BCS DECLARES GERMANY WINNER OF WORLD WARII, US Ranked 4th
After determining the Big-12 championship game participants the BCS computers were put to work on other major contests and today the BCS declared Germany to be the winner of World War II.
"Germany put together an incredible number of victories beginning with the annexation of Austria and the Sudetenland and continuing on into conference play with defeats of Poland, France, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium and the Netherlands. Their only losses came against the US and Russia; however considering their entire body of work--including an incredibly tough Strength of Schedule--our computers deemed them worthy of the #1 ranking."
Questioned about the #4 ranking of the United States the BCS commissioner stated "The US only had two major victories--Japan and Germany. The computer models, unlike humans, aren't influenced by head-to-head contests--they consider each contest to be only a single, equally-weighted event."
German Chancellor Adolph Hiter said "Yes, we lost to the US; but we defeated #2 ranked France in only 6 weeks." Herr Hitler has been criticized for seeking dramatic victories to earn 'style points' to enhance Germany's rankings. Hitler protested "Our contest with Poland was in doubt until the final day and the conditions in Norway were incredibly challenging and demanded the application of additional forces."
The French ranking has also come under scrutiny. The BCS commented "France had a single loss against Germany and following a preseason #1 ranking they only fell to #2."
Japan was ranked #3 with victories including Manchuria, Borneo and the Philippines.
A little humor for your Friday, H/T to MBMc.
Thomas More
The biggest problem with the BCS (as you (or MBMc?) reference) is that people are looking at two different things: the best over all season, and the best team on January 8th. If we're looking for the best over all season, why is the winner of January 8th automatically the champion? Couldn't the loser still have had a better season? If we're looking for the best team on January 8th, why do the computers treat September the same as November? And why are the voters expected to give more weight to November, but the computers aren't?
My other complaint with the current system is that the conferences don't play each other enough. Within a conference, there are more than enough games to sort out the rankings (although there's not much anyone could have done about Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas Tech). But the only game between the Big 12 and the SEC was Texas (tied for best) blowing out Arkansas (tied for worst).
Tim
Posted by: Tim | December 15, 2008 at 10:27 AM