The RTT computer BlogPoll ballot: raw numbers, week fifteen

by Joel on Dec 7, 2008 7:55 AM EST in College Football Comment 11 comments

This here's the RTT Ready, Fire, Aim BlogPoll computer ballot. For a complete refresher on what we're doing, go here, here, here, and here. You can also hit the "blogpoll" tag below the post for a list of all of the related stories.

Rank	Team	AVG R	W AVG
1	Florida	18.64	52.94
2	Oklahoma	25.09	63.46
3	Alabama	27.00	70.29
4	Texas	27.36	95.02
5	Texas Tech	37.18	104.98
6	Ohio St.	28.27	125.20
7	Penn St.	16.09	126.14
8	Southern California	18.27	130.17
9	Utah	21.73	146.95
10	Cincinnati	36.27	156.11
11	Boise St.	26.91	158.41
12	Georgia	37.91	170.84
13	TCU	18.91	170.87
14	Oklahoma St.	38.82	177.85
15	Pittsburgh	49.36	186.84
16	Georgia Tech	47.36	188.95
17	Michigan St.	58.91	201.85
18	Northwestern	43.27	205.43
19	Oregon	50.18	209.38
20	Ball St.	39.45	216.60
21	BYU	46.18	230.18
22	Western Mich.	47.36	239.49
23	Missouri	43.73	254.78
24	Virginia Tech	48.55	259.10
25	Boston College	43.82	260.20
26	Tulsa	51.64	276.94
27	Mississippi	22.82	277.30
28	Florida St.	35.27	283.06
29	Rice	65.00	283.86
30	Nebraska	37.82	287.86
31	Oregon St.	34.73	288.65
32	Iowa	32.27	291.52
33	North Carolina	51.18	293.20
34	West Virginia	44.18	294.40

Full chart, links to explanations, and initial CBS BlogPoll ballot below.

Prior tweaks to the system: (1) added experience ratings; (2) adjusted the weighting with a "square root of the sum of the squares." Why? I'll you why: I don't know. (3) revised the way tied teams were ranked; (4) began sorting the win/loss category based on losing percentage to hopefully alleviate the penalty to teams with early byes; (5) (a) adjusted the weighting of the win/loss factor and (b) adjusted the strength of schedule factor by subjecting the NCAA past opposition figures to a strength of conference rating. Conferences were divided into two categories: BCS and non-BCS; and (6) modified the Conference Ratings so that there were three categories instead of just BCS and non-BCS. The new categories are (a) the SEC and the Big12, (b) the other BCS conferences, and (c) the non-BCS conferences.

Tweaks for this week:

None.
The categories again: Win/Loss, Strength of Schedule, Pass Efficiency Defense, Rush Defense, 3rd Down Offense, Total Defense, Pass Efficiency Offense, Experience, Opponents Points Per Game, Total Offense, and 3rd Down Defense. The AVG R column is Average Ranking, and the last column is Weighted Average.
The current weighting of the categories: 100, 15, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. Then tweaked by the square root of the sum of the squares maneuver.
Current spreadsheet here.

All right, then. The Top 35, according to the computer:

