Toggle sidebar

Composite Computer Poll - BCS

S

skrayper77

All-American
Sep 4, 2003
3,617
401
202
This includes all but the Wolfe poll, which does not come out until mid-October

Sag And Bill Coll Mass Avg
Alabama 1 1 2 1 2 1.4
Clemson 3 3 7 3 1 3.4
LSU 2 5 1 7 6 4.2
BSU 6 4 3 9 4 5.2
OSU 7 6 5 6 3 5.4
Oklahoma 8 8 4 8 9 7.4
Texas 5 2 30 5 5 9.4
Illinois 10 10 15 4 12 10.2
Michigan 16 7 20 2 8 10.6
Stanford 13 9 9 11 16 11.6
Wisconsin 4 16 6 14 22 12.4
Auburn 11 14 12 17 10 12.8
Ga Tech 9 11 31 10 7 13.6
KSU 20 12 14 12 15 14.6
Nebraska 18 18 10 18 20 16.8
USCe 26 13 18 15 13 17
Va Tech 19 21 16 21 11 17.6
Texas Tech 14 17 17 24 17 17.8
Arkansas 12 26 11 31 25 21
West Va 24 23 25 16 21 21.8
N. Carolina 23 19 37 19 14 22.4
Florida 17 20 19 27 30 22.6
Washington 28 25 13 22 29 23.4
Ariz State 21 31 23 26 27 25.6
Oregon 15 33 8 38 35 25.8
Penn State 22 34 38 20 28 28.4
Houston 27 15 58 13 34 29.4
Iowa State 31 27 46 29 18 30.2
Wofford 47 UR UR UR 19 N/A
 
Well, my nice, neat Excel table turned out like that... /sigh.

Interesting tidbits:
Alabama is ranked #1 in 3 polls, and #2 in the other 2.
LSU and Clemson each have a #1 ranking.

Oklahoma averages 7.4 and Texas averages 9.4 - the computers must think this weekend's game is going to be impressive. :)

Houston had the biggest difference between polls, going from 13 to 58.

Illinois is the biggest surprise, Top 10 in 3 polls (#4 in one of them)

In the poll that has Clemson #1, Alabama is #1 in their primary poll but #2 in the numbers submitted to the BCS (due to removal of margin of victory).

I only used teams that made the top 20 in at least one poll - hence Wofford. Technically, I think 3 of the polls don't cover 1-AA schools anyway.


Well, food for thought. Means nothing at this point in the season. :)
 
Last edited:
DrollTide said:
Just goes to show, if you average garbage, you still get garbage. I don't see Clemson that far up, or Wisconsin that far down.
Click to expand...
What about each of the poll algorithms do you find to be garbage? I assume those who decry the opinions of the human polls would find the objectivity of a computer poll more comforting. Anyway, directed to the OP, adding a standard deviation column would be helpful in seeing at a glance the agreement of the polls on a team-by-team basis.
 
Last edited:
To answer a few things:

I believe that the BCS requires that all computer polls have a "no margin of victory" or "limited margin of victory" component - I'll see if I can look that up.

I found that, honestly, this is more accurate. Wisconsin has played only one team even deemed decent (Nebraska) and a bunch of horrible schools, all at home (and one neutral field game).

Clemson, OTOH, has played Va Tech, Auburn, and FSU.

Now, keep in mind, that it is early in the year. Some polls will even state that they do not become nearly as accurate until later in the year (hence why the Wolfe poll waits so long to release its first poll).
 
skrayper77 said:
I believe that the BCS requires that all computer polls have a "no margin of victory" or "limited margin of victory" component - I'll see if I can look that up.
Click to expand...
Yes. Sagarin hates that, and has one ranking that accounts for m.o.e.
We're still #1 in that ranking too.
 
Peter Wolf computer ranking's not yet available. Nor is Harris Interactive poll. But taking into account those BCS computer rankings which ARE available (Anderson/Hester, Billingsley, Colley, Massey BCS and Sagarin ELO), dropping the highest and lowest ranking and averaging as per the BCS formula, then averaging that number with USA Today/Coaches, which is also part of the BCS formula, it looks like this - a little more reasonable:

1. Alabama .9706
2. LSU .9113
3. Oklahoma .8417
4. Boise St .8287
5. Clemson .8085
6. Oklahoma St .8086
7. Stanford .7193
8. Texas .7180
9. Wisconsin .6990
10. Michigan .5872
11. Georgia Tech .5668
12. Illinois .4901
13. South Carolina .4028
14. Arkansas .3738
15. Nebraska .3488
16. Auburn .3469
17. Kansas St .3362
18. Oregon .3247
19. Virginia Tech .3060
20. Florida .2346
21. West Virginia .2211
22. Arizona St .0800
23. Michigan St -.1159
24. Texas A&M -.1991
25. FSU -.4890
 
