Ballot Type: Hybrid
Submitted: Oct. 10, 2022, 7:20 p.m.
Overall Rationale: Week 7 notes: Deservedness keeps teams like Baylor, FSU, LSU, Purdue, Texas, Texas A&M, Utah out when I would have them over a bunch of teams in this poll. I expect to see them back in the list if/when JMU, Syracuse, Coastal Carolina lose. General: 1st layer, computer portion: SP+, opponents’ SP+, opponents’ opponents’ SP+, opponents’ win %, opponents’ opponents’ win %. 2nd layer, human portion: home/field/away, key injuries, P5/G5 status, watched game factors (ex: offensive/defensive line domination, rush yards after contact, average point of first contact, defensive penetration on non-inside screens, missed tackles, quarterback throwing release speed, overall turnovers, average starting field position, etc). 3rd layer, human portion: wins/losses vs higher-/lower-/non-ranked teams, recency of those results. 4th layer, computer portion: Deservedness = team cannot be ranked over another team with 2+ fewer losses (ex: 3-2 Baylor cannot be ranked over 5-0 Coastal Carolina even if rankings have Baylor over Coastal Carolina and/or I think Baylor is better than Coastal Carolina).
Rank | Team | Reason |
---|---|---|
1 |
![]() |
A close game against a division rival with your starting quarterback out gets a pass. If quarterback is out longer and/or close games become more prevalent, this changes |
2 |
![]() |
If they keep this up and Alabama’s quarterback is out or they keep games close, Ohio State will probably bump up |
3 |
![]() |
Another non-close game could get them out of the doghouse (pun intended) |
4 |
![]() |
They continue to win big against non-elite teams on the road and at home as well as pull off wins against good teams on the road and at home |
5 |
![]() |
Not penalizing for Indiana game - they haven’t looked super great against conference play yet. Could change if they beat Penn State big |
6 |
![]() |
First computer layer has them much lower, but they get it done. TCU game could increase rankings if teams above them struggle |
7 |
![]() |
A loss to Alabama probably won’t dramatically drop them unless it is an absolute annihilation |
8 |
![]() |
First computer layer has them higher, but they struggled with Vanderbilt and other teams so far |
9 |
![]() |
This ranking feels both weird and good, but oddly lines up with all layers |
10 |
![]() |
If their bye week was another close game against a team like Rutgers, they would’ve dropped |
11 |
![]() |
Good win, but this was the 5th home game in 6 weeks for them - they’ll only have 3 home games in the last 6, including a roady at Oregon after their bye |
12 |
![]() |
First computer layer has them lower, but I think their results have quietly been more impressive than Utah |
13 |
![]() |
It’s really hard to score 40+ on an option team that focuses on eating up clock and limiting offensive possessions. That’s why (along with the convincing FSU road win) they’re this high despite first computer layer having them lower |
14 |
![]() |
First computer layer had them much lower, but they can prove themselves against surprise Syracuse |
15 |
![]() |
First computer layer has them about here, their wins vs SMU/Oklahoma don’t look as great, but road wins vs a good Kansas team and still-decent SMU raise them |
16 |
![]() |
First computer layer has them higher, but their past two wins have been against teams beaten up by the games from the week before. The upcoming Kentucky game is similar, but then again every team has to get over injuries and close losses |
17 |
![]() |
First team to rise primarily because of Deservedness since wins don’t look as great as before |
18 |
![]() |
Close game against USF hurt them (even when factoring in conference play), but rise in rankings due to other teams on short end of Deservedness |
19 |
![]() |
Wouldn’t have dropped a lot even with TCU loss, but rise due to Deservedness keeping other teams out |
20 |
![]() |
Don’t think they’d be ranked without Deservedness, but they have significantly improved throughout the season |
21 |
![]() |
Only ranked due to Deservedness |
22 |
![]() |
Only ranked due to Deservedness |
23 |
![]() |
Only ranked due to Deservedness |
24 |
![]() |
Only ranked due to Deservedness |
25 |
![]() |
Only ranked due to Deservedness |
Teams Ranked:
Rank | Team | Unusualness |
---|---|---|
1 |
![]() |
0.40 |
2 |
![]() |
0.00 |
3 |
![]() |
0.00 |
4 |
![]() |
0.00 |
5 |
![]() |
0.00 |
6 |
![]() |
0.04 |
7 |
![]() |
0.00 |
8 |
![]() |
0.00 |
9 |
![]() |
0.82 |
10 |
![]() |
0.00 |
11 |
![]() |
0.00 |
12 |
![]() |
-0.73 |
13 |
![]() |
0.00 |
14 |
![]() |
0.00 |
15 |
![]() |
-0.42 |
16 |
![]() |
0.00 |
17 |
![]() |
0.00 |
18 |
![]() |
1.17 |
19 |
![]() |
0.00 |
20 |
![]() |
0.00 |
21 |
![]() |
1.51 |
22 |
![]() |
0.85 |
23 |
![]() |
-0.85 |
24 |
![]() |
1.06 |
25 |
![]() |
-0.05 |