THE PRESEASON AP POLL AND THE FORTHCOMING REVOLUTION IN COLLEGE FOOTBALL ANALYSIS

by Peter Bean on Jul 21, 2006 12:57 PM EDT

At the beginning of the month, we took a look at what correlation, if any, exists between an AP national title winning football team and its final AP Poll ranking the year before. I said at that time that I wanted to dig up the data for the AP Preseason polls to look at where the eventual national champions were ranked in the preseason of their title-winning year.

Thanks to College Football Resource, whom I owe a giant tip of the hat, we have that data. Lets have a look:

Year	National Champ	Preseason Rank
1980	Georgia	16
1981	Clemson	NR
1982	Penn State	8
1983	Miami	NR
1984	BYU	NR
1985	Oklahoma	1
1986	Penn State	6
1987	Miami	10
1988	Notre Dame	13
1989	Miami	4
1990	Colorado	5
1991	Miami	3
1992	Alabama	9
1993	Florida St.	1
1994	Nebraska	4
1995	Nebraska	2
1996	Florida	4
1997	Michigan	14
1998	Tennessee	10
1999	Florida St.	1
2000	Oklahoma	19
2001	Miami	2
2002	Ohio St.	13
2003	USC	8
2004	USC	1
2005	Texas	2

¹AP National Champions

For one thing, we can see that the AP voters struggled from 1980-1984. Before we get into further analysis, let me bring you up to speed on what happened in in that five year span:

Georgia Sports PWD explained Georgias ascendancy in 1980, a confluence of lots of experience returning plus a certain missing piece. Looking at the rest of the AP Final Top 10 for 1980, most of the teams the AP had pegged for strong years came through. They just missed Georgia.

The Associated Press had a giant swing and miss in 1981. Their top four combined to lose 15 games. Preseason #1 Michigan went 9-3, #2 Oklahoma finished 7-4, #3 Notre Dame (under first year coach Gerry Faust) plummeted to 5-6, while #4 Alabama went 9-2-1.

1982 was a bizarre year, as well. Preseason #3 Alabama, in what would be Bear Bryants final year at the helm, scorched eventual national champion Penn State 42-21 early, but stumbled to an 8-4 record down the stretch. Bryant went out on top, of course, beating Illinois in the Liberty Bowl, 21-15. The Nittany Lions loss to Bama would be their only of the year, while AP preseason favorites #1 Pittsburgh and #2 Washington combined for five losses.

Things almost worked out as the AP predicted in 1983. #1 Nebraska cruised through the season undefeated before #5 Miami, unranked in the preseason, met them in the Orange Bowl. The Hurricanes eeked out a 31-30 win in a classic, taking the national title. Texas, for their part, entered the season ranked #3 under Fred Akers, and ran the regular season table, earning a berth in the Cotton Bowl. Ranked #2, the Longhorns squared with #7 Georgia, losing a heartbreaker 10-9. Had they won, the Miami victory over Nebraska would have given Texas its first national title since 1970. All the sweeter for Mack Brown, I suppose.

1984 was the year of the pass attack, with Steve Young leading Brigham Young to the national title and Doug Flutie winning the Heisman Trophy (and creating the most memorable Hail Mary pass in CFB history). The AP was well of at the top of its preseason ballot. Two of its top four teams (Pittsburgh and Clemson) finished unranked. Auburn, the preseason #1 team, dropped four games.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After 1984, though, the AP seemed to do a much better job with their preseason rankings. The average national champion was ranked 6.32 in the preseason between 1985-2005. Not once was the eventual national champion found outside the AP Preseason Top 20. Interestingly, 2 of the only 3 teams to come from outside the Top 10 preseason rankings to win the national title have done so in the BCS era. (This doesn't count Notre Dame in 1988, of course - the exception to many rules.)

Theres a lot to digest in here, but lets take a stab at some preliminary questions.

*Could the continuing growth of sports media, and ESPN, throughout the 1980s have helped sports writers be more informed about their voting? A cursory glance at the history of ESPN is very telling. In 1982 they began televising bowl games. In 1984, they began covering regular season college football. Coincidence?

Now, if I had the time, Id enjoy running a standard deviation check on AP preseason rankings (not just for the national champ, but for the entire poll) over the last 25 years and see whether its decreased in any meaningful way as voters are able to digest more and more information on teams. Is big media actually improving the ranking of teams? Or, could there possibly be an opposite effect, where the medias ability to drive voter opinion stabilizes polls? These are interesting, worthwhile questions.

*Is the BCS actually doing a good job of giving teams slightly off the radar a better chance to earn a trip to the title game? Do the inclusion of the computer rankings help identify teams that human voters may be undervaluing? Is the BCS actually more egalitarian than the previous system? Does this only apply to major conference teams?

Unfortunately, the limited data that Im working with only allows me to ask some of the right questions, but in the scientific community, thats the first step. These are the things we should be thinking about, especially in the era when everyone has an opinion about the BCS, playoffs, plus-one scenarios, and all the rest. Has anyone taken the time to study the history of how this has all worked? And where it can be improved? If you look at any one year, youre bound to find irregularities, but if you looked at the data in aggregate, there are bound to be useful patterns that can shed light on the best type of system for determining a champion.

