Dullard's Top 25 College Football Week #11

[dullard]

Well that was a very interesting upset weekend to watch. I'm assuming the BCS ranking released today will have been turned on its head as it over values wins (a one loss team is almost always ranked higher than a two loss team even though we all know that often isn't true). Here is my weekly rankings which focuses more on margin of victory (up to a cutoff point since some coaches pull the first string players before other's would). There are four teams that moved significantly in rating and in overall place: Ohio St., Virginia Tech, Maryland, and Colorado. What may seem surprizing to some is that some teams with their first loss (Notre Dame, NC State, and Georgia) didn't move much - but that is since I didn't overly value wins so they weren't ranked too high to begin with.

Place / Rating / Sch.Diff / Team name
01 / 50.2 / 19 / Oklahoma
02 / 48.8 / 01 / Southern California
03 / 48.4 / 61 / Miami Florida
04 / 46.2 / 53 / Ohio St.
05 / 45.7 / 13 / Texas
06 / 44.9 / 68 / Kansas St.
07 / 44.7 / 11 / Alabama
08 / 44.2 / 26 / Georgia
09 / 44.0 / 46 / Iowa
10 / 43.8 / 02 / Florida St.
11 / 43.1 / 31 / Washington St.
12 / 42.8 / 04 / Notre Dame
13 / 42.4 / 30 / Oregon St.
14 / 42.3 / 07 / Arkansas
15 / 41.3 / 64 / Virginia Tech
16 / 40.9 / 72 / Maryland
17 / 40.1 / 51 / Oregon
18 / 40.0 / 15 / Penn St.
19 / 40.0 / 52 / LSU
20 / 39.7 / 91 / North Carolina St.
21 / 39.4 / 107 / Boise St.
22 / 39.4 / 06 / UCLA
23 / 38.8 / 14 / Iowa St.
24 / 38.4 / 12 / Michigan
25 / 38.3 / 10 / Colorado

Rating = Points the team would beat the last ranked 1A team (currently Army, but Eastern Michigan is quickly catching up) on a neutral field.

Schedule difficulty is out of 117 division 1A teams (so you can see USC had the most difficult schedule so far, and Boise St. had nearly the easiest schedule of any 1A team).

Opinions/Questions/Flames?

 

[Spac3d]

Go OSU.

Spac3d
Buckeye, class of 2005.

 

[neomits]

WOAH WOAH WOAH....

where did SC come from? I'm a HUGE fan of USC but how do they deserve to be higher than Ohio State (class of 2004/5)

GO BUCKS!

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: neomits
WOAH WOAH WOAH....

where did SC come from? I'm a HUGE fan of USC but how do they deserve to be higher than Ohio State (class of 2004/5)

GO BUCKS!

exactly...

O-H

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: neomits
where did SC come from? I'm a HUGE fan of USC but how do they deserve to be higher than Ohio State (class of 2004/5)

It is a simple strength of schedule thing. USC's schedule is so much tougher than any other team that USC gets a boost. USC won all their difficult games by a large margin. They distroyed these ranked teams: Colorado, Washington, and Oregon - the games weren't even close. They also by one play got beaten by two other highly ranked teams: Kansas State and Washington State. USC is in the top 10 of both major polls. And under at least one of the BCS computers rankings (I only took time to look at one) its most accurate predictor algorithm says USC #4 and Ohio State ranked #7. Note: Sagarin isn't allowed to use the predictor algorithm in the official BCS since it uses scores so he must use a less reliable ranking that puts Ohio State #4 and USC #5. Ohio State's schedule has been a cake walk so far and they were one play away from losing to Cincinnati - not something that I'd brag about.

Plus looking at the ratings, they are extremely close: it says there is an 80% chance USC would beat Ohio State on a neutral field - most likely by 1.6 points. However given a typical 3 point home field advantage Ohio State would beat USC by 1.4 points at home. So since they are that close, I'd put them at a tie myself.

 

[bubbadu]

1. Okalohoma
2. OSU
3. Miami

Thats all that matters... go bucks!

-Bubbadu

 

[neomits]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: neomits
where did SC come from? I'm a HUGE fan of USC but how do they deserve to be higher than Ohio State (class of 2004/5)

It is a simple strength of schedule thing. USC's schedule is so much tougher than any other team that USC gets a boost. USC won all their difficult games by a large margin. They distroyed these ranked teams: Colorado, Washington, and Oregon - the games weren't even close. They also by one play got beaten by two other highly ranked teams: Kansas State and Washington State. USC is in the top 10 of both major polls. And under at least one of the BCS computers rankings (I only took time to look at one) its most accurate predictor algorithm says USC #4 and Ohio State ranked #7. Note: Sagarin isn't allowed to use the predictor algorithm in the official BCS since it uses scores so he must use a less reliable ranking that puts Ohio State #4 and USC #5. Ohio State's schedule has been a cake walk so far and they were one play away from losing to Cincinnati - not something that I'd brag about.

Plus looking at the ratings, they are extremely close: it says there is an 80% chance USC would beat Ohio State on a neutral field - most likely by 1.6 points. However given a typical 3 point home field advantage Ohio State would beat USC by 1.4 points at home. So since they are that close, I'd put them at a tie myself.

hmm ok. I agree that where we hurt most in the BCS is our strength of schedual. I just can't see USC as #2 with 2 losses one against a top ten team Wash State



I-O

 

[Tallgeese]

Bama at #7 WOOHOO!

Roll TIDE Roll!

 

[ElFenix]

what elfenix wants to happen:
oregon beats wazzou
USC beats ND
VT beats miami
Iowa loses again
and (because i have stonger loyalties to one school than the other) UM beats OSU

then we'd have a rematch for all the marbles.

