Methodology for ranking system. Rankings
are on-the-field win-loss results based.
So, another Saturday is in the books and it's
time to update the ratings. What follows is
the OTFRR#5 through Saturday, October
27th. The top 4 did not shift at all after all of
them surprisingly won their games, most in
dominating #1 fashion. The big news is that
Oregon has caught upto LSU among one loss
teams. Look for a post on the one-loss teams
coming up in the next few days.
Here are the rankings compared to a #5 team
Kansas +1.005W
Ohio State +0.887W
Arizona State +0.844W
Boston College +0.774W
Oregon +0.210W
LSU +0.204W
Kansas is over a full game ahead of what a
typical #5 team would be playing their
schedule. That's right-Kansas could've lost
a game this season and still had a top5 resume.
Oregon has played the toughest schedule so far
for the top 6 teams, but is essentially tied with
LSU for that honor. BC and Ohio State have
played the weakest schedules of the six teams
profiled here.
Expected #5 team performance for team schedules:
Oregon 6.790W 1.210L 0.8488winp
LSU 6.796W 1.204L 0.8495winp
Kansas 6.995W 1.005L 0.874winp
Arizona State 7.156W 0.844L 0.895winp
Ohio State 8.113W 0.887L 0.901winp
Boston College 7.226W 0.774L 0.903winp
Despite what the talking heads on tv say,
there are teams earning it on the field. The
tv pundits prefer to ignore it because it is
not the 'best' teams that are showing it on
the field. Sorry, it's not the 'best' team that
wins, it's the team with the best results.
Right now, I'd guess that Kansas and
Arizona State are the teams in control of
their destiny according to this ranking
system with BC a close third and Ohio
State a distant fourth.
Here are the details for each team:
Ohio State
Youngstown St 99.00%
Akron 99.00%
Washington 82.83%
N'Western 97.51%
Minnesota 93.33%
Purdue 73.76%
Kent St 99.00%
Mich St 93.15%
Penn St 73.76%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.3707
8 0.4150
7 0.1753
6 0.0352
5 0.0036
4 0.0002
3 0.0000
2 0.0000
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Boston College
Wake Forest 89.33%
NC St 96.31%
G Tech 73.99%
Army 99.00%
Umass 99.00%
B Green 99.00%
N Dame 91.96%
V Tech 73.99%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.4203
7 0.4113
6 0.1443
5 0.0225
4 0.0017
3 0.0001
2 0.0000
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Arizona State
SJ ST 99.00%
Colorado 87.40%
SD ST 97.51%
Org St 80.02%
Stanford 86.57%
Wazzu 94.15%
Washington 94.74%
Cal 76.24%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.3975
7 0.4030
6 0.1622
5 0.0334
4 0.0038
3 0.0002
2 0.0000
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Kansas
C Mich 99.00%
SE La 100.00%
Toledo 99.00%
FIU 100.00%
K St 50.83%
Baylor 99.00%
Colorado 73.43%
Texas A&M 78.27%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.2835
7 0.4641
6 0.2177
5 0.0339
4 0.0009
3 0.0000
2 0.0000
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
LSU
Miss St 94.15%
V Tech 88.44%
MTSU 99.00%
S Car 88.94%
Tulane (N) 99.00%
Florida 68.67%
Kentucky 69.15%
Auburn 72.23%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.2490
7 0.4044
6 0.2547
5 0.0785
4 0.0124
3 0.0010
2 0.0000
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Oregon
Houston 94.74%
Michigan 69.01%
Fresno St 95.05%
Stanford 86.57%
Cal 76.24%
Wazzu 97.51%
Washington 83.68%
USC 76.24%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.2552
7 0.3969
6 0.2495
5 0.0817
4 0.0150
3 0.0016
2 0.0001
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Showing posts with label BCS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BCS. Show all posts
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Best Conference? SEC? No. PAC10? No. Big East! Actually, a tie?
rwperu at the twoplustwo forums brought up an interesting point and asked if the on-the-field results ranking (OTFRR) methodology could shed some light on the best conference.