As an example, one might run a study on whether or not there would be an added benefit to eliminating preseason rankings altogether. Would releasing the first polls in October alter the final rankings in a meaningful way? Why isnt someone looking at this with a control group of AP (or other) voters?

Fortunately, in this era, anyone and everyone can do this if they have the desire and commitment. Blogs are popping up everywhere, new statistical databases are evolving, and smart, dedicated writers are asking and answering these questions all the time. Its not unlike any other evolution in sports analysis. Baseballs been doing this for decades. Is college football next?

This post originally was published at Burnt Orange Nation.

--PB--

Tweet Comment 28 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Here is a link that may be able to help you with figuring out if preseason prognosticators are getting better. This is a comparison between preseason rank and final rank (though not just AP poll) since 1989.
Look at who is ranked as most overrated:
http://www.stassen.com/preseason/over-under/

by Irish Brown Eyes on Jul 21, 2006 1:13 PM EDT reply actions

What made 1988 ND an anomaly, as far as winning the national championship with a pre-season ranking outside the top 10?

by fanofnd on Jul 21, 2006 1:45 PM EDT reply actions

I will never accept USC as the 2003 champion. Therefore, in my mind, your chart is inaccurate and useless.

by N. Saban on Jul 21, 2006 2:00 PM EDT reply actions

I was merely pointing out that they were an exception to a general trend (that being the eventual national champion being found in the preseason top 10), while pointing out that they are an exception to many rules in college football. Look no further than their special BCS status.

by Peter Bean on Jul 21, 2006 2:10 PM EDT reply actions

2003 should say LSU, not USC dipshit

by matt on Jul 21, 2006 2:10 PM EDT reply actions

AP national champs, dipshit

by Peter Bean on Jul 21, 2006 2:12 PM EDT reply actions

Seriously, though, I had to choose some consistent metric – the AP national title has been around since 1980. I’m not taking sides on who was the better team. I had to use USC in 2003 and Colorado in 1990. No slight to LSU or Georgia Tech intended.

by Peter Bean on Jul 21, 2006 2:16 PM EDT reply actions

1984 was the year of the “Passing Attack,” but is wasn’t Steve Young leading the BYU Cougars to the National Championship. Steve Young capped his college career by scoring the game-winning touchdown in BYU’s 21-17 victory over Missouri in the 1983 Holiday Bowl. Young signed a record 10-year, $40m contract with the Los Angeles Express of the now-defunct United States Football League in 1984.
Robbie Bosco was the QB on the 1984 BYU team.

by Michael on Jul 21, 2006 2:16 PM EDT reply actions

You’re right, Michael. Thanks.

by Peter Bean on Jul 21, 2006 2:18 PM EDT reply actions

Seriously, LSU fans have no room to bitch about sharing the 03 title (and it WAS shared). If they didn’t want to split it, they shouldn’t have been smacked around – at HOME – by you know who.

by NoleinTexas on Jul 21, 2006 2:49 PM EDT reply actions

Mormons are Teh Suxorz.

when does this years first AP poll come out?
or has it already?

by CK on Jul 21, 2006 2:50 PM EDT reply actions

“Interestingly, 2 of the only 3 teams to come from outside the Top 10 preseason rankings to win the national title have done so in the BCS era. (This doesnt count Notre Dame in 1988, of course – the exception to many rules.)”

Actually, the 1997 Michigan team fits into this exception as well, since the post-1997 bowls were not part of the BCS yet. If they had been, Michigan would have faced Nebraska.

(*Unless you mean that ND isn’t even counted as part the “3”)

by Alces on Jul 21, 2006 3:42 PM EDT reply actions

so clemson won the year i was born. this curse of a life makes sooooo much more sense.

by adam on Jul 21, 2006 3:43 PM EDT reply actions

Alces – yes, that’s what I meant. I counted 1997 Michigan, did not count Notre Dame.

by Peter Bean on Jul 21, 2006 3:48 PM EDT reply actions

Funny that the Wolverines historically have been the most overrated team in the country. I guess that happens when you automatically get plugged in at pre-season No. 3 every season. That’s pretty tough to live up to on a regular basis.

by rebel84 on Jul 21, 2006 3:51 PM EDT reply actions

Your analysis didn’t say anything about Auburn getting cobbed in ‘83. What’s with that?

by P. Dye on Jul 21, 2006 4:36 PM EDT reply actions

CFN looked at it going back to 1971, here, http://www.collegefootballnews.com/2006/Columnists/RC/OverratedTeams.htm, and got an answer very similar to that in post #1, but with one significant change (and it was not close).

by Devin McCullen on Jul 21, 2006 5:03 PM EDT reply actions

Rebel84,

While I agree with you philospically, has it been the case that Michigan was always overrated even BEFORE their National Championship? I agree that they have been consistently plugged in the top five every year since then, and yet lose at least three games every years since then, too.

by Alces on Jul 21, 2006 6:41 PM EDT reply actions

Peter — to answer your question on whether pollsters are getting smarter… the answer would appear to be “no”.

