Welcome to another year of the Gus Rankings! As you know, the Gus Rankings are an objective ranking system that focuses on simplicity in generating a college football ranking for all 124 FBS full members. You can find the original post here. Given its simplicity, I've always thought that it's impressive how close to a more reputable computer ranking it ends up being.
This year, and henceforth, we're going to try something a little bit different. Every year, a new wrinkle or two is going to be added to the Gus Rankings to attempt to correct for a perceived shortcoming in the original rankings. In keeping with the original spirit of the Gus Rankings, additional adjustments will be 1) objectively defensible to the largest extent possible, and 2) completely transparent in terms of how the calculations are done. Don't know the algorithm that Sagarin uses for his ratings? Don't worry-- that'll never be the case here. The downside is we're losing a bit of the simplicity that made the rankings straight-forward and easy to interpret. I will do my best to arrange to have the original Gus Rankings alongside the new and improved Gus Rankings, so whatever flavor of Gus you enjoy (or ranks your team higher) you can have at the ready.
I had large plans for this year's adjustments-- enough to work on to provide several years of improvements. I think some of them could 1) take some more thought on the objectivity front, and 2) could definitely take some thought on how to implement them so as to minimize the week-to-week effort on my end. So patience here will win out.
Nevertheless, I believe taking a piecemeal approach can prevent anything too drastic from happening on the fly-- after all, I only have so much Excel ability. Further, adding in different features at different times should give a sense for how adjusting for different factors play into the rankings at the end of the day. I view it as an experiment in power rankings-- and since mine are the only ones I know of that straddle the line between silly-in-construction and break-out-the-supercomputer-to-calculate-them, I think there's something to be taken from different aspect of a power ranking.
With that out of the way, here's what's changed to generate this year's rankings-- Gus+.
- I've been struck in the past at how much an end of the game scenario can really swing things for a team. It's not terribly surprising-- after all, when the only thing that counts is your opponents' wins or losses, a flip from one to the other is going to be a big deal. But I don't think that should be such a violent swing. So this year's adjustment deals with that issue.
- Many power rankings deal with margin of victory; Gus+ now does the same. We view close games as part victory and part loss. Now, point differential across the entire spectrum of scores shouldn't all have the same impact. In terms of the chances of winning a game, a field goal to extent a lead to 5 points is much more impactful than a field goal to extent a lead to 53 points. So, all wins over 16 points will be considered 100% wins.
Is 16 arbitrary? Yes. But that's two touchdowns and two two-point conversions, and that's what we're going with.
Games within 16 points are assigned a percent win and a percent loss for each team; one team's percent victory is their opponent's percent loss and vice versa. I considered a range of functional forms to capture this-- something that needed to have a fairly high rate of change around closer scores and then flattening out as it approached 16. The inverse hyperbolic sine provides this form quite nicely-- and is certainly defensible as objective as, conveniently enough, I did not derive the distribution of the inverse hyperbolic sine.
- Overtime games have always bothered me. We judge the vast majority of games on sixty minutes of game play. Why are there a subset of games where we consider more time? That seems arbitrary to me, especially in a power rankings format. So all overtime games, regardless of winner, are now 50% victory and 50% loss. Whether the team ultimately won or lost will play a role in the secondary effects of your other opponents' rankings but not directly within the overtime game. The secondary effects aren't trivial in theory-- maybe these games need to be considered pseudo-ties moving forward, with all of the appropriate adjustments therein-- though in practice there have been exactly three overtime games in the first two weeks. It's something to think about moving forward. That is how ties will be dealt with this year.
- Without further ado, here are this season's first Gus+ Rankings.
- As always, the early portion of the season does not lead to much variation in the rankings. Generally this falls by the wayside after a few weeks; the adjustment for margin of victory should bring about enough variation perhaps a week or two sooner. There is considerably more variation this year as compared to last year's Week 2 rankings.
- It is interesting to me that the largest score is 1; basically, no team has recorded two significant victories over two teams that, in each of their other games, recorded victories themselves. I'm fairly certain I've got everything arranged properly-- there is a team at -2 (Idaho!), and, since the reverse of the above statement could be made, I think the calculations are accurate. And to be fair, only 2 teams had 2 points (or, more accurately, more than 1 point) at this juncture last year, so we're not entirely away from normalcy here.
Comments welcome! I'm excited to see how it all shakes out.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query gus rankings. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query gus rankings. Sort by date Show all posts
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
Thursday, January 08, 2009
The Gus Rankings
I don't believe I've posted about this before, so let me explain. On an annual basis, college football has a serious issue on its hands-- how to select the two teams that play for the national championship. As you know, the Bowl Championship Series generates a calculation that determines who will play. It's not perfect; I'm not going to talk about that.
Well, my uncle had an idea for an alternative way of ranking teams a few years back, and it's fun to see how they line up with what the BCS generates at the end of the year. (I don't know if it was originally his or not, but I haven't seen it elsewhere.) We assign points to every team in the following manner: For every win a team has, they get a number of points equal to wins of the team they beat. So, if Texas Tech beats Oklahoma State, they get 9 points since Oklahoma State won 9 games this year. For every loss a team has, they lose points equal to the number of losses of the team that beat them. So, if Oklahoma State loses to Texas Tech, they lose 1 point, since Texas Tech lost one game. You do this for every team on the schedule for the entire season. Since more games means more points (for the successful teams), dividing by the number of games played needs to be done and, viola, you have the Gus Rankings.
Some thoughts on the Gus Rankings:
- Clearly, the rankings are completely objective, which has its positives and negatives, but on net I think it's a positive. Margins of victory don't count, nor does playing at home or on the road, nor does the timing of your losses, nor does the conference you play in.
- It's tough to figure how to manage games against I-AA teams (I believe they are called FCS teams now). The general idea behind the Gus Rankings is to give more points for beating teams with better records. Better teams have better records (see next comment for more on this), but if you shift divisions, this isn't true any more. You clearly shouldn't get as many points for beating a 11-1 I-AA team as for a 11-1 I-A team. For the time being, I excluded those games against I-AA competition from team's schedules.
- Here is what I consider to be the best aspect of the Gus Rankings. As it sits now, teams in BCS conferences have no incentive to play teams from outside of BCS conferences. They are perceived as weaker competition, so even a win against one of these teams is taken with a grain of salt, and a team could get snake-bitten by a team that turned out to be pretty good. Take the argument made by the BCS conferences as to why they shouldn't make it into the title games-- they run up gaudy records against poorer schedules, and therefore aren't actually that good themselves. If they believe that to be the case, then those are exactly the types of teams that you want to schedule if the Gus Rankings were used. You'd love nothing more than to play a 11-1 that has supposedly run up its record against bad competition; after all, you get a lot of points from a poor team. As the years go on, teams that persistently run up good records against poor compeition will end up on the schedule of better teams, and their true value will be ascertained on the field. This is a very good thing.
