 2011 and 2012 (behind Oklahoma State and Florida, respectively), yet played and won both BCS title games because it placed second in the polls both years.

(FULL ARTICLE @ BLEACHER REPORT)

The Guru's BlogPoll Ballot (Week 8)

The Guru's BlogPoll ballot, with notes below:

BCS Guru Ballot - Week 8

Rank	Team	Delta
1	Alabama Crimson Tide	--
2	Oregon Ducks	--
3	Kansas St. Wildcats	--
4	Florida Gators	--
5	Notre Dame Fighting Irish	--
6	Oregon St. Beavers	--
7	Oklahoma Sooners	--
8	LSU Tigers	--
9	USC Trojans	1
10	Mississippi St. Bulldogs	1
11	Texas Tech Red Raiders	3
12	Florida St. Seminoles	4
13	Ohio St. Buckeyes	-1
14	Clemson Tigers	4
15	Georgia Bulldogs	--
16	Michigan Wolverines	3
17	Texas A&M Aggies	-4
18	South Carolina Gamecocks	-9
19	Stanford Cardinal	1
20	Louisiana Tech Bulldogs	2
21	Boise St. Broncos	--
22	Ohio Bobcats	3
23	Rutgers Scarlet Knights	New
24	Louisville Cardinals	New
25	Tulsa Golden Hurricane	New
Dropouts: West Virginia Mountaineers, TCU Horned Frogs, Nevada Wolf Pack

SB Nation BlogPoll College Football Top 25 Rankings

* There isn't a lot of movement on my ballot this week because there's just not that much happening. K-State beat the living crap out of an overrated West Virginia team. Florida trouncing South Carolina at home - the margin was a mild surprise but the outcome was not. Oregon blasted Arizona State, as expected, even if the Ducks pretty much took the second half off after taking a 43-7 halftime lead.

* Yet, Oregon lost a lot of ground in the only two polls that matter in the BCS standings - and the two polls that has the most number of clueless voters. Case-in-point, Nevada, despite losing at home in OT to San Diego State, gained two more votes in the Harris Poll. Come again?

* I'm reluctantly adding both of the undefeated Big East teams in this week's ballot, meaning now all 11 remaining unbeaten teams are ranked. Even if they played against unimpressive competition, the fact that Rutgers and Louisville still have yet to lose will have to count for something.

* Conference-by-conference tally: SEC (7), Pac-12 (4), Big 12 (3), Big Ten (2), ACC (2), Big East (2), C-USA (1), MWC (1), MAC (1), WAC (1), Independent (1).

Final Simulated BCS Standings

Next Sunday, the BCS will release its first official standings for the 2009 season, so this is the final Simulated BCS Standings.

As has been the practice since our inception, beginning next week, the Guru will release the projections for the BCS Standings by Saturday night, following the final game of consequence for the evening - in next week's case, the Missouri-Oklahoma State game that kicks off at 9:15 p.m. ET. On Sundays, the Guru will publish the most comprehensive BCS Standings anywhere, including every team that has received any points from the polls and computers.

The final Simulated BCS Standings are a bit of a downer, as world order appears to have been restored. Florida, the consensus No. 1 in the polls, is also No. 1 in the BCS Standings. The Gators will be No. 1 in the first official standings next week as well, no matter what happens as long as they defeat Arkansas. Florida is No. 1 because it has an insurmountable lead in the two polls.

Alabama checks in at No. 2, now slightly behind Florida in the computer ratings. The Tide have made up ground on Texas in the polls, tying the 'Horns in the Harris poll for No. 2. They have opened up a rather comfortable lead over everyone else while rolling toward a collision with Florida in the SEC title game.

Virginia Tech has leap-frogged unbeaten Texas for No. 3. The Longhorns, after another lackluster victory against an outmatched opponent, are slipping fast in the polls and getting no love from the computers. Texas' troubles with the computers will continue even if it defeats Oklahoma next week, as OU is ranked in the top 25 only by Billingsley.

Lurking at No. 6, behind Boise State, is USC. But the Trojans' misfortune with the computers is about to change. They face Notre Dame, Oregon State and Oregon in the next three weeks - three teams fairly well-regarded by the computers. If USC manages to sweep the trio, then it will have a chance to move back up the standings as some of the frontrunners fall. The Trojans finish the season with three straight home games.

The Guru's prediction of a Boise State ceiling appears to have been on target, as Boise is getting dropped by one-loss teams even during a bye week. USC jumped the Broncos in the always-suspect Coaches Poll though both teams were idle. In the Harris Poll, Boise was jumped by Virginia Tech this week.

After their Wednesday night game at Tulsa, the Broncos will finish the slate with seven straight against WAC opponents, with only one (Idaho) currently boasting a winning record. Boise State, at this juncture, appears to have no shot at the BCS title game, even if all other teams have at least one loss. The Broncos might even have to fend off TCU for a BCS bowl spot if both teams finish the season undefeated.

Both Coaches and Harris polls continue to defy logic and undermine their credibility (whatever little they had to start with) with some oddball rankings. In the Coaches Poll, Oklahoma, with two losses, is ahead of BYU, which has one loss and has beaten the Sooners head-to-head. In the Harris Poll, Tennessee (3-3), Michigan State (3-3) and Connecticut (3-2) all received votes - which begs the question: Are these voters willfully ignorant or downright stupid?

But we'll never know. Since they won't tell us who voted how for whom.

