SHUFELT Computer Poll; Week 7
Computer Resume Poll Top 25
| Rank | Team | VoW Avg | Change | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Boise State | 3.212 | 0.047 | 0 |
| 2 | Oklahoma | 2.779 | 0.581 | 4 |
| 3 | Auburn | 2.533 | 0.408 | 4 |
| 4 | TCU | 2.427 | 0.007 | 0 |
| 5 | Oklahoma State | 2.336 | 0.248 | 3 |
| 6 | Ohio State | 2.255 | -0.325 | -3 |
| 7 | Utah | 2.082 | 0.265 | 4 |
| 8 | Alabama | 2.070 | -0.318 | -3 |
| 9 | Missouri | 2.032 | 0.399 | 5 |
| 10 | Oregon | 2.032 | 0.033 | -1 |
| 11 | Stanford | 1.969 | 0.081 | -1 |
| 12 | LSU | 1.644 | -0.996 | -10 |
| 13 | Michigan State | 1.471 | 0.292 | 6 |
| 14 | Florida | 1.465 | -0.348 | -2 |
| 15 | USC | 1.462 | 0.474 | 5 |
| 16 | North Carolina | 1.453 | 0.586 | 8 |
| 17 | NC State | 1.352 | 0.520 | 8 |
| 18 | Arizona | 1.295 | -0.266 | -3 |
| 19 | Oregon State | 1.289 | -0.516 | -6 |
| 20 | Iowa | 1.229 | 0.297 | 2 |
| 21 | Florida State | 1.196 | -0.222 | -4 |
| 22 | Texas | 1.153 | 0.697 | 10 |
| 23 | Virginia Tech | 1.149 | 0.333 | 3 |
| 24 | Nebraska | 1.133 | -0.403 | -8 |
| 25 | South Carolina | 1.085 | -0.120 | -7 |
With Ohio State losing, and Boise State annihilating San Jose State, The Broncos maintain its position for two consecutive weeks in a row. A SHUFELT Computer Poll first. Florida is still getting credit for their schedule, despite losing for three weeks in row. Enjoy it while you can, Florida. Appalachian State is waiting to for you.
It does bring me up to answer an email I got from someone. They asked if I could show the week-to-week changes, like every other poll. The answer? Alright, fine!No. I will not. I think people look too much at the delta and say "Oh, why did you drop so-and-so more?" or "Why didn't so-and-so jump up more?". I don't/haven't punish teams, they punish themselves with their resume. If you REALLY want to know, you can make the week-to-week comparison. However, what I will [also] do is show the numerical impact of a team's resume.
I've moved the poll explanation to the bottom of the page. On to the extra curricular awards:
Flavor of the Week Award
This is awarded to the team that has the best win of the week. This is generally given to a team that has a solid win against a good team.
| Team (Team VAvg) | Opp (Opp VAvg) | Score | VoW |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oklahoma (2.566) | vs. Iowa State (-0.909) | W 52-0 | 4.773 |
| Wisconsin (2.052) | vs. Ohio State (2.683) | W 31-18 | 4.674 |
| Georgia (0.867) | vs. Vanderbilt (-0.858) | W 43-0 | 4.638 |
| USC (1.837) | vs. California (0.826) | W 48-14 | 4.423 |
| Texas (0.912) | @ Nebraska (2.736) | W 20-13 | 4.330 |
Oklahoma walks away with the biggest win, by stomping on a poor Iowa State on both sides of the field. Also, I'm not sure if you heard, but Ohio State lost to Wisconsin. That totally matters in polls that use inertia, and punish teams via "The Delta".
