PennStateHoops.com Discussion Forum

Jerry Palm is so good at this stuff

He finds an error with the BCS data. It won’t make any difference for the title game but it did cost Boise State a top ten finish and could have long term implications for the Mountain West’s effort to get an automatic bid.

Palm regularly corrects the NCAA’s RPI data which is why I always use his numbers for any RPI based posts that I make.

For anyone who is interested in RPI or BCS numbers/rankings I would strongly encourage them to support Jerry and sign up for his $ite$.

CollegeRPI.com

CollegeBCS.com

Very interesting read. I don’t like the fact that information isn’t verified like it should be. Poor Boise State.

$30 a year, can’t beat it

How’s about $29.99?? :wink:

You should’ve witnessed Jerry at the NCAA bracket seminar when he was my partner. Amazing. He was (tactfully) correcting Greg Shaheen and Dave Worlock during the tutorial.

BCS just issued release and didn’t even put out new numbers, just rankings…

Bowl Championship Series
Every Game Counts
Bill Hancock, Executive Director<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = “urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office” />

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 6, 2010
CONTACT: Tracie Dittemore 913-341-8151

Revised Final BCS Standings Are Released

BCS Games and Teams’ Eligibility for Those Games Was Unaffected

The National Football Foundation today released revised final BCS standings. The revision was necessitated by a miscalculation in the Colley computer rankings, where the Appalachian State-Western Illinois FCS playoff game was omitted from the final Colley rankings. Mr. Colley discovered this error in a subsequent review and informed the BCS group earlier today. The net result of the error is that Boise State goes from #11 to #10 and LSU goes from #10 to #11 in the revised BCS final standings as shown below.

“I was deeply disturbed when I learned about this today. This error should not have happened and is unacceptable. The final standings have been corrected. Fortunately, it had no effect on any team’s eligibility for the BCS games. But the simple fact that it could have means this issue will be near the top of the agenda for the conference commissioners’ annual review next spring,” said Bill Hancock, Executive Director of the BCS.

The final standings are as follows:

1 Auburn
2 Oregon
3 TCU
4 Stanford
5 Wisconsin
6 Ohio State
7 Oklahoma
8 Arkansas
9 Michigan State
10 Boise State
11 LSU
12 Missouri
13 Virginia Tech
14 Oklahoma State
15 Nevada
16 Alabama
17 Texas A&M
18 Nebraska
19 Utah
20 South Carolina
21 Mississippi State
22 West Virginia
23 Florida State
24 Hawaii
25 Central Florida

Having accurate data in computer rankings is only “near” the top of their list.

Right, because they know the system is already flawed, so why bother to make sure the data is accurate.

[quote="Tom, post:6, topic:1608"]Having accurate data in computer rankings is only "near" the top of their list.[/quote]

Right, because they know the system is already flawed, so why bother to make sure the data is accurate.

When you’ve got a paint by number velvet ELvis, does it really matter what colors you use?

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5896480

Boise lashes out…

Transparency…??..??..??..??..??..

How about the NCAA selection criteria where Million dollar a year (Approx./could be more ) coaches go public in saying they don’t have a clue what the selection criteria is!!
If you need to ask for names of the coaches, you should not be on this board. Think 2 large conference schools.

I doubt he’d be complaining had they not choked vs. Nevada

He would have been locked out of the NC game, why would he not be complaining?

[quote="Tom, post:10, topic:1608"]I doubt he'd be complaining had they not choked vs. Nevada[/quote]

He would have been locked out of the NC game, why would he not be complaining?

All conference champions should be complaining anyway. What makes an undefeated champion of a crappy conference better than a one or two loss champion from a good conference?