GREAT IDEA!
I thought it could and, judging by the results,
it definitely does. I've always had a problem
with traditional conference ratings. Talking
heads on tv are just that--talking heads. The
computer rankings of conferences all suffer
from the same flaws that the rpi suffers from
in NCAAB, a linear weighting of opponents.
By a linear weighting, it says that a
conference that has the number 1, number
28, and number 61 team in the land is the
same as the conference with number 29,
number 30, number 31. Both average #30.
However, which of those is truly a better
conference? It's the age old debate of
weighting the top heavy verse the depth
heavy and all the combinations in between.
To paint a fuller picture of conference
strength, I decided to use the OTFRR to
test each conference. I tested to see the
expected win and loss total for the #5, #15,
and #50 teams in the country playing the
full conference slate. By looking at the
records, one obtains the win pct a team of
that quality would have playing against
every team in the conference. The results
are somewhat surprising. It seems most
talking heads have assumed this year to be
a two horse race between the SEC and Pac10.
The numbers make it seem a 3 horse race,
with the dark horse, the Big East, actually
being a nose ahead of the others. However,
it turns out the difference between the top 3,
Big East, SEC, and PAC10, are extremely
small and within therange of error. What we
actually have is strong competition
throughout the college landscape with some
subtle differencesthat get blown out of
proportion.
Here are the main results:
For a #5 team in the land playing every conference member:
Big East 6.042W 1.958L 0.755winp
SEC 9.129W 2.871L 0.761winp
PAC10 7.639W 2.361L 0.764winp
BIGXII 9.361W 2.639L 0.780winp
Big11Ten 9.374W 1.626L 0.852winp
ACC 10.602W 1.398L 0.884winp
For a #15 team
Big East 4.830W 3.170L 0.6038winp
SEC 7.249W 4.751L 0.6041winp
PAC10 6.052W 3.948L 0.605winp
BIGXII 7.607W 4.393L 0.634winp
Big11Ten 8.016W 2.984L 0.729winp
ACC 9.082W 2.918L 0.757winp
For a #50 team
SEC 4.543W 7.457L 0.379winp
PAC10 3.811W 6.190L 0.381winp
Big East 3.143W 4.858L 0.393winp
BigXII 5.086W 6.914L 0.424winp
Big11Ten 5.562W 5.438L 0.506winp
ACC 6.139W 5.861L 0.512winp
Many things are pretty telling from the analysis.
1) Looks like the talking heads are mainly right
--ACC isn't good (a #50 team would be above .500)
--Big11Ten isn't good (again, #50 > .500)
--BIGXII is somewhere in the middle
--SEC and PAC10 are good
2) Big East is severely underrated
3) The differences aren't that much on the whole
--hundredths and even thousandths of a proportion seperating
the top 3 in numerous categories.
4) The difference non-linearities create
--Sagarin has SEC a clear #1...this analysis, which uses his base,
shows otherwise.
5) The better teams have it tougher running through the
BigEast. The lower teams have a tougher road through the SEC.
GREAT IDEA!
I thought it could and, judging by the results,
it definitely does. I've always had a problem
with traditional conference ratings. Talking
heads on tv are just that--talking heads. The
computer rankings of conferences all suffer
from the same flaws that the rpi suffers from
in NCAAB, a linear weighting of opponents.
By a linear weighting, it says that a
conference that has the number 1, number
28, and number 61 team in the land is the
same as the conference with number 29,
number 30, number 31. Both average #30.
However, which of those is truly a better
conference? It's the age old debate of
weighting the top heavy verse the depth
heavy and all the combinations in between.
To paint a fuller picture of conference
strength, I decided to use the OTFRR to
test each conference. I tested to see the
expected win and loss total for the #5, #15,
and #50 teams in the country playing the
full conference slate. By looking at the
records, one obtains the win pct a team of
that quality would have playing against
every team in the conference. The results
are somewhat surprising. It seems most
talking heads have assumed this year to be
a two horse race between the SEC and Pac10.