- There is a huge upside and a small downside to playing a very good team. Let's say you anticipate that USC is going to be good, so you schedule them, and they end up going 11-1. If you lost to them, you only lose a point, and if you were the team that beat them, you get 11 points. Conversely, it's not good to play a bad team-- you don't get a lot for winning and you could lose a lot if you lost the game. Insofar that good teams playing other good teams is an attractive proposition, the Gus Rankings are a big plus in this regard.
- The rankings really only make a lot of sense at the end of the year. Of course, with the BCS, the final one is the only one that ends up mattering, but it is fun to follow along through the season.
- Conferences with a title game will give a bump to the winner; it adds a game against good competition to the overall score. Thus, conferences with title games should produce champions with a better score. (Remember, it's an average, so as long as the points gained were more than the average points gained in a game throughout the season, the ranking goes up.)
- Good conferences end up with a bump for all their teams. Consider within conference games; they're a wash since teams will play a range of good to poor teams within the conference schedule. But consider now a conference that has performed well outside of its league games-- there is a bump up for points to be had from wins and a bump down for points to be taken away from losses. Unbalanced conference schedules mitigate this a little bit, but the overall idea is still the same-- better conferences get more points, but not by subjectivity. Their good teams get more points by beating teams that themselves have performed well. Rewarding strong conferences in an objective way is also a very good thing.
The BCS rankings are as follows:
1. Oklahoma
2. Florida
3. Texas
4. Alabama
5. USC
6. Utah
7. Texas Tech
8. Penn State
9. Boise State
10. Ohio State
The Gus Rankings are as follows, pre-bowl game results:
1. Oklahoma 6.417
2. Florida 6.250
3. Texas 6.167
4. Utah 5.727
4. Boise State 5.727
6. Texas Tech 5.500
7. Alabama 5.000
8. Ohio State 4.909
9. Penn State 4.818
10. USC 4.750
This is only the top 10 from above re-calculated-- it takes a decent amount of time to do this, since you have to find every team they played and then adjust THEIR record for bowl game results too. I realize now that I ignored the secondary I-AA games-- that is, I ignored them for those teams above, but if these teams played other teams that beat I-AA teams, then they got a bump up for that they shouldn't have received. Conferences that beat up on I-AA teams would be biased upwards here; take from that what you want. I really should write up an Excel sheet to do this for next season to take everything into consideration.
Well, my uncle had an idea for an alternative way of ranking teams a few years back, and it's fun to see how they line up with what the BCS generates at the end of the year. (I don't know if it was originally his or not, but I haven't seen it elsewhere.) We assign points to every team in the following manner: For every win a team has, they get a number of points equal to wins of the team they beat. So, if Texas Tech beats Oklahoma State, they get 9 points since Oklahoma State won 9 games this year. For every loss a team has, they lose points equal to the number of losses of the team that beat them. So, if Oklahoma State loses to Texas Tech, they lose 1 point, since Texas Tech lost one game. You do this for every team on the schedule for the entire season. Since more games means more points (for the successful teams), dividing by the number of games played needs to be done and, viola, you have the Gus Rankings.
Some thoughts on the Gus Rankings:
- Clearly, the rankings are completely objective, which has its positives and negatives, but on net I think it's a positive. Margins of victory don't count, nor does playing at home or on the road, nor does the timing of your losses, nor does the conference you play in.
- It's tough to figure how to manage games against I-AA teams (I believe they are called FCS teams now). The general idea behind the Gus Rankings is to give more points for beating teams with better records. Better teams have better records (see next comment for more on this), but if you shift divisions, this isn't true any more. You clearly shouldn't get as many points for beating a 11-1 I-AA team as for a 11-1 I-A team. For the time being, I excluded those games against I-AA competition from team's schedules.
- Here is what I consider to be the best aspect of the Gus Rankings. As it sits now, teams in BCS conferences have no incentive to play teams from outside of BCS conferences. They are perceived as weaker competition, so even a win against one of these teams is taken with a grain of salt, and a team could get snake-bitten by a team that turned out to be pretty good. Take the argument made by the BCS conferences as to why they shouldn't make it into the title games-- they run up gaudy records against poorer schedules, and therefore aren't actually that good themselves. If they believe that to be the case, then those are exactly the types of teams that you want to schedule if the Gus Rankings were used. You'd love nothing more than to play a 11-1 that has supposedly run up its record against bad competition; after all, you get a lot of points from a poor team. As the years go on, teams that persistently run up good records against poor compeition will end up on the schedule of better teams, and their true value will be ascertained on the field. This is a very good thing.
- There is a huge upside and a small downside to playing a very good team. Let's say you anticipate that USC is going to be good, so you schedule them, and they end up going 11-1. If you lost to them, you only lose a point, and if you were the team that beat them, you get 11 points. Conversely, it's not good to play a bad team-- you don't get a lot for winning and you could lose a lot if you lost the game. Insofar that good teams playing other good teams is an attractive proposition, the Gus Rankings are a big plus in this regard.
- The rankings really only make a lot of sense at the end of the year. Of course, with the BCS, the final one is the only one that ends up mattering, but it is fun to follow along through the season.
- Conferences with a title game will give a bump to the winner; it adds a game against good competition to the overall score. Thus, conferences with title games should produce champions with a better score. (Remember, it's an average, so as long as the points gained were more than the average points gained in a game throughout the season, the ranking goes up.)
- Good conferences end up with a bump for all their teams. Consider within conference games; they're a wash since teams will play a range of good to poor teams within the conference schedule. But consider now a conference that has performed well outside of its league games-- there is a bump up for points to be had from wins and a bump down for points to be taken away from losses. Unbalanced conference schedules mitigate this a little bit, but the overall idea is still the same-- better conferences get more points, but not by subjectivity. Their good teams get more points by beating teams that themselves have performed well. Rewarding strong conferences in an objective way is also a very good thing.
The BCS rankings are as follows:
1. Oklahoma
2. Florida
3. Texas
4. Alabama
5. USC
6. Utah
7. Texas Tech
8. Penn State
9. Boise State
10. Ohio State
The Gus Rankings are as follows, pre-bowl game results:
1. Oklahoma 6.417
2. Florida 6.250
3. Texas 6.167
4. Utah 5.727
4. Boise State 5.727
6. Texas Tech 5.500
7. Alabama 5.000
8. Ohio State 4.909
9. Penn State 4.818
10. USC 4.750
This is only the top 10 from above re-calculated-- it takes a decent amount of time to do this, since you have to find every team they played and then adjust THEIR record for bowl game results too. I realize now that I ignored the secondary I-AA games-- that is, I ignored them for those teams above, but if these teams played other teams that beat I-AA teams, then they got a bump up for that they shouldn't have received. Conferences that beat up on I-AA teams would be biased upwards here; take from that what you want. I really should write up an Excel sheet to do this for next season to take everything into consideration.
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
2011 Gus Rankings: Week 11
Here are this week's Gus Rankings. LSU leads the way with Oklahoma State two points back in the second spot. Alabama is third, Oklahoma fourth, and Oregon fifth.
At the bottom of the rankings, Memphis holds a two point "lead" over Tulane.
