Back to poll results >>

BosskOnASegway Ballot for 2026 Week 2

Ballot Type: Computer

Submitted: Sept. 8, 2026, 1:08 p.m.

Overall Rationale: Before we get started a couple notes. First, I am not a Louisiana judge and as such am not going to be making arbitrary rulings or changes. My model is a computer model that exactly reflects the official outcomes. LSUs nonsense and arguments over 1 second don't come into play.

Second, You can find a bit of details behind my preseason and general model methodology in my week 0 rationale, https://poll.redditcfb.com/ballot/73775/. This preseason model makes up 5/6th of the rating this week and will continue to decline. The MLE model requires well connected groups to get meaningful results. Some things will look strange especially if you look solely at the in-season ratings. For example this model currently has FSU as #5 despite a loss. This is because FSU is one of the few schools on with connected chain that allow it to confidently place it.

Pre-season Florida State was rated 1278 or #77. In Season they are currently rated 1856.2 or #5. This gives them a final rating of 1374.4 moving them UP to #60. This can be explained by looking at the implied ratings.

FSU beat New Mexico State with a win share of 0.919 our cap. New Mexico State ended week one with an rating of 1493.4 giving an implied rating of 1856.0 for FSU. Similar FSU lost to SMU with a win share of 0.361. SMU ended with a rating 2015.6 giving FSU an implied rating of 1856.2. The model leverages the chain of SMU > FSU > NMSU > NON_FBS to generate a most likely chain of ratings in this case 2015.6 -> 1856.2 -> 1493.4 -> 1130.6. As more games play these numbers for all teams will become more connected and get more "natural"

Similar note on LSU, their in-season rating is 1681 (tied with many other teams who blew out an opponent without a week 0 game); however, LSU only had a 1386 preseason rating (#55). This gave LSU a composite 1435 good for around 48. I would expect them to appear in the top 25 next week if the blow out LA Tech similar to Clemson.

Third and most important despite the weird results for now though the model is working. Running an accuracy report and retrograde analysis, we find our preseason model correctly predicted 72.7% of games with a Brier of 0.1612. Our blended model has a look back accuracy of 78.8% with a Brier of 0.1226. Our in-season only due to small sample leading to no circular reasoning yet has an accuracy of 100% on look back with a Brier of 0.0228. This means the model is performing as intended and over time will refine to be more natural.

One other important minor note, many people assume making a model is just throwing an arbitrary formula at a computer and using the results. This is not accurate nor how this model works. While it will look strange at the start, the model is designed from first principles around maximum likelihood estimators with numerous statistical tests and best fits to make sure the choices around clipping, constants, and the presence of home field advantage reflect data over the last decade. While the model is not perfect, especially early, and could certainly be improved, I will not arbitrarily tweak it or make adjustments to get "better looking" results short term as it would undermine the goal of minimizing the retrograde Brier.

