Sign in to follow this  
Kid Cid

My very own personal ranking system

Recommended Posts

Ok, so I've been thinking really hard about all the I'm great, you suck comments that college football generates. Most, if not all of that is based on those fraked up things that are the polls. Let's face it, with at least 35 college games each week, there isn't a chance that the voters watched more than a couple of the games. The polls are worthless popularity contests that are grounded in the flawed and biased perceptions of the voters.

 

So I took a page out of college basketball and put together a kind of RPI like grading of all the teams. Here's my reasoning, feel free to bash it as you see fit. I'm just trying to get what I perceive as an unbiased ranking of the teams based on objective criteria. Most importantly, every team starts at ground zero. That means until the first game is played, all teams are regarded as equal. Beating a team ranked #3 doesn't count any more than beating a team ranked at #103.

 

The most important criteria is a teams record. Wins and losses count for the most. So a team gets points awarded to it for a win and gets points taken away for a loss. This means that there are no good losses or bad wins, all are counted equally. I feel that the other criteria account for some of that subjective feel that you get with those terms. However, included in this is a bonus for a win on the road. After looking at the records of all the teams, I found that road wins are just plain hard to come by in college football. Therefore, there needs to be something that takes this into account.

 

The next criteria is your opponents record. Let's face it, a win over a 6-2 team is better than a win over a 2-6 team. That's gotta count for something.

 

Then comes scoring. This is a margin of victory thing. However, much like the wins and losses, points are given for points scored by a team and points are taken away for points scored against a team. In this way, a 20-6 win counts for the same as a 50-36 win.

 

Finally comes yardage, both gained and given up. This is a minor factor but it will help to separate otherwise really close measurements. A team that is great between the 20 yard lines but can't score has to be graded higher than a team that goes 3 and out every time. Same goes for the defenses. A bend but don't break defense gets a lower score than one that just shuts everything down.

 

Now I know that there's still some subjectivity in this because not every team has played the same amount of games. Oh yeah, I didn't count games against 1AA or FCS teams because short of Michigan's debacle last year, those games are stat padders and money makers. I'm also sure that the computer rankings included in the BCS are far more thorough than this. I feel that some of them are unecessarily complicated. I'm pretty sure that this is something that everyone can understand. So here they are, read 'em and weep.

 

These rankings were my first cut. I've left them here for historical purposes but they are not accurate, nor are they current. Please see the latest rankings in a post later in this thread.

 

 

