Another Jam-Packed Mailbag

Where's Mailman Steve when you need him?

The Guru won't cry about being overwhelmed by mail - it's a sign of business is good. And with President-elect Barack Obama seemingly having some kind of fetish about the BCS - and the fact that the BCS just signed a four-year deal with ESPN ... my days as the Guru should be anything but numbered.

To reassure you the Guru's commitment, here's an announcement: The Guru answers EVERY SINGLE piece of e-mail that contains a question. Sometimes it'll take me a few days to get back to you, but always before the next weekend. Even if you post your question on the comments board, I'll get back to you - but I'd prefer to answer questions via e-mail.

And every two weeks or so, the best of these e-mails, with the most pertinent questions - along with answers - will be posted here. This is the latest installment:

• For a USC fan what result should we be rooting in the Texas Tech/OK game?

I think you want to root for Texas Tech for a couple of reasons: 1) it eliminates Oklahoma; 2) then all you need is a Tech loss in the Big 12 title game against Missouri - they don't play each other this season - and I just think with Tech being new at this, it might not be able to handle the pressure of being one win away from the BCS title game - ironically like Missouri a year ago.

• Say it ain't so! I am a die-hard Longhorn, and feel sick at the thought of OU jumping us in the BCS. I DON'T GET THIS AT ALL!!!!
  
  How can this be possible when the following is true:
  
  * Texas beat OU by 10 on a neutral field
  * Texas SOS is 5 opposed to OU at 27.
  * OU is 0-1 against Top 10 opponents, Texas is 3-1 (Four weeks in a row!!!)
  * BCS ranking now: TEXAS #3 with .891, OU #5 with .839 (How can OU make up this distance?)
  * Points allowed by OU defense opposed to points allowed by Texas defense (For example, Texas allowed KU 7 points opposed to OU allowing KU to score 31)
  
  I am no math expert, but I just don't understand how OU can jump Texas unless it blows out both TT and OSU. Please shed some light on this.

I know you're disheartened to hear this - and logic seems to favor the Longhorns - but the fact remains that if OU beats Texas Tech, especially if it's a blowout, OU probably will jump Texas - eventually. The Sooners' SOS will improve - as will their computer ratings - just by playing these last two games.

The best-case scenario, as a Texas fan, is for OU to win a close game and then beat OSU in another close game. A Tech win eliminates Texas (and Oklahoma) from the Big 12 title game ... so you definitely don't want that. Texas' best argument, if it gets to that dreaded three-way tie, will be that it won on the neutral field while the other two won at home.

• We all know how important voting is going to be if it indeed does come down to a three way tie. The voters will have a big say over the issue, and my question is surrounding the votes of Mike Leach and Mack Brown. Stoops is not voting this year, and I'm worried about the biases of the other two coaches trying to get their teams into the Big 12 title game. For all we know, Brown and Leach could leave OU out of the top 25 altogether to hurt their overall points in the poll. I'm told that coaches votes are not made public until the last poll, which means they could technically vote however they want.
  
  One, do you see them leaving OU out of their ranking to hurt the Sooners' overall point total?
  
  And two, if this does happen, do you think the votes of these two coaches will have a substantial impact on the Sooners' BCS positioning?

Brown and Leach indeed can leave the Sooners out of the Top 25 entirely on the secret penultimate ballot. If they both do, the impact on the coaches' poll would be about .033 points - enough to alter the outcome in a close race. But the most likely event would be for them to move OU to, say, 10th. It would be sneaky but probably won't make that much of a difference.

However, most of the Harris voters have school/conference affiliations, too. And like the coaches poll, their anonymity is protected until the final poll. This is the very screwy thing about the BCS standings - the total lack of transparency.

That's why two things needs to happen: 1) It should be open ballot every week, like the AP; 2) The standings should not be used for any tiebreaking purposes, there is just too much inherent conflict of interest, and it was never the intent of the standings anyway.

• If Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Texas all finish 11-1 and near the top of the BCS standings. Whoever wins the tiebreaker ends up losing the championship game to Missouri, and whoever wins the SEC Championship game loses a game to their arch rival before that. This could potentially end up with two big 12 teams finishing 1-2 in the BCS, and another Big 12 team (Missouri, presumably) having the conference championship. If I am reading the rules right, this would leave Missouri (the Big 12 Champion) out of the BCS entirely, wouldn’t it?

