Ballot Type: Computer
Submitted: Sept. 18, 2017, 9:06 p.m.
Overall Rationale: This is my first year using a computer generated poll, something I've wanted to do for a long time but didn't have time to figure out until recently. This poll is ENTIRELY resume based, meaning the rankings reflect what my algorithm determines to be the 'objective value' of the wins and losses each team has accumulated so far this season. It is not a projection or prediction or 'eye ball test', it's based only on who have you beat, and how good are they? Teams are never punished for winning, and never rewarded for losing. The basic formula is that teams earn positive points for wins and negative points for losses, and then all 129 full fledged FBS teams are sorted by net points each week (Liberty is transitional, so I'm still counting them as FCS for this season). There is zero human intervention to tweak and re-order teams based on where I *feel* a team should be ranked. All teams have a baseline difficulty value set by their tier within DI: FCS teams are all lumped into a generic "FCS" opponent with low difficulty value, while G5 and P5 teams are each tracked individually, with slightly higher baseline difficulty values for P5 compared to G5. The points your team earns beyond the baseline for winning and losing depend on several things, including (1) any difference in baseline difficulty of your opponent and yourself (FCS, G5, P5), (2) the record of your opponents, and (3) the record of your opponents' opponents. For example, P5 teams losing to FCS teams get hit with major penalties (eg Baylor), while G5 teams beating P5 teams get a decent boost (eg EMU). The overall size of the a penalty or boost for any given win depends on how good the opponent is. These values are dynamic, meaning they change over the course of the season -- it doesn't depend on what a team was ranked when they played, but how good they are based on ALL games played up to the current week. So, for example, a G5 win over an otherwise 2-0 P5 team in Week 3 is worth a lot at the time, but it could be worth less at the end of the season if that P5 team goes on to finish 2-10, especially if that P5 team loses to a bunch of bad teams; similarly, that win for the G5 team is worth slightly more initially if the P5 teams' 2 wins are over other P5 teams with good records, or slightly less if wins are against FCS/G5. Rankings are based on a team's accrued points normalized per game played, which is done to account for things like championship games, the "Hawaii rule", bye weeks scattered throughout the season, and (especially this year) canceled games. The poll does NOT (yet) factor in margin of victory or home/away status. I have no immediate plans to include these parameters, since I'm not sure their impact would be worth the hassle. The poll also does not factor in anything related to "strength of schedule", aside from the records of your opponents and your opponents' opponents. But the algorithm does give me the ability to track the 'ranking points' scored by all of those teams in addition to their records, and I can use those numbers to make something of an SoS ranking. Using that approach, after 3 weeks, the 5 hardest schedules are: (1) Stanford (1-2), (2) FL Atlantic (1-2), (3) Pittsburgh (1-2), (4) Rutgers (1-2), and (5) Tulane (1-2). while the 5 easiest schedules so far are: (125) Virginia Tech (3-0), (126) Michigan State (3-0), (127) Penn St (3-0), (128) E Michigan (2-0), and (129) UT San Antonio (2-0). The worst 5 teams in FBS according to my poll are: (125) Charlotte (0-3) (126) East Carolina (0-3) (127) Georgia St (0-2) (128) Baylor (0-3), and (129) Ga Southern (0-2). The first 5 out this week are: (26) Washington St, (27) Notre Dame, (28) Mississippi St, (29) Michigan, and (30) Utah. If you're confused or upset or curious about my formula and/or why a given team is/isn't ranked a certain way, or what your team's ranking is, I'm happy to answer any questions. Remember, mine is an objective resume-based algorithm, so the only thing that's up to me is how to weight different factors. I'm pretty happy with how things have turned out so far, but I might tweak the formula over the season, especially if I find any bugs. Now, to break down the glaringly obvious quirk of this week's poll: #1 Eastern Michigan, and unranked (#39) Alabama -- a good example of the consequences of a purely resume based ranking system. Obviously, I fully expect Alabama would destroy EMU in a game, but that's not what these rankings are about. To understand how these numbers shake out, let's look at each team's wins. P5 Alabama has beaten: (1) Florida St, a 0-1 P5 team whose only game so far is a loss to Alabama. With only one game to work with, we can't tell yet what this victory is really worth. As FSU plays (and presumably wins) more games, the impact of this game on Alabama's ranking will increase significantly. (2) Fresno St, a 1-2 G5 team has only one win over an FCS team and whose only non-Alabama FBS opponent is 3-0 Washington. And (3) Colorado St, a 2-2 G5 team who has beaten 1-3 P5 Oregon St and an FCS team, while losing to 3-0 P5 Colorado. Turns out none of those wins are worth very many points in my formula, since (a) we know nothing yet about FSU, and (b) the other two games are just a P5 school beating mediocre G5 competition. The wins are good enough to get Alabama some points and land them in the top 40, but not enough yet to crack the top 25. A win next week over 3-0 P5 Vanderbilt would likely catapult Alabama up the ranks fast, at least the top 25 if not top 10. Although Alabama's win over P5 FSU *looked* impressive, my system doesn't factor in margin of victory or eye-tests, and FSU literally hasn't played anybody else. Meanwhile, EMU benefits a lot here from having played only two games, in which it has beaten: (1) 1-2 G5 Charlotte, whose only non-EMU FBS opponent is 2-1 P5 Kansas State, and (2) 1-2 P5 Rutgers, whose only non-EMU FBS opponent is 3-0 Washington -- making Rutgers a P5 team that has lost only twice, and those losses are to undefeated teams. While I realize it's absurd to have EMU #2 and Alabama unranked, I take it as a good indication that my system is actually working exactly as intended -- it's just that these early season games and cancelations have disproportionately affected a few teams and forced me to normalize by the number of games played, exemplified best by #39 Alabama and #1 EMU. FWIW, EMU has the second easiest SoS of all 129 teams (UTSA has the first), and they drop to #13 if I go by total points instead of points/game (while UTSA drops out completely). I'm confident these rankings will straighten themselves out as the season goes on and more games are played, and/or if I decide to factor in SoS. 