Name						  Nickname						Record		 ScoreTexas						 Longhorns					   8-1			12.629Penn State					Nittany Lions				   8-0			11.845Texas Tech					Red Raiders					 7-0			11.228Alabama					   Crimson Tide					9-0			11.158Texas Christian			   Horned Frogs					8-1			10.97Oklahoma					  Oklahoma Sooners				7-1			10.867Southern California		   Trojans						 7-1			10.738Utah						  Utes							8-0			10.602Florida					   Gators						  7-1			10.583Boise State				   Broncos						 7-0			10.254Oklahoma State				Cowboys						 7-2			 8.361Missouri					  Tigers						  6-2			 7.954Tulsa						 Golden Hurricane				7-1			 7.75Ball State					Cardinals					   7-0			 7.609Michigan State				Spartans						8-2			 7.24Brigham Young				 Cougars						 7-1			 7.203Ohio State					Buckeyes						6-2			 7.191Georgia					   Bulldogs						5-2			 6.61California					Golden Bears					6-2			 6.496Oregon State				  Beavers						 5-2			 5.494Minnesota					 Gophers						 6-2			 5.479Pittsburgh					Panthers						6-2			 5.476Air Force					 Falcons						 6-2			 5.393North Carolina				Tar Heels					   5-2			 4.987Oregon						Ducks						   6-3			 4.788Northwestern				  Wildcats						6-2			 4.788Louisiana State			   Tigers						  5-2			 4.702Cincinnati					Bearcats						5-2			 4.681Western Michigan			  Broncos						 6-2			 4.562South Carolina				Gamecocks					   5-2			 4.548Georgia Tech				  Yellow Jackets				  5-2			 4.527South Florida				 Bulls						   5-3			 4.35Florida State				 Seminoles					   4-2			 4.192Miami (FL)					Hurricanes					  5-3			 4.177Kansas						Jayhawks						5-3			 4.018West Virginia				 Mountaineers					5-2			 3.885Nebraska					  Cornhuskers					 5-4			 3.829Connecticut				   Huskies						 5-3			 3.775Arizona					   Wildcats						5-3			 3.75Central Michigan			  Chippewas					   6-2			 3.654Rice						  Owls							6-3			 3.636Wake Forest				   Demon Deacons				   5-3			 3.337Kentucky					  Wildcats						5-3			 3.221Navy						  Midshipmen					  5-3			 3.167Illinois					  Fighting Illini				 4-4			 3.007Mississippi				   Rebels						  4-3			 2.939Maryland					  Terrapins					   5-2			 2.818Iowa						  Hawkeyes						4-4			 2.798Notre Dame					Fighting Irish				  5-3			 2.777Vanderbilt					Commodores					  5-3			 2.61Virginia Tech				 Hokies						  4-3			 2.606Troy						  Trojans						 4-3			 2.402San Jose State				Spartans						5-3			 2.169Northern Illinois			 Huskies						 4-3			 2.028East Carolina				 Pirates						 5-3			 2.02Wisconsin					 Badgers						 4-5			 1.967Stanford					  Cardinal						5-4			 1.906Virginia					  Cavaliers					   4-4			 1.869Louisiana Lafayette		   Ragin' Cajuns				   5-3			 1.806Boston College				Eagles						  4-3			 1.429Louisville					Cardinals					   4-3			 1.393Fresno State				  Bulldogs						5-3			 1.158Duke						  Blue Devils					 3-4			 0.984Buffalo					   Bulls						   4-4			 0.925Houston					   Cougars						 3-4			 0.874New Mexico					Lobos						   4-6			 0.779Arkansas					  Razorbacks					  3-5			 0.276Nevada						Wolf Pack					   3-4			 0.100Bowling Green				 Falcons						 4-5			 -0.524Arkansas State				Red Wolves					  3-4			 -5.99Clemson					   Tigers						  2-4			 -6.20Rutgers					   Scarlet Knights				 2-5			 -0.621Auburn						Tigers						  4-5			 -0.675Kansas State				  Wildcats						3-5			 -0.768Akron						 Zips							4-4			 -8.10Hawaii						Warriors						3-5			 -0.935Colorado					  Buffaloes					   3-5			 -0.951Colorado State				Rams							3-5			 -1.022Memphis					   Tigers						  3-5			 -1.091Louisiana Tech				Bulldogs						3-4			 -1.14Tennessee					 Volunteers					  3-6			 -1.388Texas A&M					 Aggies						  4-5			 -1.444Southern Mississippi		  Golden Eagles				   3-6			 -1.506Purdue						Boilermakers					2-6			 -1.644Tulane						Green Wave					  3-5			 -1.662California Los Angeles		Bruins						  3-5			 -1.764Temple						Owls							3-6			 -1.764Florida Atlantic			  Owls							3-5			 -1.929Marshall					  Thundering Herd				 3-4			 -2.017Army						  Black Knights				   3-5			 -2.479Indiana					   Hoosiers						2-6			 -2.787Florida International		 Golden Panthers				 3-5			 -2.819Nevada Las Vegas			  Rebels						  3-6			 -2.835Baylor						Bears						   2-6			 -3.286Mississippi State			 Bulldogs						2-7			 -3.49Arizona State				 Sun Devils					  1-6			 -3.537New Mexico State			  Aggies						  2-5			 -3.643Toledo						Rockets						 2-6			 -3.984Mid Tennessee State		   Blue Raiders					2-6			 -3.994Texas El Paso				 Miners						  2-6			 -3.995Syracuse					  Orange						  1-6			 -4.289Wyoming					   Cowboys						 2-6			 -4.389Ohio						  Bobcats						 1-7			 -4.591Michigan					  Wolverines					  2-7			 -5.05North Carolina State		  Wolfpack						1-6			 -5.079Utah State					Aggies						  2-7			 -5.54Louisiana Monroe			  Warhawks						2-6			 -5.686Central Florida			   Knights						 1-6			 -5.729Eastern Michigan			  Eagles						  1-8			 -5.879Miami (OH)					Redhawks						1-6			 -6.132Kent State					Golden Flashes				  1-7			 -6.303Western Kentucky			  Hilltoppers					 0-7			 -7.33Iowa State					Cyclones						1-7			 -7.585Alabama Birmingham			Blazers						 1-7			 -7.668San Diego State			   Aztecs						  1-7			 -7.879Southern Methodist			Mustangs						0-8			 -8.062Washington					Huskies						 0-8			 -8.171North Texas				   Mean Green					  1-8			 -9.282Idaho						 Vandals						 1-8			 -10.09Washington State			  Cougars						 0-8			 -10.982