The numbers make it seem a 3 horse race,
with the dark horse, the Big East, actually
being a nose ahead of the others. However,
it turns out the difference between the top 3,
Big East, SEC, and PAC10, are extremely
small and within therange of error. What we
actually have is strong competition
throughout the college landscape with some
subtle differencesthat get blown out of
proportion.
Here are the main results:
For a #5 team in the land playing every conference member:
Big East 6.042W 1.958L 0.755winp
SEC 9.129W 2.871L 0.761winp
PAC10 7.639W 2.361L 0.764winp
BIGXII 9.361W 2.639L 0.780winp
Big11Ten 9.374W 1.626L 0.852winp
ACC 10.602W 1.398L 0.884winp
For a #15 team
Big East 4.830W 3.170L 0.6038winp
SEC 7.249W 4.751L 0.6041winp
PAC10 6.052W 3.948L 0.605winp
BIGXII 7.607W 4.393L 0.634winp
Big11Ten 8.016W 2.984L 0.729winp
ACC 9.082W 2.918L 0.757winp
For a #50 team
SEC 4.543W 7.457L 0.379winp
PAC10 3.811W 6.190L 0.381winp
Big East 3.143W 4.858L 0.393winp
BigXII 5.086W 6.914L 0.424winp
Big11Ten 5.562W 5.438L 0.506winp
ACC 6.139W 5.861L 0.512winp
Many things are pretty telling from the analysis.
1) Looks like the talking heads are mainly right
--ACC isn't good (a #50 team would be above .500)
--Big11Ten isn't good (again, #50 > .500)
--BIGXII is somewhere in the middle
--SEC and PAC10 are good
2) Big East is severely underrated
3) The differences aren't that much on the whole
--hundredths and even thousandths of a proportion seperating
the top 3 in numerous categories.
4) The difference non-linearities create
--Sagarin has SEC a clear #1...this analysis, which uses his base,
shows otherwise.
5) The better teams have it tougher running through the
BigEast. The lower teams have a tougher road through the SEC.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Notre Dame (Charlie) v Washington (Ty) and some Island Love
I've recently come across many debates on the
whole Charlie Weis v Ty Willingham, ND v
Washington mumbo jumbo. While I hope to
keep my blog Irish free, since it's about
winning teams, I thought I'd add my two cents
based on the on-the-field Results Ranking for
a #50 teams (OTFRR50). OTFRR50 looks how
a generic #50 team in the country would do
verse a schedule and compare that to how the
actual team did based on the methodology here.
While, I'm at it, I'll throw in a comparison
between the 2 schools and Hawai'i so that the
island folk don't get on me too much for the
last post.
The results first
OTFRR50
Hawai'i
+0.933W expected 6.067W 0.933L 0.867winp
Washington
-0.255W expected 2.255W 4.746L 0.322winp
Notre Dame
-1.893W expected 2.893W 5.108L 0.362winp
While Ty's team has underperformed compared
to a #50 team, Notre Dame is a complete joke to
even be mentioned as a # 50 team. Also, the
Huskies have played a tougher schedule for a #50
team to compete against, while Notre Dame
still gets lots of credit for a schedule that isn't
that close to Washington's in difficulty. Finally,
we see that Hawai'i does stand out well above a
typical #50 team even with a light schedule.
What follows are the details:
Notre Dame if #50
G Tech 51.61%
Penn St 26.88%
Michigan 26.88%
Mich St 51.61%
Purdue 32.56%
UCLA 16.74%
B C 40.60%
USC 42.37%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0002
7 0.0031
6 0.0222
5 0.0865
4 0.2023
3 0.2907
2 0.2513
1 0.1196
0 0.0241
Washington if #50
Syracuse 82.50%
Boise ST 48.84%
Ohio St 18.83%
UCLA 16.74%
USC 42.37%
Arizona St 5.43%
Oregon 10.74%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0000
7 0.0000
6 0.0012
5 0.0157
4 0.0949
3 0.2782
2 0.3741
1 0.2065
0 0.0294
Hawai'i if #50
N Colorado 100.00%
La Tech 70.85%
UNLV 70.85%
Charleston So 100.00%
Idaho 91.96%
Utah St 92.39%
SJST 80.66%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0000
7 0.3440
6 0.4240
5 0.1907
4 0.0380
3 0.0033
2 0.0001
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Sorry Domers, we deal in cold hard facts around here.
