SEC needs to find a new way for media to predict champions in the pre-season

[WizardofhOgZ]

Until further notice, it is IMPOSSIBLE to finish second in either division and still win the overall Championship (unless, of course, the team that finishes first in that division is ineligible because of NCAA sanctions).  Therefore, you cannot have Auburn finishing second in the West and also have them as SEC Champions.

They must have an Aggie tallying votes.

[dhizzle]

I saw that also. I was actually trying to figure out how that could happen.

[Hog_Swanson]

Until further notice, it is IMPOSSIBLE to finish second in either division and still win the overall Championship (unless, of course, the team that finishes first in that division is ineligible because of NCAA sanctions).  Therefore, you cannot have Auburn finishing second in the West and also have them as SEC Champions.

They must have an Aggie tallying votes.

Dufuq?

[rhames]

It's just the way the numbers work.


To make easy. Say you have 10 people voting.

6 pick Alabama to win the west but of this six, only three pick Alabama to win the conference.


The last four pick auburn to win the west and to win the conference.



Bama had more west votes but auburn had more conference votes.

[tigerinhogtown]

BAMA writers picked Auburn to finish last

[Huds_HawgTide]

its cray cray...BAD NEWS BOARS

[rhames]

its cray cray...BAD NEWS BOARS

Forgot the hashtag

[WizardofhOgZ]

I fully understand HOW it happened.  I'm just saying the current method is unstable and needs to be done another way. 

For example, have the writers vote on the order within each division (as they currently do now), then have them pick whether the overall SEC Champion (i.e., winner of the SECC game) will come from the West or the East (not a specific team for that question).  Then you have a projected order of finish in the east and west (which gives you the two teams projected to be in the Championship game), and total up the East/West votes to see which of the two division winners is predicted to be the overall champion.  Using today's vote as an example, if the media had voted for the west division to produce the Champion, it would have been Alabama, not Auburn.

That may seem a little convoluted - but at least it will produce results consistent with reality - something that COULD happen.  As already discussed, the selection of a second place finisher in either division as the overall SEC Champion CANNOT happen.

Another idea - same as above, but keep a separate tabulation of all ballots that pick both of the two overall #1 teams.  Require all ballots to pick a winner (of their projected SECC game - between the 2 teams they pick to win each of the two divisions).  Since the teams voted atop each division will be among the most popular (usually, they WILL be the one voted on top of their division the most) teams selected, it is likely several of the ballots will pick them both, and therefore predict the outcome of their SECC match-up.  Whoever gets the most votes among the #1 vs. #1 ballots is deemed to be the predicted SEC Champion.

I'm sure some may have other suggestions to vote on the Champions in pre-season . . . let's hear them!

It's just the way the numbers work.


To make easy. Say you have 10 people voting.

6 pick Alabama to win the west but of this six, only three pick Alabama to win the conference.


The last four pick auburn to win the west and to win the conference.



Bama had more west votes but auburn had more conference votes.

[rhames]

I fully understand HOW it happened.  I'm just saying the current method is unstable and needs to be done another way. 

For example, have the writers vote on the order within each division (as they currently do now), then have them pick whether the overall SEC Champion (i.e., winner of the SECC game) will come from the West or the East (not a specific team for that question).  Then you have a projected order of finish in the east and west (which gives you the two teams projected to be in the Championship game), and total up the East/West votes to see which of the two division winners is predicted to be the overall champion.  Using today's vote as an example, if the media had voted for the west division to produce the Champion, it would have been Alabama, not Auburn.

That may seem a little convoluted - but at least it will produce results consistent with reality - something that COULD happen.  As already discussed, the selection of a second place finisher in either division as the overall SEC Champion CANNOT happen.

Another idea - same as above, but keep a separate tabulation of all ballots that pick both of the two overall #1 teams.  Require all ballots to pick a winner (of their projected SECC game - between the 2 teams they pick to win each of the two divisions).  Since the teams voted atop each division will be among the most popular (usually, they WILL be the one voted on top of their division the most) teams selected, it is likely several of the ballots will pick them both, and therefore predict the outcome of their SECC match-up.  Whoever gets the most votes among the #1 vs. #1 ballots is deemed to be the predicted SEC Champion.

I'm sure some may have other suggestions to vote on the Champions in pre-season . . . let's hear them!

Oh I agree.


Also there are people who really don't understand how it happened

[WizardofhOgZ]

Oh I agree.

Also there are people who really don't understand how it happened

That's got to be close to a board record. 

Within one minute (exactly 60 seconds) of my new post in this thread, you (1) noticed a new post had been made in the thread; (2) opened the thread, scrolled to the bottom and saw that the new post was a response to one of your posts; (2) read it (and it wasn't short); and (3) wrote and posted a reply to my post.

It would be a little different if we were posting back-and-forth, almost conversationally, and you were looking for my next post.  Nope . . . my post - the first I've ever made in direct response to you, as far as I know - was made an hour after the post (by you) that I quoted and replied to. 

Just kind of random.

[Vantage 8 dude]

I fully understand HOW it happened.  I'm just saying the current method is unstable and needs to be done another way. 