Rank	Team	WL	SOS	PED	RD	3DO	TD	PEO	EXP	OPPG	TO	3DD	AVG R	W AVG
1	Florida	3	3	2	16	13	9	5	116	5	18	15	18.64	52.94
2	Oklahoma	3	1	41	18	7	65	1	59	57	3	21	25.09	63.46
3	Alabama	3	22	13	4	36	3	56	95	6	56	3	27.00	70.29
4	Texas	7	5	59	2	2	50	2	116	20	9	29	27.36	95.02
5	Texas Tech	7	7	69	45	4	72	10	68	68	4	55	37.18	104.98
6	Ohio St.	12	26	11	20	32	8	26	59	7	78	32	28.27	125.20
7	Penn St.	7	59	6	8	6	5	19	38	4	15	10	16.09	126.14
8	Southern California	7	60	1	5	25	1	13	72	1	14	2	18.27	130.17
9	Utah	1	79	22	14	24	18	16	14	12	31	8	21.73	146.95
10	Cincinnati	11	51	28	13	102	26	27	59	26	50	6	36.27	156.11
11	Boise St.	1	83	3	15	27	16	9	114	3	13	12	26.91	158.41
12	Georgia	17	2	56	41	39	28	15	90	64	21	44	37.91	170.84
13	TCU	12	71	4	1	8	2	48	26	2	29	5	18.91	170.87
14	Oklahoma St.	17	11	77	27	17	86	4	45	70	7	66	38.82	177.85
15	Pittsburgh	17	33	47	37	82	31	74	77	46	63	36	49.36	186.84
16	Georgia Tech	17	41	40	22	67	23	78	109	22	46	56	47.36	188.95
17	Michigan St.	17	45	27	72	93	62	81	68	42	66	75	58.91	201.85
18	Northwestern	17	65	28	36	23	53	84	59	23	62	26	43.27	205.43
19	Oregon	17	62	57	24	61	80	57	38	78	8	70	50.18	209.38
20	Ball St.	3	113	30	61	9	55	6	53	21	11	72	39.45	216.60
21	BYU	12	103	58	65	3	58	12	49	34	17	97	46.18	230.18
22	Western Mich.	17	89	63	58	33	83	18	14	53	25	68	47.36	239.49
23	Missouri	26	9	81	39	5	99	8	32	75	6	101	43.73	254.78
24	Virginia Tech	26	35	34	19	77	7	98	105	13	107	13	48.55	259.10
25	Boston College	26	40	7	7	91	6	103	68	19	94	21	43.82	260.20
26	Tulsa	15	118	110	44	1	84	3	49	82	2	60	51.64	276.94
27	Mississippi	30	10	43	6	38	15	25	26	14	37	7	22.82	277.30
28	Florida St.	30	25	25	34	29	13	91	53	32	55	1	35.27	283.06
29	Rice	17	110	96	102	12	114	7	32	107	10	108	65.00	283.86
30	Nebraska	30	14	89	29	15	66	14	32	83	12	32	37.82	287.86
31	Oregon St.	30	38	46	46	44	33	31	12	61	27	14	34.73	288.65
32	Iowa	30	49	8	10	64	12	44	53	8	52	25	32.27	291.52
33	North Carolina	30	44	26	57	35	62	37	72	29	95	76	51.18	293.20
34	West Virginia	30	50	14	47	60	35	40	53	9	65	83	44.18	294.40

Candidates for human override:

Possibly out of order

Texas Tech and Texas
Florida and Oklahoma
Others?

Possibly too high

Pittsburgh
Western Michigan
Others?

Possibly too low

Southern Cal
Utah
Boise State
Others?

Any others that you see?

Current draft ballot, without any interventions, will be added as soon as the switch is flipped.

Rank	Team	Delta

1	Florida	--
2	Oklahoma	1
3	Alabama	1
4	Texas	--
5	Texas Tech	--
6	Ohio State	1
7	Penn State	1
8	Southern Cal	--
9	Utah	--
10	Cincinnati	1
11	Boise State	1
12	Georgia	--
13	TCU	--
14	Oklahoma State	--
15	Pittsburgh	11
16	Georgia Tech	--
17	Michigan State	1
18	Northwestern	1
19	Oregon	1
20	Ball State	2
21	Brigham Young	--
22	Western Michigan	1
23	Missouri	8
24	Virginia Tech	2
25	Boston College	8

Dropped Out: Mississippi (#24), Florida State (#25).

0 recs | Comment 11 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Thanks you, Southern Cal,

for finally playing as many games as most of the country. Now if we could only convince you to take a chance on a 13th game, you might be in the discussion for a certain 14th game in Miami…

by Hooper on Dec 7, 2008 9:39 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

They can't really do anything about that, though.

Unless they start playing Hawaii on a yearly basis, the rules are pretty straightforward from the NCAA. It’ll just be how things turn out.

