EWW, MATH!: THE PRESEASON FRANKEN-TOP 25
It's one thing for overly caffeinated sportswriters to issue way-early "pre-preseason" top 25s within days (or sometimes hours) of the preceding season's national-title game. Now that we've actually had the opportunity to view some spring games and summer practices, however, the heavy hitters of CFB punditry have begun pumping out some actually relevant preseason rankings, which, taken as a whole, paint a reasonable preview of what we can expect the "official" AP and coaches' preseason rankings to look like.
Ten of those sets of rankings are tallied up in a matrix you can view via this Google spreadsheet. All of the rankings contained herein were plunked down after spring games had started, and they all come from reasonably reputable media outlets, the kind that might actually get to vote in the official polls come this fall -- nobody who goes by the handle "BigPoppaATL" or "TiGeRfReAk2009," in other words. Based on these rankings, it is fair to estimate that the opening polls of the 2010 season might look a little something like this:
1. Alabama
2. Ohio State
3. Boise State
4. Texas
5. Florida
6. TCU
7. Nebraska
8. Iowa
9. Oregon
10. Virginia Tech
11. Oklahoma
12. Wisconsin
13. Miami
14. USC
15. Pittsburgh
16. Arkansas
17. Florida State
18. North Carolina
19. Georgia Tech
20. Penn State
21. Oregon State
22. LSU
23. Georgia
24. Cincinnati
25. Auburn
Others receiving votes: West Virginia, Stanford, Houston, Notre Dame, Connecticut, Utah, South Carolina, Clemson, Missouri, Navy, Oklahoma State, Arizona, Washington, Texas A&M.
Only intermittently objective analysis follows:
Alabama, your more-or-less unanimous Number 1. Apparently the prospect of the Tide returning but two starters on defense bothers the nation's punditocracy not a whit, because everybody put the defending national champions in a nice comfy chaise lounge at the top of the rankings except for two: Phil Steele, who's always sort of marched to the beat of his own drummer because he's Phil Steele and Phil Steele can do whatever the hell Phil Steele wants, and Brett McMurphy of AOL Fanhouse, who is . . . well, innovative in many of his selections. McMurphy totally takes the trendy OMG MID-MAJOR NATIONAL CHAMPION bait in putting Boise State at #1, followed by Iowa, whom he evidently thinks will ride Ricky Stanzi's red-white-and-blue rocket-powered Evel Knievel superbike to the best season in Hawkeye history. (There is almost as much consensus at the spots directly below, with Ohio State barely edging BSU for the #2 ranking -- which means the unthinkable has happened and at least a plurality of the nation thinks Jim Tressel will field an offense this year that moves at a speed faster than "pregnant mastodon.")
Tim Tebow? Never heard of him. Colt McCoy? Him either. Despite losing once-in-a-generation quarterbacks, both Texas and Florida did quite well among the pundits, checking in at consensus #4 and #5, respectively.
WHERE IS YOUR HELMET JOHN BRANTLEY DAMMIT YOU HAVE TO SAVE CONCUSSIVE BRAIN INJURY FOR THE FIELD DAMMIT
Great moments in standard deviation. The preseason's controversy champion: Your USC Trojans, who ranked everywhere from #3 (Athlon Sports, putting more faith in Kiffykins than anyone besides perhaps Mike Garrett) to not at all (Brett McMurphy and Tony Barnhart, who are old-fashioned guys and need more than a smirk and a hot wife to give their stamp of approval, thank you very much). And this was before the NCAA brought down their Thor-hammer on the Trojans' cranium. Other sources of disagreement: North Carolina, who veers between #10 and #25; Oregon State, unranked on half the lists but as high as 14th on the others; and Da U, which ranges between #4 and #20.
It's still trendy to be, well, trendy. Now is usually the time when the bloom comes off the uber-trendy "pre-preseason" darlings (see: Ole Miss and Oklahoma State last year) and the pundits start to come to their senses, but many of the February/March darlings have retained their brand power well into June. North Carolina clearly remains a darling of the pundits, as does Arkansas, who is ranked on every list (and as high as 14th, by Mark Schlabach, who should know better) despite fielding a defense that, according to the CDC, caused epilepsy in lab rats. Though Jimbo Fisher starts his rookie season already despised by half of Tallahassee, Florida State got a vote from everyone except Lindy's; despite losing its top two offensive stars and switching itse defense to a 3-4, Georgia Tech appeared in all but two sets of rankings and went as high as #13 (Dennis Dodd at CBS).
He's only smiling because he's thinking about what a total pussy you are, and that's funny, really.
Obligatory conference chest-pounding. The SEC leads the pack with six teams in the aggregate top 25 (WOOOO), but the ACC, last seen having to throw in two hot dogs and a Toyota RAV4 to get people to buy tickets to its league championship game, surprisingly muscles its way into second place with five. In what doesn't look like a terrific sign of health for the league, the Big [Soon-to-Be-Somewhat-Less-Than-]Twelve only had three teams in the top 25 -- one of which will soon be rubbing elbows with Ohio State and Wisconsin in the Big Ten.
And before anyone asks: No, UAB isn't in there. Whatever, pundits, it's your own graves you're digging.
169 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Slight correction
The Arkansas defense caused epilepsy in the lab equipment. Therefore, the mice may or may not have had the condition beforehand.
Also, Missouri will change conference affiliation upon demand to not be ranked there as well. Really, they just want to be loved.
Texas
I want the best for my team, but how can we be ranked No. 4 with a QB who has never started a college game?
Reminder
We we awash in all kinds of people last year who sincerely believed that Greg McElroy could not match a John Parker Wilson level of play.
by Counter Trap on Jun 21, 2010 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions
we throw the ball
While I appreciate the encouragement, Texas is FAR more dependent on its QB than Alabama.