The Fatal Flaw of the BCS

What's wrong with the BCS? Look no further than the two polls that account for two-thirds of the BCS Standings.

This week's Simulated BCS Standings are just about as good as the real thing, with nearly 90 percent of the data for the actual standings available - both the Coaches and Harris polls and four of the six computers.

But the near-fatal flaw of the BCS Standings becomes immediately evident as soon as the Harris Poll is released. With another year potentially to be dominated by parity - only 17 teams remain unbeaten after four weeks - the standings will have the final say on who gets to play in the BCS national championship game. And yet again, the standings will be heavily influenced by two highly biased and unreliable polls.

Let's count the ways:

1. The Harris Poll doesn't come out until the fourth week of the season, ostensibly to free the voters from preseason prejudices. Guess what? It's just not happening. The top 10 of the Harris Poll has the exact same 10 teams from the AP Poll, and in the exact order, except for Nos. 8-9 Ohio State and Oklahoma traded places.

2. If the Harris Poll was to be free of preseason biases, how would you explain the fact that Oregon is ranked No. 23 and Cal at No. 21? The Ducks just destroyed the Bears by 39 points. The two teams have identical records at 3-1. And Oregon played a considerably tougher schedule than the Bears did, with games against three ranked opponents. If the Harris voters indeed voted on the basis of pure performance, there is no way that Cal should be ranked ahead of Oregon. ... The same goes for Penn State being two spots ahead of Iowa.

3. The credibility of the Harris Poll is again highly questionable, with voters putting teams like Iowa State, Kansas State, Washington and Texas Tech in the top 25.

4. The Coaches Poll has the same sort of problems, as usual. And since both polls do not release the individual ballots to the public until the final vote, there is little or no transparency in the process.

As long as these two polls get to dominate the BCS Standings, the BCS will always lack a certain amount of legitimacy. With so much money and prestige on the line in the biggest intercollegiate sport, it's in many ways mind-boggling that a system can continue to thrive with so little checks and balances to ensure fairness.

Then again, big-time college sports isn't really about fairness, is it?

Waiting on the Harris Poll

Next Monday's Simulated BCS Standings will be nearly as good as the real thing (so maybe our friend Chris Dufresne might stop mocking us at the Fabulous Forum). The Harris Poll will be released for the first time on Sunday. That, combined with the Coaches Poll, four of the six computers, gave us nearly 90% of the components of the BCS Standings.

The only components missing would be two computer rankings: Anderson & Hester, which will release its first 2009 ratings after the Oct. 3 games; and Peter Wolfe, who always withholds the data until the first Official BCS Standings are released, this year on Oct. 18.

A few notes about the Harris Interactive College Football Poll, which was founded after the Associated Press demanded that its poll be removed from the BCS Standings following the Cal-Texas Rose Bowl debacle in 2004:

* This is the fifth season that the Harris poll has been an element of the BCS Standings.

* The Harris Poll comprises one-third of the Standings. The other two elements, of course, are the USA Today Coaches Poll and the average of six computer rankings.

* Each of the 11 conferences nominated 30 people to serve on the Harris panel; Harris randomly selected 10 from each bunch. Notre Dame nominated nine (Harris selected three) and Army and Navy nominated three (Harris selected one.) Yep, there are 114 panelists.

* The identities of the panelists will be made available by the end of the week.

* The rankings will be posted on the Harris Web site each Sunday. But each panelist's individual ballot will not be revealed until the final regular season poll. Unlike the AP and Coaches Poll, the Harris Poll does not have a final poll that comes out after the bowls.

Why the AP Poll Still Matters

The Associated Press top 25 was released over the weekend. And it didn't make much of a splash aside from that Florida got an unprecedented 58 of 60 first-place votes.

But don't be fooled. Even in the BCS Era, the AP Poll still matters. A lot.

Ever since the AP asked (or more accurately, demanded) out of the BCS standings after the 2004 season, the most venerable and prestigious college football poll seemed to have taken a backseat. To the coaches poll, for sure. But also to the Harris Poll, which was founded for no other reason than to replace AP in the BCS standings.

On so many levels, however, the AP Poll is still very influential:

1. It has more credibility than any other poll: The AP poll began in 1936, long before the coaches poll (1950) and never mind the Harris poll (2005). It has released a weekly ranking with a final poll without interruption, through war and peace. Its voters' identities are disclosed to the public, as are their ballots. Contrast that with the decidedly non-transparent process of the Coaches Poll.

The Associated Press continues to crown its champions, regardless of other polls or arrangements. It's been around long before the BCS and it might outlast the BCS. There's always a possibility that the BCS may disband after the next contract runs out - even if it's a slim one. But the AP Poll? It'll always be there.

2. It's still used by most of the media: Don't forget, the AP is the media poll. All print publications and most of the electronic media use the AP poll as a reference. The purpose of the BCS standings is to produce two teams for the BCS national title game and other BCS bowl games, as evidenced by its lack of a season-ending standings. Case-in-point: Utah finished No. 2 in the AP Poll and No. 3 in the Coaches Poll last season. Guess which one was always cited in this spring's BCS discussions?

3. The Harris Poll is basically an AP Poll surrogate: Never mind that the Harris Poll doesn't come out until late September and its voters are supposedly keeping an open mind by watching a few weeks' worth of games before they vote.

Make no mistake, Harris voters are greatly influenced by the AP poll. They can't help it. They have to start somewhere.