At this point, it is fun to extrapolate whom Gus would have playing in the BCS bowl games. We'll use the current Gus Rankings to determine bowl choice and to break any conference tiebreakers or uncertainty.
The National Championship Game is easy enough-- the top two ranked teams in the poll are LSU and Oklahoma State, here assumed to be the champions of the SEC and the Big 12, respectively.
The Rose Bowl is the next easiest bowl to figure. The champion of the Pac-12 and the Big 10 are each sent to the Rose Bowl unless they are committed to the National Championship Game. Neither figure to fit this stipulation this week; Oregon would be the champion of the Pac-12 (with the highest Gus Ranking), and would face Michigan (again, the highest ranked team from the Big 10). Note that the actual Big 10 race is still wide open; Michigan finds itself one game behind Michigan State in the standings, and Nebraska, Penn State and Wisconsin all have two losses or less as well.
Only one remaining conference has a binding tie to a particular bowl-- the ACC, in which current Gus champion Virginia Tech would travel to the Orange Bowl. The SEC (Sugar) and Big 12 (Fiesta) champions are not committed to these bowl because they have been chosen for the National Championship Game. These bowls get to choose replacements before the pool of at-large teams is considered.
So, the first bowl that gets to select a replacement is the Sugar Bowl, as LSU was the first team to be taken for the National Championship Game with their #1 ranking. We assume that the Sugar Bowl takes the highest remaining team in the Gus Rankings. Thus, the Sugar Bowl selects Alabama, which is ranked #3.
The Fiesta Bowl is next in selecting a replacement for Oklahoma State; next highest on the list is Oklahoma at #4.
The remaining teams are selected according to the pre-determined order for the season: Fiesta, Sugar, then Orange. The Big East champion remains as an automatic qualifier; the highest ranked Big East team is West Virginia at #29. Because Houston is presumed to be the conference champion of Conference USA and they are ranked within the top 12, they, too, are an automatic qualifier (though would have been the next team selected by virtue of ranking strength anyhow). That leaves one remaining team to be selected from the Gus Rankings-- and Boise State captures the final at-large selection.
So, in assembling the final selections according to requirements and still preferring teams with the highest possible rankings, we are left with the following bowl lineup:
National Championship Game: LSU vs. Oklahoma State
Rose Bowl: Oregon vs. Michigan
Fiesta Bowl: Oklahoma vs. Houston
Sugar Bowl: Alabama vs. Boise State
Orange Bowl: Virginia Tech vs. West Virginia
Of course, things change from week to week...so we'll see where this ends up! As a fun side note...what would be the over/under on that Fiesta Bowl matchup?
At the bottom of the rankings, Memphis holds a two point "lead" over Tulane.
At this point, it is fun to extrapolate whom Gus would have playing in the BCS bowl games. We'll use the current Gus Rankings to determine bowl choice and to break any conference tiebreakers or uncertainty.
The National Championship Game is easy enough-- the top two ranked teams in the poll are LSU and Oklahoma State, here assumed to be the champions of the SEC and the Big 12, respectively.
The Rose Bowl is the next easiest bowl to figure. The champion of the Pac-12 and the Big 10 are each sent to the Rose Bowl unless they are committed to the National Championship Game. Neither figure to fit this stipulation this week; Oregon would be the champion of the Pac-12 (with the highest Gus Ranking), and would face Michigan (again, the highest ranked team from the Big 10). Note that the actual Big 10 race is still wide open; Michigan finds itself one game behind Michigan State in the standings, and Nebraska, Penn State and Wisconsin all have two losses or less as well.
Only one remaining conference has a binding tie to a particular bowl-- the ACC, in which current Gus champion Virginia Tech would travel to the Orange Bowl. The SEC (Sugar) and Big 12 (Fiesta) champions are not committed to these bowl because they have been chosen for the National Championship Game. These bowls get to choose replacements before the pool of at-large teams is considered.
So, the first bowl that gets to select a replacement is the Sugar Bowl, as LSU was the first team to be taken for the National Championship Game with their #1 ranking. We assume that the Sugar Bowl takes the highest remaining team in the Gus Rankings. Thus, the Sugar Bowl selects Alabama, which is ranked #3.
The Fiesta Bowl is next in selecting a replacement for Oklahoma State; next highest on the list is Oklahoma at #4.
The remaining teams are selected according to the pre-determined order for the season: Fiesta, Sugar, then Orange. The Big East champion remains as an automatic qualifier; the highest ranked Big East team is West Virginia at #29. Because Houston is presumed to be the conference champion of Conference USA and they are ranked within the top 12, they, too, are an automatic qualifier (though would have been the next team selected by virtue of ranking strength anyhow). That leaves one remaining team to be selected from the Gus Rankings-- and Boise State captures the final at-large selection.
So, in assembling the final selections according to requirements and still preferring teams with the highest possible rankings, we are left with the following bowl lineup:
National Championship Game: LSU vs. Oklahoma State
Rose Bowl: Oregon vs. Michigan
Fiesta Bowl: Oklahoma vs. Houston
Sugar Bowl: Alabama vs. Boise State
Orange Bowl: Virginia Tech vs. West Virginia
Of course, things change from week to week...so we'll see where this ends up! As a fun side note...what would be the over/under on that Fiesta Bowl matchup?
Tuesday, September 09, 2014
2014 Gus Rankings: Introducing Gus++ and Week 2 Rankings
College football season is upon us, and that means Year 6 of the Gus Rankings! As we did last year, we've added a new wrinkle to the calculations this year to try and better capture the nature of game outcomes. The goal is to try to build a ranking system from the ground up that is as objective and as transparent as possible.
Last year, we considered the margin of victory when determining the points that teams get from games. Instead of having a last second field goal swing a team from a win (and the points generated from a win) to a loss (and the points subtracted from a loss), we generated an algorithm that translated a final point differential into a fraction of a win and a fraction of a loss. (It was at this point that you fell in love with the inverse hyperbolic sine function.) Does it perfectly capture the dynamics of a game? No; we aren't ever going to be able to capture all of the nuances of a game down to a single number. But it was a step in the right direction. Also, overtime games were also viewed as a 50% win and a 50% loss-- why judge some games by more than sixty minutes and others by sixty minutes exactly? We kept everything the same outside of that from the original rankings-- and so that was Gus+.
This year's adjustment corrects for what I consider to be an oversight of last year's system. At the base of the original Gus Rankings was the idea that you gain points equal to the number of wins the teams you defeated had, and lost points equal to the number of losses of the teams that defeated you. That never changed. What changed was that you now didn't always get the entirety of your opponent's win total if you defeated them; if the score was sufficiently close, then you only got a fraction of the win total or loss total. This year, we're keeping track of the effective wins and effective losses that a team accrues throughout the year. So underneath every team's reported, on-the-stadium-program record is their effective record-- the sum of the partial wins and losses that they accumulate throughout the year. It is from your opponents' effective wins and effective losses by which you now gain or lose points. It's called Gus++. If you like the name, thanks! If you don't, it was Rob Holub's idea.