 

Edited by Kid Cid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! Whether you agree with him or not, you have to admit, pretty impressive.

 

edit to add: further proving that if you had a ranking system of humans like the NCAA does with the Tournament Selection committee, that would be a far better way of ranking teams than biased journalists who totally regionalize there votes in the AP poll, or coaches who have no business voting at all. It needs to be an independent panel of folks just like you that come up with there own way of rationalizing and I guarantee watch more college football than any newspaper writer or coach (besides film on the next team his team is playing of course).

Edited by GWPFFL BrianW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is only one solution, and Obama nailed it. An eight team playoff is desperately needed. I'd rather the #9 ranked team griping than a possible scenario of three undefeated teams, and one being told they aren't as good as the other two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is only one solution, and Obama nailed it. An eight team playoff is desperately needed. I'd rather the #9 ranked team griping than a possible scenario of three undefeated teams, and one being told they aren't as good as the other two.

 

At least he didn't call for a crackdown on steroids.....:wacko:

 

The season still has a month to go. Texas Tech still has to play @ Oklahoma, Alabama is @ LSU this weekend, and they'll have to beat Florida. Your Nittany Lions will be there as long as they don't poo the panty this weekend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, the Northwest is certainly not in the house.

 

Nice work Kid. I'm curious (though I'm not saying you should go through the effort to do this), doesn't the RPI take SOS to the next level by checking out the SOS of the teams a team plays?

 

To me that is a very, very important step and one that needs to be done if you're going down this road. If you're going to make beating a 6-2 team more important than beating a 2-6 team, then it's important to determine how that 6-2 got that way compared to how the 2-6 team did. I suppose you could continue to make that argument to any number of levels but I would also guess that it becomes increasingly less important the more levels it is taken to.

 

Not at all trying to bash your work because it's a nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow! Whether you agree with him or not, you have to admit, pretty impressive.

 

edit to add: further proving that if you had a ranking system of humans like the NCAA does with the Tournament Selection committee, that would be a far better way of ranking teams than biased journalists who totally regionalize there votes in the AP poll, or coaches who have no business voting at all. It needs to be an independent panel of folks just like you that come up with there own way of rationalizing and I guarantee watch more college football than any newspaper writer or coach (besides film on the next team his team is playing of course).

I agree with your edit to a point. No computer based system is perfect. There are things in my model that I want to tweak such as using an average of yards per offensive play or defensive play instead of total yards as a way to smooth out discrepancies such as the different number of games having been played by different teams. Also, no matter how you do this, some pundit will always say that computers can't make value judgements about teams.