AP Poll Archive (one of the Guru's most favored go-to sources) did the research. And as you can see, there's not much of a difference between Harris Poll rankings and the AP ones. In fact, in its four seasons of existence, there has been just three minor variations in its final regular-season top 10, and none among the top four. In 2008, the two polls had identical top 10s at the end of the regular season.

4. AP still crowns a champion: Who was the national champion in 2003? The majority of the country would acknowlege a split, with many siding with USC over LSU (to the eternal consternation of Tigers fans). Last year, had Oklahoma defeated Florida in the BCS title game, the AP might've crowned Utah as the champion over OU, who would've been the BCS champion.

For as long as AP crowns its own champion, there is always a possibility of a split title. And the AP champion would be every bit as legitimate as the BCS champion. Look at it another way - The BCS merely produces a champion for the Coaches Poll, one that by all counts an inferior one to the AP Poll.

This list of national champions will always be the one that shows up in your hometown newspaper (unless you're in Louisiana) - for as long as newspapers exist. That's why the AP Poll still matters.

Ten Years of BCS: 2005

Without a doubt, in the short history of the BCS, 2005 was its crowning achievement. It was its best season. It was its most controversy-free season. And it ended with its best game, in the best setting possible for a college football game - the Rose Bowl.

It was a dream season for the BCS.

USC, after winning back-to-back AP national titles, was back for an unprecedented three-peat. It had a Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback who surprised everyone by returning for his senior season. It had a soon-to-be Heisman-winning running back. It had NFL first-round picks up the ying-yang on offense. But its defense was somewhat suspect.

No matter, the Trojans blew through the schedule by outscoring everybody. They won a thriller in South Bend when their Heisman combo Matt Leinart-Reggie Bush orchestrated a final second touchdown to beat Notre Dame. They escaped Fresno State when Bush produce a career worth of highlights in a single game, piling up 513 total yards. USC rolled into the Rose Bowl for the national championship with a 34-game winning streak after destroying UCLA, 66-19.

Keeping on the Trojans' heels was No. 2 Texas, led by junior quarterback Vince Young, a Heisman hopeful himself. The Longhorns were ranked right behind USC the entire season, and were a juggernaut in their own right. After getting by Ohio State in Columbus in the second game of the season, Texas scored at least 40 points and won by double-digits every game. The Longhorns claimed their date with USC by atomizing Colorado in the Big 12 title game, 70-3.

In this BCS perfect season, everything fell into place. Penn State, the only other team that might otherwise had a claim on the title game, was done in by Michigan's Mario Manningham, who caught a TD pass on the game's final play to thwart perfection for the Lions. Alabama, the last unbeaten team besides USC and Texas, bowed out of the race on Nov. 12 after a loss to LSU.

The national championship game was a classic. The Trojans jumped ahead. The Longhorns took the lead by halftime. USC regained control in the second half and was one play away from finishing off its three-peat. On fourth-and-2 at the Texas 45, with 2:13 remaining and Texas out of timeouts, the Trojans elected to go for a first down instead of punting to protect a 38-33 lead.

Bush, the Heisman winning back, was on the sideline. The Trojans loaded up the left side of the line and ran Lendale White off tackle. It was a play full of machismo. USC had run this play three times in crucial situations in this game and prevailed each time. It dared Texas to stop it.

The Longhorns did. White was stuffed a yard short and Young got the ball back. He methodically drove Texas downfield, scoring the game-winner on fourth-and-5 with 19 seconds left. Texas ended the Trojans' reign and won its first national title since 1970.


Final BCS Standings: 1. USC, 2. Texas, 3. Penn State, 4. Ohio State.

Alternative Methods -

Using 1998-2003 (BCS I) Formula: 1. USC, 2. Texas, 3. Penn State, 4. Ohio State.

Using human polls only: 1. USC, 2. Texas, 3. Penn State, 4. Ohio State.

Plus One: USC vs. Ohio State; Texas vs. Penn State.


Controversy: There was little regarding the BCS. The title game was only slightly marred by instant replay malfunction, which allowed a disputed Texas touchdown to stand in the second quarter. Young's knee was down on the play before he lateraled the ball to Selvin Young, who ran 12 yards for the score to put Texas ahead, 9-7. The play was not reviewed because the equipment wasn't working.

BCS Formula Review: After the controversy of the previous year when Texas leapfrogged California for a Rose Bowl berth, the BCS made another tweak with the formula, out of necessity. A number of AP voters were besieged by angry fans who found fault with their ballots. As a result, the AP sent a cease-and-desist letter demanding that the AP poll be removed from the BCS formula.

The BCS hastily contracted Harris Interactive to furnish a replacement poll, which debuted in 2005. The poll features over 100 voters who are former athletic directors, coaches and players, as well as members of the media. Unlike the AP poll or the coaches poll, the Harris Poll does not have a preseason poll and isn't released until four weeks into the season; and it also does not have am end-of-season final poll.

With the installment of the Harris Poll as part of the standings, the BCS formula would remain unchanged to this day. The 2009 season will be the fifth consecutive with the exact same BCS formula.

Analysis: The USC-Texas game was easily the most-watched BCS championship game and its most thrilling, thanks to the star power of both teams. And the BCS deserved credit for making it happen. Under the previous bowl regime, USC would've played (and most likely, beaten) Penn State in the Rose Bowl whereas Texas would've faced (and also beaten) either one-loss Oregon or two-loss Notre Dame in the Fiesta Bowl.