Bitter Sweet Award
This is awarded to the team that the most disastrous win of the week. This is generally given to the team that played close against a bad team. Teams will find themselves here if they fail to win very convincingly against an FCS team.
| Team (Team VAvg) | Opp (Opp VAvg) | Score | VoW |
|---|---|---|---|
| LSU (2.268) | vs. McNeese State (-7.571) | W 32-10 | -4.601 |
| Temple (0.541) | vs. Bowling Green (-1.512) | W 28-27 | -0.770 |
| ULM (-1.167) | @ Western Kentucky (-2.831) | W 35-30 | -0.419 |
| Eastern Michigan (-2.661) | @ Ball State (-1.266) | W 41-38 | -0.350 |
| Troy (1.100) | vs. Louisiana (-1.792) | W 31-24 | -0.293 |
Les Miles' Tigers put up a less-than satisfactory win, not that any win over an FCS team is satisfactory. In non FCS news, a half-decent Temple barely beats a really bad Bowling Green
No Shame In Losing Award
This is awarded to the team that had the most respectable loss of the week. This is generally given to the team that played well against a good team.
| Team (Team VAvg) | Opp (Opp VAvg) | Score | VoW |
|---|---|---|---|
| Boston College (-1.148) | @ Florida State (2.580) | L 19-24 | 0.827 |
| Ole Miss (0.050) | @ Alabama (2.570) | L 10-23 | 0.323 |
| Air Force (1.543) | @ San Diego State (1.977) | L 25-27 | 0.300 |
| BYU (-1.793) | @ TCU (4.029) | L 3-31 | -0.111 |
| Arkansas (1.108) | @ Auburn (2.435) | L 43-65 | -0.379 |
Boston College is not a good team, but they put up a good fight against FSU, who pulled the pants off of a Miami team that people thought were decent. They get a "Net Win" for their 5 point loss. The interesting thing here is all the teams were away.
Face Palm Award
This is awarded to the team that really should be embarrassed for their loss. This is generally given to the team that played poorly against a bad team.
| Team (Team VAvg) | Opp (Opp VAvg) | Score | VoW |
|---|---|---|---|
| North Texas (-1.943) | vs. Florida International (-0.616) | L 10-34 | -4.641 |
| Kansas (-1.654) | vs. Kansas State (1.432) | L 7-59 | -4.418 |
| Ball State (-1.266) | vs. Eastern Michigan (-2.661) | L 38-41 | -4.279 |
| Syracuse (0.959) | vs. Pittsburgh (0.702) | L 14-45 | -4.008 |
| Western Kentucky (-2.831) | vs. ULM (-1.167) | L 30-35 | -3.785 |
We know FIU isn't a good team, but North Texas losing by 24 really shows how much worse they are. I didn't get a chance to watch this one. What a shame. In news of "Bad team loses to an okay team", we get to see the Kansas teams at it. And a somewhat predictable result too. Kansas is going to compete with Iowa State for the worst team in the conference.
Fun thing about this... all the teams were at home.
Conference Rankings
| Rank | Conference | Win | Loss | Pct | Teams | VoW Avg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | SEC | 51 | 28 | 0.646 | 12 | 0.722 |
| 2 | Big 12 | 51 | 23 | 0.689 | 12 | 0.565 |
| 3 | Pac-10 | 37 | 25 | 0.597 | 10 | 0.545 |
| 4 | Independent | 12 | 8 | 0.600 | 3 | 0.012 |
| 5 | Big Ten | 49 | 22 | 0.690 | 11 | 0.010 |
| 6 | MWC | 30 | 30 | 0.500 | 9 | -0.200 |
| 7 | ACC | 44 | 33 | 0.571 | 12 | -0.284 |
| 8 | Big East | 28 | 20 | 0.583 | 8 | -0.572 |
| 9 | WAC | 31 | 27 | 0.534 | 9 | -0.721 |
| 10 | C-USA | 37 | 41 | 0.474 | 12 | -1.024 |
| 11 | Sun Belt | 17 | 38 | 0.309 | 9 | -1.796 |
| 12 | MAC | 33 | 55 | 0.375 | 13 | -1.949 |
With the Pac-10's best two teams taking a bye week, the Pac-10 beats itself a little bit as the Big-12 improves itself by quite a bit, thanks to a resurgence of Texas, and a domination from Oklahoma.
