The Harris Poll - Introduction

The last few days I've been looking at the new Harris Poll component of the BCS. The Harris Poll is basically replacing the AP Poll in the BCS computations. The results of this poll, added to the Coaches' Poll, make up the the most important portion of the BCS. Basically this poll alone can make an enormous difference in where a team finishes, in whether a team has a chance to play for the BCS Championship, in what bowl a team goes to, in how much money a program can earn, etc. That is why it's important.

It's also flawed. All humans have biases. It's part of nature. And if we're going to base the system on polls, it's a risk we have to accept (whether the system is right or not is a different issue all together and I'm not bringing it up now). Assuming that this is the system in place now and for the extended future, the goal should be to limit the risk of bias in the poll. The Harris Poll fails miserably at limiting the biases of its pollsters. It seems as if some of the pollsters were selected because of their biases.

There are 114 voters, but 5 have withdrawn (4 because they work for ESPN, which intelligently wants no part of this mess, and 1 because he's the son-in-law of the head coach at Troy and even these idiots saw that as a conflict).

So here's how I'm going to present my findings. First, a list of the voters and their evident conflicts. Then, I'll categorize the conflicts by schools and conferences and provide some analysis and findings resulting from my research. If it works, you'll see pretty clearly that this poll is a joke and an embarassment. One tease: Noted powerhouse Kansas has 4 pollsters with a conflict. Florida and Florida State (as well as many others) have none.