Last edited:
This stuff is all going to play out in the next couple of weeks. Texas and Oklahoma this week takes care of one. OK vs. OK State another. Bama vs. LSU, Barn, TN, SEC champ game(?), ILL vs. Wisconsin another. GA Tech v. Clemson another. Mich v. Ohio State. Does Stanford play USC? If so, USC could bump them off. Boise has the only clear road. Everyone else has hard games to play down the road.
 
Tide1986 said:
What about each of the poll algorithms do you find to be garbage? I assume those who decry the opinions of the human polls would find the objectivity of a computer poll more comforting. Anyway, directed to the OP, adding a standard deviation column would be helpful in seeing at a glance the agreement of the polls on a team-by-team basis.
Click to expand...
I was wrong, on the internet.
 
I wonder if ESPN forgot to use the BCS component of the computer rankings... or if I messed up on one of them. *ponders*
 
I don't care what the polls or computers put out the first week of October. I just care that we are #1 or #2 following the SEC Championship Game followed by #1 after the NC game. Not hard to please am I? RTR
 
Probably because Wofford only lost to Clemson by 8, meaning they did better against them than Auburn and Va Tech, both ranked opponents. That's just a guess, though.

This was mere food for thought that I posted on a slow day. Not my intent to imply anything beyond a conversation piece.
 
Posted this in a more recent thread, but really should have gone here:

Just finished calculating what the BCS would look like if it were calculated today (10 Oct). With only Peter Wolfe's computer ranking not reporting among BCS formula participants (Wolfe's rankings won't be calculated until after Week 7 games and will count toward roughly 5.5% of the BCS formula). Some observations:

- As we all already intuit, there are only three upper-tier teams (Alabama, Oklahoma and LSU), with a huge drop-off to number 4. Alabama and Oklahoma are separated by a mere 25/10,000 of a point. Oklahoma and LSU are nearly as close, separated by only 29/10,000 of a point. Only 54/10,000 seperate #1 and #3, with 1,228/10,000 separating #3 and #4.

- Though the humans love Wisconsin, the computers aren't that impressed.

- The computers think Clemson and Michigan are better than the humans do.

- HUGE disparity between the computers and the humans concerning Oregon. Something's got to give. Either they're a top 10 team as the humans believe (and LSU is stronger by default, since they pretty easily handled the Ducks), or Oregon barely belongs in the top 25 as the computers seem to think (making LSU's win much less impressive). We'll find out November 5th.

- Illinois, Arizona State, Texas, Baylor and North Carolina may all be underrated in the polls. Kansas State may be VASTLY underrated.

- Nebraska, West Virginia and Michigan State may all be overrated.


Here's the top 25:

Rank Team Total (Computer Rank, USA Today/Coaches Rank, Harris Interactive Rank)
1. Alabama 0.9658 (1, 3, 2)
2. Oklahoma 0.9633 (2, 1, 3)
3. LSU 0.9604 (3, 2, 1)
4. Oklahoma St 0.8376 (4, 7, 6)
5. Boise St 0.8355 (5, 6, 5)
6. Wisconsin 0.8087 (11, 4, 4)
7. Stanford 0.8079 (9, 5, 7)
8. Clemson 0.7682 (6, 8, 8)
9. Michigan 0.6818 (7, 10, 10)
10. Arkansas 0.6297 (12, 11, 11)
11. Georgia Tech 0.5892 (14, 12, 12)
12. Oregon 0.5853 (23, 9, 9)
13. Illinois 0.5432 (10, 15, 14)
14. South Carolina 0.5023 (15, 13, 15)
15. Kansas St 0.4944 (8, 18, 17)
16. Nebraska 0.4681 (20, 14, 13)
17. Virginia Tech 0.4120 (18, 17, 18)
18. Arizona St 0.3640 (16, 20, 19)
19. West Virginia 0.3633 (26, 16, 16)
20. Texas 0.3569 (12, 21, 20)
21. Baylor 0.2997 (17, 24, 21)
22. Houston 0.2085 (24, 22, 24)
23. Texas A&M 0.2077 (25, 23, 23)
24. Michigan St 0.2074 (33, 19, 22)
25. North Carolina 0.1978 (18, 28, 32)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back