Post Weekend Musings

Happy Monday!

Or not. Depends on how your team did on Saturday, I suppose. 

Anyway, I figured that this season I would split the Top 25 and ranking comparisons instead of lumping it all into a single Sunday word vomit. At this point in the season (very early still, but enough data points to start talking) we can start to point out the voter bias again. Also, I am adding the Massey CFB Ranking Composite to compare, as well as manually adding my rankings to see if we move the needle at all. I will also take a look at conference rankings.

Ray vs the AP

If you've followed any of my No Season Left Behind series, you'll know that the AP and I do not get along at all. Some seasons we are closer to agreement, like maybe 1 in 10, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. Right now, we're pretty far apart in general:

	AP		RR	Diff
1	Alabama	SEC	3	2
2	Georgia	SEC	2	0
3	Oregon	Pac-12	14	11
4	Penn State	Big Ten	16	12
5	Iowa	Big Ten	34	29
6	Oklahoma	Big 12	8	2
7	Cincinnati	American	28	21
8	Arkansas	SEC	4	-4
9	Notre Dame	Independent	6	-3
10	Florida	SEC	13	3
11	Ohio State	Big Ten	46	35
12	Mississippi	SEC	10	-2
13	Brigham Young	Independent	35	22
14	Michigan	Big Ten	1	-13
15	Texas A&M	SEC	51	36
16	Coastal Carolina	Sun Belt	53	37
17	Michigan State	Big Ten	12	-5
18	Fresno State	Mountain West	42	24
19	Oklahoma State	Big 12	7	-12
20	UCLA	Pac-12	5	-15
21	Baylor	Big 12	73	52
22	Auburn	SEC	49	27
23	North Carolina State	ACC	30	7
24	Wake Forest	ACC	37	13
25	Clemson	ACC	40	15

As you can see, the voters are close to my ranks 8 or 9 of 25 times. That's not too bad, really, but when they're off they're way off. Iowa, Cincy, OSU, BYU, A&M, Coastal Carolina, Fresno, Baylor, and Auburn are all voted too high by 20 places or more. OSU, A&M, and CC are 35+ places too high, and Baylor 52!

Mean	11.76
Variance	313.52
SD	17.71
SEC	8.86
Big Ten	11.60
Pac-12	-2.00
Big 12	14.00
ACC	11.67
American	21.00
Mountain West	24.00

The mean difference is 11.76 spots. Only the Pac 12 is close to where they should be, and only because of the offset between Oregon and UCLA. There is simply not enough data for voters to say, "Well, OSU is a good school with a great program so we know they'll be better than they are right now and we'll just vote where we think should be." Derp.

Ray and Massey

Ken Massey has put together a composite ranking system that I've talked about before. As I type this, there are 43 different ranking systems that he uses. It's pretty straightforward: each team adds up all of its rankings and he takes the mean, median, and standard deviation and ranks them according to the mean. He includes a lot of algorithm-based systems, and of course I find that appealing.

My system is not included. I'm a nobody, and my system isn't set in stone still. 

Anyway, I find that his composite ranks are usually closer to mine. Usually. Today, that is not the case. 

	Massey's		RR	Diff
1	Georgia	SEC	2	1
2	Alabama	SEC	3	1
3	Iowa	Big Ten	34	31
4	Michigan	Big Ten	1	-3
5	Notre Dame	Independent	6	1
6	Penn State	Big Ten	16	10
7	Oregon	Pac-12	14	7
8	Oklahoma	Big 12	8	0
9	Arkansas	SEC	4	-5
10	Cincinnati	American	28	18
11	Mississippi	SEC	10	-1
12	Florida	SEC	13	1
13	Texas	Big 12	27	14
14	Ohio State	Big Ten	46	32
15	Oklahoma State	Big 12	7	-8
16	Michigan State	Big Ten	12	-4
17	Texas A&M	SEC	51	34
18	UCLA	Pac-12	5	-13
19	Wake Forest	ACC	37	18
20	Brigham Young	Independent	35	15
21	Baylor	Big 12	73	52
22	Louisiana State	SEC	17	-5
23	Kentucky	SEC	15	-8
24	Auburn	SEC	49	25
25	Clemson	ACC	40	15

This really isn't very different than the AP. I'm not super surprised. Any algorithm-based model does better with more data, and like me most of these don't have enough.