Our QB needs to win games; yours only has to not lose games.
If I could lock in that ranking and the one loss it implies, I would be on that deal like white on rice.
Let me assure you
From what I saw in January (and the precursors of a massive cardiac infarction stemming there from): You have little to worry about. He’s good.
by Counter Trap on Jun 21, 2010 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Even so, Texas ain't all that QB dependent
Texas loves the hitches and curls and short crosses. While it may take a McCoy/Young-caliber beast to make the offense go from good to great, Texas is more than capable of being “good” on the shoulders of a skilled but green QB.
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
I'd just be worrying about the running game for Texas
"You know, we had a lot of fun tonight. But there's nothing funny about vapor lock! It's the third most common cause of cars stalling. So please, take care of your car and get it checked!" -Joe Namath
by billycthulhu on Jun 22, 2010 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions
While he technically hasn't "started" a college game
considering how he fared on the big stage in the BCS title game, I think y’all will be fine. The kid has the skills to be good this year. Consider it a ranking based on potential.
Pigskin Punditry
Follow me on Twitter
I reject your reality and substitute my own." ~ Adam Savage, Mythbusters
GT didnt lose top 2 offensive stars
Nesbitt is back.
In Dwyer and Thomas we lost #3 and #4. Nesbitt demands both the top 2 spots.
Where was I supposed to pick up my RAV4?
Dangit I missed out on that. Probably would have been hard to pack in my carry-on bag anyway, would have had to check it.
Only two drivers, but three cars
There were only two of us in my car, so we could have finagled getting one of the RAV4’s back to the ATL. The second would have been a problem, however. Maybe we missed the line to pick them up because my flight from DC was late and my buddy was too busy drinking.
by NoDak_jacket on Jun 21, 2010 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions
WTF
Why would this client block Google docs?
Oh right- information sharing.
/nevermind
/stillangry
"It’s not Disneyland, people. Get the hell out of the way." NYC Firefighter
UNC has an awesome D-line
Their defense is basically a good bit of next year’s NFL first round. The press like that sort of thing. Of course, Chuck Amato did that every year too (it became a running joke that guys out of FSU and later NC State had “questionable motor” appended at birth to every description of them, ever). Marvin Austin and the other dude are pretty good, so we’ll see if the carousel of idiocy in the offense will hamstring them. If you ever combined Duke’s offense with UNC’s D, their might be a crystal football contender in NC. Ironic, right?
"Voetbal is pas totaal als je wint"- Coach Adun
"The greatest sin is to spurn the gift"- Coach Alistair
shit, there
"Voetbal is pas totaal als je wint"- Coach Adun
"The greatest sin is to spurn the gift"- Coach Alistair
Terrifylingly good
Can’t wait for the Nov. 6 UNC-FSU game. I’ll watch series of FSU on offense/UNC on defense with unparalleled eagerness, then flip channels with equal vigilance when UNC gets the ball.
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
FSU and GT...
are two teams whose defenses cannot be any worse in 2010 than they were in 2009. I re-watched the shootout at Doak from last season a few weeks back and was astounded by the complete and total lack of defense.
by NoDak_jacket on Jun 21, 2010 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions
The 9 possession, 9 TD first half was bizarre
The only good sign was that GT’s D made FSU work a little for their scores while GT scored at will.
Paul Johnson's Ranking of Teams That Are Not Complete Pantywaists:
1. Georgia Tech
2. Navy
Other Receiving Votes: None
Also, am I the only one who thinks Stanford is going to regress at least a little bit this season?
Brian Kelly says no Spicy Sea Nuggets.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on Jun 21, 2010 1:35 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
They were very young last year
since most of the starters are already Harbaugh guys. Even though Gerhart is gone his backup last year weas no slouch either, another guy with fullback size and tailback speed. Offensively I think they’ll be just as good- if not better- but we’ll see how the D holds up. To answer your question, yes.
He ran a pass happy offense at San Diego- great team, great coach
He has shown the ability to adjust to his personnel. He doesn’t make a lot of mistakes. And the big dog in the conference just took a hit. He could really build something there, if someone else doesn’t pick him up first.
"Voetbal is pas totaal als je wint"- Coach Adun
"The greatest sin is to spurn the gift"- Coach Alistair
Harbaugh did a hell of a job at San Diego
especially considering that football is a non-scholarship sport.
Brian Kelly says no Spicy Sea Nuggets.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on Jun 21, 2010 5:56 PM EDT up reply actions
I suppose this list was made before Masoli got booted from UO
The QB makes all the difference in Kelly’s offense, #9 seems a little high given a lack of experience under center. Although sadly I don’t see too many Pac teams that will beat them anyway.
Not all of them
Several of them were released after he’d been suspended from the team for the 2010 season but before he was booted completely. Too lazy to confirm if they all fit that description.
by NoDak_jacket on Jun 21, 2010 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Which brings me to my next question:
What the hell am I supposed to think of Oregon?
9 returning starters on offense
+8 returning starters on defense
-1 very talented quarterback in a quarterback-centric system
x 1 schedule with no obvious losses but many dangerous games
=16
Therefore, Oregon will win 16 games this year. QED
Brian Kelly says no Spicy Sea Nuggets.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on Jun 21, 2010 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Solid analysis
I would add one win per Fulmer Cup point, though, so we’re going to win at least 30.
by HoodRiverDuck on Jun 21, 2010 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Though his booting from the UO is a recent development, he’s long been suspended for the 2010 season. I don’t think that the list will require any revision due to that particular factor.
Certainly, however, the issue of whether Oregon’s lack of experience at QB should be enough to drop them from the top 10 is a valid question.
