Are you an EPFL student looking for a semester project?
Work with us on data science and visualisation projects, and deploy your project as an app on top of GraphSearch.
Concept
2006 BCS computer rankings
Summary
In American college football, the 2006 BCS computer rankings are a part of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) formula that determines who plays in the BCS National Championship Game as well as several other bowl games. Each computer system was developed using different methods which attempts to rank the teams' performance. For 2006, the highest and lowest rankings for a team are dropped and the remaining four rankings are summed. A team ranked #1 by a computer system is given 25 points, #2 is given 24 points and so forth. The summed values are then divided by 100 (the maximum value a team can earn if they received four first place votes that were summed). The values are then ranked by percentage. This percentage ranking is then averaged with the Coaches Poll and Harris Poll average rankings, each receiving equal weight, and the results become the BCS Rankings.
For 2006, the rankings were released beginning with the eighth week of the season on October 14. Data taken from official BCS website. There are missing values in the table because the BCS Rankings only list the top 25 of the BCS Rankings, providing data on how those teams achieved their top 25 ranking. The computers ranking may include teams that do not make the top 25 BCS Rankings once averaged with the AP and Coaches Polls.
Jeff Anderson and Chris Hester are the owners of this computer system that has been a part of the BCS since its inception. The Anderson & Hester Rankings claim to be distinct in four ways:
These rankings do not reward teams for running up scores. Teams are rewarded for beating quality opponents, which is the object of the game. Margin of victory, which is not the object of the game, is not considered.
Unlike the AP and Coaches Polls, these rankings do not prejudge teams. These rankings first appear after the season's fifth week, and each team's ranking reflects its actual accomplishments on the field, not its perceived potential.
These rankings compute the most accurate strength of schedule ratings.
Official source
About this result
This page is automatically generated and may contain information that is not correct, complete, up-to-date, or relevant to your search query. The same applies to every other page on this website. Please make sure to verify the information with EPFL's official sources.