Pac-10 Standings
| Rank | Team | Wins | Loss | VoW Avg |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Oregon | 6 | 0 | 2.032 |
| 2 | Stanford | 5 | 1 | 1.969 |
| 3 | USC | 5 | 2 | 1.450 |
| 4 | Arizona | 5 | 1 | 1.295 |
| 5 | Oregon State | 3 | 3 | 1.289 |
| 6 | California | 3 | 3 | 0.414 |
| 7 | UCLA | 3 | 3 | 0.204 |
| 8 | Washington | 3 | 3 | -0.142 |
| 9 | Arizona State | 3 | 3 | -0.765 |
| 10 | Washington State | 1 | 6 | -2.293 |
It is almost the same order as last week, except USC and Oregon State swapped positions. The big win by the Trojans shows a little bit more disparity amount the 3-9 teams. Arizona and Oregon State are separated by a very tiny margin. California regresses a lot with their fail. They are similarly ranked with UCLA.
Top 10 Toughest Schedules
| Rank | Team (Record) | Opp VAvg |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Oregon State (3-3) | 1.954 |
| 2 | BYU (2-5) | 1.577 |
| 3 | Marshall (1-5) | 1.237 |
| 4 | Colorado (3-3) | 1.001 |
| 5 | Wyoming (2-5) | 0.998 |
| 6 | Colorado State (2-5) | 0.977 |
| 7 | UNLV (2-5) | 0.866 |
| 8 | Florida (4-3) | 0.862 |
| 9 | New Mexico (0-6) | 0.821 |
| 10 | East Carolina (4-2) | 0.789 |
So, this team named Baylor, who has sucked, has been winning games. They have been competitive enough to boost Colorado's schedule from 10th to 4th. Hello East Carolina.
Bottom 10 Toughest Schedules
| Rank | Team (Record) | Opp VAvg |
|---|---|---|
| 120 | Syracuse (4-2) | -2.990 |
| 119 | UTEP (5-2) | -2.828 |
| 118 | Ball State (2-5) | -2.217 |
| 117 | Ohio (4-3) | -2.119 |
| 116 | Kent State (2-4) | -2.088 |
| 115 | Southern Miss (5-2) | -1.969 |
| 114 | Northern Illinois (4-3) | -1.960 |
| 113 | Oregon (6-0) | -1.937 |
| 112 | Northwestern (5-1) | -1.922 |
| 111 | Middle Tennessee (2-4) | -1.917 |
Syracuse added their toughest game of the year with Pittsburgh. It still wasn't enough, so they repeat the award.
Games to Look Forward to Watching
| Favored Team (Team VAvg) vs. Underdog Team (Team VAvg) | Average VAvg |
|---|---|
| Missouri (2.749) vs. Oklahoma (2.261) | 2.505 |
| Oklahoma State (2.512) vs. Nebraska (2.406) | 2.459 |
| Iowa (2.296) vs. Wisconsin (1.849) | 2.072 |
| Auburn (2.077) vs. LSU (2.038) | 2.058 |
| Michigan State (2.342) @ Northwestern (1.351) | 1.846 |
Last week, I featured Auburn and Arkansas as the best game to look forward to watching. 108 points, 1036 yards and 141 plays later, we get one of the craziest shootouts in SEC history. Cam Newton got the announcers to go "Tim Whobow?". Yeah... for all of you that hated the Tim Tebow talk, they found their replacement, and he's a freakish athlete named Cam Newton. I hear they have already carved his name into the Heisman trophy.
This week, the Big-12 features a few undefeated teams matchups. This should test to see how good the Big-12 really is. Also, Auburn and LSU looks to be another interesting match. Seeing as Auburn took a 3 point lead at the end of the 3rd and pumped out 28 more points in the 4th, and it feels like Les Miles makes every game in Batton Rogue a crap shoot at the end, I'm putting my bet on Auburn - which will ensure an LSU victory.