The U of O: Where idle hands are the devil's workshop.
by ProbablyMonty on Jun 21, 2010 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Keep in mind that Darron Thomas did more or less embarass Boise State in the quarter he played against them in 2008. Granted, it was one quarter and also fuck Boise State, but 250 yards, 3 TD, and 72 rushing yards in one quarter are video game numbers for a QB. And that video game is NFL Blitz. With 5 minute quarters.
The O is the new U
And while keeping that in mind,
keep in mind those “video game” numbers were dealt in the garbage time of a 37-13 blowout. Thomas made it a “respectable loss” (if there is such a thing) at 37-32.
Chalk it up to the advantage of QB coming in whom the opponent hasn’t prepared for. That is to say, it’s an anomaly, and should be viewed as such.
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.) Now also including Fort Worth, TX and coming soon this fall, Washington D.C.!
Experience isn't as important as you might expect in the Ducks' offense
Masoli himself was thrown into the starting role only after 2 other quarterbacks went down with injury, and he had only been working within the offense by that point for a few months. Still managed to get all the way to a Holiday Bowl win against Okie State. All the QB really has to do in Kelly’s offense is sell a good ball fake. No, seriously— you don’t even have to be able to pass, because Masoli certainly couldn’t with any consistency. You just have to let the O-line (which is deep and experienced this year) pave the way for about 500 yards on the ground, with the requisite 20 total yards worth of bubble screenage.
The Ducks will score, it’ll just be a question of whether they will score enough to bail out the Big-12ian bend-don’t-break defense.
"Smokey, this be not the foul jungles of the darkest East Orient. This be ninepins. We are bound by laws."
I agree somewhat, based on watching Johnson's offense the last 2 years
Nesbitt didnt really have a clue the first 1/2 of 2008 and it still worked okay.
In 2009, he knew how to run the offense and it really clicked.
If he went down in 2010, it would end any chance of repeating in the ACC, but I think it would still be an okay season.
Same probably applies to Oregon.
And hell, with USC banned from the postseason...
… 1st runner up is 1st enough.
"Smokey, this be not the foul jungles of the darkest East Orient. This be ninepins. We are bound by laws."
Gordian knot of ACC teams in the middle
Gotta love the cluster of three ACC teams near the middle of the pack. These guys don’t know what to do with the league, so they put VPI and Miami a bit higher, throw in three others near the middle, and then throw their hands up.
And it will lead to the standard ACC pereception problem
5 of the 6 teams will go 6-2 or 5-3 (one will crash and burn) and the ACC will once again have no national contenders and that will be a sign of weakness, when its due to 5 to 8 good teams beating each other up.
It comes down to how you measure the strength of a conference. Is it the average of all the teams, or how good the top of the conference is? I think the former, and the ACC is consistently a top 3 conference by that measure (even with Duke pulling things down).
When every team in the ACC finishes at exactly 0.583
Chan Gailey’s master plan will be complete.
Brian Kelly says no Spicy Sea Nuggets.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on Jun 21, 2010 1:46 PM EDT up reply actions
That was 2008
10 teams went either 4-4 or 5-3. He had to leave the league to achieve his goal.
But OMG, the SEC!
I agree, comparisons should be done top-to-bottom. The ACC is very competitive, at least on the Coastal side of the house. The UF-UA League, I mean “Southeastern Conference”, on the other hand, just hasn’t been that competitive top-to-bottom in recent seasons. Gotta love the media’s double standard of discounting losses in the SEC because it’s such a tough league while chastising the ACC for failing to have one team that’s at the top a couple years later.
by NoDak_jacket on Jun 21, 2010 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Hmm. Remember when
Two average SEC teams (one 4-4 in SEC play, the other 3-5) beat the ACC’s two best teams (the division champs) a week before the ACC title game last year? That doesn’t inspire much confidence, and it does justify forgiving SEC losses and not ACC losses.
The ACC doesn’t fail to produce national title contenders because the middle of the ACC is so loaded. Rather, it fails to produce them because the best teams in the ACC just aren’t very good. Your 2-10 performance in BCS bowls since 1998 is indicative of this.
I’m only being half-serious here. I actually agree that over the last couple years the SEC’s mid-level teams have been perceived as being much better than they are.
But there’s no double-standard going on here. The media is right to criticize you for failing to produce a NC contender because you are failing at that. The media is wrong to praise middle-of-the-road SEC teams because it’s just factually wrong.
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
I also remember Wake Forest (4-4 ACC)
beating a top 10 (post bowl) Ole Miss team in 2008. And VT beating Nebraska in 2009.
And there is the double standard. Florida wasnt destroyed in the polls for losing to a team that lost to Wake. Legitimate criticism of the ACC isnt the problem, that same criticism isnt applied to the SEC/Big10ish/Big12ish.
LSU belonged in the championship game the year they lost 2. They should have been playing VT though. VT was #1 in the computer polls, but humans are biased idiots.
Oh I see
I thought you were making a different argument (and thus using a different standard).
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
Big Ten
has been #6 in both simple avg and central mean for the last 3 years. But you never hear anyone talking about them losing their BCS bid.
OM is your measure?
Houston Nutt wins games he shouldn’t (2008 Florida) and loses games he shouldn’t (2008 Wake, Vandy, SCarolina). That same group of Ole Miss players couldn’t win a conference game in 2007 (SEC 0-8) yet showed up well at times in 2008. You couldn’t pick a worse measure for your argument of common opponents.
Im arguing against anecdotal evidence
Using two games from anny teams isnt legitimate.
You need to average over all the games. And really, 12 isnt enough.
But yeah, Ole Miss counts as much as anyone else.