The 2006 Rose Bowl also marked the end of the phase I of the BCS bowl rotation. After two consecutive cycles of playing four BCS bowls with eight berths, the BCS, partly under pressure, would expand to a "double-host" setup following the 2005 season. An extra game would be added to allow more access for non-BCS teams. And a championship game was added, to be played a week after the traditional New Year's Day bowl games.

Remaking the BCS Formula

Part I of the Troubleshooting the BCS Series

After another season of high-wire acts, the temptation of course is to blow the BCS to smithereens and start over. But that's neither practicable nor desirable.

It's not practicable because the current BCS contract does not run out until after the 2013 season, so any wholesale change toward a playoff now or in the foreseeable future is just not reality based. It's not desirable because without thoroughly considering all the issues - logistics and otherwise - any move made in haste would only invite more disaster.

There is something that could be done - immediately - about the BCS within the framework of the current structure. It's possible to implement changes even before the next season, as the BCS has proved to be quite nimble when it comes to making up stuff as we go - witness this past season's sudden decision to allow three conference teams to be included in BCS bowl games.

When the commissioners gather for their annual meeting in April, instead of patting each other on the back and passing out vapid congratulations, they would be better off re-examining the BCS. And the best place to start would be the formula that creates the BCS standings.

The formula in its current form has survived since 2004, with the only change being that the Harris Poll replaced the Associated Press poll before the 2005 season. The current formula, created in the aftermath of the USC-LSU split championship in 2003, places overwhelming emphasis on the human polls. This is troubling because the most unstable and subjective part of the formula, naturally, is the human polls. And even more troubling is the utter lack of transparency of these two polls.

That, and a few other things, may be fixed rather quickly and easily. So here's how:

1. Bring transparency into the polls - Neither the coaches poll nor the Harris poll reveals its weekly voting results until the final week of the regular season, when the final BCS standings are released. Any system that's worth its salt demands accountability. Imagine if your congressman never had to reveal how he voted until the last bill of his term. That just won't do.

It's easy enough for the BCS to demand the Harris poll make its ballots public every week. The BCS commissioned the Harris poll, therefore owns it. If any voter objects to this new guideline, then see you later. There will be plenty of people willing and able to vote in the Harris poll.

The coaches poll is the more thorny issue. For years the coaches have resisted making their ballots open to the public and it took a near act of congress to get them to reveal the final poll. And since the BCS champion ultimately is merely the coaches poll champion, there's not a whole lot the BCS can do about it, right?

Not really. I believe there is a creative solution. The BCS commissioners can simply issue an ultimatum to their coaches to open the ballots, or else risking to have their votes become even more irrelevant. I'm sure the Black Coaches & Administrators will be more than happy to step in with their own poll. The BCA is not happy with college football's hiring practices - and rightly so - but this will be a way to increase its visibility. For the BCS, this will be a public relations coup. So if the coaches don't play ball, simply have their poll replaced by a new BCA poll.

2. Eliminate tiebreaker madness - What happened in the Big 12 Conference this year is simply unacceptable. The BCS formula was never conceived to determine anything but the top two teams for the BCS title game. The easy thing to do here is for the commissioners to police their own conferences to make sure the BCS formula will never come close to being any sort of a tiebreaker ever again.

3. Allow margin of victory back in the computers - Following the 2001 season, in a bit of a knee-jerk reaction, MoV was purged from all computer rankings ostensibly to discourage teams from running up the score. The problem is, the human voters didn't get the memo. The first fallout from this decision took place in 2003, when Oklahoma, after gotten blown out by four touchdowns in the Big 12 championship game, still stayed No. 1 in the BCS standings thanks to the computers now unable to distinguish a one-point loss from a 28-point rout.

Computer programmers should write their own formulas. The BCS has no business telling what these guys should do. It should demand to audit the results throughout the season, but leave the programming to the professionals. After all, all computer programs had built in a safeguard against excessive scoring, with either 21 points or 28 points as the threshold.

Computer rankings become much more pure and accurate when margin of victory is taken into consideration. Just think about this for a moment: If you were betting your house on a game, would you dare to look at only a team's won-loss records but not how much they won and lost by?

4. Re-calibrate the computer ratings - One of the dumbest things about the BCS formula is it mixes percentages with ordinal numbers. For the human polls, it counts actual votes for teams instead of rankings; but for computers, it uses the rankings only. So when a team falls from 2nd to 3rd in the computers, the consequences are disastrous; but when a team falls from 2nd to 3rd in the polls, it could be just about a dead-heat, as far as the BCS standings are concerned.

The BCS should keep the human part of the formula the way it is but normalize the computer rankings so they become compatible with one another numerically. An easy way to do this is to fix the top team at 1.000 and derive percentages for other teams based on their respective computer scores.

I checked all six BCS computer systems and found that their scores are fairly uniform. Teams ranked 10th score about .86 to .92 points and teams ranked at No. 25 score about .74-.81. What this does is that it stabilizes the system and reduces the wild swings toward the end of the season when a games not even involving the principals holds such sway as the Cincinnati-Hawaii game did at the end of the 2008 regular season.

5. Re-balance the formula - If steps 1-4 are taken, then we can move on to this, which should bring objectivity back to the formula and take some pressure off the voters. I mean, if we're just gonna let the voters decide everything, why even bother with a formula - we can just use the AP poll instead. After all, since the adoption of the current formula, the AP has produced the same top two teams every season anyway.

By going 50-50, the new standings also give the non-BCS teams a fighting chance. The human polls are always stacked against non-BCS teams, but the computers give them a fairer shake. And if we ever move toward at least a plus-one system involving four teams, then a team like Utah in 2008 might have a shot at qualifying.