 

For instance, I knew Penn State was going to be a VERY good team this year because they returned all but two players from last year's 9-4 team, The QB and Mike LB. In the off season, one junior declared early (a CB) and our new Mike LB tore his ACL. Still this is a senior laden team and those always perform well due to composure and leadership. It also helped that there is a lot of talent as well. If I was ranking teams, I would have ranked them higher than the initial 21st that they were in the polls. My model has ALL teams ranked as equal from the beginning so there is no way to factor in thoes type of subjective judgements.

 

As a side note: This also goes to show that the pollsters only saw the loss of the QB and Mike LB as detrimental, they did not see the senior leadership present to just allow the new players to play instead of shouldering the entire burden. The pollsters don't research the teams more than superficially in the offseason and even less during the season. It would have to be a full time job to do this, one that I'm applying for. Please send resume requests to kidcid@corrundum.net :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow, the Northwest is certainly not in the house.

 

Nice work Kid. I'm curious (though I'm not saying you should go through the effort to do this), doesn't the RPI take SOS to the next level by checking out the SOS of the teams a team plays?

 

To me that is a very, very important step and one that needs to be done if you're going down this road. If you're going to make beating a 6-2 team more important than beating a 2-6 team, then it's important to determine how that 6-2 got that way compared to how the 2-6 team did. I suppose you could continue to make that argument to any number of levels but I would also guess that it becomes increasingly less important the more levels it is taken to.

 

Not at all trying to bash your work because it's a nice.

Yes, that is true as the college basketball RPI is the following formula: 1/4*(Winning Percentage) + 1/2*(Opponents' Average Winning Percentage) + 1/4*(Opponents' Opponents' Winning Percentage).

 

This was a first cut at the model so I was certain that it would need some tweaking. Your reasoning and the one obviously supporting the RPI is solid and something that I will try to incorporate into my model. Going 6-2 against cupcakes is very different that going 6-2 against the big boys and something that should be accounted for.

 

One of the things that the RPI does is weight the SOS very heavily. My model won't have that heavy an emphasis on SOS. Combined (Opponent SOS and opponent's opponent SOS) SOS will account for about 30% of a teams overall score. If you were to break out the criteria of my model, it would currently look something like this:

 

win/loss - 30%

SOS - 30%

points - 30%

yards - 10%

 

That's not quite right in my mind. I would like to de-emphasize the points and yards while adding extra emphasis to the SOS and win/loss portions. Adding in the opponent's opponent's SOS will help with the overall SOS but I'll still need to tweak the other portions to bring it in line with what I would like to see. More along the lines of:

 

win/loss - 40%

SOS - 40%

points - 15%

yards - 5%

Edited by Kid Cid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

very nice work Kid

 

right now i have jumped on the Texas Tech band wagon with both feet ...man they are funto watch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, that is true as the college basketball RPI is the following formula: 1/4*(Winning Percentage) + 1/2*(Opponents' Average Winning Percentage) + 1/4*(Opponents' Opponents' Winning Percentage).

 

This was a first cut at the model so I was certain that it would need some tweaking. Your reasoning and the one obviously supporting the RPI is solid and something that I will try to incorporate into my model. Going 6-2 against cupcakes is very different that going 6-2 against the big boys and something that should be accounted for.

 

One of the things that the RPI does is weight the SOS very heavily. My model won't have that heavy an emphasis on SOS. Combined (Opponent SOS and opponent's opponent SOS) SOS will account for about 30% of a teams overall score. If you were to break out the criteria of my model, it would currently look something like this:

 

win/loss - 30%

SOS - 30%

points - 30%

yards - 10%

 

That's not quite right in my mind. I would like to de-emphasize the points and yards while adding extra emphasis to the SOS and win/loss portions. Adding in the opponent's opponent's SOS will help with the overall SOS but I'll still need to tweak the other portions to bring it in line with what I would like to see. More along the lines of:

 

win/loss - 40%

SOS - 40%

points - 15%

yards - 5%

I'm assuming that you are using Excel for this and have actually been trying to figure out how that second level of SOS could be added in without creating a mountain of work. Because, if you think about it, that could get pretty ugly pretty quickly. And if you're not careful, you could create a cyclical equation.

