Ballot Type: Hybrid
Submitted: Oct. 28, 2019, 10:26 p.m.
Overall Rationale: This is a forward-looking, predictive ballot. It is not a resume ranking. I start with an aggregate of the FPI and SP+ computer rankings and then adjust the teams based off of several "human" factors, including coaching, QB play, roster balance, eye test, and injuries. Because it is forward-looking, long-term injuries can significantly alter a team's ranking even before on-field performance has been affected.
Rank | Team | Reason |
---|---|---|
1 | Ohio State Buckeyes | The way Ohio State dismantled Wisconsin should remove all doubt over them being the current #1. No other team has consistently dominated their schedule the way the Buckeyes have. |
2 | Alabama Crimson Tide | The Crimson Tide did fine with Mac Jones against an overmatched opponent but their ranking going forward is still contingent upon Tua Tagovailoa's health. Still, he's returning to practice this week, which makes me think it isn't a long-term ailment. Alabama get to stay here for now. |
3 | Clemson Tigers | |
4 | LSU Tigers | |
5 | Florida Gators | |
6 | Penn State Nittany Lions | |
7 | Oregon Ducks | Oregon drops behind Florida and Penn State after their underwhelming home performance against Washington State. |
8 | Oklahoma Sooners | Despite a loss which was worse than the final scoreline suggests, OU avoids dropping behind Georgia due to how much worse Georgia's loss to South Carolina got over the weekend. |
9 | Georgia Bulldogs | |
10 | Auburn Tigers | Auburn actually closed the gap on the teams ahead of them this week with a 3-point road loss to a Top 5 LSU squad which is the statistical equivalent of a tie at a neutral site. |
11 | Utah Utes | |
12 | Wisconsin Badgers | My ballot become a cluster of confusing and inconsistent teams past the first 11 teams. Wisconsin still stands out with Top 10 FPI and SP+ rankings thanks to early season dominance. Their last two performances have certainly left a lot to be desired. |
13 | Washington Huskies | Washington and Baylor had two of the best performances of any team in the middle of my Top 25 this past week. |
14 | Baylor Bears | |
15 | Michigan Wolverines | Michigan is Top 12 in both FPI and SP+ now but I don't trust the big win over Notre Dame yet. On top of the possibility of ND being overrated, this smells like one of those "perfect storm/matchup nightmare" landmark victories that will only be followed by disappointment. On the flip side, they also have solid performances against Iowa and Penn State recently, so maybe they really have turned things around. A forgiving schedule means that their next chance for a real statement won't come until the Big Game. |
16 | UCF Knights | |
17 | Iowa State Cyclones | |
18 | Minnesota Golden Gophers | |
19 | Notre Dame Fighting Irish | |
20 | USC Trojans | USC is just one of a large coterie of back-end/borderline Top 25 teams who had unimpressive wins this week. Most of these teams are going to benefit from poll inertia without playing particularly well. |
21 | Iowa Hawkeyes | |
22 | Cincinnati Bearcats | |
23 | Texas A&M Aggies | A&M's FPI is up to 15th after a big win over a Mississippi State team which I feel is overrated by the metrics. For now, I'm holding them below where the computer numbers have them. |
24 | SMU Mustangs | SMU struggled against a 3-5 Houston team which has some tough losses but also hasn't performed impressively in any of its wins (all against bottom feeder opponents). A ranked P5 program would get skewered for a result like this (or results like SMU's close calls against Arkansas State and Tulsa for that matter). There seems to be a weird pattern where G5 programs don't get enough credit for legitimately impressive performances against conference opponents (like SMU's and UCF's blowout wins over Temple) but also get too much credit for poor performances like this one. In the end, I still have SMU ranked below the human consensus but well above the Mustangs' 40th place rankings in FPI and SP+, so I am in fact giving them a solid amount of credit for their performances so far and based on eye test. |