A note of thanks goes out to my graduate assistant, Kevin Gormley, for wrangling a lot of this together into a workable spreadsheet. We're fairly certain the wrinkles have been ironed out; once we are good on that margin, we'd like to be able to report all three iterations of Gus Rankings for comparison and, you know, because data. Onwards and upwards! Comments, complaints, grievances, etc. are welcomed as always.
Without further ado, here are this week's Gus++ Rankings. Oklahoma nabs the top spot; UMass stakes itself to the early "lead" for the worst team in the country. Interesting results throughout!
Last year, we considered the margin of victory when determining the points that teams get from games. Instead of having a last second field goal swing a team from a win (and the points generated from a win) to a loss (and the points subtracted from a loss), we generated an algorithm that translated a final point differential into a fraction of a win and a fraction of a loss. (It was at this point that you fell in love with the inverse hyperbolic sine function.) Does it perfectly capture the dynamics of a game? No; we aren't ever going to be able to capture all of the nuances of a game down to a single number. But it was a step in the right direction. Also, overtime games were also viewed as a 50% win and a 50% loss-- why judge some games by more than sixty minutes and others by sixty minutes exactly? We kept everything the same outside of that from the original rankings-- and so that was Gus+.
This year's adjustment corrects for what I consider to be an oversight of last year's system. At the base of the original Gus Rankings was the idea that you gain points equal to the number of wins the teams you defeated had, and lost points equal to the number of losses of the teams that defeated you. That never changed. What changed was that you now didn't always get the entirety of your opponent's win total if you defeated them; if the score was sufficiently close, then you only got a fraction of the win total or loss total. This year, we're keeping track of the effective wins and effective losses that a team accrues throughout the year. So underneath every team's reported, on-the-stadium-program record is their effective record-- the sum of the partial wins and losses that they accumulate throughout the year. It is from your opponents' effective wins and effective losses by which you now gain or lose points. It's called Gus++. If you like the name, thanks! If you don't, it was Rob Holub's idea.
A note of thanks goes out to my graduate assistant, Kevin Gormley, for wrangling a lot of this together into a workable spreadsheet. We're fairly certain the wrinkles have been ironed out; once we are good on that margin, we'd like to be able to report all three iterations of Gus Rankings for comparison and, you know, because data. Onwards and upwards! Comments, complaints, grievances, etc. are welcomed as always.
Without further ado, here are this week's Gus++ Rankings. Oklahoma nabs the top spot; UMass stakes itself to the early "lead" for the worst team in the country. Interesting results throughout!
Saturday, December 19, 2009
2009 Gus Rankings: Bowl Edition
As there was only one game last weekend between FBS schools, here are the final Gus Rankings for the regular season. I neglected to put the numbers next to the schools noting their actual rank, but here are the previous week's rankings that should be reflective of this week's rankings.
One big advantage of the Gus Rankings would seem to be its ability to compare teams across conferences. If there only were a natural experiment to test this...oh wait, the NCAA offers 35 games that match teams from different conferences. Let's see how Gus does!
(Justin talked about college bowl games here , and here is a similar experiment I did two years ago.)
The typical format for picking bowl games seems to be to assign a point value to each game and see how many points you can accumulate. You are to give every game a point value between 1 and 35, and you can only use each value once. Naturally, the games you feel most strongly about you will give the most points. The key, of course, is to define "feel most strongly about."
We'll do it as follows. Each team has a point total for the season; the team with the most points in the bowl matchup will be predicted as the winner, and the difference in points will determine the confidence in the game.
So, for which bowl game is Gus most confident? That would be the Chick-fil-A Bowl, with Virginia Tech (42 points) lining up against Tennessee (12). Gus also feel pretty confident about the Gator Bowl, with West Virginia (32) facing Florida State (4).
Least confident? Gus is opinion-free concerning the Holiday Bowl, that has Arizona (28) squaring off against Nebraska (28), and isn't terribly confident about the BCS Championship Game, Alabama (75) and Texas (74), the Texas Bowl, Missouri (18) and Navy (17), and the Champs Sports Bowl, Miami (FL) (33) and Wisconsin (32). We'll use the wisdom of the crowd to break any ties-- 76% of the CBS Sportsline crowd likes Nebraska, so we'll go with them, and we'll follow the same methodology to assign confidence levels for bowls that have the same difference in points.
The first game is this afternoon so you'll need to act quickly, but feel free to pit your strategy against the all-knowing, simple-calculating power that is the Gus Rankings.
One big advantage of the Gus Rankings would seem to be its ability to compare teams across conferences. If there only were a natural experiment to test this...oh wait, the NCAA offers 35 games that match teams from different conferences. Let's see how Gus does!
(Justin talked about college bowl games here , and here is a similar experiment I did two years ago.)
The typical format for picking bowl games seems to be to assign a point value to each game and see how many points you can accumulate. You are to give every game a point value between 1 and 35, and you can only use each value once. Naturally, the games you feel most strongly about you will give the most points. The key, of course, is to define "feel most strongly about."
We'll do it as follows. Each team has a point total for the season; the team with the most points in the bowl matchup will be predicted as the winner, and the difference in points will determine the confidence in the game.
So, for which bowl game is Gus most confident? That would be the Chick-fil-A Bowl, with Virginia Tech (42 points) lining up against Tennessee (12). Gus also feel pretty confident about the Gator Bowl, with West Virginia (32) facing Florida State (4).
Least confident? Gus is opinion-free concerning the Holiday Bowl, that has Arizona (28) squaring off against Nebraska (28), and isn't terribly confident about the BCS Championship Game, Alabama (75) and Texas (74), the Texas Bowl, Missouri (18) and Navy (17), and the Champs Sports Bowl, Miami (FL) (33) and Wisconsin (32). We'll use the wisdom of the crowd to break any ties-- 76% of the CBS Sportsline crowd likes Nebraska, so we'll go with them, and we'll follow the same methodology to assign confidence levels for bowls that have the same difference in points.
The first game is this afternoon so you'll need to act quickly, but feel free to pit your strategy against the all-knowing, simple-calculating power that is the Gus Rankings.
Monday, December 03, 2012
2012 Gus Rankings: Week 14
Here are the final Gus Rankings of the year. (Army plays Navy next week but that should have no bearing on either end of the rankings.) Notre Dame maintains a stranglehold on the top spot. Stanford, Florida, Ohio State and Alabama round out the top 5. Notre Dame claims the Gus National Title easily with a win over Alabama in the National Championship Game, though also has a fair chance to claim the GNT even with a loss to Alabama depending on how the remaining bowl games shake out. A Florida win over Louisville presents the strongest threat to Notre Dame's top spot. We shall see how it all shakes out!
On the other end of the spectrum, New Mexico State claims their own national title-- Gus' Worst Team in America. New Mexico State edged out Southern Mississippi over the last weekend; perennial favorites Akron and Massachusetts finished just behind the Aggies.
