enigmaax;532056 wrote:But so are other schools. Should it really matter that Oregon beat New Mexico by 72? Does that alone make really demonstrate how good/great they are? And those are the types of teams that Boise and TCU would be beating by ridiculous scores to demonstrate their worth, which I say doesn't demonstrate their worth at all because half of the country could do the same thing against that schedule.
If MOV isn't considered, then the strength of schedule becomes even more important. If all W are treated the same regardless of score, this really hurts teams in bad conferences.
E.g., say Team A and B are both exactly as good as each other. A plays in a tough conference, B plays in a bad conference. A wins every game by 3 points. B wins every game by 40 points. If they switched conferences, they'd get the exact same results.
If a computer model treats all Ws as Ws, A ends up much higher because they're playing a tougher schedule. B ends up much lower, because they need to win each game by 40 points to demonstrate how good they are. Remember, we know each team is exactly as good as the other, yet a system that treats all Ws the same would put A far above B. If you don't consider MOV, a computer model would predict that A would drill B in a game, even though we know (in this hypo) that they'd tie.
Now, whether B is as "deserving" as A is a different story--the goal of a system may not be to match the two "best" teams but the two "most deserving" teams. Under that theory, A and B may be equally good, but A may be more deserving by virtue of its schedule.
