Ballot Type: Hybrid
Submitted: Sept. 23, 2018, 8:12 p.m.
Overall Rationale: This is a hybrid poll while the model collects and adjusts to data. Since this is the Year of the Chaos, it may take longer than normal for the model to start producing results that a human might (begrudgingly) agree make sense. _______________________________________ For each team I report 3-4 values. The first is the model's raw score, the second is the bonus or penalty I apply to correct the model, the third is the final score I use to rank the team, and finally I may give some kind of explanation if I think it's needed. For example, for Clemson I might give the reason "348, +20, 368", which means the model gave it a score of 348, I manually added 20 points to correct that score, and 368 is the score I used to rank Clemson. This week I tried not to add or subtract more than 30% of the model's score for each team. I'll continue decreasing this number by 10% per week if possible, and produce a fully-computerized poll by week 7. The biggest bonus went to Clemson this week, and the biggest penalty went to Michigan State. 9 teams got no bonus or penalty, an improvement from last week. The median absolute value of bonus or penalty was 60 points, which is worse than last week. ________________________________________ 3 teams had model scores which, if unaltered, would have ranked them. This is an improvement over last week. Those teams were: Maryland (564.2, #7); South Carolina (442, #16), and Ole Miss (426, #17, ineligible). The median bonus or penalty including these four teams was 50 points, which is worse than last week. ______________________________________ Why are Miami and UCF (etc) missing? I try to drop as few teams from the model as possible each week. Even if I gave the missing teams the maximum bonus, ranking them would mean dropping the minimum score required to be ranked, and also assigning more than the maximum penalty to several teams above them. If I didn't stick to my own rules, they'd be worthless. Why is Texas Tech (etc) so high? When possible, I try to leave the model's score unchanged. Wisconsin, Army, Georgia, and Duke are several more examples of unchanged scores.
Rank | Team | Reason |
---|---|---|
1 | Alabama Crimson Tide | 699, +0, 699 |
2 | LSU Tigers | 670, +0, 670 |
3 | Stanford Cardinal | 607, +0, 607 |
4 | Ohio State Buckeyes | 462, +128, 590; The model doesn't like how the teams they've beaten keep losing. TCU, Rutgers, and Oregon State all lost this week, and Tulane isn't a good enough team to boost Ohio State's numbers back up. |
5 | Georgia Bulldogs | 581, +0, 581 |
6 | Clemson Tigers | 447, +133, 580; Biggest bonus of the week for Clemson. A&M was a good win even though the loss to Alabama this week made them look worse to the model. |
7 | Oklahoma Sooners | 431, +99, 530 |
8 | Kentucky Wildcats | 563.8, -32.8, 527; Kentucky keeps climbing. Good win after good win means the model likes them, and I'm less and less inclined to disagree. |
9 | Penn State Nittany Lions | 589, -76, 513; Penn State's wins aren't impressive yet. The model really likes their upcoming B1G East schedule, but they get a penalty until they come through that schedule unscathed. |
10 | Notre Dame Fighting Irish | 572, -60, 512; The Irish, too, have a record that belies how bad they looked in arriving at it. The model also likes their schedule, and they'll continue getting a penalty until they clear the gauntlet. |
11 | Auburn Tigers | 414, +97, 511; It still doesn't like the loss to LSU and is skeptical of the victory over Washington. In fact, it really doesn't like the Pac-12 at all except for Stanford, mostly because they have the toughest schedule among Pac-12 teams and are as yet undefeated. But I digress. Auburn gets a bonus because they're better than the model thinks. |
12 | Duke Blue Devils | 499, +0, 499; Part of my philosophy while I'm in hybrid mode is to leave scores unchanged when I can't find a compelling reason to change them. Duke may seem overrated here, but they beat multiple P5 opponents out of conference and looked good doing it. |