Games to Watch During a Root Canal
| Favored Team (Team VAvg) vs. Underdog Team (Team VAvg) | Average VAvg |
|---|---|
| San Diego State (1.756) @ New Mexico (-3.351) | -0.798 |
| Utah (3.265) vs. Colorado State (-1.593) | 0.836 |
| Stanford (2.207) vs. Washington State (-2.447) | -0.120 |
| Boise State (3.676) vs. Louisiana Tech (-0.469) | 1.603 |
| Oregon (3.645) vs. UCLA (-0.112) | 1.767 |
San Diego State isn't a great team - they are competitive for their conference, but on a national scale... eh, but New Mexico is current ranked 118th in the country on my poll, just ahead of Ball State and Akron. San Diego State should be able to handle New Mexico with ease.
Probably the most surprising thing is UCLA. The computers see this as a pretty big mismatch, but it is more with the discrepancy of on the field performance. Let's be honest, UCLA's offense just hasn't compared with Oregon's offense. However, UCLA is ranked 45th in the computer poll. That should be enough to boost Oregon's resume, as long as Oregon can pull off a somewhat lopsided win.
Shout Outs
First to Missing Barry over at CGB. He's the other crazy insano dude that does resume style computer-ish rankings. I submitted my computer poll last week to CGB's community poll. We both got called out for being the most divergent voters. Whoo! Go us! We had some good discussion regarding polling over there, and it's good to bounce ideas and understand the methodology of other people.
Next, to everyone that has provided feedback in the comments and emails. I appreciate hearing from you all, and to help make sure I'm not going insane.
Finally, to the University of Wisconsin. Thanks. Now we are in control of our own destiny to another bowl game!
About the Poll
- It has a memory. It will remember what happened in Week 1. Team A may look bad Week 1, but in Week 6, they don't look so bad.
- That means the values are dynamic. To take an example from this year, Boise State squeaked by a highly ranked Virginia Tech team. The next week, Virginia Tech lost to James Madison. Boise State's close call to Virginia Tech does not look NEARLY as impressive now. Week 1 scores will actually change dynamically based upon results, not just Week 1, but every week of college football.
- Style points matter. This includes the margin of victory. Nobody is impressed when you pull of a 1 point squeaker to Saint Mary’s school of the blind. But everyone would be impressed when Alabama is beaten 35-0. MOV matters, but it has diminishing returns. The point difference between winning by 50 and winning by 70 is practically infinitesimal.
- There is no pride in playing an FCS team.
- Location has a small influence on the scoring. A slight penalty for the home team, and a slight bonus for the visiting team. Neutral fields cancel each other out.
- There are bonus points for winning, and penalties for losing. This isn't a significant part of the formula, but it is factored.
- There are three main values. (There are several formulas that make up these values, but I am going to try and simplify it). A score of 0 is neither good nor bad.
- Team Avg (Team Average); This is simply your team’s performance in a game based upon a formula I’ve made up.
- Opp Avg (Opponent Average); This is an aggregated value of your opponent's Team Average.
- VoW Avg (Value of Win Average.); This is the resume score. Good team vs. Good team will = Great ; Bad team vs. bad team = Awful
- I’ll also be putting up a number next to each extra curricular awards. This is the VoW, (Value of Win). It is a score that factors in the Team's performance vs. their Opponent's resume. A team with a large win vs. a great team will result in a great VoW.
- I can make the numbers simple for you to understand. Negative is bad, positive is good. The further the number is from 0, the more extreme it is. -5 is bad, +5 is good. 0 represents neither good nor bad. This is applicable to all the scores you'll see.
- You get points for playing well against good teams, win or lose. You'll get more for beating good teams, but there is no shame for losing to a good team - as long as it is actually a good team. If you're 4-0, but it's all against FCS teams and the New Mexicos, you'll probably have a decent Team Avg, but your Opp Avg is going to make an embarrassment out of your team.
- Prior to week 1, ALL FBS teams are equal. Previous years have no influence on the poll.
- There are no bonus or penalty points for being in or absent in a BCS conference.