Mean	9.12
Variance	258.78
SD	16.09
SEC	4.78
Big Ten	13.20
Pac-12	-3.00
Big 12	14.50
ACC	16.50
American	18.00

Interestingly, neither the composite nor I have Fresno in the top 25. But, similar to the AP differences, we have huge numbers except for the Pac 12.

Ray included in Massey

I would like to reach a level of completeness someday that would allow me to be included in the Massey Composite. Until then, all I can do is add myself manually and see what happens. My voice is one of 44 (43 plus me) and so I don't really expect much movement, if any. 

Here's how I did it:

• Massey composite mean (UGA mean is 2.09 currently) multiplied by 43. Just a simple reversal of the mean. That gives us 89.87
  
• Add my rank (UGA is #2 for me) to that total for 91.87
• Divide the total by 44 for a new mean of 2.088
• Do the same for all 130 FBS schools and then rank them smallest to largest.
• Compare actual Massey to Ray's fantasy Massey

That's it. Basic high school stuff. Here's what we get:

	Massey's w/ RR		Massey	Diff
1	Georgia	SEC	1	0
2	Alabama	SEC	2	0
4	Iowa	Big Ten	3	-1
3	Michigan	Big Ten	4	1
5	Notre Dame	Independent	5	0
6	Penn State	Big Ten	6	0
7	Oregon	Pac-12	7	0
8	Oklahoma	Big 12	8	0
9	Arkansas	SEC	9	0
11	Cincinnati	American	10	-1
10	Mississippi	SEC	11	1
12	Florida	SEC	12	0
13	Texas	Big 12	13	0
14	Ohio State	Big Ten	14	0
15	Oklahoma State	Big 12	15	0
16	Michigan State	Big Ten	16	0
17	Texas A&M	SEC	17	0
18	UCLA	Pac-12	18	0
19	Wake Forest	ACC	19	0
20	Brigham Young	Independent	20	0
23	Baylor	Big 12	21	-2
21	Louisiana State	SEC	22	1
22	Kentucky	SEC	23	1
24	Auburn	SEC	24	0
25	Clemson	ACC	25	0

It takes a very large difference to swing a position change, and even then it's not guaranteed nor is it likely to be more than one spot. That said, we moved Baylor down 2 because the variance was so great. Anyway, a couple of position swaps is about all we get.

I do feel that my system can make a positive contribution to the sport, and that's all I'm really after. Equal treatment for all, and no bias.

Conference Ranks

I've been doing this from the start, but haven't really made much use of it. May as well start sharing, right?

We've all heard or read people from all walks of life prattling on about how awesome their conference is and how weak all the others are, especially from Power 5 conference fans. I suppose if you compare the SEC as a whole to the AAC or MAC, you're pretty safe in making broad generalizations. But is that true of the SEC and B1G? Is the Pac 12 really as weak as ESPN would like us to believe?

In Jan of 2020, I posted this: Conference Strength 2013-2019. That's about as deep as should need to dive into the details. The TL;DR is this: take the average 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level points for each team in a conference, add them up, and rank them. That's it.

Rank	Conf	Score	% of
1	SEC	0.2342
2	B1G	0.2133	91.1%
3	IND	0.1777	75.9%
4	BIG 12	0.1767	75.5%
5	ACC	0.1641	70.1%
6	PAC-12	0.0751	32.1%
7	MTNW	0.0674	28.8%
8	AAC	0.0651	27.8%
9	SUN BELT	0.0641	27.4%
10	C-USA	0.0586	25.0%
11	MAC	0.0397	17.0%

Rank is self explanatory, as is Conf, and Score was explained above. What is "% of?" That is the conference score in relation to the #1 score. What it means (and I explain this in the above linked post) is this: 

• If the average SEC team played the average B1G team 1000 times, and both conferences had equal scores, we would expect each team to win 500 games.
• The B1G is currently 91.1% "as good" as the SEC, which means that the average B1G team should win 91.1% of the 500 games, or 456 games
• The average SEC team should win 544 games of the 1000.