Really, we should strike the Washington / Wazzou games from their record anyway, since those weren’t against college teams.

by Graysnail on Dec 7, 2008 10:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I was meaning that I'd like the PAC-10 to include a championship game.

But my real beef with USC is that they’re chronically two games behind the rest of college football. Because of that, they have the same amount of practice time as their opponents but a far lower chance of having significant injuries. It also makes them much harder to rank compared to other teams because they just don’t have the evidence to support their claims.

by Hooper on Dec 7, 2008 3:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

With the Pac-10 doing a round robin

I’m more inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt on not having a championship game, since any comparison between teams can – indirectly at worst – go back to how they did head-to-head. Unfortunately, because they don’t have a championship game, they get to arbitrarily stretch out their season, but the alternative is the Big Ten-esque “let’s take a month and a half off.” There’s not an easy answer.

by Graysnail on Dec 7, 2008 5:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That's part of why it's so darned difficult to compare teams from different conferences.

They play such different schedules that it really mucks up the comparison throughout the regular season – especially the middle of the season when most voters begin to solidify their opinions of various teams.

Of course, the Baker’s 10 (I am switching to that now for the Big 10; thanks Joel!) has paid their price for the early end to the regular season. After about 50 days off, Ohio State tends to look about as organized as they did when the season began. Which isn’t well-organized.

But the Baker’s 10 could solve their problem by adding merely one more team. Notre Dame is the name that’s constantly flown out, but they’ll never join so long as their NBC contract is good. And knowing them, they’ll just have a good season or two during the contract renegotiation period and keep it going – kinda like a baseball player facing free agency. So the next best option would be for Cincinnati to join the Baker’s 10 and for the Big East to be replaced by the MWC in the BCS conferences. :-) (Then the MWC could add Boise State and one more team to have their own playoff and only the PAC-10 would be left to fix. Let them scavenge Fresno State and one other team from the WAC and we’re set!)

by Hooper on Dec 7, 2008 5:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You're using Cincinnati there to pacify me, right?

I don’t think Cincy would jump, but that’s because of basketball (and if ND went anywhere, they’d go Big East because of that same connections); they’d need a Central Michigan-type who can basically blow the MAC out … but on the other hand there’s no incentive for the Baker’s 10 to pick one of those teams.

But the MWC could add Boise State and ….um, Nevada? Tulsa? on their own.

by Graysnail on Dec 7, 2008 6:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Frightening note: Florida's EXP is 116

Here’s hoping their juniors all decide to skip off to the NFL and avoid the possible rookie salary cap.

by Hooper on Dec 7, 2008 9:41 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

There's no point in sticking around if you've already won everything you can win, right?

Right, Tebow?

by Graysnail on Dec 7, 2008 10:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Tebow especially should go.

And I don’t mean that as a fan who wants to see him leave. He simply has nothing left to achieve at this level.

Meanwhile, there’ll undoubtedly be a team that takes a chance on him with a high pick; even if they don’t always use him as a QB, he’s big and tough enough to be a fullback, a TE, or some hybridized player, and that would give you two passers on the field at once.

But I’m beginning to wonder if he might actually be a better passing QB than Stafford. I like his throws better, to be honest, and I haven’t seen a bad throw from him in a long time.

Well, back to the point. He’ll project high in the first round, which would be worth a multilmillion dollar rookie contract. That probably won’t be there in 2010; I believe the new CBA will include a rookie salary cap to allow clubs to pay the proven players better and to increase the funding available for free agency. Any mid or high first round projection would be enough to assume a higher rookie contract this draft than next draft.

by Hooper on Dec 7, 2008 3:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Tebow can hit his receivers?

I mean, if I want someone to throw rockets 20 yards away from the intended target, I want Stafford. If I want someone who can actually make throws, I’ll pick Tebow. That being said, I’m not sure if money would make a difference with him anyway, since he’s always struck me as the kind of kid where that wouldn’t make a big deal.

Actually, I think Tebow will end up as a RB/WR type at the next level who can also throw, since he’ll lose his biggest advantage (being the toughest guy on the field) in the NFL.

by Graysnail on Dec 7, 2008 6:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs