Ballot Type: Human
Submitted: Oct. 30, 2022, 8:21 a.m.
Overall Rationale: General ranking thought process is a combination of considering efficiency metrics and quality of resume (recency weighted more heavily). Slight bonus added for G5 at the bottom to recognize them, since it's later in the season. Dropped from last week: Syracuse (17 - The top 25 is still so weak at the bottom but they look helpless without Schrader and are trending badly. Tough schedule too. This might get ugly for them, but fortunately they still have bowl eligibility), Kentucky (21 - Fine to lose that game but also look helpless on offense), Cincinnati (24), Texas (25 - Attrition, OK State loss looks MUCH worse). New this week: All idle teams who were in my "next few out" 28-30 (SC was 26) last week and slotted up accordingly. Just a coincidence. Liberty (22), Washington (23), Maryland (24), Troy (25). Next few out, in order (Long list this week because it's really bunched): Texas, Baylor, Syracuse, Notre Dame, NC State, UCF, Florida State, Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisville, Minnesota, Coastal Carolina.
Rank | Team | Reason |
---|---|---|
1 |
![]() |
Top 4 unchanged since they all took care of business in equally respectable ways. OSU may have looked shakiest, but they had the hardest situation. |
2 |
![]() |
|
3 |
![]() |
|
4 |
![]() |
|
5 |
![]() |
|
6 |
![]() |
|
7 |
![]() |
|
8 |
![]() |
|
9 |
![]() |
|
10 |
![]() |
|
11 |
![]() |
|
12 |
![]() |
Also no change 5-13 (except OSU sliding down) due to idle teams and decent victories across the board. Utah had the toughest challenge going on the road for a weekday game, but they handled that fine as well. |
13 |
![]() |
Into what I have allotted as the set of 2-loss wagons with Utah and LSU. Could put as high as 11 based on recency, but we'll see how QB shakes out moving forward. |
14 |
![]() |
|
15 |
![]() |
|
16 |
![]() |
|
17 |
![]() |
|
18 |
![]() |
I wish I could only rank 17. The gulf between 17 and 18 is so great that Moses could not part it. Oklahoma State and Wake deserve to be punished more, but there is no rankable team behind them who deserves to take their place. |
19 |
![]() |
|
20 |
![]() |
|
21 |
![]() |
|
22 |
![]() |
|
23 |
![]() |
|
24 |
![]() |
|
25 |
![]() |
Teams Ranked:
Rank | Team | Unusualness |
---|---|---|
1 |
![]() |
0.39 |
2 |
![]() |
0.00 |
3 |
![]() |
0.00 |
4 |
![]() |
0.00 |
5 |
![]() |
0.43 |
6 |
![]() |
0.00 |
7 |
![]() |
-0.23 |
8 |
![]() |
0.00 |
9 |
![]() |
0.00 |
10 |
![]() |
0.00 |
11 |
![]() |
0.17 |
12 |
![]() |
0.52 |
13 |
![]() |
0.00 |
14 |
![]() |
-0.06 |
15 |
![]() |
0.00 |
16 |
![]() |
-0.19 |
17 |
![]() |
0.00 |
18 |
![]() |
0.00 |
19 |
![]() |
0.00 |
20 |
![]() |
0.00 |
21 |
![]() |
0.12 |
22 |
![]() |
0.00 |
23 |
![]() |
1.79 |
24 |
![]() |
0.00 |
25 |
![]() |
0.00 |
Omissions:
Team | Unusualness |
---|---|
![]() |
0.72 |
![]() |
0.60 |
![]() |
0.11 |
Total Score: 5.33