A key here is sample size 3 or 4 crossover games is not enough data to draw conclusions from.

Right now, the SEC is the best conference. Will that hold? Hard to say. We head into hardcore conference play for everyone now, so the whole cannibalism thing is going to rear its ugly head.

Anyway, I hope you enjoyed this. We'll do it again next Monday!

Ray

Ray's Rankings Top 25 Week 5

There is a reason I preach the "no voters, computer only" gospel. I've explained it more than enough times. If you're curious, I have a few blog posts that go into great detail. Suffice to say that voters are fickle and biased.

I say that as a reminder that people like RJ Young and Joel Klatt cannot be counted on to be objective, and that they tend to disregard things like SoS. We all do it. It's human nature to be biased. This is why I created my system: to remove the bias. Any changes I make to my algorithm affects all teams equally.

That said, this was a pretty exciting weekend of football! Let's start with a recap of my previews:

• Zona looked not awful for a little while. Just a little while. It was 19-24 at the end of 3.
  
• UGA had more TD's than Vandy had 1st downs.
• "Baylor gets up for big games, the Cyclones play down to their competition. Upset in the making?" Nailed it.
• OkSt over K-State. Yawn
•  MSU-Neb did not disappoint. The Huskers in the game all night, forcing OT.
• Rutgers held UM to 20 and lost by 7. That's a win for Schiano and the boys.
• UF got right back on track. Not sure I buy the 2QB system though.
• OU is not a top 10 team. Rattler was 26 of 36 with a TD and a pick. They needed a last second FG to beat #50 WVa.
• "I think Chip Kelly has them [UCLA] ready to play and we see that the Tree is still just 'ok'."  Nailed it again.
•  I didn't actually predict a Razorback win, but I think my feelings were clear lol!
• ND-Wisky were tied at the end of 3. Let's not lose sight of that fact. When the wheels come off of the Badgers, they come all the way off!

I also enjoyed the BC-Missou OT, but I somehow missed the BG over Minnesota upset. Ouch.

If I'm Ryan Day, I have a QB quandary. Kyle McCord was 13/18 for 319 yds and 2 TD to 1 INT. Only the 4th true freshman to start for OSU ever.

 So, after all the fallout from yesterday, where do we stand? Things certainly got weirder. I had to think about it, and the reason I keep being surprised is the 1st level point changes each week.

Now, I gave this more thought in regards to the FCS penalty. I've said a few times that playing an FCS school gives a team an unfair advantage over teams who do not. Pretty obvious. And I've said before that the penalty should be treating the game as a loss. For some reason it just today occurred to me that in my system a loss is just 0 pts, not -1 pts. Not sure how I missed that for so long? Anyway, I made the adjustment and here's what we have!

Top 25

It just gets weirder every week. I do think that changing the FCS wins to 0 and FCS losses to -1 makes more sense, and it gives more reasonable results that are in line with the design of the system, so we've got that going for us. 

Yes, UTSA is ranked higher than Oregon. Oregon played Stony Brook, so that's counted as a loss (UTSA played Lamar, so that's a push). Oregon's signature win is over OSU, ranked 46th currently. That Minnesota loss did them no favors, and we can clearly see the trickle up effects of downstream points. The Gophers lose, OSU's 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level scores are negatively affected, and that makes Oregon's points derived from the OSU win less valuable. 

As. It. Should. Be.

At the end of the day, UTSA has played better teams than Oregon has. 0.3 pt difference in 1st level points, and only a 0.0406 gap between the teams.

Look, we all know that UTSA is not a powerhouse. Most teams have played 4 games so far, so we're starting to get some usable data, but really we need more. As I've stated, 4 games is when we start to get enough data points for anything to make sense. Watch; in the next 2-3 weeks we'll see it all start to come together. For now, enjoy the chaos!