Did I say Plus-One? Ah, you'll have to come back for Part II.

A Split Title for Florida, AP-Style

The BCS race will come down to the last game of the regular season. And we don't mean the Big 12 championship game between Oklahoma and Missouri.

The last few digits on the BCS standings, the ones between a place in the BCS title game and a Fiesta or Sugar Bowl berth, will be decided on the field of Aloha Stadium. In a game between Cincinnati and Hawaii.

This is not an alarmist declaration. It's a fact.

Go to Wes Colley's computer, and play God - and see for yourself. A Hawaii win may be enough to provide safe passage for the Gators as long as they win the SEC championship game. A Cincinnati victory, then Texas just might get its coveted rematch with Oklahoma.

This isn't the first time that a BCS title race is settled in Honolulu, in the very last game of the season. In 2003, a Hawaii loss to Boise State cost USC just enough computer and (the now-defunct) strength-of-schedule points to keep the No. 1-ranked Trojans out of the BCS title game, setting the stage for the first split title in the BCS Era.

We may have an encore in 2008.

If Florida beats Alabama and somehow finishes No. 3 in the BCS standings, then the Gators may very well play for the AP title in the Sugar Bowl. Now ranked No. 2 in the AP poll, Florida is a lock for the top ranking should it topple the Tide in the SEC title game. And no top-ranked team in the AP has ever lost its position after winning its bowl game.

Who will Florida face, in that scenario? The best the Gators could hope for is undefeated Utah in the Urban Meyer Bowl. That matchup also gives the Utes an outside shot of stealing the AP title if they can upset the Gators. If the Fiesta Bowl decides to spoil the party by taking the Utes, then the Sugar would end up with Alabama (in a rematch), Boise State or Cincinnati.

(The Guru has checked with BCS Administrator Bill Hancock and he has confirmed that in the event the BCS title game is an all-Big 12 affair, the Fiesta will have the first two picks.)

But let's deal with how and why Florida might not get to the BCS title game, even with a victory.

Here are the scenarios:

1. Alabama and Oklahoma win: Alabama vs. Oklahoma. There is zero chance for Texas to jump OU, even if the Sooners win a squeaker.

2. Alabama and Missouri win: Alabama vs. Texas. Also a no-doubter.

3. Florida and Missouri win: Florida vs. Texas. Take this to the bank as well.

4. Florida and Oklahoma win: Mathematically the most likely scenario and also the most uncertain. This is where the Cincinnati-Hawaii game comes in. If Hawaii wins, it's 95% Florida-Oklahoma, 5% Texas-Oklahoma. If Cincinnati wins, it's 60% Florida-Oklahoma, 40% Texas-Oklahoma.

Whoa!

Well, let's break down the standings. Florida is now a distant fourth, but should make up significant ground with a win over top-ranked and undefeated Alabama. Where Florida needs to catch up the most is in the computer rankings. This is where they stand now:

• Oklahoma .980

• Texas .940

• Florida . 820

Following scenario No. 4, AND a victory by underdog and host Hawaii, this is the projection:

• Oklahoma .990

• Texas .930

• Florida .930

If the Gators can achieve a dead-heat with Texas, or close to it, then their superior poll rankings will put them over the top.

Following scenario No. 4, AND a victory by favored Cincinnati, this is the projection:

• Oklahoma 1.000

• Texas .940

• Florida .910

That's where it gets complicated, and the voters will wield the hammer. The question is, do they know how to use it?

If the voters defect to Florida for the top-ranking, en masse on both polls, then the Gators will be in. But if they divide the votes three ways between Florida, Texas and Oklahoma, then the Gators would be in trouble. Furthermore, if some of the voters are trying to mete out their own justice in the Big 12 tiebreaker post ex facto, putting Texas ahead of Oklahoma on their ballots, then they'll only hurt ... Florida.

The Gators need the voters to put the Sooners in as a solid No. 2, creating some distance between themselves and Texas. They also want voters to put USC in the top 3 to further wedge down the Longhorns. So when it comes to the Big 12 title game, Florida wants an OU blowout so the Sooners can siphon off more votes from Texas.

Florida is already No. 2 in the Harris poll, so room for improvement there is less dramatic. The Gators need to - and should - finish No. 1 there with a victory over Alabama, and then they'd hope for a 70- to 100-point gap between themselves and Texas.

The coaches poll is where it gets tricky. The Gators are No. 4 there right now. They need to make a quantum leap there. If they finish behind Texas in that poll, they'd be in big trouble. A virtual three-way tie doesn't help, either. They need at least half of the 61 coaches put them No. 1 - and the rest to either split their votes between OU and UT, if not outright favor OU - to git 'er done.

All that illustrates just how important the Cincinnati-Hawaii game will be. Florida fans might want to stay up a little later to sleep a little easier. They can hope for the Bearcats, a freshly-minted BCS bowl team, to spend a little more time lost in the sights and sounds of Waikiki than worry about the resurgent Warriors. After starting the season 1-3, Hawaii has won six of eight - including the last three - to become bowl-eligible.

Longhorns fans, on the other hand, would want Hawaii to feel self-satisfied with the turnaround and be exposed once again by a BCS conference power, as it did in the disastrous Sugar Bowl last year. Otherwise, the AP title may be all Texas has to hope for.

With so much on the line, then, it's imperative for you to know whom to root for, and how much. So here's the breakdown:

Alabama - Roll Tide.