- A team's opponent's opponent's opponent's opponent's (potentiality infinite) score has influence on a team's perception. Meaning: Texas Tech's (Who played New Mexico, who played Oregon) score will influence Oregon's score.
- You now already know more about my computer poll than the ones that actually influence the BCS.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or the Addicted To Quack Moderators. FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable Oregon fans.
27 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good work as always, Shu!
Although I’ll be happy when Oregon’s SOS starts going up. It hurts to see them sitting down there in 10th.
Defending maligned chants since 2009
Nice work, but..
the Big-12 improves itself by quite a bit, thanks to a resurgence of Texas, and a domination from Oklahoma.
How exactly does it show that the Big 12 is improving itself when Texas beats Nebraska and Oklahoma pounds another Big12 team it should pound on an annual basis?
She's a Cougar; he's a Duck.
Both agree: The Huskies Suck.
I was mistaking the on the Oklahoma part. I just looked at the big wins, and typed something out. They had the most impressive win, but weighed against their opponent, it doesn’t factor much.
The reason why a conference can improve on itself is because it takes into consideration the opponent’s entire resume. A loss is not a negatively proportional value of a win, because of factors like location, previous opponents, etc.
If I weigh the values against their opponents, I can see that the biggest factors were actually Missouri over Texas A&M., Texas over Nebraska, and Oklahoma State over Texas Tech. Oklahoma and Baylor wins factored in very little, while Kansas State over Kansas was a negative value.
The more bad teams you have, the more they’ll end up “infecting” the conference totals each week. The more good teams you have, the more they’ll end up “boosting” the conference totals each week. The Big 12 has more “good teams” than “bad teams”, when compared to the entire FBS scene.
Does that make sense? If not, I blame sleep deprivation.
It’s spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-A-L-I-T-T-L-E-T-I-G-H-T-A-T-T-H-E-H-E-E-L"
Just curious,
Where did Cal-USC show up in the “Face-Palm” category? I would’ve though that would be a candidate.
Great work, keep it up!
That would have been down to 21st in that category at -2.149. They have benefited with USC having a favorable resume. In a broader comparison, 51 teams lost last week, so they were in the “face palm” half.
MInnesota’s loss to Purdue was slightly better, and Western Michigan’s loss to Notre Dame was slightly worse.
It’s spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-A-L-I-T-T-L-E-T-I-G-H-T-A-T-T-H-E-H-E-E-L"
Love it dude
But would you mind adding a last week’s rank (not score) column? I’m always interested in movement
I think it would be polite to offer a vegetarian option as well.
CaDuck should be called "Lil' Juju", not "The Hand of Juju", Daisy
by Bill Musgrave on Oct 18, 2010 5:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Pshaw! You herbivores can get your VoW elsewhere. We don’t want your kind here.
Defending maligned chants since 2009
I'm not a vegetarian, just a nice person.
And thus, you are mean and dead inside.
Sarcasm font, AWAAAAAAYYYYY
CaDuck should be called "Lil' Juju", not "The Hand of Juju", Daisy
by Bill Musgrave on Oct 18, 2010 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions
But ATQ won’t be as fun without Quinn
"Hawaii doesn't win many games in the United States." -Lee Corso
I'm confused
Quinn is the fun police. Hence, more fun with fewer police.
I mean listen, we’re sitting here talking about rankings, not a game, not a game, not a game, but we’re talking about rankings.
by HoodRiverDuck on Oct 20, 2010 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Interesting poll
I can appreciate it, being a computer guy myself :) One thing that stuck out like a sore thumb to me, though, is:
14 Florida 1.465 -0.348 -2
If this were the scotty poll, losing would have more consequences. Then again this isn’t the scotty poll, but just my 2 cents.
Thanks for your input.
Florida’s performance was not great, but it was balanced out due to Miss State’s resume. Their loss, much like all their losses, isn’t that bad of a loss.