whole Charlie Weis v Ty Willingham, ND v
Washington mumbo jumbo. While I hope to
keep my blog Irish free, since it's about
winning teams, I thought I'd add my two cents
based on the on-the-field Results Ranking for
a #50 teams (OTFRR50). OTFRR50 looks how
a generic #50 team in the country would do
verse a schedule and compare that to how the
actual team did based on the methodology here.
While, I'm at it, I'll throw in a comparison
between the 2 schools and Hawai'i so that the
island folk don't get on me too much for the
last post.
The results first
OTFRR50
Hawai'i
+0.933W expected 6.067W 0.933L 0.867winp
Washington
-0.255W expected 2.255W 4.746L 0.322winp
Notre Dame
-1.893W expected 2.893W 5.108L 0.362winp
While Ty's team has underperformed compared
to a #50 team, Notre Dame is a complete joke to
even be mentioned as a # 50 team. Also, the
Huskies have played a tougher schedule for a #50
team to compete against, while Notre Dame
still gets lots of credit for a schedule that isn't
that close to Washington's in difficulty. Finally,
we see that Hawai'i does stand out well above a
typical #50 team even with a light schedule.
What follows are the details:
Notre Dame if #50
G Tech 51.61%
Penn St 26.88%
Michigan 26.88%
Mich St 51.61%
Purdue 32.56%
UCLA 16.74%
B C 40.60%
USC 42.37%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0002
7 0.0031
6 0.0222
5 0.0865
4 0.2023
3 0.2907
2 0.2513
1 0.1196
0 0.0241
Washington if #50
Syracuse 82.50%
Boise ST 48.84%
Ohio St 18.83%
UCLA 16.74%
USC 42.37%
Arizona St 5.43%
Oregon 10.74%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0000
7 0.0000
6 0.0012
5 0.0157
4 0.0949
3 0.2782
2 0.3741
1 0.2065
0 0.0294
Hawai'i if #50
N Colorado 100.00%
La Tech 70.85%
UNLV 70.85%
Charleston So 100.00%
Idaho 91.96%
Utah St 92.39%
SJST 80.66%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0000
7 0.3440
6 0.4240
5 0.1907
4 0.0380
3 0.0033
2 0.0001
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Sorry Domers, we deal in cold hard facts around here.
Kansas is #1! (post week 8 NCAAF musings)
Here's an interesting stat result about the 'top'
teams in the land:
Kansas +0.703
Ohio State +0.659
Arizona State +0.619
Boston College +0.461
LSU +0.376
Oregon -0.119
In my results oriented world, Kansas is the top
team in all the land. What are those numbers?
How did I get them? Well, I'll introduce that in
the rest of this post.
These are a pure results oriented ranking.
They represent how many more (or less) wins
each respective team has verse the schedule
they played than a generic #5 team in the
land would have. That's the general idea and,
of course, it requires some breaking down as
there are quite a few assumptions
(reasonable I hope) and explanations.
1) For each team, I gathered their opponents'
sagarin predictor rating after week 8
Saturday games. Sagarin predictor is the best
known computer evaluation system and the
most reliable from everything I've seen. (In
an ideal world, I'd probably find a weighted
combination of all rankings, like on Massey
compare web page, and assign a rating
through that.)
2) I then pull out the rating for the #5 team according to sagarin predictor
3) I construct a ex post facto 'spread' for
each game by taking the difference
between the #5 ranking and each
opponent's sagarin predictor and add or
subtract a blanket 3 point home-field
advantage.
4) From there, I convert the 'spread' into
a win pct by comparing
the 'spread' to the a database that has the
actual win pcts for
each game played at that spread in college
football from 1993 to 2006 (ty to goldsheet
for that info).