For example, have the writers vote on the order within each division (as they currently do now), then have them pick whether the overall SEC Champion (i.e., winner of the SECC game) will come from the West or the East (not a specific team for that question).  Then you have a projected order of finish in the east and west (which gives you the two teams projected to be in the Championship game), and total up the East/West votes to see which of the two division winners is predicted to be the overall champion.  Using today's vote as an example, if the media had voted for the west division to produce the Champion, it would have been Alabama, not Auburn.

That may seem a little convoluted - but at least it will produce results consistent with reality - something that COULD happen.  As already discussed, the selection of a second place finisher in either division as the overall SEC Champion CANNOT happen.

Another idea - same as above, but keep a separate tabulation of all ballots that pick both of the two overall #1 teams.  Require all ballots to pick a winner (of their projected SECC game - between the 2 teams they pick to win each of the two divisions).  Since the teams voted atop each division will be among the most popular (usually, they WILL be the one voted on top of their division the most) teams selected, it is likely several of the ballots will pick them both, and therefore predict the outcome of their SECC match-up.  Whoever gets the most votes among the #1 vs. #1 ballots is deemed to be the predicted SEC Champion.

I'm sure some may have other suggestions to vote on the Champions in pre-season . . . let's hear them!

Convoluted voting !! Welcome to the SEC; or more specifically, conference of the TAM Aggies

[rhames]

That's got to be close to a board record. 

Within one minute (exactly 60 seconds) of my new post in this thread, you (1) noticed a new post had been made in the thread; (2) opened the thread, scrolled to the bottom and saw that the new post was a response to one of your posts; (2) read it (and it wasn't short); and (3) wrote and posted a reply to my post.

It would be a little different if we were posting back-and-forth, almost conversationally, and you were looking for my next post.  Nope . . . my post - the first I've ever made in direct response to you, as far as I know - was made an hour after the post (by you) that I quoted and replied to. 

Just kind of random.

I'm stalking you and read fast

[Hawgey-Davidson]

Im trying to figure out why anyone would give 2 shats about preseason picks.
1 shat for preseason picks. The other shat being picks from the media. Just my 2 shats, uh cents.

[WizardofhOgZ]

Im trying to figure out why anyone would give 2 shats about preseason picks.
1 shat for preseason picks. The other shat being picks from the media. Just my 2 shats, uh cents.

I don't give a sh*t about WHO they pick; I care (a little) that the WAY they pick make the whole conference look like the ignorant inbreeds the rest of the country likes to think we are.  Just reinforces unfortunate stereotypes.

[Theolesnort]

Needs? come on this is just a prediction contest which is no contest or accomplishment at all. If you are on top or bottom what real difference does it make. It is the stuff that dreams are made of, fantasy stuff. Like all things human there is a element of bias involved much like recruiting rankings, like he is the 67 TH best tight end in the country. What are the chances that that is accurate at all? Slim and none.

[Tusks]

Since the media knows no more than anyone else about picking much of anything, I think they should just do away with it.

[mizzouman]

Until further notice, it is IMPOSSIBLE to finish second in either division and still win the overall Championship (unless, of course, the team that finishes first in that division is ineligible because of NCAA sanctions).  Therefore, you cannot have Auburn finishing second in the West and also have them as SEC Champions.

They must have an Aggie tallying votes.

LOL.  It doesn't matter.  Pre-season predictions are never correct anyway so who cares?

[razorbacker3]

LOL.  It doesn't matter.  Pre-season predictions are never correct anyway so who cares?

^^^^^^^ this

[WizardofhOgZ]

LOL.  It doesn't matter.  Pre-season predictions are never correct anyway so who cares?

As I said above . . . I couldn't care less if the SEC never took another pre-season poll.  BUT . . . if they ARE going to do one, at least come up with a projected Champion that is one of the two division winners (as per the same vote).  That is not too much to ask.  To select a team for the overall Champion that is also chosen second in it's own division (and, therefore, not a participant in the projected SECC game) just reinforces a lot of unfortunate stereotypes about those in the SEC and the folks that follow the conference.

That is to say, it looks stupid. 

Say what you want about it not mattering - and, it doesn't.  But if you're going to do something, do it right.

 

[mizzouman]

As I said above . . . I couldn't care less if the SEC never took another pre-season poll.  BUT . . . if they ARE going to do one, at least come up with a projected Champion that is one of the two division winners (as per the same vote).  That is not too much to ask.  To select a team for the overall Champion that is also chosen second in it's own division (and, therefore, not a participant in the projected SECC game) just reinforces a lot of unfortunate stereotypes about those in the SEC and the folks that follow the conference.

That is to say, it looks stupid. 

Say what you want about it not mattering - and, it doesn't.  But if you're going to do something, do it right.

 

I really doesn't matter.  There's no such thing as a pre-season champion.  What does that even mean?  Is there some sort of trophy?

These pre-season things are for TV.  TV has to put a number next to the team to get ratings.  It's better to see #1 rank vs. #8 rank in an early game than to have nothing at all.

[Biggus Piggus]

They gathered all the data they needed to make an intelligible set of rankings, just didn't know what to do with it.

Look at the wire service polls. They don't rank someone No. 1 just because they get the most first-place votes. Whoever decided to do that was an idiot.

Someone told me that the SEC office did what they did because some Tide-loyal media downranked Auburn + they thought it manipulated the poll results.