Sunday Morning Quarterback: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: Has Kentucky Improved Since the Non-Conference Season?

BLOG POLLIN': WEEK SEVEN BALLOT


Yes, but, as arbitrary endeavors go, it's one of the best.
- - -
Pretty pleased with this week's effort: better than average amount of work, comparison and revision, and nobody is inadvertently left out. Yes, after hours of looking at wins and losses side by side, I'm more confident than ever that ranking college football teams by any method is one of the most completely arbitrary, contradictory endeavors ever undertaken by man.

Update [2007-10-10 12:22:28 by SMQ]: As promised, notes and justification:

BlogPoll Ballot, Week Six
This is not a power poll.
1. LSU (6-0)
2. California (5-0)
3. South Florida (5-0)
4. South Carolina (5-1)
5. Arizona State (6-0)
6. Ohio State (6-0)
7. Missouri (6-0)
8. Boston College (6-0)
9. Illinois (5-1)
10. Oklahoma (5-1)
11. Oregon (4-1)
12. Cincinnati (6-0)
13. Kansas (5-0)
14. Florida State (4-1)
15. Auburn (4-2)
16. Kentucky (5-1)
17. Florida (4-2)
18. Wisconsin (5-1)
19. West Virginia (5-1)
20. Virginia Tech (5-1)
21. Southern Cal (4-1)
22. Colorado (4-2)
23. Tennessee (4-2)
24. Georgia (4-2)
25. Boise State (4-1)

Waiting: Connecticut, Wyoming, Virginia, Indiana, Texas A&M, Hawaii, Purdue, Texas Tech, Kansas State, Maryland
First things first: I have to confront what appears to be an unmistakable SEC bias. It would take a rabid anti-SEC bias to deny LSU the top spot right now – in the first half of the season, the Tigers are still the only team to beat either South Carolina or Virginia Tech, came from two scores down in the fouth quarter to knock off the defending mythical champion and shut out a Mississippi State team that is subsequently 4-1 with a win over Auburn – but it's less obvious the league deserves six other spots, especially when those include once-beaten South Carolina ahead of four undefeated teams and Auburn, Florida, Tennessee and Georgia comprising fourth-fifths of the poll's two-loss membership, the former pair ahead of four high-profile teams with one loss apiece.

I can only answer by saying the teams are getting a lot of value from playing one another. Most teams in the poll have something like one quality win and one quasi-quality win, usually one (like Nebraska, for instance, or Louisville) that looks far less valuable at the moment – in fact, Kentucky drops substantially based on the diminished value of beating Arkansas and Louisville – and the SEC is getting a lot of credit for beating up on one another. In the top five, I roughly measured the value of South Carolina's schedule against those of South Florida, Arizona State, Ohio State and Boston College:

So. Florida So. Carolina AZ State Ohio State
W. Virginia Kentucky
Auburn Georgia Colorado Purdue
Miss. State Orgn. State Washington
N. Carolina Stanford N'western
LSU Wash. State Minnesota
Fla. Atlantic UL-Laft. S.D. State Akron
Elon S.C. State S.J. State Y'twn. State

The actual system I had slightly more nuance, because it included more teams, but you get the basic idea: assuming losing to the undisputed number one team in the country by less than four touchdowns is somewhat akin to beating Washington State by three or blowing out a barely functioning, 1-5 Minnesota team, South Carolina's resume compares favorably with teams that don't have two wins of anywhere near the quality of Kentucky and Georgia – though both of those teams count for significantly less than they did a week ago (even beating Kentucky was worth less on Saturday than it was on Thursday, after Louisville's umpteenth – that is, fourth, in six games – defensive collapse against Utah Friday night, though the Cats are still a better pelt than Purdue, Ohio State's best, or Georgia Tech, the tarnished gem of Boston College's rapidly flattening schedule).

The same method led me to shuffle spots 15-20 a couple times, eventually deciding in favor of the SEC; in actuality, no matter what method you want to employ, there's barely a hair's worth of difference between the resumes of Auburn, Kentucky and Florida right now and those of West Virginia, Wisconsin and Virginia Tech. Every one of those teams is currently serving as someone's "big" win while also holding cards of fluctuating value. Is Wisconsin's escape against Michigan State a good a win after the Spartans fell to Northwestern Saturday as Kentucky's comeback at Arkansas? Where does Florida's admirable effort in Baton Rouge fall in? I had the SEC trio there 18-20 in the first draft and moved it to the front in the last; I see arguments against that decision and can't raise them much.

USC plummets with an atrocious loss and a lot of questions now about the value of its win at Nebraska. Do the Trojans have what might qualify as a "quality win" right now? Certainly there is nothing that negates losing at home to Stanford. There is a valid argument for booting the Trojans out of the poll altogether; I keep them in at 21, ahead of fast risers Colorado and Tennessee and sinking Georgia, all of them with at least one good win (a great win, in the case of Colorado) and "acceptable" losses to their credit.

I cannot and will not bring myself to rank UConn until it beats Virginia this weekend (the Huskies' best win is Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, and close call or not, it shouldn't come down to one play to beat Temple). Hawaii will not be in the poll for much longer than that. Winner of Texas A&M-Texas Tech Saturday might be in the top 20 next week.