25 | Washington State Cougars | The final spot was a two-team race between Washington State and Memphis, who were the Top Two teams in my "Honorable Mentions" Section last week. On top of being an interesting study in contrasts based on their computer rankings (Memphis is only 38th in FPI but 19th in SP+, while Washington State is around the mid-20s in both), this provides a really good case study for the most controversial aspects of my thought process. Obviously, many would disagree that Washington State and Memphis really deserved to be next to each other in my rankings last week (Memphis was 6-1 with wins over Navy and Tulane teams which have good W-L records; Washington State was 4-3 with no notable wins) but let's assume for the sake of simplicity and illustration that their body of work/team quality/statistical profile/etc coming into this past week really were more or less equivalent. Who would then deserve to be ranked ahead of the other now? The most common reply would be "Well, Memphis won and Washington State lost so that's that. Memphis should be ahead." I'd counter with the argument that a 2 point loss at a Top 10 Oregon team is more impressive than a 1 point win at home against 2-6 Tulsa (admittedly, Tulsa is a victim of a brutal schedule and some close losses, and better than their record suggests, but still clearly well below Top 10 territory.) But even more so, the way these games played out is instructive because Washington State and Memphis played themselves into the exact same situation. Both led by one point and then allowed the opposing team to take a chip shot field goal as time expired (meaning they didn't win it with their defense). Neither team blocked the field goal (meaning they didn't win it with their special teams). Both teams *should* have lost. There was no difference in what the teams did at the end of the game to earn a win or a loss with their play on the field. The only difference is the performance of the other team's kicker. Oregon hit their chip shot and Tulsa missed theirs. If both Oregon's and Tulsa's kickers had connected, or if both had missed, there would be zero argument against the fact that Washington State's close loss (or somewhat lucky win) against Top 10 Oregon would merit a bigger boost or smaller drop in the rankings than Memphis' result. And if the situation was flip flopped and Tulsa's kicker connected while Oregon's kicker missed, a 5-3 Washington State would almost certainly be ranked above a 6-2 Memphis in all the polls, even amongst ardent resume voters. Once again, this isn't a case where both teams had similar games but one team made clutch plays at the end that the other didn't. The difference in outcomes is literally down to what the other team's kicker did. This is why I shy away from weighing W-L heavily and ignoring aggregate opponent-adjusted performance. Close games are so heavily influenced by one or two plays either way, and most importantly by what a given team's opponent does, that it's hard to accurately determine how much of the ultimate outcome should be ascribed to the winning team's skill and how much should be ascribed to other factors. Reducing your evaluation of teams down to W-L record leaves you at this point in the season with only 8 data points, which is way too granular to ensure accurate predictive results. |
Teams Ranked:
Rank | Team | Unusualness |
---|---|---|
1 | Ohio State Buckeyes | 0.14 |
2 | Alabama Crimson Tide | 0.04 |
3 | Clemson Tigers | 0.00 |
4 | LSU Tigers | -1.20 |
5 | Florida Gators | 0.24 |
6 | Penn State Nittany Lions | -0.57 |
7 | Oregon Ducks | 0.00 |
8 | Oklahoma Sooners | 0.05 |
9 | Georgia Bulldogs | 0.00 |
10 | Auburn Tigers | 0.00 |
11 | Utah Utes | 0.00 |
12 | Wisconsin Badgers | 0.60 |
13 | Washington Huskies | 11.66 |
14 | Baylor Bears | -0.38 |
15 | Michigan Wolverines | 0.00 |
16 | UCF Knights | 6.09 |
17 | Iowa State Cyclones | 7.80 |
18 | Minnesota Golden Gophers | -1.04 |
19 | Notre Dame Fighting Irish | 0.00 |
20 | USC Trojans | 5.00 |
21 | Iowa Hawkeyes | 0.00 |
22 | Cincinnati Bearcats | -0.62 |
23 | Texas A&M Aggies | 1.95 |
24 | SMU Mustangs | -2.05 |
25 | Washington State Cougars | 0.23 |
Omissions:
Team | Unusualness |
---|---|
Appalachian State Mountaineers | 1.24 |
Boise State Broncos | 0.81 |
Memphis Tigers | 0.55 |
Wake Forest Demon Deacons | 0.58 |
Kansas State Wildcats | 0.46 |
Total Score: 43.30