Here is the full table for post week 1.
| # | Team | Blended | In-Season | Preseason | ΔRank | ΔElo |
|---|------|---------|-----------|-----------|-------|------|
| 1 | Notre Dame | 1988 | #32 (1681) | #1 (2050) | – | -61 |
| 2 | Ohio St. | 1927 | #15 (1681) | #2 (1976) | – | -49 |
| 3 | Southern California | 1898 | #1 (2311) | #7 (1816) | ▲4 | +83 |
| 4 | Georgia | 1876 | #60 (1493) | #3 (1953) | ▼1 | -76 |
| 5 | Oregon | 1843 | #44 (1560) | #5 (1899) | – | -57 |
| 6 | BYU | 1834 | #57 (1493) | #4 (1902) | ▼2 | -68 |
| 7 | Texas Tech | 1815 | #84 (1493) | #6 (1880) | ▼1 | -64 |
| 8 | Miami (FL) | 1741 | #7 (1791) | #11 (1731) | ▲3 | +10 |
| 9 | Texas | 1738 | #34 (1681) | #8 (1749) | ▼1 | -11 |
| 10 | Indiana | 1736 | #27 (1681) | #9 (1747) | ▼1 | -11 |
| 11 | Oklahoma | 1735 | #33 (1681) | #10 (1746) | ▼1 | -11 |
| 12 | Texas A&M | 1687 | #19 (1681) | #12 (1688) | – | -1 |
| 13 | Washington | 1680 | #35 (1681) | #13 (1680) | – | +0 |
| 14 | SMU | 1648 | #2 (2016) | #22 (1575) | ▲8 | +74 |
| 15 | Michigan | 1642 | #47 (1520) | #14 (1666) | ▼1 | -24 |
| 16 | Ole Miss | 1639 | #48 (1520) | #16 (1663) | – | -24 |
| 17 | Tennessee | 1635 | #83 (1493) | #15 (1663) | ▼2 | -28 |
| 18 | Vanderbilt | 1625 | #89 (1493) | #17 (1651) | ▼1 | -26 |
| 19 | Alabama | 1624 | #23 (1681) | #18 (1612) | ▼1 | +12 |
| 20 | Pittsburgh | 1610 | #17 (1681) | #20 (1596) | – | +14 |
| 21 | Maryland | 1592 | #69 (1493) | #19 (1612) | ▼2 | -20 |
| 22 | Nebraska | 1590 | #30 (1681) | #23 (1572) | ▲1 | +18 |
| 23 | New Mexico | 1589 | #14 (1681) | #24 (1570) | ▲1 | +18 |
| 24 | Houston | 1583 | #37 (1660) | #26 (1568) | ▲2 | +15 |
| 25 | Utah | 1567 | #88 (1493) | #21 (1581) | ▼4 | -15 |
| 26 | Iowa | 1562 | #28 (1681) | #30 (1539) | ▲4 | +24 |
| 27 | Minnesota | 1555 | #71 (1493) | #25 (1568) | ▼2 | -12 |
| 28 | Florida | 1548 | #12 (1681) | #34 (1522) | ▲6 | +27 |
| 29 | Navy | 1546 | #73 (1493) | #27 (1557) | ▼2 | -11 |
| 30 | Arizona | 1542 | #53 (1493) | #28 (1551) | ▼2 | -10 |

Rank Team Reason
1 Notre Dame Fighting Irish 2049.7 -> 1988.3 [-61.4] (#1 -> #1)
2 Ohio State Buckeyes 1975.8 -> 1926.7 [-49.1] (#2 -> #2)
3 USC Trojans 1815.5 -> 1898.1 [+82.6] (#7 -> #3)
4 Georgia Bulldogs 1952.6 -> 1876.0 [-76.5] (#3 -> #4)
5 Oregon Ducks 1899.2 -> 1842.6 [-56.6] (#5 -> #5)
6 BYU Cougars 1902.1 -> 1833.9 [-68.1] (#4 -> #6)
7 Texas Tech Red Raiders 1879.7 -> 1815.3 [-64.4] (#6 -> #7)
8 Miami Hurricanes 1730.7 -> 1740.7 [+10.0] (#11 -> #8)
9 Texas Longhorns 1748.9 -> 1737.6 [-11.2] (#8 -> #9)
10 Indiana Hoosiers 1747.4 -> 1736.4 [-11.0] (#9 -> #10)
11 Oklahoma Sooners 1745.9 -> 1735.2 [-10.8] (#10 -> #11)
12 Texas A&M Aggies 1688.5 -> 1687.3 [-1.2] (#12 -> #12)
13 Washington Huskies 1679.9 -> 1680.1 [+0.3] (#13 -> #13)
14 SMU Mustangs 1574.6 -> 1648.1 [+73.5] (#22 -> #14)
15 Michigan Wolverines 1666.3 -> 1641.8 [-24.4] (#14 -> #15)
16 Ole Miss Rebels 1663.0 -> 1639.1 [-23.9] (#16 -> #16)
17 Tennessee Volunteers 1663.1 -> 1634.8 [-28.3] (#15 -> #17)
18 Vanderbilt Commodores 1651.2 -> 1624.9 [-26.3] (#17 -> #18)
19 Alabama Crimson Tide 1612.2 -> 1623.7 [+11.5] (#18 -> #19)
20 Pittsburgh Panthers 1595.9 -> 1610.1 [+14.3] (#20 -> #20)
21 Maryland Terrapins 1611.9 -> 1592.2 [-19.8] (#19 -> #21)
22 Nebraska Cornhuskers 1572.2 -> 1590.4 [+18.2] (#23 -> #22)
23 New Mexico Lobos 1570.2 -> 1588.7 [+18.5] (#24 -> #23)
24 Houston Cougars 1567.6 -> 1583.0 [+15.4] (#26 -> #24)
25 Utah Utes 1581.4 -> 1566.7 [-14.7] (#21 -> #25)

Back to poll results >>