According to BCS administrator Bill Hancock, this potential conflict has just been amended to allow a THIRD team from the same conference to get a BCS bowl bid. So, if the Big 12 finishes with the Nos. 1 and 2 teams in the BCS standings but Missouri wins the automatic bid, then the conference would indeed claim three spots.

• "The champions of the Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big 10, Big 12, Pac-10 and Southeastern Conferences will have annual automatic qualification for a BCS game after the regular seasons of 2008 through 2013, based on mathematical standards of performance during the 2004-2007 regular seasons. The 2006-2009 regular seasons will be evaluated under the same standards to determine if other conferences will have annual automatic qualification for the games after the 2012 and 2013 regular seasons. The champions of no more than seven conferences will have annual automatic berths."- according to the BCS Website.
  
  So, do you think that you could start tracking the BCS by Conference in a manner consistent with this evaluation process. I think it would be great information and give people some insight into the elite bias as well as the hope that the current system could actually benefit other conferences in the future.

Good idea ... it'll definitely be on my plate as a postseason project. They refused to reveal the formula, but I'm sure I can generate something comparable.

• What happens if Utah and Boise both end up in the top 12 at the end of the year? Are they both guaranteed spots? If not, what is the BCS rule that governs this?

Only the highest-ranked non-BCS team, if it's in the top 14, is guaranteed a BCS berth. If there's another team, it would merely be "eligible" but not guaranteed (and not likely) to be selected. Right now, it looks like Boise needs a Utah loss to get that bid.

• Any chance that if BYU beats Utah, either Utah or TCU end up going to a BCS Bowl instead of BYU (assuming Boise State and Ball State losses)?

First, you don't need to worry about Ball State. BYU is already ahead in the BCS standings. Second, you do need to worry about Boise State, it's not likely that a one-loss BYU would jump an undefeated Boise. Finally, Utah could survive a loss to BYU and stay ahead in the BCS standings (not so for two-loss TCU). If the voters only drop the Utes one or two spots in the polls, they can conceivably make up the difference with their superior computer rankings.

• I can understand that with 4 non-BCS teams in the top 15 it a virtual guarantee that one of them will get a BCS invite, but what would have to happen for two of them to get invites?

Hell freezing over? Actually, not quite. You need three events, and two are quite probable: 1) Oregon State losing one of its remaining games, ensuring the Pac-10 gets only one BCS invite (USC); 2) Penn State beating Michigan State at home, eliminating a second Big Ten team in the event of ...; 3) Hell freezing over, 2008 edition - Michigan winning at Ohio State. The 3-8 Wolverines are a 21-point underdog. But the UM win, coupled with an MSU loss, eliminates the Big Ten from gaining a second entry, thus ensuring a second non-BCS team getting an at-large bid.

• This notion that 'SC fans want another Rose Bowl is false. We want Oregon St to win out be co-Pac-10 champs and we want to go to the Fiesta and play a big 12 team or sugar and play an SEC team. We have nothing to gain by going to Pasadena and running over another big 10 team ala Illinois and Michigan the last 2 times. This is not only my feeling but the sentiments of the entire marching band and majority of a sports commentary course with knowledgeable USC and college football fans. They aren't making us nervous they're making us excited and anxious to see if we can avoid the Rose even if we don't play for the BCS title.

I get this, it's very sensible, but there is one trap with this line of thinking. USC might need to win the Pac-10 outright in the event of a stumble by the Big 12 South champ in the conference title game. Why? Because then if the Trojans are to get a favorable outcome from the voters for a spot in the BCS title game, they need to have the argument that they "won" the conference whereas Texas, Texas Tech or Oklahoma didn't. If USC and Oregon State are Pac-10 co-champions, the perception would be that USC didn't win the conference because the Beavers got the automatic Rose Bowl bid.

• I absolutely love your Orange Bowl prediction.....ACC Champ vs. Big East Champ......
  
  As if to say, "who really cares about this game???"
  
  That's classic...we're not even gonna waste time guessing who these teams will be...they're just going to play each other in this meaningless BCS bowl game.

Yep. You read my mind.

Mailbag Time Again

Guru gets so much mail, especially right after the new BCS standings come out, it takes time to get through them. But here it is, the highlights:

• Can USC still make the title game?