Only?
No. But I wouldnt have a problem if the BCS thru out humans altogether – especially the coaches.
I would also like them to throw out Billingsley, which is a joke of a computer ranking system.
Got it.
BCS poll: No humans, SOME computers, some….animals?
by Call Me the Breeze on Jun 21, 2010 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure, those game picking chickens seem to do a good job.
Really, just a reweighting so that the computers actually have an effect on the results. Now, computers basically break ties.
Count the computers 2/3rds and the Harris 1/3 and throw out the coaches would be fine by me.
I think you'd REALLY regret putting so much emphasis on the computers
in 2001, the computer component put nebraska AND colorado above oregon
in 2003, the computer component put OU in the title game
in 2006, the human vote was required to break a computer tie between michigan and florida
in 2007, the computers would have put LSU against VT. A rematch game from earlier in the year when LSU beat VT by 41(!!) points.
in 2008, the computers would have re-matched OU and texas
in 2009, the computers would have put cincinnati in the title game, leaving texas out.
still think the computers should be the most-influential factor in ranking teams?
Yes.
I uses the VT one as a specific example of what should have happened somewhere in this thread.
yes, I know you used it as "should have" example...
I’m using it as a “should not have” example
I’m just pointing out that the computers can be just as idiotic as the humans.
When you try to pick out a top 2, any system will have idiotic results
I favor a 16 teams playoff – 11 conference champs (no confusion about how they qualify) and 5 at larges. I would be perfectly fine using the computers to pick those 5. Heck, I would be fine with current BCS system, even with its human biases. But, like I said, reversing the ratio to 2/3 computers, 1/3 human (and getting rid of the damn coaches poll) would probably be best.
It can be used to seed the tourney too.
Any system that picked USC over Auburn
without first accounting for Bush cheating looks idiotic too.
Wow
Cincy in the 2009 title game looks pretty stupid in hindsight
"You know, we had a lot of fun tonight. But there's nothing funny about vapor lock! It's the third most common cause of cars stalling. So please, take care of your car and get it checked!" -Joe Namath
by billycthulhu on Jun 22, 2010 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Cincy in the title game might have encouraged Texas...
…to upgrade their OOC schedule. LA-Monroe, UTEP, Wyoming, UCF is pretty bad. They also had #5 and #6 in the B12 North pulling their SOS down. When you have the easy teams in the other division, that isnt the time to double down with craptacular scheduling.
Maybe they would have given Boise a home and home. :)
Not enough games in a CFB season...
…to justify giving computers more power than they have now. Those rankings are designed to be more and more accurate as more games are played. Since the amount of inter-conference games involving quality teams is relatively low before bowls, the rankings will always suffer. They are also always a step behind in intangibles such as injuries and suspensions (ie. they never can take them into account fully, and don’t even take them into account at all until downs are played minus the injured/suspended player).
Oh, the fact that most of these rankings don’t even publish their formulas is bullshit, drowning in ladles of weaksauce.
“No. But I wouldn’t have a problem if the BCS thru out humans altogether – especially the coaches.”
That means you think that computers should be the only element, since the other two are, in fact, human (the polls), so you should have answered “YES.”
by MnM Enterprises on Jun 21, 2010 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions
There is a difference between
“wouldnt have a problem with” and “preferred solution”.
Humans, especially coaches, are worse at measuring those things than computers even.
And, I agree about formulas. If the code isnt independently reproducible, it shouldnt be used in the BCS. Its one thing I like about Colley.
You make Claiborn's head hurt with your logical analysis
And that makes him angry! You know whay happens then? Claiborn SMASH!
Everybody wants a little milk of Michael
Where did you use "preferred solution" previously?
If we had your playoff scenario (or even an 8 or 4 team one), then I’d have little problem with computers being used completely, or, at least giving them more power than they have now. But in the system we have, a system designed to pick the two best teams only, relying on computers too much will lead to some awful scenarios, since the top teams in each conference don’t face each other in the regular season, and have few common, as demonstrated above.
by MnM Enterprises on Jun 22, 2010 8:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Wait...
Didn’t LSU play VT. Granted, In Baton Rouge, but still, it wasn’t even remotely close.
by JoeinSavannah on Jun 22, 2010 12:16 AM EDT up reply actions
Yes, they did.
And it wouldnt have been the first rematch in a championship game ever.
SEC in RECENT seasons...
In the last 4 seasons, the SEC is 25-11 in bowl games. A conference that wins 69% of its bowl games in a 4 years period surely has to be considered “competitive”.
It’s not the perfect measure of top-to-bottom, but it’s about as good as it gets to measure the overall depth of the conference.
No, sagarin's conference rankings
are about as good as it gets (you could prefer some other computer system, but will give roughly the same results).
And it doesnt knock SEC out of the top spot. At least most years.
Meh
They probably as good as it gets, but only using 1 ranking to answer a complex inquiry is always going to leave you short. In the sciences this is compensated for by using a shitload of different metrics.
A good ranking
-is clear about exactly what it’s measuring
-accurately measures what it intends to measure
-only measures what it intends to measure
We can’t be clear on that first point because inquiry “is Conference X better than Conference Y?” could be measured in all sorts of ways.
A good example of this is the various methods to try to quantify how good basketball players are. There simply is no good way to do that right now, no matter how much John Hollinger or anybody else tries to sell you on one big “Player Value Ranking” or “Player Efficiency Ranking” or what have you. Better to come up with a bunch of high quality rankings, compare that player, and get a nice picture from all of that put together.
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
Up above I already defined
“Is conf X better than Y”. I said its measured by all the teams in the conference. While others disagree, they are wrong. :)
Computers?