SDs for the past 23 years, 10 years, and 5 years are all pretty close to one another, considering the CFR “frequently rated teams” population.

Most consistently rated “correctly” team: Fredo (BC for all you non-ND-grads)
Least consistently rated team: Georgia Tech

by beattherush on Jul 21, 2006 6:46 PM EDT reply actions

“Look no further than their special BCS status.”

That seems to be a common misconception, and while I’m not positive about the new rules with the addition of the BCS title game, in past years ND’s BCS status was the same as that for any other non-BCS school (ie. Utah, who were automatic in their year like ND was last year). In any case, good stuff here (and good stuff filling in all week).

by newill on Jul 21, 2006 7:24 PM EDT reply actions

Newill you are wrong look it up, I don’t feel like doing the work for you.

by Jonathan on Jul 21, 2006 11:28 PM EDT reply actions

Ah, right, the whole thing about how if an independent other than ND, or a non-BCS team, automatically qualifies by being top-6 and ND is top-10 and has at least nine wins, they get the second automatic… unless there is also a number two team in a major conference that is top-4, or two non-BCS conference champs in the top-6, in which case they lose that automatic.

Um, yeah, looks like something to worry about (or to have worried about, since it’s, like, so last year), especially since a top-10, nine win ND (having already met the same top-12, nine win standard any team had to meet for an at large) would be selected based on the whole being ND thing regardless of that clauseand that’s down to the bowls wanting to make money and has nothing to do with giving ND a special, unfair contract. So I guess I should have said that, for all intents and purposes and short of a bowl scenario as unlikely as the rapture coming ‘round Tuesday next and that would only result in ND being given what they would get in any case without that subclause, ND had to meet the same criteria as an non-BCS school to get an automatic bid. Now please go and waste somebody else’s time.

by newill on Jul 22, 2006 1:06 AM EDT reply actions

Damn it, now I’ll be pissed off for the entire weekend after seeing Colorado mentioned as the 1990 champion.10-1-1 vs. 10-0-1, fifth down, “clipping” penalty. Yeah, I know you’re using the AP poll, but that ranking is still a damn travesty.

by Up with the White and Gold on Jul 22, 2006 2:24 AM EDT reply actions

auburn got ripped off for the 2004 title i mean they clobbered 4 top 10 teams and only had 1 close game against lsu i mean usc in the pac 10 and notre dame sucked that year and ppl will argue bout non conference games but doesnt usc play hawaii like every year they would have drilled usc in the title game usc fans will b like we 2 times in the previous 2 years but this was a different team the 4 off cord was the charm for campbell

by sean on Jul 23, 2006 11:39 AM EDT reply actions

hey sean,
2004; isn’t that the year 20% of the auburn football team was taking sociology? Were you an interim that year?

by SimmaDownNow on Jul 24, 2006 12:29 AM EDT reply actions

Johnathan, if you’re going to be rude, at least be right.

ND does in fact have the same qualification standard as any other non-BCS conference team, and in fact gets less money than any other non-BCS conference team.

There is one obscure provision which essentially says “if Utah gets in and ND is qualified, ND gets in too”. Hardly preferential treatment.

Text follows (since Johnathan was too lazy to look it up):

Pool of Eligible Teams

All Division I-A college football teams are eligible for at-large selection provided they meet both of the following requirements:

1. Have won at least nine regular season games.
2. Are among the top 12 teams in the final BCS Standings.

If a team chooses to count a game played against a IAA opponent for BCS selection eligibility, such game must be declared as a countable game to meet post-season requirements per NCAA regulations.

Automatic Qualification for At-Large Selection

   1. If both the number one and number two teams in the BCS standings are from independent institutions, Conference USA, the Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt, or Western Athletic Conferences, those two teams shall play in the national championship game regardless of conference affiliation, and will fill both at-large slots. If one of the top two ranked teams is from an independent institution, Conference USA, the Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt, or Western Athletic Conference, that team shall play in the national championship game and fill one of the at-large slots and one at-large slot will remain available.
   2. Any team from an independent institution Conference, USA, the Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt, or Western Athletic Conference that is ranked three through six shall qualify for automatic selection.
         1. If one or more teams other than Notre Dame qualify for automatic selection under this provision, Notre Dame shall also qualify provided it is ranked in the top ten or has won at least nine games.
         2. If more than one at-large team qualifies for automatic selection under this provision and there are insufficient at-large slots available to accommodate all of them, the BCS bowls will select from those that qualify.
   3. After application of the previous provisions, if any at-large slots remain unfilled and the team ranked either three or four is from the Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pacific-10, or Southeastern Conference but is not its representative, that team shall automatically fill one at-large slot and shall be selected to play in one of the BCS bowls. If both the third and fourth ranked teams meet these criteria, then only the third ranked team shall qualify automatically. The third and fourth ranked teams cannot both qualify automatically under this provision.
   4. If any at-large slots remain unfilled after application of all previous provisions, then the BCS bowls shall fill such slot(s) by selecting from among the pool of all eligible at-large teams.

by beattherush on Jul 24, 2006 11:22 AM EDT reply actions