This is the most asked question, and at the moment, it's not looking good.

All but one of the following will have to happen for the Trojans -

Penn State will have to drop a game (unlikely).

Texas will have to lose to Texas Tech, and then Tech will have to lose to someone else (also unlikely - because the Longhorns should win Saturday).

Alabama will have to lose once, but not to a one-loss Florida or Georgia team in the SEC title game (possible but not probable).

Oklahoma will have to miss the Big 12 title game (probable).

As of now, USC is too far back in the pecking order. A lot will have to happen for that door to be open again. And of course, don't forget that at the moment, the Trojans don't even control their own destiny in terms of winning the Rose Bowl bid.

• How can the BCS possibly think that this formula works when the computer polls are so incredibly screwed ... er, skewed? Consider these disparities, particularly in the SEC, which is the league that gets kicked in the teeth the most by these polls (using last week's rankings):

Florida, ranked #5 by the AP, gets no love...
Anderson & Hester - 10th
Billingsley - 8th
Colley - 12th
Massey - 11th
Sagarin - 17th
Wolfe - 20th

Somehow, Mr. Sagarin and Mr. Wolfe both agree that the Gators rank behind Boise State, Utah, TCU, Tulsa and Ball State. Interesting, particularly when Sagarin's predictive index, which he says is far more accurate at predicting actual outcomes, says the Gators would destroy any and all of these teams by 15, 17, 13, 22 and 18 points, respectively.

Of course, Ball State, ranked 18th by the AP, gets tons of respect from Sagarin and Wolfe, but no one else...

Anderson & Hester - 18th
Billingsley - unranked
Colley - 17th
Massey - 23rd
Sagarin - 13th
Wolfe - 10th

It would seem that these polls should have some measure of consistency in their rankings. When the numbers are so wildly scattered all over the board, how can this system possibly be taken seriously?

This brings back one of something I've pounded on for the last few years. Margin of victory needs to be put back into the computers, otherwise, it's just a farce.

You mention Sagarin's Predictor Index, which by his own admission is more accurate than the ELO_CHESS version that's used by the BCS. A gambler wanting to bet on the games would not even take a second look at ELO_CHESS as they know the ratings are bogus. Winning margins do speak volumes about a team's strength. You think the voters don't consider that when they're making up their ballots?

That MOV is verboten in the computers will someday come back to bite the BCS big time - hopefully sooner than later.

• Assuming UF goes without losing for the rest of the season, can they overcome and otherwise undefeated penn state and/or a 1 loss big 12?

The real answer is NO (to the first part) and maybe (to the second part).

The Gators will not jump an undefeated Penn State team but they might squeeze into the top 2 if everything else falls in place for them. For starters, they need Texas to lose to Texas Tech this week and for Tech to lose somewhere down the road. I think they can jump a one-loss Oklahoma or Texas Tech, but they'll need a loss by Texas big time.

• Given the following scenario, which team would play for the Big 12 Championship:

Texas has already beaten Oklahoma. If Texas Tech beats Texas and Oklahoma Beats Texas Tech, then who plays for the Big-12 Championship (assuming they all end up with only one loss).

As mentioned in a previous mailbag session, this will come down to who's where on the BCS standings - and voila! scores matter.

Assuming they're all close games, I think Texas has the best chance to be ranked higher than the other teams. The reason is that Tech suffers from a recognition deficit and they'll automatically be the lowest ranked among the three teams. And then, the lemmings known as the pollsters will put Texas ahead of Oklahoma because of head-to-head results. Of course, if somehow Tech blows out Texas, it'll all be different.

• If Texas Tech wins this week ... can I argue the undefeated Red Raiders have a better win (over Texas) than Penn State and should be in the top 2 ??

You may argue that and you may be right. but the voters are still not going to put Texas Tech ahead of Penn State - unless it's a big-time blowout - because of ... again, brand recognition. Polls are inherently biased in favor of traditional football powers. That's why the heavy emphasis on human polls is a huge flaw in the current formula.

• I'm hearing a lot about PSU not making the championship game, even if they are 12-0. Losing the spot to a one loss sec or big 12 team. I don't think it is a possibility. what are the chances? I do see them out if they lose one.

The only scenario that Penn State doesn't make it to the BCS title game, if it goes 12-0, is if Texas and Alabama both stay undefeated. The Lions will not get jumped by a one-loss team. There is just no such possibility.

That said, PSU could get jumped by an undefeated Texas Tech, though the Lions have a healthy edge in the computer ratings. But yes, if PSU loses another game, it's done.

• If Oregon State wins out and wins the PAC10 Auto Bid, where do you think a Oregon State team that is 9-3 overall from the PAC10 would be ranked in the final Poll? If they become the BCS Auto Bid, I would expect a HUGE jump in the Human (biased) polls, but how much would it be? 25? 20? 15? Higher or lower than the ACC champ? Higher or lower than the Big East champ?

For that to happen, OSU most likely would have to win its remaining five games. If the Beavers do, then they'll be in the top 25 in the polls, probably in the high teens with a 9-3 record.

Just to show how much attention voters pay to non-glamour teams. Oregon State in fact received ZERO votes from either the Coaches poll or Harris poll this past week. None. What did the Beavers do last week? Oh, they were idle.

• What of TCU getting a shot at a BCS bowl? Even with one loss they're still positioned well in the rankings. If they manage a win over Utah, all they would seem to require is a Boise loss. And what do you figure the odds are of TCU passing BSU if they both win out? TCU has the tougher schedule to finish the year and will certainly start to close the gap, but will it be enough?

TCU is poised to become the first non-BCS team to win a BCS bid without going undefeated. If TCU beats Utah and wins its remaining games and finishes 11-1, there's a good chance that the Horned Frogs would end up in a BCS bowl.

The catch? Boise State winning out. Without a BSU loss, it's highly unlikely that TCU will pass BSU in the BCS standings. Their poll numbers will be comparable, but the computers give a preponderance of consideration to teams without a loss, so a 12-0 BSU's computer ratings will trump an 11-1 TCU's ratings, thus serving as the tiebreaker. TCU needs a BSU loss.

• How does the BCS calculate really low scores? For example, if South Florida loses on the road this Thursday, and drops even lower in the polls ...do they continue to give BCS points for "others getting votes" category? If South Florida falls out of the top 25 in the Human polls, and continues to be 40+ in the computer polls, how does the BCS calculate their BCS rank?

It matter not whether a team is actually ranked in the top 25 in the human polls. The BCS formula uses votes received as the numerator, divided by the total votes available (denominator). So any team that receives at least one vote will be placed in the standings

But since South Florida's computer ratings are non-existent at the moment, it'll have to rack up all the points from the human polls - assuming they continue to win. Another loss might permanently banish the Bulls outside of the BCS top 25.

• Well, two weeks ago or so I questioned about the two non-BCS teams. I'm back to say the Guru was right and I was wrong. The Big Ten WILL end up with two teams in the top 14. I really expected OSU to fall 5 to 8 places (similar to Michigan State's 10-place drop the week before and Mizzu's drop the week before that). They didn't, they only fell like 3 places.
  
  So, I guess I'm here to say "you were right and I was wrong!"

The Guru appreciates the candor. Just don't doubt the Guru ever again!

Mailbag! Your Questions Answered

• I am confused. It shows that your site was updated yesterday…but when I look at the computer rankings (based on the links provided) I get different numbers than what you show. For instance, I assume “JS” must equal the Jeff Sagarin rankings. You have Utah as 22 and BYU as 0. I followed the link on your site to Sagarin’s rankings and see Utah as 12 and BYU as 13. This is just one example.

Jeff Sagarin actually publishes two rating - Predictor and ELO_CHESS. The ranking of the ratings is a synthesis of these two - that's where you saw Utah at No. 12 and BYU at No. 13.

Now, look at the ELO_CHESS rankings - ELO_CHESS is the unbiased formula where margin of victory isn't not taken into consideration, i.e., a 59-point win is equal to a 1-point win on a blocked last-second PAT (you get my drift). The BCS uses Sagarin's ELO_CHESS ranking, and now you see that Utah is ranked 4th and BYU 35th. In the BCS system, first place gets 25 points, second 24 and so on. Therefore Utah gets 22 points and BYU gets 0 for being outside of top 25.

Obviously, BYU's blowout wins are not helping because of this scheme. What matters is that UCLA and Washington need to win as many games as possible to help out the Cougars.

• Virginia Tech has a lead in the cumulative scores of the Coaches and Harris Polls. According to you, Michigan State has a computer average of .63, while Virginia Tech has a computer average of .47. However, after subtracting the top and bottom scores of both teams, Tech averages a ranking of 14.25, while MSU averages a ranking of 15.75. Can Michigan State really own such a sizeable advantage in computer scores?

The computer scores are calculated as such: For each team, a value is assigned to each computer ranking in inverse of 25 - i.e. No. 1 gets 25 points, 2 gets 24, and so on. So the points you see in each column is NOT rankings, but values. And for that purpose, the bigger the number, the better. Michigan State, after discarding the highest and lowest rankings, has a point total of 63, which translates into .630 in the computer average, and VT has 47, so .470. And yes, MSU's computer scores more than offset VT's better poll numbers.

• I'm surprised you said "chances for two non-BCS teams are virtually nil". I think it looks like two non-BCS are virtually assured!

As it is right now, six BCS conference champions, a second team from both the SEC and Big 12, and one non-BCS team are assured of berths, so that leaves one.

That pick will end up with the second-place Big Ten team, in my estimation. Any combination of PSU-OSU-MSU will yield two teams in the top 14. An outside chance also is there for Cal to finish 10-2 and get into the top 14.

I'd love to see two non-BCS teams in the top 14 and force the BCS to take both, but that's just so unlikely.

• IF, in the final BCS poll, there are TWO non-BCS in the top 14, (the first pool of at-large teams) and the PAC10 runner up and BigTen runner up are NOT in the top 14, then the BCS HAS TO TAKE the second non-BCS team. Right?

1. The top 14 rule is sacrosanct UNLESS there are not 14 eligible teams. Therefore, if none of the second place teams in the Pac-10, Big Ten, ACC and Big East are in the top 14, then by rule the BCS MUST take a non-BCS team that's eligible. The top 18 rule can only be invoked if there are not 10 eligible teams in the top 14 (regardless of conference affiliation).

2. All that said, I just don't think it's likely that only the SEC and Big 12 will have more than one team in the top 14, here's why:

The top 14 currently is populated by five Big 12 teams - four from the South Division - and that just won't hold. You'll see at least two of those teams, maybe three, drop from the top 14 after they all play each other.

Remember how far down Illinois was last year? Yet, at the end of the season, a 9-3 record was still good enough to be ranked No. 13 and a Rose Bowl invitation (a criminal one, but I digress).

• Do you have to win your conference championship to go to the BCS title game? There was talk of Georgia maybe deserving to go last year. What are the chances of a rematch if Texas and Oklahoma both win out and of course Penn State and Alabama both loose?

You don't have to win the conference to get into the BCS title game. But a rematch of OU and UT in the BCS title game is unlikely because OU can't even advance to the Big 12 title game and will be punished by the voters for it. (As Georgia did a year ago)

• What if OU, Texas & Texas Tech all have 1 conf loss at the end of the year (i.e OU beats Tech, Tech beats UT). Who makes the B12 title game?

In the three-way tie scenario, it'll probably come down to the placement in the BCS standings on Nov. 30. Here's the tiebreaker procedure:

1. The records of the three teams will be compared against each other.

2. The records of the three teams will be compared within their division.

3. The records of the three teams will be compared against the next highest placed teams in their division in order of finish (fourth, fifth and sixth).

4. The records of the three teams will be compared against all common conference opponents.

5. The highest ranked team in the first Bowl Championship Series Poll following the completion of Big 12 regular season conference play shall be the representative.

6. The team with the best overall winning percentage [excluding exempted games] shall be the representative.

7. The representative will be chosen by draw.

• Who would be your BCS bowl matchups if the were to be picked for this Sunday?

Wow, this is waaaaaay too early. But what the heck, here's my crystal ball -

BCS - Alabama vs. Penn State

Rose - USC vs. Michigan State

Fiesta - Texas vs. BYU

Sugar - Florida vs. Oklahoma

Orange - Wake Forest vs. Pittsburgh

Finally, the BCS standings tracking has been updated to give better balance to unranked teams. And be sure to come back Saturday night as the Guru will unveil projections for the first official BCS standings. It will be published shortly after the Texas-Missouri 8 p.m. ET game. A live blogging comment forum will be available for those of you want to banter while you wait.