 

My guess is that the first thing you do is create a factor for each team that is a ratio of wins and losses for teams they play. Then you factor their own w-l into that equation (heavily I would think). Then you use that number for each team when determining their effect on the SOS of the teams that play them.

 

So, team x has played teams with an average record of 5-3 and has a 8-0 record. So maybe their SOS factor is (.625 x 2x (1.000))/3 That weighs their own w/l heavier in the equation. That gives them a SOS factor of .775. So when you're factoring them into someone's SOS, they're added in as .775 rather than 1.000. You could basically repeat the same equation, taking the average of all the SOS factors of all the teams you've played and put that into an equation along with you're own w/l.

 

I don't want to co-opt your very cool toy here, just throwing out ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm assuming that you are using Excel for this and have actually been trying to figure out how that second level of SOS could be added in without creating a mountain of work. Because, if you think about it, that could get pretty ugly pretty quickly. And if you're not careful, you could create a cyclical equation.

 

My guess is that the first thing you do is create a factor for each team that is a ratio of wins and losses for teams they play. Then you factor their own w-l into that equation (heavily I would think). Then you use that number for each team when determining their effect on the SOS of the teams that play them.

 

So, team x has played teams with an average record of 5-3 and has a 8-0 record. So maybe their SOS factor is (.625 x 2x (1.000))/3 That weighs their own w/l heavier in the equation. That gives them a SOS factor of .775. So when you're factoring them into someone's SOS, they're added in as .775 rather than 1.000. You could basically repeat the same equation, taking the average of all the SOS factors of all the teams you've played and put that into an equation along with you're own w/l.

 

I don't want to co-opt your very cool toy here, just throwing out ideas.

No, this gets way too complex for Excel very quickly. This is all done with a database and code. Every team is done on the fly as the data is read from the database. Also, I wrote a parser that just goes to a web page and chunks up the data I need and writes it into the database. This way I don't have hand enter all the data every time a change is made. I did this all yeasterday. I told you I was a nerd. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've implemented the changes that are discussed above namely, adding in a component for the opponent's strength of schedule and changing to a yards per game calculation to better compare apples to apples or Gators to Sooners as the case may be. It does changes things a bit. It takes me a while to format the results for these pages so it'll be a little bit before I can show them to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here they are. One thing this all does tell me is that the current systems don't take the non-BCS teams seriously enough. Oh yeah and that Penn State is probably better than most of you think. :wacko:

 