5) After obtaining a win pct for a generic
#5 team against each team on the schedule,
I just add simple math to get the average
amount of wins the #5 team should have
against that schedule.
6) I then subtract the projected #5 team
win total from the actual win total for the
specific team to obtain a result for how
many wins a team has outperformed a
generic #5 team.
7) For giggles, I go further and work through
every possible combination to see what
would a generic #5's teams win total look
like against that schedule for all possible
outcomes.
Without further ado, here is some of the
grunt work for each team
Kansas
C Mich 99.00%
SE La 99.00%
Toledo 99.00%
FIU 99.00%
K St 57.34%
Baylor 99.00%
Colorado 77.37%
6.297W 0.703L 0.900%
WINS p
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0000
7 0.4219
6 0.4586
5 0.1143
4 0.0051
3 0.0001
2 0.0000
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Ohio State
Youngstown St 99.00%
Akron 99.00%
Washington 81.70%
N'Western 96.48%
Minnesota 92.59%
Purdue 77.37%
Kent St 99.00%
Mich St 88.92%
7.341W 0.659L 0.918%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.4872
7 0.3839
6 0.1124
5 0.0154
4 0.0011
3 0.0000
2 0.0000
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Arizona State
SJ ST 99.00%
Colorado 88.13%
SD ST 96.48%
Org St 87.94%
Stanford 85.56%
Wazzu 90.24%
Washington 90.72%
6.381W 0.619L 0.912%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0000
7 0.5185
6 0.3617
5 0.1031
4 0.0154
3 0.0013
2 0.0001
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Boston College
Wake Forest 92.08%
NC St 98.18%
G Tech 76.39%
Army 99.00%
Umass 99.00%
B Green 99.00%
N Dame 90.24%
6.539W 0.461L 0.934%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0000
7 0.6047
6 0.3338
5 0.0573
4 0.0041
3 0.0001
2 0.0000
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
LSU
Miss St 93.41%
V Tech 92.08%
MTSU 98.18%
S Car 88.10%
Tulane (N) 99.00%
Florida 62.03%
Kentucky 57.34%
Auburn 72.27%
6.624W 1.376L 0.828%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.1893
7 0.3900
6 0.2970
5 0.1043
4 0.0178
3 0.0015
2 0.0001
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Oregon
Houston 92.11%
Michigan 70.86%
Fresno St 93.81%
Stanford 85.56%
Cal 79.82%
Wazzu 99.00%
Washington 90.72%
6.119W 0.881L 0.874%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0000
7 0.3756
6 0.4119
5 0.1726
4 0.0357
3 0.0039
2 0.0002
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Now, don't get me wrong LSU fans. I do believe you might have the 'best' team. In no sport, however, is the title given to the 'best' team. It's given to the team that earns it on the field. While I don't think Kansas is as good as any of the teams I compared them against here. They've had the best results on the field. But, there are alot of games left and plenty of time for things to change.
BTW-I think LSU has had the toughest schedule and my analysis bears backs that notion. The key is the expected win pct for a #5 team playing the respective schedules.
LSU 0.828
Oregon 0.874
Kansas 0.900
Arizona State 0.912
Ohio State 0.918
Boston College 0.934
I might due some sensitivity analysis and see how the numbers come out if I go with the #1 sagarin predictor instead of #5.
teams in the land:
Kansas +0.703
Ohio State +0.659
Arizona State +0.619
Boston College +0.461
LSU +0.376
Oregon -0.119
In my results oriented world, Kansas is the top
team in all the land. What are those numbers?
How did I get them? Well, I'll introduce that in
the rest of this post.
These are a pure results oriented ranking.
They represent how many more (or less) wins
each respective team has verse the schedule
they played than a generic #5 team in the
land would have. That's the general idea and,
of course, it requires some breaking down as
there are quite a few assumptions
(reasonable I hope) and explanations.
1) For each team, I gathered their opponents'
sagarin predictor rating after week 8
Saturday games. Sagarin predictor is the best
known computer evaluation system and the
most reliable from everything I've seen. (In
an ideal world, I'd probably find a weighted
combination of all rankings, like on Massey
compare web page, and assign a rating
through that.)