Oklahoma - Boomer Sooner.

Texas - If Alabama wins, root for Missouri. If Florida is winning, root for a close game. If Florida wins, root for Missouri, or at least a close game. And Cincinnati.

Florida - Go Gators, of course. In the Big 12 game, if Mizzou isn't going to pull it out, then you want OU to pour it on. And of course, Hawaii.

And be sure to say Mahalo if the Warriors do pull it out.

===

The Guru's projected BCS bowl games -

• BCS championship: Oklahoma vs. Florida

• Rose Bowl: USC vs. Penn State

• Fiesta Bowl: Texas vs. Utah

• Sugar Bowl: Alabama vs. Ohio State

• Orange Bowl: Cincinnati vs. Virginia Tech

P.S. And here's the Texas AP scenario: If OU wins a close one over Florida, the 'Horns may potentially claim the AP crown if they can stay ahead of the Sooners in the AP poll this week. They are only 8 points ahead in the latest poll. Of course, this gives Utah a chance as well.

The Envelope, Please ...

(Late update added to provide more robust data, the analysis remains unchanged)

This is probably the most difficult projection the Guru has ever had to do. But here goes ...

No. 2 SHOULD BE Oklahoma.

But will it be? That's entirely up to the voters.

Logically, Oklahoma should be No. 2. But if the BCS is about logic, then it wouldn't even exist. And with all these voters - 175 in all, if they all vote - having foisted upon them a responsibility that they neither desired nor deserved, there really is no telling where they're going to go.

Nevertheless, they're asked to decide on the Big 12 tiebreaker, as the winner of the South Division will be determined by the BCS standings, among Oklahoma, Texas and Texas Tech. Whoever gets into the Big 12 title game will be the prohibitive favorite to beat Missouri and have the inside track to the BCS title game, against the SEC title game winner between Florida and Alabama.

Well, let's examine those three Big 12 South contenders, side-by-side:

1. Against Big 12 South teams:

Oklahoma Beat ...

at Baylor, 49-17
at Oklahoma State, 61-41
at Texas A&M, 66-28

Cumulative Score: 176-86
Point Differential: +90

Texas Beat ...

Baylor, 45-21
Oklahoma State, 28-24
Texas A&M, 49-9

Cumulative Score: 122-54
Point Differential: +68

Texas Tech Beat ...

Baylor, 35-28
Oklahoma State, 56-20
at Texas A&M, 43-25

Cumulative Score: 134-73
Point Differential: +61

Advantage: Oklahoma.

2. Against all other common opponents:

Only Kansas played all three and this is how it fared:

Lost to Texas Tech, 63-21
Lost to Texas, 35-7
Lost at Oklahoma, 45-31

Advantage: Texas Tech.

3. None-conference opponents:

Oklahoma

Chattanooga (I-AA), 1-11
No. 16 Cincinnati (Big East Champion), 10-2
at Washington, 0-11
No. 14 TCU, 10-2

Cumulative Record: 20-15 (I-A only)
Bowl Teams: 2

Texas

Florida Atlantic, 6-6
at UTEP, 5-7
Arkansas, 5-7
Rice, 9-3

Cumulative Record: 25-23
Bowl Teams: 1

Texas Tech

Eastern Washington (I-AA), 6-5
at Nevada, 7-5
SMU, 1-11
UMass (I-AA), 7-5

Cumulative Record: 8-16 (I-A only)
Bowl Teams: 1

The Sooners did play at winless Washington, but they beat two teams expected to be in the top 15 of the BCS standings. In total, OU beat four teams ranked in the projected BCS top 15. Or put it another way, these 15 teams had a total of 18 losses, and OU is responsible for doling out four of them, twice as many as Texas, Texas Tech and USC, the only other teams with multiple wins vs. the top 15. Advantage: Oklahoma.

4. Head-to-head: Texas wants to talk about beating OU, 45-35, true, but this is not a pure head-to-head situation, it's a three-way tie and a circular argument. Texas Tech has to be included in every discussion because we're trying to break a three-way tie. That Oklahoma routed the Red Raiders is a credit to the Sooners, not an opportunity to dismiss Tech.

And just for logic's sake, the fact that Texas beat OU on a neutral field is a classic non-sequitur. One may deduce that Texas would've beaten OU in Austin, but nothing more - so essentially each team WOULD'VE won at home. The following is how these three teams did against each other, the research courtesy of our friends at Saurian Sagacity:

Oklahoma

Points Scored: 100
Points Against: 66
Net Points: 34
Total Yards: 1060
Total Yards Against: 844
Net Yards: 216

Texas

Points Scored: 78
Points Against: 74
Net Points: 4
Total Yards: 812
Total Yards Against: 1014
Net Yards: -202

Texas Tech

Points Scored: 60
Points Against: 98
Net Points: -38
Total Yards: 985
Total Yards Against: 999
Net Yards: -14

Taken in its totality, it's rather obvious that Oklahoma is the most impressive in the head-to-head results. Advantage: Oklahoma.

If last week's poll results stay relatively stable - given that every team in the top 10 either won or was idle - this is how the computer rankings should break down:

1. Alabama (.970), 2. Texas (.960), 3. Oklahoma (.940), 4. Florida (.880), 5. Utah (.830).

And the BCS standings would look like this:

1. Alabama (.987), 2. Oklahoma (.926), 3. Texas (.921), 4. Florida (.909), 5. USC (.797).

The biggest loser this weekend, without a doubt, is USC. The Trojans not only don't have a shot at the BCS title game, their AP title hopes also evaporated with Oregon State's loss to Oregon. By being forced to play in the Rose Bowl against Penn State, there is little chance for USC to claim the AP title, as opposed to a Fiesta Bowl matchup against either Oklahoma or Texas.