Name									   Record	ScorePenn State Nittany Lions					 8-0	   15.0139Alabama Crimson Tide						 9-0	   14.0256Southern California Trojans				  7-1	   13.31Utah Utes									8-0	   12.8411Texas Longhorns							  8-1	   12.8161Texas Christian Horned Frogs				 8-1	   12.67Texas Tech Red Raiders					   7-0	   12.6627Florida Gators							   7-1	   12.4663Oklahoma Sooners							 7-1	   12.2772Tulsa Golden Hurricane					   7-1	   10.8044Oklahoma State Cowboys					   7-1	   10.3206Brigham Young Cougars						7-1	   10.2305Boise State Broncos						  7-0		9.9275Ball State Cardinals						 7-0		9.6563Missouri Tigers							  6-2		8.8028Michigan State Spartans					  8-2		8.64Oregon Ducks								 6-3		7.6527Northwestern Wildcats						6-2		7.2233California Golden Bears					  6-2		7.05Ohio State Buckeyes						  6-2		6.6172Minnesota Gophers							6-2		6.4016Pittsburgh Panthers						  6-2		6.3425Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets				  5-2		6.1183Air Force Falcons							6-2		6.0195Georgia Bulldogs							 5-2		5.7312Central Michigan Chippewas				   6-2		5.7011Oregon State Beavers						 5-3		5.685Western Michigan Broncos					 6-2		5.5745North Carolina Tar Heels					 5-2		5.4663Louisiana State Tigers					   5-2		5.4375South Carolina Gamecocks					 5-2		5.4277South Florida Bulls						  5-3		5.3106Florida State Seminoles					  4-2		5.26Arizona Wildcats							 5-3		5.2525Miami (FL) Hurricanes						5-3		5.1372West Virginia Mountaineers				   5-2		5.0763Connecticut Huskies						  5-3		4.9389Maryland Terrapins						   5-2		4.795Notre Dame Fighting Irish					5-3		4.6038Cincinnati Bearcats						  5-2		4.4837Wake Forest Demon Deacons					5-3		4.1762Rice Owls									6-3		4.0495Kansas Jayhawks							  5-3		3.9823Fresno State Bulldogs						5-3		3.7125Navy Midshipmen							  5-3		3.6689Kentucky Wildcats							5-3		3.5061San Jose State Spartans					  5-3		3.0812Iowa Hawkeyes								4-4		3.0505East Carolina Pirates						5-3		3.0321Illinois Fighting Illini					 4-4		2.9805Vanderbilt Commodores						5-3		2.9475Nebraska Cornhuskers						 5-4		2.9217Mississippi Rebels						   4-3		2.8905Louisiana Lafayette Ragin' Cajuns			5-3		2.75Boston College Eagles						4-3		2.6738Troy Trojans								 4-3		2.64Northern Illinois Huskies					4-3		2.525Stanford Cardinal							5-4		2.4834Louisville Cardinals						 4-3		2.3113Virginia Tech Hokies						 4-3		2.2325Nevada Wolf Pack							 3-4		1.3113Houston Cougars							  3-4		1.3075Wisconsin Badgers							4-5		0.6277Duke Blue Devils							 3-4		0.57Virginia Cavaliers						   4-4		0.5617Akron Zips								   4-4		0.5138Auburn Tigers								4-5		0.3222Buffalo Bulls								4-4		0.2237Colorado Buffaloes						   3-5	   -0.6839Bowling Green Falcons						4-5	   -0.9262Texas A&M Aggies							 4-5	   -0.9589Arkansas State Red Wolves					3-4	   -1.385Clemson Tigers							   2-4	   -1.3975Louisiana Tech Bulldogs					  3-4	   -1.505Kansas State Wildcats						3-5	   -1.5195Memphis Tigers							   3-5	   -1.7472Arkansas Razorbacks						  3-5	   -2.0072Tennessee Volunteers						 3-6	   -2.0173Marshall Thundering Herd					 3-4	   -2.0362Army Black Knights						   3-5	   -2.0812Florida Atlantic Owls						3-5	   -2.1437Rutgers Scarlet Knights					  2-5	   -2.305New Mexico Lobos							 4-6	   -2.446Colorado State Rams						  3-5	   -2.5794Tulane Green Wave							3-5	   -2.5875Baylor Bears								 2-6	   -2.8012Hawaii Warriors							  3-5	   -2.8356Southern Mississippi Golden Eagles		   3-6	   -2.8839New Mexico State Aggies					  2-5	   -3.4663Temple Owls								  3-6	   -3.6022Florida International Golden Panthers		3-5	   -3.6288California Los Angeles Bruins				3-5	   -3.685Purdue Boilermakers						  2-6	   -3.8045Nevada Las Vegas Rebels					  3-6	   -3.9905Mid Tennessee Blue Raiders				   2-6	   -4.695Indiana Hoosiers							 2-6	   -4.7411Mississippi State Bulldogs				   2-7	   -4.815Arizona State Sun Devils					 1-6	   -4.8587Texas El Paso Miners						 2-6	   -5.1413Ohio Bobcats								 1-7	   -5.1484Michigan Wolverines						  2-7	   -5.7056Louisiana Monroe Warhawks					2-6	   -5.7661Wyoming Cowboys							  2-6	   -5.8866Miami (OH) Redhawks						  1-6	   -5.98Toledo Rockets							   2-6	   -6.0025North Carolina State Wolfpack				1-6	   -6.6962Central Florida Knights					  1-6	   -6.9672Iowa State Cyclones						  1-7	   -7.0595Syracuse Orange							  1-6	   -7.1187Utah State Aggies							2-7	   -8.1717Kent State Golden Flashes					1-7	   -8.1828San Diego State Aztecs					   1-7	   -8.2283Western Kentucky Hilltoppers				 0-7	   -8.2434Alabama Birmingham Blazers				   1-7	   -8.9005Eastern Michigan Eagles					  1-8	   -9.029Southern Methodist Mustangs				  0-8	  -10.5484North Texas Mean Green					   1-8	  -11.5172Idaho Vandals								1-8	  -11.74Washington Huskies						   0-8	  -11.7512Washington State Cougars					 0-8	  -12.74
Edited by Kid Cid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oregon State has three losses, not two...