As these are the final Gus Rankings, Gus would have the BCS as follows:
National Championship Game: Notre Dame (At-large) vs. Stanford (Pac-12 champions)
Rose Bowl: Wisconsin (Big 10 champion) vs. Florida (At-large)
Fiesta Bowl: Kansas State (Big 12 champion) vs. Oregon (At-large)
Sugar Bowl: Alabama (SEC champion) vs. San Jose State (At-large)
Orange Bowl: Florida State (ACC champion) vs. Louisville (Big East champion)
The National Title Game features the top two teams, Notre Dame and Stanford (technically, Stanford and Florida are tied-- if you put Florida in the title game, simply swap Florida for Stanford). As Stanford is the Pac-12 winner, the Rose Bowl gets first choice in replacing them and the highest remaining team is Florida. They would face Wisconsin, automatic qualifiers from the Big 10.
The Fiesta Bowl gets the next choice of teams. Kansas State, champions of the Big 12, automatically qualify. The next highest remaining eligible team is Oregon at #6. Alabama automatically makes the Sugar Bowl as SEC champions; the Sugar Bowl is left to choose between two other automatic qualifiers-- Louisville as Big East champions, and...San Jose State! (Gus overlooked the Spartans last week on the incorrect assumption that a non-BCS-conference automatic qualifier needed to be a conference champion. No such requirement exists.) Everyone knows Northern Illinois' story by now, and they do finish at #16 in the final Gus Rankings...but San Jose State outpaces them at #14, and both teams are well ahead of Big 10 champion Wisconsin (#37) and Big East champion Louisville (#29). SJSU, as the highest remaining eligible team, heads to the Sugar Bowl. That leaves the Orange Bowl with Florida State (ACC champions) and Louisville.
Next week, we'll update the rankings to capture Army/Navy and pick the winners of every bowl game.
On the other end of the spectrum, New Mexico State claims their own national title-- Gus' Worst Team in America. New Mexico State edged out Southern Mississippi over the last weekend; perennial favorites Akron and Massachusetts finished just behind the Aggies.
As these are the final Gus Rankings, Gus would have the BCS as follows:
National Championship Game: Notre Dame (At-large) vs. Stanford (Pac-12 champions)
Rose Bowl: Wisconsin (Big 10 champion) vs. Florida (At-large)
Fiesta Bowl: Kansas State (Big 12 champion) vs. Oregon (At-large)
Sugar Bowl: Alabama (SEC champion) vs. San Jose State (At-large)
Orange Bowl: Florida State (ACC champion) vs. Louisville (Big East champion)
The National Title Game features the top two teams, Notre Dame and Stanford (technically, Stanford and Florida are tied-- if you put Florida in the title game, simply swap Florida for Stanford). As Stanford is the Pac-12 winner, the Rose Bowl gets first choice in replacing them and the highest remaining team is Florida. They would face Wisconsin, automatic qualifiers from the Big 10.
The Fiesta Bowl gets the next choice of teams. Kansas State, champions of the Big 12, automatically qualify. The next highest remaining eligible team is Oregon at #6. Alabama automatically makes the Sugar Bowl as SEC champions; the Sugar Bowl is left to choose between two other automatic qualifiers-- Louisville as Big East champions, and...San Jose State! (Gus overlooked the Spartans last week on the incorrect assumption that a non-BCS-conference automatic qualifier needed to be a conference champion. No such requirement exists.) Everyone knows Northern Illinois' story by now, and they do finish at #16 in the final Gus Rankings...but San Jose State outpaces them at #14, and both teams are well ahead of Big 10 champion Wisconsin (#37) and Big East champion Louisville (#29). SJSU, as the highest remaining eligible team, heads to the Sugar Bowl. That leaves the Orange Bowl with Florida State (ACC champions) and Louisville.
Next week, we'll update the rankings to capture Army/Navy and pick the winners of every bowl game.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
2009 Gus Rankings: Week 3
Week 3 of the Gus Rankings are out, you can find them here.
A few things of note:
- Again, points are the wins of your opponents you defeated less the losses of the teams that beat you, concerning only games with two I-A teams.
Washington, which currently sits also at the top, is a good team to look at. They have 4 points because they defeated two teams-- USC and Idaho-- that have themselves each defeated two other teams. Further, the team that Washington lost to (LSU) hasn't lost any games yet, so they lose nothing for that loss.
Consider the possibilities for the rest of the season. If USC and LSU have great seasons, this further helps Washington. If they slip up and have less than phenomenal seasons, this mitigates the value of those wins. Win value now is not the same as win value later; this is different than the traditional polls, and I think it's an advantage.
Which bring us to the Idaho victory that is really helping Washington at the moment--I would gather that many people feel they are not too strong. What does this mean? As the season winds on, they will end up with a lukewarm record-- maybe somewhere around .500, maybe even less. This reduces the value of the Idaho victory for Washington as the season moves on; again, values of wins and losses change from week to week.
- I'm debating a few of the tiebreakers. Namely, if two teams have the same number of points, should a 2-1 team be ranked ahead of a 1-0 team? As it sits now, they would be-- though their winning percentage is less, and that tends to be a default tiebreaker in many cases. I'm noting how the measures do in predicting games (see next bullet point), so it's of importance now...but moving towards the future, as the complexity of the points system emerges, this will subsequently become less important.
- The benchmark for the Gus Rankings are the Sagarin rankings, the go-to power rankings (in my opinon) in college football. Taking last week's rankings and simply seeing if the higher team won (again, only in games in which both teams were I-A), the Gus Rankings were 25-22 and Sagarin went 38-14. Sagarin is able to predict a few more games than us because he has no ties in his rankings. We had quite a few ties last week but, again, that will diminish as the season goes on (13 different ranking levels last week, 32 this week).
- Southern Methodist went from #8 last week to #81 this week. Yikes!
A few things of note:
- Again, points are the wins of your opponents you defeated less the losses of the teams that beat you, concerning only games with two I-A teams.
Washington, which currently sits also at the top, is a good team to look at. They have 4 points because they defeated two teams-- USC and Idaho-- that have themselves each defeated two other teams. Further, the team that Washington lost to (LSU) hasn't lost any games yet, so they lose nothing for that loss.
Consider the possibilities for the rest of the season. If USC and LSU have great seasons, this further helps Washington. If they slip up and have less than phenomenal seasons, this mitigates the value of those wins. Win value now is not the same as win value later; this is different than the traditional polls, and I think it's an advantage.
Which bring us to the Idaho victory that is really helping Washington at the moment--I would gather that many people feel they are not too strong. What does this mean? As the season winds on, they will end up with a lukewarm record-- maybe somewhere around .500, maybe even less. This reduces the value of the Idaho victory for Washington as the season moves on; again, values of wins and losses change from week to week.
- I'm debating a few of the tiebreakers. Namely, if two teams have the same number of points, should a 2-1 team be ranked ahead of a 1-0 team? As it sits now, they would be-- though their winning percentage is less, and that tends to be a default tiebreaker in many cases. I'm noting how the measures do in predicting games (see next bullet point), so it's of importance now...but moving towards the future, as the complexity of the points system emerges, this will subsequently become less important.