So, assuming the voters actually do their homework and not go nuts or conspiracy-happy, here's the Guru's projection of the penultimate BCS standings:

1. Alabama, 2. Oklahoma, 3. Texas, 4. Florida, 5. USC, 6. Utah, 7. Penn State, 8. Texas Tech, 9. Boise State, 10. Ohio State, 11. TCU, 12. Ball State, 13. Cincinnati, 14. Oklahoma State, 15. Oregon.

Ten Years of BCS: 2004

The Guru's Note: Beginning in June, the Guru will publish a review of each of the 10 seasons since the Bowl Championship Series came into existence in 1998. In this series -- Ten Years of BCS -- the Guru will examine the results from these seasons -- who got lucky and who got robbed, what could've been, what should've been and other controversies of the day. The series will appear weekly leading up to the 2008 season. 

=========================

If 2003 was a wakeup call for the BCS, then 2004 represented a broken snooze button.

The alarm just kept blaring.

Five teams remained undefeated all season. And at the end, while USC and Oklahoma faced off for the BCS title, SEC champion Auburn was left with a consolation prize in the Sugar Bowl. Mountain West champion Utah did get a BCS berth, but its opponent Pittsburgh was so overmatched in the Fiesta Bowl that the Utes didn't get to prove their mettle, either. WAC champion Boise State was left out of the BCS picture all together.

There was no split championship, like in 2003, mostly because the Trojans savagely mauled the Sooners, 55-19. Even Auburn coach Tommy Tuberville, who was on hand to troll for AP votes, conceded during ABC's halftime show that USC would be difficult to beat "when you give (offensive coordinator) Norm Chow a month to get ready for somebody."

But that was hardly a happy ending for the BCS, which had completely overhauled its formula from the previous season.

In fact, the BCS formula may be seen in two phases. BCS I ran from its inception in 1998 through the disastrous 2003 season. While there were alterations, they were mostly minor. BCS II emerged with the 2004 season, with human polls taking over the preponderance of the equation.

Ironically, BCS I and BCS II would've yielded the same USC-Oklahoma result in 2004, leaving Auburn and Utah out. With the Utes (and the Broncos), it's fairly easy to explain. The non-BCS conferences are not respected by the voters even if the computers treat them more fairly. The Mountain West in 2004 also was not a particularly solid conference, with only three teams finishing with winning records (both New Mexico and Wyoming were 7-5).

The last non-BCS school to win a national championship was Brigham Young in 1984. And it will remain the last one, well after this country elects a woman president, and possibly all through eternity.

As for Auburn, two factors proved fatal to its BCS title prospects. One, the Tigers were lightly regarded before the season started, checking in at No. 17 in the preseason AP poll. Auburn eventually worked its way up to No. 3, but could never crack the stranglehold USC and Oklahoma held on Nos. 1 and 2 -- going wire-to-wire. Two, just as LSU in 2003 and most of SEC teams in general, the Tigers played an extremely uncompetitive non-conference schedule.

Of their 11 regular-season games in 2004, seven were at home. Their three non-conference games were against Louisiana-Monroe, Louisiana Tech and I-AA Citadel -- all at home. Compared that with USC (at Virginia Tech and BYU, home to Colorado State and Notre Dame) and Oklahoma (home to Bowling Green, Houston and Oregon), it's easy to see that both the human voters and computers punished Auburn for the soft schedule.

The Tigers eked out a 16-13 win over Virginia Tech in the Sugar Bowl to finish second in the final AP and coaches polls.  But that didn't stop Tuberville and Auburn from declaring themselves champions. The Tigers made themselves big diamond rings to commemorate their "championship" season, and they're now available on eBay.

Final BCS Standings: 1. USC, 2. Oklahoma, 3. Auburn, 4. Texas.

Alternative Methods

Using 1998-2003 (BCS I) formula: 1. USC, 2. Oklahoma, 3. Auburn, 4. Texas.

Using human polls only: 1. USC, 2. Oklahoma, 3. Auburn, 4. California.

Plus One: USC vs. Utah; Oklahoma vs. Auburn.

Controversy

The Mack Brown Campaign: In 2003, Texas finished No. 5 in the BCS standings but was relegated to the Holiday Bowl. The Longhorns seemed headed to San Diego again in 2004, until coach Mack Brown did something about it.

With undefeated Utah poised to become the first BCS Buster, there was only one BCS bowl slot available to a non-conference champion. And since the No. 4 team was guaranteed an at-large spot, the race was on between Texas and California.

The Golden Bears had a tenuous hold on the fourth spot since October. Their only loss all season was a 23-17 heartbreaker to USC at the L.A. Coliseum when they couldn't get the ball in the end zone from the 9-yard line in the game's waning moments. Texas's only loss was a 12-0 defeat at the Cotton Bowl against the Sooners. 

After Cal routed archrival Stanford in the Big Game, its season should've been over. But once again, a hurricane proved to be a Pac-10 team's undoing, as it was in 1998. The Bears' Sept. 23 game at Southern Mississippi was postponed because of Hurricane Ivan, and it was re-scheduled for Dec. 4.