When, as always, everything will be completely different.

0 recs  |  Comment 9 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

We resume folks
Interesting vis-à-vis my efforts -
 http://sauriansagacity.blogspot.com/2007/10/blogpoll.html

At this point on a resume basis I simply cannot include 2 loss teams (that applies to my Gators). I simply still don't feel I have enough valid comparisons to include 2 loss teams. I think Florida would beat the vast majority of teams in my poll, but as you say, we are not power polling here - just ranking, or "grading" as I like to say.

I wonder where Arizona State will rank in the overall BlogPoll effort. I think the team is both deserving of a high ranking from either a "resume" or "power" angle (I have them 6th).  They net a positive 116 yards per game (19th nationally, better than BC and the same as Oregon).

We also both have USC ranked over 20th (25th in my case). I bet they will be a lot lower in the overall BlogPoll.

by Mergz on Oct 10, 2007 10:26 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Purest of pure resumes....
At this point on a resume basis I simply cannot include 2 loss teams (that applies to my Gators). I simply still don't feel I have enough valid comparisons to include 2 loss teams. I think Florida would beat the vast majority of teams in my poll, but as you say, we are not power polling here - just ranking, or "grading" as I like to say.

I say it isn't how many wins and losses a team has, it's who ye beat and to whom ye lost. In one of my computer rankings that takes into account MOV, I have 4-2 Florida ahead of 5-0 Kansas.

Why? The average rank of Kansas' victims is 115th (out of 218 ranked teams). Rather than say "I can't include a 2-loss team" I say "there isn't enough data that suggests Kansas is better than a team with four victories over teams that average being ranked 56th, and lost by 4 to #1 and by 3 to  #23.  

by JPK on Oct 10, 2007 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I see your point...
...but are you not really saying that you are "power" ranking rather than "resume" ranking?

by Mergz on Oct 10, 2007 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

no
It's saying a respectable loss to a good team (like LSU or even Auburn) has about the same value of beating the crap out of Florida International - it takes more to play a good team close than it does to beat some weakling. Wins like Kansas' first four games are only valuable in that they aren't losses.

'Power polling' says 'Florida would beat Kansas' or 'Florida is better than Kansas' based on an individual perception of strength and weakness. This implies that teams have some inherent level of strength/weakness, though, when it actually fluctuates week to week. Or quarter to quarter. Or drive to drive, a lot of the time. Hence USC remains in the top 10 after losing to Stanford: USC is still 'just better' than the vast majority of the country.

by SMQ on Oct 10, 2007 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

How to value then?
If Kansas' wins are only valuable in that they are "not losses", how do we value them then? If all wins against inferior teams are not better than 1 loss to a superior team, does the same hold true for 2 losses to superior teams? Or more?

In theory, what you are saying is that a team that goes 0-5 narrowly to great teams is better than a team that goes 5-0 to lousy teams.

At what point do losses count more against you than wins?

by Mergz on Oct 11, 2007 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Double no!
I said it was a pure resume approach, just not defined in terms of meaningless W-L records.

Opponents' ranks in UConn's wins: [80* 187 138 65* 87]. UConn is 5-0, alright, but there's noo evidence in their resume they're better than 64th.

Florida's wins: [92 46 32 52*]
Florida's losses: [13 1*]

There's "evidence" that Florida might not be as good as 13th or as bad as 31st. Compare that to UConn's "perfect" record which shows they might be as good as 64th or as bad as 64th. No "resume" approach can legitimately put them in the top 25 just because they haven't lost - they also haven't beaten anybody from which one could draw a "top 25" conclusion.

And don't get me started on Hawaii....

by JPK on Oct 10, 2007 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

slight correction
Of course, that should read "there's evidence that Florida might not be as good as 13th and there is evidence that they're better than 32nd." It's that corrected phrase that would have me rank them above UConn on a "pure resume" approach, since "better than 32nd" is better than "better than 65th".

by JPK on Oct 10, 2007 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Food for thought
I do my own computer rankings , and my rankings hold pretty close to yours for Kansas' opponents (I don't rank non-division I-A)-

Central Michigan 75th
SE Louisiana - UR
Toledo - 93rd
FIU - 119th (dead last, baby)
Kansas State - 32nd

So an average opponent of 79.75 for what we can rank.

However, USC's opponents are nearly as bad -

Idaho - 107th
Nebraska - 69th
Washington State - 78th
Washington - 84th
Stanford - 77th

I still don't see why USC gets the love they do. There is no evidence at all they are very good.

That aside, I see what you are saying JPK. In my computer rankings, I have Florida's opponents as -

WKU - UR
Troy - 65
Tennessee - 48
Ole Miss - 85
Auburn - 26
LSU - 1

So, following your thoughts to my own computer rankings, losing to 26 and 1 is better than beating 75, 93 and 119.

Once again, the question arises how to value any of this? I have much to chew on.

And thanks for the comments both.

by Mergz on Oct 11, 2007 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

In USC's case "lower" meaining ...
...numerically, but "higher" in the sense that the Trojans will probably be top 10ish.

by Mergz on Oct 10, 2007 10:27 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

College Football Coverage
Start posting on Sunday Morning Quarterback »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Official Partner of CBS Sports