- The benchmark for the Gus Rankings are the Sagarin rankings, the go-to power rankings (in my opinon) in college football. Taking last week's rankings and simply seeing if the higher team won (again, only in games in which both teams were I-A), the Gus Rankings were 25-22 and Sagarin went 38-14. Sagarin is able to predict a few more games than us because he has no ties in his rankings. We had quite a few ties last week but, again, that will diminish as the season goes on (13 different ranking levels last week, 32 this week).
- Southern Methodist went from #8 last week to #81 this week. Yikes!
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
2010 Gus Rankings: Week 5
Here are this week's Gus Rankings. Oklahoma tops the list, followed by TCU.
There was an interesting development in the Gus Rankings after this weekend's games, involving two of the more important games, that would happen only with great rarity in the traditional human-based polls. Florida lost to Alabama, yet remains ranked higher (3 vs. 4), and Stanford lost to Oregon, yet also remain ranked higher (14 vs. 18). How'd that happen? Florida's (and Stanford's) past opponents had a better weekend than Alabama's (and Oregon's). It's probably not likely to persist-- all four of these teams will probably win a vast majority of their remaining games, and these games will likely contain a large percentage of common opponents (with regards to the pairings above). So no large point advantage there. The advantage gained from last weekend's winners, however, is that they get additional points every time last weekend's loser wins another game. So in the long run, Gus pieces it out-- but the short-run effect is nonetheless interesting.
Art Carden requested a listing of the most overrated teams-- since that's a matter of relativity, I'll simply eyeball the largest differences (10 spots or greater) between the AP poll and the Gus Rankings, contingent on both teams being ranked. Feel free to compare yourself; I'll split it into two categories:
Gus likes, humans dislike:
- Virginia Tech (19 spots)
- Kansas State (15)
- Oklahoma State (13)
- Michigan (12)
- Missouri (12)
- Northwestern (12)
- Florida (11)
- Baylor (10)
Humans like, Gus dislikes:
- Arkansas (34 spots)
- Miami (FL) (25)
- Utah (22)
- Wisconsin (22)
- Oregon State (16)
- Oregon (15)
- USC (15)
- Nebraska (14)
- Ohio State (14)
It's interesting to look at-- there's 4 Big 12 teams on the "Gus likes" list, and 3 Pac-10 teams on the "Humans like" list, and Utah's joining that conference next season. Virginia Tech's difference may well be explained by the fact that Gus does not track games against FCS teams.
Actually, now that I've finished the list, I'd love to keep these groupings of teams in mind and see which group shakes out better over the course of the season.
There was an interesting development in the Gus Rankings after this weekend's games, involving two of the more important games, that would happen only with great rarity in the traditional human-based polls. Florida lost to Alabama, yet remains ranked higher (3 vs. 4), and Stanford lost to Oregon, yet also remain ranked higher (14 vs. 18). How'd that happen? Florida's (and Stanford's) past opponents had a better weekend than Alabama's (and Oregon's). It's probably not likely to persist-- all four of these teams will probably win a vast majority of their remaining games, and these games will likely contain a large percentage of common opponents (with regards to the pairings above). So no large point advantage there. The advantage gained from last weekend's winners, however, is that they get additional points every time last weekend's loser wins another game. So in the long run, Gus pieces it out-- but the short-run effect is nonetheless interesting.
Art Carden requested a listing of the most overrated teams-- since that's a matter of relativity, I'll simply eyeball the largest differences (10 spots or greater) between the AP poll and the Gus Rankings, contingent on both teams being ranked. Feel free to compare yourself; I'll split it into two categories:
Gus likes, humans dislike:
- Virginia Tech (19 spots)
- Kansas State (15)
- Oklahoma State (13)
- Michigan (12)
- Missouri (12)
- Northwestern (12)
- Florida (11)
- Baylor (10)
Humans like, Gus dislikes:
- Arkansas (34 spots)
- Miami (FL) (25)
- Utah (22)
- Wisconsin (22)
- Oregon State (16)
- Oregon (15)
- USC (15)
- Nebraska (14)
- Ohio State (14)
It's interesting to look at-- there's 4 Big 12 teams on the "Gus likes" list, and 3 Pac-10 teams on the "Humans like" list, and Utah's joining that conference next season. Virginia Tech's difference may well be explained by the fact that Gus does not track games against FCS teams.
Actually, now that I've finished the list, I'd love to keep these groupings of teams in mind and see which group shakes out better over the course of the season.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
2009 Gus Rankings: Week 2
As promised, we here at TPS will be following the college football season with our own version of ranking teams-- the Gus Rankings. The outline of the methodology is here.
Here are the rankings for Week 2 (after the second week of games).
Some points of interest:
- The rankings incorporate information only from this season and only from games played. Thus, since there's only been two weeks of games, there isn't much information to incorporate. That is why you see a lot of ties. That being said, there is a decent amount of variation amongst the teams-- there are 13 different levels after just 2 weeks. Variation will increase dramatically with each week, as more teams play more games and, more importantly, teams' opponents will have played more games. Note also that after only two weeks, the rankings discern a single worst team-- Washington State. Recall that the BCS rankings-- those rankings used to determine who plays for the National Championship-- are released only after 6 or 7 weeks, largely (I presume) for the information shortcomings I just described.
- The rankings are as follows: Most points, then sorted by most wins, then sorted by least losses. Ties that are still tied after that are simply listed alphabetically at the same ranking. There are a lot of ties, so there are a lot of tiebreakers sorted in the above manner. Again, expect the ties to diminish rapidly over the upcoming weeks.
- For this season, games against FCS opponents (previously I-AA) won't be counted. The above methodology for adding wins and subtracting losses doesn't hold when considering teams from other divisions. That means wins and losses against teams in I-AA simply mean the team had a bye that week. I think this is the best way to handle the situation. Rankings matter most at the upper end of the distribution, and most FBS teams (previously I-A) will win their games against FCS opponents; those that lose are likely to be nearer the bottom of the rankings, and will not be the focus of rankings in general.
It will be interesting to see how the rankings develop over the course of the season. Given its simplicity and plain objectivity, there are a lot of reasons to like it.
Here are the rankings for Week 2 (after the second week of games).
Some points of interest:
- The rankings incorporate information only from this season and only from games played. Thus, since there's only been two weeks of games, there isn't much information to incorporate. That is why you see a lot of ties. That being said, there is a decent amount of variation amongst the teams-- there are 13 different levels after just 2 weeks. Variation will increase dramatically with each week, as more teams play more games and, more importantly, teams' opponents will have played more games. Note also that after only two weeks, the rankings discern a single worst team-- Washington State. Recall that the BCS rankings-- those rankings used to determine who plays for the National Championship-- are released only after 6 or 7 weeks, largely (I presume) for the information shortcomings I just described.
- The rankings are as follows: Most points, then sorted by most wins, then sorted by least losses. Ties that are still tied after that are simply listed alphabetically at the same ranking. There are a lot of ties, so there are a lot of tiebreakers sorted in the above manner. Again, expect the ties to diminish rapidly over the upcoming weeks.