Texas was done with its schedule on Nov. 26, after beating rival Texas A&M. Immediately thereafter, Brown started an endless media campaign on behalf of his No. 5-ranked Longhorns. His tactics also made the Cal-Southern Miss matchup something of a referendum on the Bears, whose game would be nationally televised on ESPN.

Perhaps affected by the pressure and expectations, the Bears did not play an impressive game, but nonetheless they won, 26-16. While Cal coach Jeff Tedford thought his team had done what it needed to secure the program's first Rose Bowl berth since 1959, others weren't so sure.

The Bears' worst fears were realized when they fell from No. 4 to No. 5 in the final BCS standings as Texas snatched the coveted Rose Bowl berth. Voter defection carried the day. In the AP poll, Cal's advantage over Texas shrunk from 85 points to 62. But the real story was the coaches poll.

In the penultimate standings, Cal held a 48-point lead over Texas. In the one that counted, it was ahead by a mere 5 points. In other words, no fewer than 20 coaches switched their placements of Texas and Cal. But more telling was that four coaches voted Cal No. 7 and two No. 8 -- after a Bears victory, and behind 2-loss Georgia.

Predictably, the Pac-10 was furious and demanded that the coaches disclose their final ballot.The AFCA refused and disputed the suggestions that impropriety took place behind the cloak of secrecy. The Longhorns went on to win the Rose Bowl behind the electrifying performance of sophomore QB Vince Young. The dispirited Bears were routed by Texas Tech in the Holiday Bowl.

The Texas-California controversy had a long-lasting effect on the BCS standings. First, the AP poll refused to be included in the BCS standings after the 2004 season. Because all AP poll balloting is available to the public, some AP voters were harassed and threatened by fans who were unhappy with the decisions. The BCS had to scramble and invent the "Harris Interactive Poll" to replace the venerable and prestigious AP poll in its standings. Second, to promote more transparency, the coaches reluctantly agreed to reveal their final regular-season balloting.

Through it all, Tedford took the high road. He didn't try to score an extra touchdown against Southern Miss in the game's final minutes to curry favor with the voters and never indulged in a war of words with Brown or anyone else. And the final irony was that the AP flip-flops alone would've put Texas ahead of Cal in the final standings. But the coaches ended up catching most of the heat because of their shenanigans. 

BCS Formula Review: The BCS blew up its previous formula (BCS I) and started from scratch. The new formula (BCS II) comprised of only two parts -- the human polls and computers. Strength of Schedule and Quality Win components were purged. 

The human polls now account for two-thirds of the formula, with the AP poll and coaches poll each weighing one third. Instead of using the team's actual ranking, the formula now calls for the percentage of total votes received. This alteration actually made the deciding difference in the Texas-Cal controversy as the old formula would've disregarded the vote-margin difference.

The computer ratings shrank further from seven to six, with the New York Times bowing out. The new formula required strength of schedule to be part of each computer's calculations. The computer average counts for one-third of the formula, with the highest and lowest rating for each team discarded.

After replacing the AP with Harris poll following the 2004 season, this formula has stayed exactly intact, at least through the 2008 season.

Analysis: The twin controversies engulfed the 2004 season, mitigated only somewhat by USC's impressive Orange Bowl win and "repeat" championship. But unlike the previous season, the BCS did not blow up the system and start from scratch again.

The nonchalant, near-shrug of a reaction actually, in the long view, saved the BCS. It's as if the BCS simply stated: "We're here to stay so deal with it." It may be because the BCS couldn't risk undergoing another wholesale change without completely destroying its already-tattered credibility. Or because there just wasn't anything else to do short of going to a playoff system.

Either way, this steadfastness would serve BCS well, for better or for worse. Despite all the outcry in the subsequent seasons, the public and media began to grudgingly accept the BCS for what it is.

Harris Poll Out; LSU Back on Top

The Harris Interactive Poll made its season debut today and LSU regained the top spot over USC in the Week 4 unofficial BCS standings. It marked the third straight week that those two teams have swapped the top two positions. The Trojans have a significant lead on No. 3 Florida, with Oklahoma and Ohio State rounding out the Top 5.

West Virginia, Texas, California, Wisconsin and Boston College fill out the rest of the Top 10.

Despite receiving 91 first-place votes in the Harris poll, out of 114 voters, far ahead of LSU's 19, USC dropped to No. 2 because of the Bayou Tigers' superior computer rankings. Having played a tougher schedule than the Trojans thus far, LSU is No. 1 on three computer ratings and No. 2 on another. USC is ranked first, third, fourth and sixth on the four computers that have published their ratings.

The standings this week have taken on much greater authenticity. Because of the release of the Harris poll, and also the Colley Matrix computer ratings, more than 85 percent of the components that form the actual BCS standings are available. Previously, the AP poll was used in place of the Harris poll and only three computer ratings were available prior to this weekend.

Also starting this week, the Guru has incorporated a new feature in the standings: Now every team that received any votes or earned any computer points will be included in the standings. This information is important since several conferences use the BCS standings as a tiebreaker for bowl berths.

And finally, the Guru's loyal readers might want to take advantage of the RSS feed now available through this site. Anyone interested in signing up for a reader service or receiving e-mail notification of new postings can do so by clicking on the RSS button on the right-hand bar, or here. By signing up, you'll be the first to find out about the new BCS standings, official or unofficial, from the Guru.

Later this week, the Guru will begin dissecting various aspects of this year's conference races as we head toward the unveiling of the first official BCS standings, due out on Oct. 14.