Rank | Team | Reason |
---|---|---|
1 | Eastern Michigan Eagles | My algorithm likes EMU a lot right now mostly because of their win over 1-2 P5 Rutgers, whose only non-EMU FBS opponent is 3-0 P5 Washington -- i.e., we know Rutgers is not actually a great win for EMU, but the data aren't there yet to prove it. EMU currently has the second easiest SoS according to my algorithm, which is not factored in to their ranking.  |
2 | Clemson Tigers | Clemson has solid wins over 2 P5 opponents in Auburn and Louisville who both have 2-1 winning records, but the teams they've beaten (Georgia Southern, FCS Mercer, Purdue, and North Carolina) aren't as impressive to the algorithm.  |
3 | USC Trojans | My algorithm likes their win over 1-2 P5 Stanford, whose losses are to two undefeated teams. They also get decent points for beating Texas and WMU. |
4 | Memphis Tigers | Huge boost from beating UCLA |
5 | Oklahoma State Cowboys | |
6 | Wisconsin Badgers | |
7 | San Diego State Aztecs | |
8 | Iowa Hawkeyes | |
9 | Oklahoma Sooners | |
10 | Minnesota Golden Gophers | |
11 | Duke Blue Devils | |
12 | Navy Midshipmen | Benefits from only playing 2 games so far, decent wins against G5 teams who have lost to undefeated opponents |
13 | Penn State Nittany Lions | |
14 | UTSA Roadrunners | Like EMU over Rutgers, UTSA gets more credit than it probably should for beating P5 Baylor. If Baylor keeps losing, this win will help them less and less. They currently have the easiest SoS in my ranking system, which is not factored in. |
15 | California Golden Bears | |
16 | Louisville Cardinals | |
17 | Washington Huskies | |
18 | Houston Cougars | |
19 | South Carolina Gamecocks | |
20 | Georgia Bulldogs | |
21 | Wake Forest Demon Deacons | |
22 | Kentucky Wildcats | |
23 | Texas Tech Red Raiders | |
24 | Oregon Ducks | |
25 | Vanderbilt Commodores |
Teams Ranked:
Rank | Team | Unusualness |
---|---|---|
1 | Eastern Michigan Eagles | 24.17 |
2 | Clemson Tigers | 0.00 |
3 | USC Trojans | 0.49 |
4 | Memphis Tigers | 8.35 |
5 | Oklahoma State Cowboys | 0.00 |
6 | Wisconsin Badgers | 0.30 |
7 | San Diego State Aztecs | 2.73 |
8 | Iowa Hawkeyes | 7.42 |
9 | Oklahoma Sooners | -3.05 |
10 | Minnesota Golden Gophers | 7.32 |
11 | Duke Blue Devils | 5.17 |
12 | Navy Midshipmen | 13.03 |
13 | Penn State Nittany Lions | -1.54 |
14 | UTSA Roadrunners | 11.20 |
15 | California Golden Bears | 2.35 |
16 | Louisville Cardinals | 0.43 |
17 | Washington Huskies | -1.28 |
18 | Houston Cougars | 6.71 |
19 | South Carolina Gamecocks | 6.18 |
20 | Georgia Bulldogs | -1.44 |
21 | Wake Forest Demon Deacons | 3.62 |
22 | Kentucky Wildcats | 0.69 |
23 | Texas Tech Red Raiders | 1.90 |
24 | Oregon Ducks | 0.00 |
25 | Vanderbilt Commodores | 0.00 |
Omissions:
Team | Unusualness |
---|---|
Alabama Crimson Tide | 13.03 |
Michigan Wolverines | 5.60 |
Ohio State Buckeyes | 2.24 |
Virginia Tech Hokies | 2.76 |
Mississippi State Bulldogs | 1.39 |
Florida State Seminoles | 1.18 |
TCU Horned Frogs | 1.96 |
Washington State Cougars | 1.46 |
Miami Hurricanes | 0.89 |
Auburn Tigers | 0.65 |
Utah Utes | 0.43 |
USF Bulls | 0.37 |
Florida Gators | 0.26 |
Colorado Buffaloes | 0.10 |
Total Score: 141.71