- For this season, games against FCS opponents (previously I-AA) won't be counted. The above methodology for adding wins and subtracting losses doesn't hold when considering teams from other divisions. That means wins and losses against teams in I-AA simply mean the team had a bye that week. I think this is the best way to handle the situation. Rankings matter most at the upper end of the distribution, and most FBS teams (previously I-A) will win their games against FCS opponents; those that lose are likely to be nearer the bottom of the rankings, and will not be the focus of rankings in general.
It will be interesting to see how the rankings develop over the course of the season. Given its simplicity and plain objectivity, there are a lot of reasons to like it.
Monday, November 21, 2011
2011 Gus Rankings: Week 12
Here are this week's Gus Rankings. LSU continues to lead the pack, and Oklahoma State retains the second position despite suffering their first loss of the season. Houston surges into the third position, followed by Alabama and Virginia Tech.
As we noted last week, it's fun to project the BCS lineup per the Gus Rankings. You can find the BCS selection procedures here; remaining games are assumed to be decided by the Gus Rankings as well. As such, Gus determines the lineup for the BCs games should be as follows:
National Championship Game: LSU (SEC Champion) vs. Oklahoma State (Big 12 Champion)
Rose Bowl: Oregon (Pac 12 Champion) vs. Penn State (Big 10 champion)
Fiesta Bowl: Alabama (at-large, replacement for Oklahoma State) vs. Boise State (at-large)
Sugar Bowl: Houston (automatic qualifier, replacement for LSU) vs. Stanford (at-large)
Orange Bowl: Virginia Tech (ACC Champion) vs. Rutgers (Big East champion)
Not a bad lineup; the Sugar Bowl and Fiesta Bowl would probably swap lineups in this situation out of geographic preference. I don't see Boise State making it, but Alabama and Stanford have to be looking pretty good at this point to secure at large bids. Note also that Michigan cannot make the Big 10 title game and thus does not secure the automatic Big 10 bid. Rutgers takes the automatic Big East bid because I *think* Gus predicts a 4-way tie at the end of the season, and the tie-breaker is highest BCS ranking.
As we noted last week, it's fun to project the BCS lineup per the Gus Rankings. You can find the BCS selection procedures here; remaining games are assumed to be decided by the Gus Rankings as well. As such, Gus determines the lineup for the BCs games should be as follows:
National Championship Game: LSU (SEC Champion) vs. Oklahoma State (Big 12 Champion)
Rose Bowl: Oregon (Pac 12 Champion) vs. Penn State (Big 10 champion)
Fiesta Bowl: Alabama (at-large, replacement for Oklahoma State) vs. Boise State (at-large)
Sugar Bowl: Houston (automatic qualifier, replacement for LSU) vs. Stanford (at-large)
Orange Bowl: Virginia Tech (ACC Champion) vs. Rutgers (Big East champion)
Not a bad lineup; the Sugar Bowl and Fiesta Bowl would probably swap lineups in this situation out of geographic preference. I don't see Boise State making it, but Alabama and Stanford have to be looking pretty good at this point to secure at large bids. Note also that Michigan cannot make the Big 10 title game and thus does not secure the automatic Big 10 bid. Rutgers takes the automatic Big East bid because I *think* Gus predicts a 4-way tie at the end of the season, and the tie-breaker is highest BCS ranking.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
2009 Gus Rankings: Week 11
Here are this week's Gus Rankings. A few comments:
- Art's team, Alabama, continues to impress. It's at this point that I wish I had previous years of Gus Rankings to fall back upon. Is a 4 point lead large at this point in the season? If things shake out a certain way, could that be overcome by Texas or TCU in a week's time? (It's probably harder for Florida due to the common opponents.) I get the sense that it's probably not likely but I'd like some historical precedent.
- Congrats to Marshall and his Rice Owls-- winners over Tulane and likely removing themselves from the bottom spot at the end of the season. As Marshall mentioned last week, the Owls had the inside track for the bottom rung of the Gus ladder but righted the ship just in time.
The larger question: Can the Gus Rankings grow in popularity beyond Rhodes College?
- I did some quick calculations to get a sense for conference strength-- here's the average number of points:
SEC: 12.25 (West: 18.33, East: 6.16)
Big East: 10.00
Pac-10: 7.30
Big 10: 7.09
Big 12: 6.17 (South: 12.83, North: -0.50)
ACC: 5.25 (Coastal: 14.33, Atlantic: -3.83)
Mountain West: -1.78
WAC: -7.89
The top 6 are the BCS conferences, and the bottom two have teams in the running for an at-large BCS spot.
Surprising is the dichotomy between divisions in the three BCS conferences that have such a split. Again, it would be nice to have some sort of historical precedent. Is this usually the case, or are both sides of the conference pretty balanced? Before looking at this, I would have guessed that you might have a split in the Big 12's divisions but not in the SEC and the ACC. It's an interesting result. You could certainly slice the remaining conferences to have differences like this if you so desired, but what's par for the course? I'm intrigued.
- Art's team, Alabama, continues to impress. It's at this point that I wish I had previous years of Gus Rankings to fall back upon. Is a 4 point lead large at this point in the season? If things shake out a certain way, could that be overcome by Texas or TCU in a week's time? (It's probably harder for Florida due to the common opponents.) I get the sense that it's probably not likely but I'd like some historical precedent.
- Congrats to Marshall and his Rice Owls-- winners over Tulane and likely removing themselves from the bottom spot at the end of the season. As Marshall mentioned last week, the Owls had the inside track for the bottom rung of the Gus ladder but righted the ship just in time.
The larger question: Can the Gus Rankings grow in popularity beyond Rhodes College?
- I did some quick calculations to get a sense for conference strength-- here's the average number of points:
SEC: 12.25 (West: 18.33, East: 6.16)
Big East: 10.00
Pac-10: 7.30
Big 10: 7.09
Big 12: 6.17 (South: 12.83, North: -0.50)
ACC: 5.25 (Coastal: 14.33, Atlantic: -3.83)
Mountain West: -1.78
WAC: -7.89
The top 6 are the BCS conferences, and the bottom two have teams in the running for an at-large BCS spot.
Surprising is the dichotomy between divisions in the three BCS conferences that have such a split. Again, it would be nice to have some sort of historical precedent. Is this usually the case, or are both sides of the conference pretty balanced? Before looking at this, I would have guessed that you might have a split in the Big 12's divisions but not in the SEC and the ACC. It's an interesting result. You could certainly slice the remaining conferences to have differences like this if you so desired, but what's par for the course? I'm intrigued.
Monday, November 19, 2012
2012 Gus Rankings: Week 12
Here are this week's Gus Rankings. Notre Dame holds a sizable advantage over #2 Ohio State. Stanford finds itself at #3 after their win over Oregon, Nebraska sits at #4 and Alabama is at #5.