What about Sagarin’s rankings gives you a clear picture of the competitiveness of either the middle or the bottom half of each conference? That would require backing out the top 2-4 teams, wouldn’t it?
In theory the ranking handles that
middle teams that stay competitive with the good teams will be highly ranked also.
I dont know the details of Sagarin, but having played with a number of systems myself, I have a good feel for what his does. Part of ranking a conference is the top teams too, so that is important. If you care more about the middle, Sagarin’s central mean instead of his simple average would be the preferred conference ranking (and it is Sagarin’s preference).
When Sagarin ranks conferences, he weights them with a center-heavy scheme. For instance, the Big X currently has 11 teams. The influence weights are
1-2-3-4-5-6-5-4-3-2-1
so that the ‘outliers’ are de-emphasized and the middle of the pack carries the greatest weight.
The U of O: Where idle hands are the devil's workshop.
by ProbablyMonty on Jun 21, 2010 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions
This is a good illustration of my point
That isn’t necessarily a better way to evaluate whether one conference is better than another. This measurement, by emphasizing the middle, gives a greater reflection of central tendency of a conference…but “Is Conf X > Conf Y” isn’t necessarily just about central tendency.
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
You and Monty are reading my posts
Sagarin does it two ways, central mean (and desribed by ProbablyMonty) and simple average – a straight average, unweighted.
Im not saying any one way is the best, Im saying there is cherry picking going on by media types in declaring the best (and worst).
He does both ways, but at least on his website, he ultimately uses central mean as the primary method of ranking conferences. Though the simple mean is also used, it’s notably out of order.
The U of O: Where idle hands are the devil's workshop.
by ProbablyMonty on Jun 21, 2010 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions
(To prove that I’m reading your posts, I do know that you said something to that effect already.)
The U of O: Where idle hands are the devil's workshop.
by ProbablyMonty on Jun 21, 2010 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, had to reorder stuff for some of my posts
Just because he has a preference doesnt mean Im not using the other data instead. :)
Fair enough. And I’m not really advocating for one over the other. (Gun to my head, I’d go with central mean, but I can’t defend that position. And dammit, I’m a PAC-10 fan, and I hear we don’t play defense anyway.)
The U of O: Where idle hands are the devil's workshop.
by ProbablyMonty on Jun 21, 2010 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions
P10 has the same problem as ACC, only to lesser degree
As a conference, you all dont get credit when you are #2 overall either. Although, probably due to USC, no one talks about the P10…er… P12 losing their BCS bid.
Also, Im not really an ACC fan
I hate conference homers. I cheer against most ACC teams in OOC games.
Forgive me, but I have to note that
Vandy beat BC in the 2008 Music City Bowl. The punter was the MVP.
An example of this in a microcosm
The ACC has now had 5 years of divisional play. That means that everyone has finally played all of their non-rival cross divisional opponents twice each. Schedule-wise totals are as balanced as they are going to be. In those 5 years, the Atlantic Division champion has never won 7 games, they were 6-2 3 times and 5-3 twice. Meanwhile, the Coastal champ has been 7-1 4 out of the 5 times.
So, the Coastal is clearly better? Well, overall in cross-division games, the Atlantic leads by 2. The Atlantic has been very slightly better over those 5 years despite never producing a 7-1 team in the regular season. Mostly due to Duke being in the Coastal, with their stellar 4-36 record (The worst Atlantic team has been NC St at 14-26).
Hypothetical Conference Strengths Argument with "Data" and "Maths" =

"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
by Go Big Rev on Jun 22, 2010 8:20 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Again with the preseason Big East hate
UConn & WVU unranked? Pitt @16 and Cinci @24?
I mean, it’s not as bad as last year (no ranked teams to start the year, three at the end, Cinci @ #3 at the end of the regular season), but it’s still silly.
Is this going to continue until my Orange are good again?
Ask Georgia and Oklahoma
who they remember from the Big East
by An 'eer with a beer on Jun 21, 2010 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions
The Big East reliably produces 1 very good team a year
Sometimes they even manage a 2nd good one. Unfortunately, there’s more to a conference than the top 1 or 2 teams.
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
True enough
But since we only had two bad teams (my Orange and the ‘Ville) in an 8-team conference, and had two other top 25 teams (WVU and Pitt) and three other respectable teams (Rutgers, UConn, USF) to go along with the Bearcats, I don’t think we did all that badly.
I think that's fair
And even though I hate the north and love my SEC country, I am willing to concede that the Big East top-to-bottom has been underrated vis-a-vis the SEC top-to-bottom.
I love dashes.
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
Sagarin (simple average) top 3 in 2009:
1. SEC
2. Big East
3. ACC
(BigInt was #6 if anyone cares)
His central mean
confuses it up. That one weights the middle teams more and the extremes (top and bottom) less.
Sec, BE and Big10 remain at 1,2,6. ACC, P10, B12 jumble around the 3, 4, 5 spots (P10 3 in central mean, 5 simple avg – ACC 4,3 – Big12 5,4).
So explain the SEC
They have been 1-2 very good teams for a few years now.
That's only half of my claim
My claim that “Big East has 1-2 great teams and nothing else, while SEC has 1-2 great teams plus more” isn’t refuted by “but SEC only has 1-2 good teams too.”
I can go on to argue how much better the SEC’s #1 has been than the Big East’s #1, how much better the SEC’s #2 has been than the Big East’s #2, and how that more or less extends all the way down the conference. But it’d take a long time to find all that evidence, and I think you know what I’m getting at, and I’m fixin to go buy me a 360 so I can play this Red Dead Redemption everyone keeps talking about
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
It doesnt extend all the way down.
Well, it did last year, but not as much as you would think.
And it isnt really Big East (or ACC) vs SEC. SEC is the top conference. Its Big East (or ACC) vs Big10 or Big12 that shows the media bias.
This is true
It’s pretty much bullshit to compare conferences
-with few common opponents
-admitting the reality of teams being dynamic in their performance
-with different numbers of members.
The second is just realizing that teams get better and worse throughout the season, although we generally can only use common opponents at the beginning of the season, because that’s when teams play almost all their OOC games.
The third is a bitch, too. Do you compare the Big East’s worst (8th place) team with the SEC’s 8th place team? That’s not fair to the Big East. Do you instead compare the Big East’s worst team to the SEC’s worst team (12th best)? That’s not fair to the SEC. Do you instead compare the Big East’s worst team to a hypothetical 8 team SEC conference? At that point you’re getting so abstract and full of shit that you may as well just get hammered.
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
The last problem can be handled two ways
1. Just average the ratings
2. Compare everyone to everyone. So SEC to BE would have 96 (12×8) comparisons.
It's not as simple as averaging them
Because some ratings better measure what you intend them to measure than others do, and there’s not clear way to weight them.
For example, if Sagarin ranks the conferences and your grandma ranks them, are you really going to just average them together and call that a superior product?
Trust me—this is an entire field of research across multiple disciplines. There is no simple, 1 measurement that fixes all problems. Some, however, are better than others.
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
No, I meant average the rankings of the teams
For example, as Sagarin does in his simple average.
Judgment of which systems to use is, of course, important.
I agree with the last paragraph
I dont recommend using any one system of measure. But when you look across a bunch of them and see the same kind of thing, it leads to conclusions.
And I dont see anything suggesting that the ACC and BE are consistently the worst 2 BCS conferences.
The second is just realizing that teams get better and worse throughout the season
It’s that, but there’s a more complicated component as well. There’s an inherent randomness to all this. If you take two squads and have them play 10 games against one another, assuming no injuries and that nobody learns from the experiences, there will still be different outcomes (at least in the score, if not in the winner).
Whether players catch passes, whether refs see illegal blocks in the back, whether Les Miles drinks a rum and coke or goes straight for the Absinthe — these are basically unpredictable quantum-level events.
The U of O: Where idle hands are the devil's workshop.
by ProbablyMonty on Jun 21, 2010 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Yep, and 12 games really isnt enough for that stuff to average out
But its all we got.
Try this one
Garbage in, garbage out
by Crabapple Buck on Jun 21, 2010 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Could you contact Dan Beebe
and DeLoss Dodds and remind them of this fact? I don’t know if they would wholly agree with you.
Pigskin Punditry
Follow me on Twitter
I reject your reality and substitute my own." ~ Adam Savage, Mythbusters
Then Cincy crapped the bed vs the Tebows.
by HawkeyeRecon on Jun 21, 2010 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, yes
but losing your coach, and having an interim replacement on his way elsewhere is not a good way to set up for a bowl game with Florida. I mean, if Kelly’s around the Bearcats probably still allow almost 50 points and still lose, but they probably score 30-something.
Bill Stewart thinks interim coaching a BCS games is fun
The other games, not so much.
"I'm colonel cool! And I'm the captain on this rocket to the stars!"
Well, yeah
But an interim coach trying to ‘win the job’ is one thing. An interim coach that has already been hired to be the head coach somewhere else is another thing entirely.
Good point
I forgot he got hired by UB.
"I'm colonel cool! And I'm the captain on this rocket to the stars!"
Cincy was at a disadvantage...
…but at least he didn’t retire and unretire a week before the game.
I think Florida’s D would have manhandled the Cincy O with or without Kelly. Florida had far too much advantage among the Jimmys and Joes, not just coaching.
Waiter, there's a turd in my kool-aid!
You didn’t see anything.
Brian Kelly says no Spicy Sea Nuggets.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on Jun 21, 2010 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Signs of the Apocalypse
#4,903,201(a)
Blog comment indignation over the non-ranking of Connecticut. In football.
I’m heading to the bunker.
by Counter Trap on Jun 21, 2010 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions
And it's perfectly reasonable, too
It’s damn near certain the Huskies will be ranked at the end of the year.
UConn should be ranked
I’ve seen them ranked in several preseason polls. I cannot wait for the Michigan beatdown…the Michigan fans have absolutely no idea they’re in for an old-fashioned buttkicking. Don’t think the fine folks in Connecticut, particularly one Randy Edsall, have forgotten about Rich Rod running up the score back in 2007.
by Edsall is God on Jun 21, 2010 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I would have gladly given up a few of those points in that game
for a few more in the next game.
Sigh.
by An 'eer with a beer on Jun 21, 2010 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions
"Is this going to continue until my Orange are good again?"
Who has the patience for that?
Shouldn't take too much longer for borderline respectablity
We improved a lot last year, even if we only won four games. Getting back to playing in major bowls and losing them, or winning second-tier bowls make take a little longer.
Question
Are the preseason polls a ranking of:
1. How good a team is today
2. How they will be ranked at the end of the season
I know from week to week the pollsters use #1, but the preseason poll is all about predicting where a team will land at the end of it all right?
IMO they shouldn’t release a poll until week 5 of the season and they should keep a running average of previous week’s polls to dampen the knee-jerk reactions.
Do you want the mustache on, or off?
Too bad.
Counter Trap is correct
There’s no defined answer. That’s one of a million reasons why polls are terrible.
(Seriously, if you analyze sports polls from the perspective of an econometrist or psychometrist, they flunk about every single that’s possible for them to flunk).
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
Utesfan and BCS evolution...
We certainly know where you stand on this issue. Although I stand in the minority in that I am anti-playoff, most of us can agree that the competition in the regular season should set up a national championship. Competition in the Mountain West Conference is not comparable to the Big 6 and you know this. The Big East was not up standards the year they sent the Fitzgerald led Pitt team against you and you caught an Alabama team sleep-walking. I give you credit for both those victories, though. But… Don’t you for one second think that I believe you put either of those regular season records up playing true competition. I believe you might do well in PAC 10(?) play, but you are most certainly not running the table. We (Big 6 Conferences, I am a Georgia fan BTW) play tough competition week in, week out and you will see shortly the difference that it makes. Good luck for real because I do enjoy watching a program rise over time to an elite status (i.e. 80’s-90’s Florida schools).
by JoeinSavannah on Jun 22, 2010 12:58 AM EDT up reply actions
I think the Big 6 is a myth.
The SEC is far and away better than the ACC and Big East. Is the MWC much further behind the back end of the big 6?
With three teams that have been at or near top 25 level the MWC teams get a reasonable challenge. This is being rewarded by the polls and potential future automatic qualifications.
I agree that the odds of going undefeated go way down in the PAC 10. We won’t be seeing undefeated years every four years. Maybe once every other decade. The difference is we will be ranked where we are now when we go undefeated with a loss and have a shot at the national title if we go undefeated.
We won’t be guaranteed a shot at the national title if we go undefeated. Just ask Auburn. That is why we still need a playoff. And frankly the bowls and conferences that govern the BCS are the people best able to run a playoff.
BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter
Week in week out is a bit of stretch.
When almost every SEC, BIGXII or BIG10 team have OOC schedules filled with teams the likes of Chattanooga, Citadel, William and Mary and so on, it’s a little much to say “week in week out”.
Sure anyone with a firm grasp of the obvious can admit the SEC is more formidable “top to bottom” then say the MWC. But Utah showed us all that “top to bottom” doesn’t mean shit in one game. Which is what a playoff would essentially be. Which is why I’m assuming you would oppose it.
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.) Now also including Fort Worth, TX and coming soon this fall, Washington D.C.!
No Notre Dame?
I thought they always got an automatic top 10 birth in the preseason rankings as part of their awesomeness and independentness.

You know, Notre Dame, a preseason ranking is a lot of responsibility.
You’ll have to take it out to exercise every day and feed it with wins. I’m just not sure you’re ready for that.
I love how they all looked shocked to discover that playing footbaw requires repeated lifting of heavy objects that are not Chipotle burritos.
Brian Kelly says no Spicy Sea Nuggets.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on Jun 21, 2010 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Actually . . .
. . . That is a before and after picture. Watch out for the Irish this year!
/chugs kool aid
REFILL PLZ THX
Brian Kelly says no Spicy Sea Nuggets.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on Jun 21, 2010 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions
here you go

"Voetbal is pas totaal als je wint"- Coach Adun
"The greatest sin is to spurn the gift"- Coach Alistair
More Fuel for the Idiocy Fire
Nebraska at #7 is based solely on 1.5 games: the defensive side of the Big XII Championship, and the overall performance at the Holiday Bowl. As much as I love my Huskers, I’m amazed that none of the national punditry can remember that the Husker offense was so bad it boosted TV sales in Omaha due to heavy objects being thrown through screens. I’d be surprised if Nebraska Furniture Mart didn’t sponsor the 2010 offense as a result.
"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
At least it's not "addition by subtraction"
The “It can’t be worse” conclusion about NU’s offense is in full effect.
by Albino Tornado on Jun 21, 2010 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
So...
You don’t think w/ a healthy offensive line and a healthy QB(or 2 or 3) that those things can’t happen again? I’m optimistic, but I see what you’re saying. GBR!
I'm your huckleberry.
Not at all.
Just saying that one game of excellence against a somewhat suspect defense ≠ a pattern. General argument: pre-season rankings, no matter how mathed up they get, aren’t worth the paper on which they get printed (or the bytes they take up on my laptop, FWIW). I’m optimistic, too, but I’d prefer all polls wait until at least 1 October before assuming we know anything about anything in CFB.
"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
I remember Iowa State...
"Hush now, let it go now. I know it's time to go. Time to let this fall from my hands" VNV Nation, "From My Hands"
by Stuck in the Plains on Jun 22, 2010 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions
My point exactly
If that’s a top ten program, I’ll eat Ndamukong Suh’s athletic supporter.
"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
mmmm already looking forward to week 3 intersectional matchups wooooo
Nebraska @ Washington on Sept. 18th is gonna be fun. love how they renewed this series which was pretty entertaining throughout the 90’s, (save for a 55-7 nebraska victory in ’98. yuck. by the way whatever happened to Deangelo Evans)
UW’s offense returns 9 starters in 2010…including Jake… just how good is that husker D? UW’s defense projects to be Pac-10 average in 2010, so yeah, unless you’re the cougars you should put some points up.
Nebraska will be 2-0. UW should probably be 2-0. should be a great day on Montlake…GAMEDAY??!?!?!?!?! (UW still has yet to lose it’s gameday virginity)
by jack lockner on Jun 23, 2010 3:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Arkansas Ranking Too High?
Arkansas won 8 games last year with close losses to Florida and LSU on the road.
Arkansas trades @ Florida for Vanderbilt this season. Arkansas gets Alabama, LSU and Ole Miss at home instead of on the road this season.
Why is ~17th or so too high for a team who should win 9 games? LSU, Miami and SC were all ranked 17-20th in final USAToday poll last season with 9 wins.
Well... perhaps the belief that a top 20 team should play D
"It’s not Disneyland, people. Get the hell out of the way." NYC Firefighter
by jokastrength on Jun 21, 2010 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Red Zone D Excellent, Big Play D Horrid
Arkansas’ red zone defense ranked 12th nationally. The REAL weakness of the defense was giving up the HUGE play. I forget how many TD’s of 50+ yards were scored on Arkansas’ D, but it was several season’s worth. IF the D can cut those in half this year, the overall defense improves dramatically. The great red zone D play allowed them to rank 58th in scoring D despite much worse in passing/rushing yards. But points are what counts.
Unfortunately, the polls are weighted in that early losses end up counting for less in the final polls than later losses. That’s why you’ll end up seeing nine-win teams in the top 10. So no, I’d argue that 17th is not too high.
by Alaska Hokie on Jun 21, 2010 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the Hogs' uninspiring performance
in the Liberty Bowl is what sets them back in the minds of pundits and pollsters.
Red Cup Rebellion - Changing the Culture of Ole Miss Athletics
Take a picture, trick.
by The Ghost of Jay Cutler on Jun 21, 2010 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Uninspiring is not what I would call it
It was 5 fucking degrees and the front 7 of ECU was as good as Arkansas had faced all year.
I think “unfocused” is a better descriptor.
When I say "uninspiring" I'm speaking of the effect it had on the audience.
It may have been the coldest night in Memphis in recent memory and ECU may have had a great front seven, but what 90% of the people who watched it saw was “an SEC team struggling to put away a CUSA team.”
Polls are about based on, pimarily, two things: actual, on-field performance and perception. The latter is why “17th or so [is] too high for a team who should win 9 games.”
Red Cup Rebellion - Changing the Culture of Ole Miss Athletics
Take a picture, trick.
by The Ghost of Jay Cutler on Jun 22, 2010 6:20 AM EDT up reply actions
So if you were doing the ranking...
…where would you rank Arkansas, Auburn and LSU in preseason, if at all?
by Jim Grizzle on Jun 22, 2010 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions
LSU, nowhere.
Auburn, 20-25. Arkansas about the same.
Red Cup Rebellion - Changing the Culture of Ole Miss Athletics
Take a picture, trick.
by The Ghost of Jay Cutler on Jun 22, 2010 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Looks about right to me
Auburn needs as much improvement on defense as Arkansas (Auburn actually gave up more points per game). Both offenses need to be more consistent against the best defenses.
LSU
has the opportunity to be 2008 Auburn-level atrocious on offense…
"Hush now, let it go now. I know it's time to go. Time to let this fall from my hands" VNV Nation, "From My Hands"
by Stuck in the Plains on Jun 22, 2010 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Isnt that a warm Liberty Bowl?
It seems someone is freezing in Memphis every year.
Biased season ticket holder
UConn is going to be very, very good this year. They’re going to absolutely drill Michigan on opening weekend and the Big East is a two-team race between them & Pitt. Also, if Dave Wannstedt can stay out of his own way, Pitt is a 10-win team.
Rutgers will suck, as they do in any year where they don’t have two NFL running backs in the backfield.
Man, quarterback play is going to suck this year.
Get ready for incessant “the running game is back, baby!” columns.
Boooorrrring
"Got a bill that's big enough to twist the Tiger's tail. Husked some corn and made those SORRY HUSKERS BAIL!"
by KennyGregoryRockThaCradle on Jun 21, 2010 4:07 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Amen
And pass the stretch play. please.
by Counter Trap on Jun 21, 2010 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions
My idea of heaven includes
the 41 Toss, Counter sweep, triple option (with play action every once in a while to fuck with the safeties) and fullback trap being run over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over…
"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
Do you have a Tom Rathman plushy?
"Hush now, let it go now. I know it's time to go. Time to let this fall from my hands" VNV Nation, "From My Hands"
by Stuck in the Plains on Jun 22, 2010 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I did
until he broke his facemask and retired. Now I’m on to a Joel Mackovicka model, which will not quit until you actually rip its damn head off.
"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
FSU being ranked in the preseason...
…pretty much kryptonite these days.
However, I’d go out on a limb and say that Jimbo has a 75% approval rating so far in Tallahassee. A decent recruiting class and his myriad cookie-cutter Sabanisms has kept the pitchforks at bay for now. But once we lose two in a row, those pitchforks will be wielded with great impunity.
does anyone else think...
that UNC is ONLY ranked in case they beat LSU in the first week of September?
bc if they win, then pundits get to be all, like, ‘whoo, i told ya so’ and if they lose, there are virtually no consequences bc they are an ACC team playing an SEC team?
/d’oh
For some reason...
…whichever ACC team is playing in ATL is always highly ranked. Then the SEC team whips them and jumps up in the rankings (but doesnt fall equivalently when it turns out Clemson/VT/UNC isnt the best team in the ACC).
Conspiracy theory? Maybe.
Could just be that the media are idiots.
Or that ESPN likes talking up the game all summer.
Oklahoma State: Also receiving votes because (fill in the blank)
A. They lost every viable player from last year’s team
B. Last year’s team was vastly overrated to begin with
C. Their coach is incompetent
D. Voter made the mistake of confusing the fact that OSU has a single large donor who keeps their football program almost mediocre, for the Cowboys being competitive
E. Their creepy, five o’clock-shadowed, gun-wielding mascot held voters for ransom, but only escaped with enough loot to qualify as “always receiving votes”
F. Some strange combination of “all of the above”
by TheBlackAttack on Jun 22, 2010 10:08 AM EDT reply actions
F.
Definitely F. Though I’d say Gundy is “colorful” rather than incompetent.
"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
To be fair...
They got ONE vote, among all those polls.
They shall know me by the tang of my bitter and untenable jadedness.

by 




