Ray's Week 4/5 Preview

I think last week made clear that I am incapable of predicting which games will be compelling and which will not. That said, I'm still going to talk about the games I think will be fun to watch for various reasons.

Zona @ Oregon: just curious to see if Arizona can recapture any of the upset spark from the past couple of seasons. Unfortunately, I will probably be asleep by the time it starts!

UGA @ Vandy: That D is too entertaining to miss! This should be like watching Bishop Sycamore get blasted by IMG.

Iowa State @ Baylor: Baylor gets up for big games, the Cyclones play down to their competition. Upset in the making?

K-State @ OK State: morbid curiosity, to be honest.

Nebraska @ MSU: The Spartans have looked pretty good. I want to see if the Huskers can build on a pretty solid performance at OU.

Rutgers @ UM: I'm wondering if Schiano has anything for 6-Callers-Ahead-of-Us-Jimmy?

Tennessee @ UF:  I keep thinking Tennessee has finally gotten over the hump, and they keep proving me wrong. They remind me of another UT. You know who I mean. And I'm curious to see if UF is maybe a little hungover from that ridiculous 2pt attempt last week.

WVa @ OU: I think it's safe to say that no one is impressed by OU's play so far this season. Well, except for AP voters who are too busy smelling their own flatulence to actually watch them play (bonus points if you get the reference). They barely escaped Tulane and Nebraska...at home. The only decent game they've played so far was against Western Carolina. No need to look it up, they're an FCS school with an overall record of 341-502-23 (.407). Spencer Rattler is 74 of 99 for 761yds and 7/2 TD/INT. However, if we take out the Western Carolina game, he is 54 of 73 for 518yds and 2/2 TD/INT in the 2 games vs FBS schools. Not impressive; not Heisman material. 

On the other hand, WVa looked pretty good last week, at least in the first half, and they did enough in the second half to hold off a pretty good VaTech. Yes, they Mountaineers stumbled out of the gate (though the Terps are looking decent so far) but seem to be on a small roll. The Sooner faithful should maybe be concerned that this is a home game?

UCLA @ Stanford: Gotta be honest; I'm not sold on Stanford yet. They got Helton fired, but that was coming anyway. And they beat one of the worst schools in FBS. I think that UCLA had a case of the 'Buckeyes' after beating LSU, only they didn't completely blown out by Iowa. Or Purdue. I think Chip Kelly has  them ready to play and we see that the Tree is still just 'ok'.

Texas A&M @ Arkansas: Possibly the most important game of the weekend, assuming no major upsets. The Razorbacks have been putting the spurs to her so far, scoring 123 points against all-FBS opponents (yes, Rice and Georgia Southern are FBS schools). It's easy to say that Texas isn't that great of a win, but the Longhorns have played way better than Arkansas over the last decade or so.

A&M has struggled, though. This is supposed to be a team that challenges Bama or Georgia and they needed a late score to down 1-2 Colorado. The Buffs, by the way, got shut out by Minnesota 30-0. So, which Aggie team shows up tomorrow? The CFP challenger from last season who thought they were more worthy than OSU, or the stumbling Aggs who were under 50% on completions vs the Buffs?

ND @ Wisky:  Well, I missed this one somehow even though I knew about it and it was on my mind. Not really sure what to make of either team, truly. ND escaped an historically awful FSU and G5 mid-packer Toledo, and really didn't impress vs Purdue, who out-gained the Irish.One thing ND will not do on Saturday is push the Wisky line around.

The Badgers looked half dead against PSU, and Mertz is sitting 0 TD to 2 INT after 2 games. I bet they're missing Coan about now. How they let him get away I'll never know. I mean, he's not Bryce Young or CJ Stroud, but he's better than Mertz. Wisconsin rolled up over 350 yds rushing vs Eastern Michigan, which isn't really saying much, but it shows the direction they're moving: same as always. Take a bunch of 3 star behemoths and teach them how to be NFL caliber linemen, then run behind them.

What games are you looking forward to?