2) I then pull out the rating for the #5 team according to sagarin predictor
3) I construct a ex post facto 'spread' for
each game by taking the difference
between the #5 ranking and each
opponent's sagarin predictor and add or
subtract a blanket 3 point home-field
advantage.
4) From there, I convert the 'spread' into
a win pct by comparing
the 'spread' to the a database that has the
actual win pcts for
each game played at that spread in college
football from 1993 to 2006 (ty to goldsheet
for that info).
5) After obtaining a win pct for a generic
#5 team against each team on the schedule,
I just add simple math to get the average
amount of wins the #5 team should have
against that schedule.
6) I then subtract the projected #5 team
win total from the actual win total for the
specific team to obtain a result for how
many wins a team has outperformed a
generic #5 team.
7) For giggles, I go further and work through
every possible combination to see what
would a generic #5's teams win total look
like against that schedule for all possible
outcomes.
Without further ado, here is some of the
grunt work for each team
Kansas
C Mich 99.00%
SE La 99.00%
Toledo 99.00%
FIU 99.00%
K St 57.34%
Baylor 99.00%
Colorado 77.37%
6.297W 0.703L 0.900%
WINS p
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0000
7 0.4219
6 0.4586
5 0.1143
4 0.0051
3 0.0001
2 0.0000
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Ohio State
Youngstown St 99.00%
Akron 99.00%
Washington 81.70%
N'Western 96.48%
Minnesota 92.59%
Purdue 77.37%
Kent St 99.00%
Mich St 88.92%
7.341W 0.659L 0.918%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.4872
7 0.3839
6 0.1124
5 0.0154
4 0.0011
3 0.0000
2 0.0000
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Arizona State
SJ ST 99.00%
Colorado 88.13%
SD ST 96.48%
Org St 87.94%
Stanford 85.56%
Wazzu 90.24%
Washington 90.72%
6.381W 0.619L 0.912%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0000
7 0.5185
6 0.3617
5 0.1031
4 0.0154
3 0.0013
2 0.0001
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Boston College
Wake Forest 92.08%
NC St 98.18%
G Tech 76.39%
Army 99.00%
Umass 99.00%
B Green 99.00%
N Dame 90.24%
6.539W 0.461L 0.934%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0000
7 0.6047
6 0.3338
5 0.0573
4 0.0041
3 0.0001
2 0.0000
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
LSU
Miss St 93.41%
V Tech 92.08%
MTSU 98.18%
S Car 88.10%
Tulane (N) 99.00%
Florida 62.03%
Kentucky 57.34%
Auburn 72.27%
6.624W 1.376L 0.828%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.1893
7 0.3900
6 0.2970
5 0.1043
4 0.0178
3 0.0015
2 0.0001
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Oregon
Houston 92.11%
Michigan 70.86%
Fresno St 93.81%
Stanford 85.56%
Cal 79.82%
Wazzu 99.00%
Washington 90.72%
6.119W 0.881L 0.874%
WINS P
12 0.0000
11 0.0000
10 0.0000
9 0.0000
8 0.0000
7 0.3756
6 0.4119
5 0.1726
4 0.0357
3 0.0039
2 0.0002
1 0.0000
0 0.0000
Now, don't get me wrong LSU fans. I do believe you might have the 'best' team. In no sport, however, is the title given to the 'best' team. It's given to the team that earns it on the field. While I don't think Kansas is as good as any of the teams I compared them against here. They've had the best results on the field. But, there are alot of games left and plenty of time for things to change.
BTW-I think LSU has had the toughest schedule and my analysis bears backs that notion. The key is the expected win pct for a #5 team playing the respective schedules.
LSU 0.828
Oregon 0.874
Kansas 0.900
Arizona State 0.912
Ohio State 0.918
Boston College 0.934
I might due some sensitivity analysis and see how the numbers come out if I go with the #1 sagarin predictor instead of #5.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)