 

[bubbadu]

Michigian wont beat OSU.... i wear my anti michigian shirt that i got for a dollar at champs every saturday... the shirt will protet OSU from a lose...

-Bubbadu

 

[neomits]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
what elfenix wants to happen:
oregon beats wazzou
USC beats ND
VT beats miami
Iowa loses again
and (because i have stonger loyalties to one school than the other) UM beats OSU

then we'd have a rematch for all the marbles.

but I want some marbles too

 

[BigSmooth]

Originally posted by: dullard

13 / 42.4 / 30 / Oregon St.

How is this possible? First off, they're only 6-3. However, the Pac-10 is (IMO) one of the toughest conferences in the nation, so I can see how they'd get some strength-of-schedule credit. But they're right behind WSU and Notre Dame??

Heck, consider this.
The Univ. of Oregon is 7-2.
Their losses are to USC and ASU (who both beat OSU).
AND, they *beat* UCLA, which is OSU's other loss.
Granted, U of O had to play I-AA Portland St. after Michigan backed out on them this year (so their SOS is pretty weak) but it still doesn't make sense.

I'm not a U of O fan, I just think Oregon State's ranking is way out of whack.

 

[Parrotheader]

This is why I'm torn between liking and not liking a playoff. My favorite team (Alabama) is playing as well just about anybody in the country right now. We may have two losses, but both of those were to top teams, Oklahoma who we dominated for a majority of the game on the road, but lost on just a couple big plays. And Georgia simply outplayed us that day and even then we only lost on a last minute field goal. If there were a playoff, I think Alabama would stand to do really well given how we've been playing almost all season.

However, one of the things I like most about college football is that you HAVE to shoot for perfection since you don't have a post season to fall back on. That's why I generally find the NFL so boring. All you have to do is play well enough to cruise into the playoffs. The regular season means nothing. It's all about the playoffs. The same with NCAA basketball. March Madness is VERY exciting and I thoroughly enjoy it (especially since I won the office pool by a HUGE margin last year ) But at the same time, all the work of the regular season doesn't mean as much since you're basically just vying for entrance into the tournament and/or seating. People say the only real way to determine a championship is a playoff since it 'decides it on the court/field.' So is the regular season just a bunch of scrimmages? Should the total body of work over the course of a season not count for anything OTHER than just seeding in a single-elimination tournament at the very end of the year? A team that hit its peak at the end of the year instead of during the middle of the season is somehow better? For instance, in the World Series this year, does anybody besides fans of the Angels and Giants (who I know I'll get flamed from for saying this) really think those were the best 2 teams in baseball this year? They were both very good, but if I look at the season as a whole I can think of at least 3/4 other teams that were better, but didn't win the title because a playoff rewards a team that happens to be peaking at the end of the season. However, at least baseball allows series and not just single-elimination.

And what makes the NFL playoffs so boring to me personally is that in a high contact sport like football, injuries usually change the face of a team over the course of a season. A team that was dominant throughout most of the season could suddenly lose a few lineman, etc and then be lame ducks, quickly knocked out in the playoffs even though they were arguably the best team that year. In sports like basketball injury attrition (sp?) doesn't quite have the same impact.

Sorry. Didn't mean to hijack your thread with a playoff/BCS tangent, but we were just discussing this around the office this morning and I still find myself torn about the whole BCS/playoff thing.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Parrotheader
Sorry. Didn't mean to hijack your thread with a playoff/BCS tangent, but we were just discussing this around the office this morning and I still find myself torn about the whole BCS/playoff thing.

No problem, my posts always end up in a playoff discussion. We can learn a lot about the playoff problems in the NFL (sorry I don't watch baseball, basketball, or any other sport). In the NFL there only 32 teams and there are quite a few playoff spots. Thus just about any team has a chance to get in the playoffs. Just have a semi-winning season and you are in and once you are in the previous games are ignored. I agree that that can make the regular season boring. But college football is quite different. There are 117 teams. Thus if we limit the playoff to say the top 8 teams, it will be quite difficult and competitive to get in. Here is what I want:

All conferences have a conference championship game. Many conferences already have them - so this is just a minor change. That will leave us with 6 teams qualified from the 6 major conferences. There are 2 wildspots for teams that just missed out on winning their conference, or for teams from outside the 6 major conferences - the BCS system can choose the top two teams who didn't win their conference. Then the remaining 8 teams play together. We pit #1 versus #8, #2 versus #7, etc. This way it is really helpful to be well into the mix and not just squeek into #8 (making the regular season even more important). We will play 4 games in the 2nd week of December and narrow the field to 4 teams. The following week there are two more games resulting in the two top teams in the nation. Then there is the final BCS rankings and teams are chosen as usual for the bowl season to continue as it always has (it can include any team, even those who were in this playoff if that is what each bowl desires). The only difference is that a 4 teams played 1 extra game and 4 teams played 2 extra games. That way we preserve the bowl games, we only add 2 games to a few team's schedules so they don't complain about a long season, the regular season is still really important, and we have a playoff with the top two teams in the national championship game.

 

[McPhreak]

WHAT??!! Where's Cal?!!

<---closet Cal fan and alumni

 

[pecel]

BOOMER SOONER !!!

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: McPhreak
WHAT??!! Where's Cal?!!

<---closet Cal fan and alumni

even their alumni are only closet fans

 

[McPhreak]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: McPhreak
WHAT??!! Where's Cal?!!

<---closet Cal fan and alumni

even their alumni are only closet fans

I attended Cal during the dark age of Cal football that was known as "Tom Holmoe"

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: McPhreak
WHAT??!! Where's Cal?!!

<---closet Cal fan and alumni

California:
Place: 27
Rating: 37.6
Schedule difficulty: 9

They are playing well - but with 4 losses it pushes them just outside the top 25.