Losing has a fair amount of consequence, but it gets offset by losing to a good team, at least if it is a close game. Florida has had one of the toughest schedules in the country so far. I’m also not upset with them currently being ranked, because so many other teams have played an FCS school, while Florida hasn’t (yet).
In my opinion, the biggest reason why Florida isn’t ranked in most polls is because of inertia, failure for them to meet set expectations, or they put more weight in losses. The only one of those that has any value would be putting more weight in the losses. The problem with putting more weight with a loss is that Northwestern, Kansas State, and West Virginia would be considered having better resumes, while Florida, Oregon State, and Georgia would be getting punished for actually playing unperceptively tougher teams.
I also see Boston College’s loss to Florida State to be better than Temple’s win over Bowling Green.
And finally, because style points have significance, if you lose badly, you’re already getting punished. Adding even more of a penalty on top of that does throw things off balance and when it comes down to it, losing by 1-3 points is not nearly as bad as losing by 20, or 40.
It’s spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-A-L-I-T-T-L-E-T-I-G-H-T-A-T-T-H-E-H-E-E-L"
Sorry. One more thing.
From a numbers standpoint, Florida’s combined opponent’s record is 30-17, so as you increase/decrease the penalties, you are also changing the penalties of all these other teams, and their opponent’s record. I just messed with the values, and in order to drop Florida from the Top 25, you would have to have a loss penalty/win bonus ratio of 7:1, meaning to offset one loss, you would have to have seven wins without taking in to consideration the other style points.
It’s spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-A-L-I-T-T-L-E-T-I-G-H-T-A-T-T-H-E-H-E-E-L"
I’m curious about where a team would rank if it lost to the #1, 2, 3, 4,…12 team by a point each during the season. Is that easy to compute?
No, because I would have to simulate scores for all 119 teams for each week of football. And that’s the easy part (Which it isn’t. That would be time consuming.)
The difficult part is that there is virtually no way to know who will be ranked #1-#12 by the end of CFB. The scores are dynamic, and the fact that a team would be playing a 0-11 team would impact another team’s resume negatively, and could very likely make that team no longer ranked. Every loss has a negative impact, while the VoW may not have a negative score.
This isn’t a one way street for each team. It’s a 120 way street. As each week progresses, each match up gets tied in deeper and deeper to where that Alabama/South Carolina game will impact the score of Miami (OH)/Missouri.
It’s spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-A-L-I-T-T-L-E-T-I-G-H-T-A-T-T-H-E-H-E-E-L"
I like how you've data mined the crap out of this, and we're still asking for more work out of you.
It would be nice if your poll would make me a damn cup of coffee once in a while.
One day, my dogs will stop barking outside.
by Bill Musgrave on Oct 21, 2010 4:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Shufelt's Poll...
GET ME A BEER!
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The other third is covered by Cliff Harris.
Addicted to Quack
I have a feeling Oregon’s going to move up in your poll this week, regardless of what others do.
Defending maligned chants since 2009
So, Oregon’s VoW over UCLA is currently sitting at 3.873. That is enough to put Oregon in 4th place.
It was big enough to boost Oklahoma’s resume just enough (Oregon beat UCLA, who beat Texas, who lost to Oklahoma) to move them to 1st place, and have Boise State slide down to second place.
It’s spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-A-L-I-T-T-L-E-T-I-G-H-T-A-T-T-H-E-H-E-E-L"
Did UCLA’s stock rise in their loss? I would’ve thought it would’ve been lowered…thus making Texas seem less impressive…meaning the value of Oklahoma’s win over Texas would be slightly lower. Or is there some other stuff going on?
I’ll take my coffee now.
UCLA isn’t an “awful” team.
Their Team Avg fell big time, while their Opp Avg took a nice raise.
Honestly, at this point, there are so many factors, which is why it’s a computer poll. It can factor all 120 teams better than I can.
It’s spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-A-L-I-T-T-L-E-T-I-G-H-T-A-T-T-H-E-H-E-E-L"

by 
