13 | Texas Tech Red Raiders | 474, +0, 474 |
14 | Wisconsin Badgers | 467, +0, 467; This is the weirdest unchanged score. I wanted to give them a bonus for winning at Iowa while ranked, but also keep penalizing them for losing to BYU at home. It turned out that they wound up about where I thought they belonged anyway, by mathematical accident. |
15 | West Virginia Mountaineers | 346, +103, 449; The cancelled game at NC State is still punishing the Mountaineers too harshly. Bonus to correct that. |
16 | Washington Huskies | 364, +76, 440; The model doesn't like the loss to Auburn, it doesn't like Washington's schedule, and it really just doesn't like the Pac-12 at all. |
17 | Michigan State Spartans | 518, -79, 439; Beating previously-undefeated Indiana was a shot in the arm for the Spartans, according to the model. But Indiana was overrated already, and the loss to Arizona State looks worse and worse every week. |
18 | California Golden Bears | 398, +40, 438; Okay I promise this is the last Pac-12 team that gets an arbitrarily-large bonus. And I'll shut up about how the model hates the conference and its schedules. |
19 | Buffalo Bulls | 355, +82, 437; With a win over ostensibly-P5 Rutgers, and a transitive win over Texas (via Temple and Maryland), Buffalo has the best claim among G5 teams of being "back, folks". Note that since this is the week with the highest ratio of completed OOC games to completed conference games, it's the worst week in the model for G5 teams. This is because P5 conferences tend to beat G5 conferences, making G5 schedules appear weaker. Next week, some strong P5 teams will have losses, while the good G5 teams keep on a steady climb up the rankings, filling spots vacated by losing P5 teams. The model's bonus for being undefeated will keep the 2017 UCFs of the world in the conversation with the big boys. |
20 | Indiana Hoosiers | 501, -65, 436; Despite losing to Michigan State this week, the model still really likes Indiana's remaining schedule. They have most of the tough teams in the East left, including Maryland (which the model likes because of the win over Texas and the East schedule), and also two tough West matchups in Minnesota and Purdue. |
21 | Syracuse Orange | 420, +0, 420; Insert weed joke here. |
22 | Army West Point | 418, +0, 418 |
23 | USF Bulls | 337, +77, 413; Two wins over P5 teams. Enough said. |
24 | Mississippi State Bulldogs | 373, +40, 413; Is Kentucky legit? If they are, no reason to drop the Bulldogs as far as the model wanted to. |
25 | Missouri Tigers | 341, +70, 411; Not everyone can hang with Georgia all game. Mizzou's OOC performance is still impressive. Now for the teams the model would have ranked: Maryland (564.2), South Carolina (442), Ole Miss (426, ineligible). Next 5 out: Michigan (410), BYU (407), USC (399), Texas (377), Temple (367) |
Teams Ranked:
Rank | Team | Unusualness |
---|---|---|
1 | Alabama Crimson Tide | 0.00 |
2 | LSU Tigers | 0.54 |
3 | Stanford Cardinal | 0.70 |
4 | Ohio State Buckeyes | 0.00 |
5 | Georgia Bulldogs | -0.29 |
6 | Clemson Tigers | -0.06 |
7 | Oklahoma Sooners | 0.00 |
8 | Kentucky Wildcats | 0.96 |
9 | Penn State Nittany Lions | 0.00 |
10 | Notre Dame Fighting Irish | 0.00 |
11 | Auburn Tigers | 0.00 |
12 | Duke Blue Devils | 0.52 |
13 | Texas Tech Red Raiders | 2.67 |
14 | Wisconsin Badgers | 0.10 |
15 | West Virginia Mountaineers | -0.28 |
16 | Washington Huskies | -0.01 |
17 | Michigan State Spartans | 1.45 |
18 | California Golden Bears | 0.01 |
19 | Buffalo Bulls | 2.57 |
20 | Indiana Hoosiers | 5.08 |
21 | Syracuse Orange | 0.07 |
22 | Army West Point | 3.20 |
23 | USF Bulls | 0.00 |
24 | Mississippi State Bulldogs | 0.00 |
25 | Missouri Tigers | 0.21 |
Omissions:
Team | Unusualness |
---|---|
UCF Knights | 1.81 |
Michigan Wolverines | 1.57 |
Miami Hurricanes | 1.04 |
Oregon Ducks | 0.61 |
BYU Cougars | 0.48 |
Texas Longhorns | 0.51 |
Total Score: 24.75