<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Despite Blowout Loss, Notre Dame Ranked Ahead Of Bama In One Computer Poll</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mrsec.com/2013/01/despite-blowout-loss-notre-dame-ranked-ahead-of-bama-in-one-computer-bowl/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mrsec.com/2013/01/despite-blowout-loss-notre-dame-ranked-ahead-of-bama-in-one-computer-bowl/</link>
	<description>Up to the minute SEC football and basketball news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 02:16:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: redav</title>
		<link>http://www.mrsec.com/2013/01/despite-blowout-loss-notre-dame-ranked-ahead-of-bama-in-one-computer-bowl/comment-page-1/#comment-118297</link>
		<dc:creator>redav</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:29:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mrsec.com/?p=266183#comment-118297</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Oh, boo-hoo.
 
The computers are cold, uncaring, unbiased calculations. There is no &quot;correct&quot; calculation--they are all estimates. That means you WILL get different rankings for different algorithms, and that&#039;s why we average them. There is no problem here, even if rankings return results that contradict results on the field. There would be a problem if computers consistently return results that contradict actual game results.
 
So, instead of whining about point differential (which, IMO, is better to leave out), why not campaign for computer polls to be added/removed according to their accuracy? At the end of each year, their overall results can be compared to all the actual game results, and if any computer system shows that it is consistently inferior to other systems, it gets replaced.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, boo-hoo.<br />
 <br />
The computers are cold, uncaring, unbiased calculations. There is no &#8220;correct&#8221; calculation&#8211;they are all estimates. That means you WILL get different rankings for different algorithms, and that&#8217;s why we average them. There is no problem here, even if rankings return results that contradict results on the field. There would be a problem if computers consistently return results that contradict actual game results.<br />
 <br />
So, instead of whining about point differential (which, IMO, is better to leave out), why not campaign for computer polls to be added/removed according to their accuracy? At the end of each year, their overall results can be compared to all the actual game results, and if any computer system shows that it is consistently inferior to other systems, it gets replaced.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: j_scott_o</title>
		<link>http://www.mrsec.com/2013/01/despite-blowout-loss-notre-dame-ranked-ahead-of-bama-in-one-computer-bowl/comment-page-1/#comment-118215</link>
		<dc:creator>j_scott_o</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 13:00:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mrsec.com/?p=266183#comment-118215</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is also my problem with Georgia being ranked/tied w/ A&amp;M in the final HUMAN polls.  Both had 2 losses.  A&amp;M lost 2 games this season by a total of 8 points...3 points to Florida the 1st game of the season and 5 to LSU early in the season.  Georgia, on the other hand, lost to Bama in the SECCG, a team A&amp;M beat on their own field.  And, they got absolutely blown out by 4 touchdowns to South Carolina.  No one was playing better than the Aggies to finish the season...no one.  Final polls should have been 1.  Bama, 2.  Oregon, 3.  Texas A&amp;M, 4.  Georgia,  5.  Notre Dame,  6.  Stanford.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is also my problem with Georgia being ranked/tied w/ A&amp;M in the final HUMAN polls.  Both had 2 losses.  A&amp;M lost 2 games this season by a total of 8 points&#8230;3 points to Florida the 1st game of the season and 5 to LSU early in the season.  Georgia, on the other hand, lost to Bama in the SECCG, a team A&amp;M beat on their own field.  And, they got absolutely blown out by 4 touchdowns to South Carolina.  No one was playing better than the Aggies to finish the season&#8230;no one.  Final polls should have been 1.  Bama, 2.  Oregon, 3.  Texas A&amp;M, 4.  Georgia,  5.  Notre Dame,  6.  Stanford.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamesgoss</title>
		<link>http://www.mrsec.com/2013/01/despite-blowout-loss-notre-dame-ranked-ahead-of-bama-in-one-computer-bowl/comment-page-1/#comment-118096</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamesgoss</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2013 23:43:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mrsec.com/?p=266183#comment-118096</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nice pun to finish it off.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice pun to finish it off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SouthernBoiSB</title>
		<link>http://www.mrsec.com/2013/01/despite-blowout-loss-notre-dame-ranked-ahead-of-bama-in-one-computer-bowl/comment-page-1/#comment-118074</link>
		<dc:creator>SouthernBoiSB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2013 20:45:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mrsec.com/?p=266183#comment-118074</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why do we even have polls?  The human aspect has that main flaw - HUMAN!  Not all people see the same things the exact same way.  &amp; we all know that people are going to be pro/anti certain teams/conferences &amp; will have that aspect in their mind when they vote.  &amp; now, you&#039;re telling us the computers aren&#039;t even measuring the same factors?
 
An example with this computer&#039;s rankings:  it&#039;s putting Florida (who didn&#039;t go to the SEC CG &amp; lost their BCS bowl) 4th, &amp; Georgia 9th.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why do we even have polls?  The human aspect has that main flaw &#8211; HUMAN!  Not all people see the same things the exact same way.  &amp; we all know that people are going to be pro/anti certain teams/conferences &amp; will have that aspect in their mind when they vote.  &amp; now, you&#8217;re telling us the computers aren&#8217;t even measuring the same factors?<br />
 <br />
An example with this computer&#8217;s rankings:  it&#8217;s putting Florida (who didn&#8217;t go to the SEC CG &amp; lost their BCS bowl) 4th, &amp; Georgia 9th.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