The Beavs lost to Stanford, Penn State and Utah....

 

Just trying to help...

 

 

Thanks. I'll try and find that glitch.

 

Found it, bad data. I had incorrectly attributed that game to Oklahoma State. I'll update the data and rerun the model.

Edited by Kid Cid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I look at computers as valuable tools used to make my own personal decision. One of many tools. On a selection committee, each member is gonna have his own way of evaluating teams. Some might put more emphasis on computers than others. Combine that way of thinking with the idea that these folks have one job and one job only and that is to watch games, I would say that is a much better way of ranking teams than it is to rely on sportswriters that couldn't tell the difference between anything much less football teams, or coaches that have no time at all for this kind of stuff. They get paid millions of dollars to win football games, not rank teams at the end of the week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I look at computers as valuable tools used to make my own personal decision. One of many tools. On a selection committee, each member is gonna have his own way of evaluating teams. Some might put more emphasis on computers than others. Combine that way of thinking with the idea that these folks have one job and one job only and that is to watch games, I would say that is a much better way of ranking teams than it is to rely on sportswriters that couldn't tell the difference between anything much less football teams, or coaches that have no time at all for this kind of stuff. They get paid millions of dollars to win football games, not rank teams at the end of the week.

 

If there were a selection committee for football then yes I agree 100%. Unfortunately, there isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Name									   Record	ScoreWashington Huskies						   0-8	  -11.7512Washington State Cougars					 0-8	  -12.74

 

That Apple Cup is going to be scintillating.

Edited by godtomsatan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No offense, but you have a glitch in your program. :D

 

Not only does the Big 10 have the #1 team, but they also have 4 teams in the top 25 while the SEC only has 3 teams ranked in that same top 25 including Georgia at #25. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oklahoma State Cowboys 7-2 8.361

 

Not sure if it reflects in the rankings but Oklahoma State is 8 - 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No offense, but you have a glitch in your program. :D

 

Not only does the Big 10 have the #1 team, but they also have 4 teams in the top 25 while the SEC only has 3 teams ranked in that same top 25 including Georgia at #25. :wacko:

 

I'm guessing that is because all teams start with a level playing field. I'm thinking that without the preconceived notion of one conference being better than another the numbers would most definitely come up with something different that the polls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oklahoma State Cowboys 7-2 8.361

 

Not sure if it reflects in the rankings but Oklahoma State is 8 - 1.

 

 

Gracias. I'll look into it.

 

Ok, there was a data error earlier involving Oklahoma State, but it has since been corrected. If you look at the second ranking I posted OK State is:

 

Oklahoma State Cowboys 7-1 10.3206

 

The reason they aren't 8-1 is that one of their early games was against Missouri State. They are a FBS or IAA team and that game isn't counted for the purpose of this ranking.

Edited by Kid Cid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.