At the bottom of the spectrum, Southern Mississippi charges to a one point edge over Akron. Since Southern Mississippi finishes with 7-loss Memphis, Akron finishes with 3-loss Toledo, and Massachusetts ends with 6-loss Central Michigan, the Golden Eagles seem to be in line to take the title of worst FBS team.
At this stage of the game, it's fun to project whom Gus would place into each of the BCS game. The bowl lineup is as follows:
National Championship Game - BCS #1 vs. BCS #2
Rose Bowl - Ben Ten Conference Champion vs. Pac-12 Conference Champion
Fiesta Bowl - Big 12 Conference Champion vs. At-large
Sugar Bowl - SEC Champion vs. At-large
Orange Bowl - ACC Champion vs. At-large
Note that the Big East Conference champion does not automatically qualify for a particular bowl, so they can be viewed as a mandatory at-large.
Should a conference champion qualify for the National Championship game from a conference that is tied to another bowl, that bowl gets first choice on replacing that team from the eligible pool of teams. If both teams are conference champions, the #1 BCS team is replaced first.
In 2013, at-large spots are filled in the following order: Fiesta, Sugar, Orange
Conference champions are determined by the highest spot on the Gus Rankings should any discrepancies arise.
So that gives us the Gus BCS:
National Championship Game: Notre Dame (At-large) vs. Stanford (Pac-12 champion)
Rose Bowl: Nebraska (Big 10 Champion) vs. Oregon (At-large replacement for Stanford)
Fiesta Bowl: Kansas State (Big 12 champion) vs. Florida (At-large)
Sugar Bowl: Alabama (SEC champion) vs. Clemson (At-large)
Orange Bowl: Florida State (ACC champion) vs. Rutgers (Big East champion)
Notice that Clemson is higher than Florida State in the Gus Rankings but cannot win the ACC as they are not in the ACC Championship Game. But not a bad slate! As far as my two cents, I think we end up seeing the following-- we'll see how things can change over the next two weeks:
National Championship Game: Notre Dame vs. Alabama
Rose Bowl: Nebraska vs. Stanford
Fiesta Bowl: Kansas State vs. Oregon
Sugar Bowl: LSU vs. Clemson
Orange Bowl: Florida State vs. Rutgers
A few notes:
- I think Florida State beats Florida this weekend in Tallahassee. That should eliminate Florida from BCS consideration.
- Stanford beating UCLA two weeks in a row would be impressive; should that not happen, Stanford will be out of the BCS (well, they could lose next week, Oregon State could beat Oregon, then Stanford could come back and beat UCLA in the Pac-12 title game). The real issue for the Fiesta Bowl is if Oregon makes it to the Rose Bowl. Let's say they want to take a big name to offset the less-than-big-name of Kansas State; Oregon fits that role beautifully and they'd take Oregon in a heartbeat if they could. On top of that, they should be able to since they choose from the at-large pool first. Only the Sugar Bowl would likely have the chance to beat them to Oregon, but that doesn't really make sense for anyone involved for Oregon to end up in New Orleans.
But the Fiesta Bowl can't take Oregon if they end up as Pac-12 champions. There shouldn't be any SEC teams left at that point; one will likely be in the title game, and the Sugar Bowl will get the first replacement pick and likely take another SEC team. Conferences can't have any more than two teams, so that eliminates Texas A&M. Oklahoma would be an interesting pick for a rematch with Kansas State, and I wouldn't normally think them to do that...but who is left? Clemson to Tempe? Rutgers? Oregon State would have three losses in this scenario so they're out, Texas would as well. This scenario probably won't happen but it's definitely feasible...that would be an interesting decision to make. If I had to guess, I'd probably say Oklahoma, but the Fiesta Bowl folks can't be liking that too much. They just can't expect Clemson to draw across the country, and you can say the same for Rutgers in light of the UConn experience a few years ago.
- I suppose you could make the argument for a two-loss Georgia (or maybe Florida) team in the Sugar Bowl instead of LSU. Georgia would have made the SEC title game and had a better in-conference record, but (1) LSU is the home-state team and (2) it's not like the Sugar Bowl has looked to find the best remaining teams to fill their slots in the past (see: Michigan, 12 months ago).
At the bottom of the spectrum, Southern Mississippi charges to a one point edge over Akron. Since Southern Mississippi finishes with 7-loss Memphis, Akron finishes with 3-loss Toledo, and Massachusetts ends with 6-loss Central Michigan, the Golden Eagles seem to be in line to take the title of worst FBS team.
At this stage of the game, it's fun to project whom Gus would place into each of the BCS game. The bowl lineup is as follows:
National Championship Game - BCS #1 vs. BCS #2
Rose Bowl - Ben Ten Conference Champion vs. Pac-12 Conference Champion
Fiesta Bowl - Big 12 Conference Champion vs. At-large
Sugar Bowl - SEC Champion vs. At-large
Orange Bowl - ACC Champion vs. At-large
Note that the Big East Conference champion does not automatically qualify for a particular bowl, so they can be viewed as a mandatory at-large.
Should a conference champion qualify for the National Championship game from a conference that is tied to another bowl, that bowl gets first choice on replacing that team from the eligible pool of teams. If both teams are conference champions, the #1 BCS team is replaced first.
In 2013, at-large spots are filled in the following order: Fiesta, Sugar, Orange
Conference champions are determined by the highest spot on the Gus Rankings should any discrepancies arise.
So that gives us the Gus BCS:
National Championship Game: Notre Dame (At-large) vs. Stanford (Pac-12 champion)
Rose Bowl: Nebraska (Big 10 Champion) vs. Oregon (At-large replacement for Stanford)
Fiesta Bowl: Kansas State (Big 12 champion) vs. Florida (At-large)
Sugar Bowl: Alabama (SEC champion) vs. Clemson (At-large)
Orange Bowl: Florida State (ACC champion) vs. Rutgers (Big East champion)
Notice that Clemson is higher than Florida State in the Gus Rankings but cannot win the ACC as they are not in the ACC Championship Game. But not a bad slate! As far as my two cents, I think we end up seeing the following-- we'll see how things can change over the next two weeks:
National Championship Game: Notre Dame vs. Alabama
Rose Bowl: Nebraska vs. Stanford
Fiesta Bowl: Kansas State vs. Oregon
Sugar Bowl: LSU vs. Clemson
Orange Bowl: Florida State vs. Rutgers
A few notes:
- I think Florida State beats Florida this weekend in Tallahassee. That should eliminate Florida from BCS consideration.
- Stanford beating UCLA two weeks in a row would be impressive; should that not happen, Stanford will be out of the BCS (well, they could lose next week, Oregon State could beat Oregon, then Stanford could come back and beat UCLA in the Pac-12 title game). The real issue for the Fiesta Bowl is if Oregon makes it to the Rose Bowl. Let's say they want to take a big name to offset the less-than-big-name of Kansas State; Oregon fits that role beautifully and they'd take Oregon in a heartbeat if they could. On top of that, they should be able to since they choose from the at-large pool first. Only the Sugar Bowl would likely have the chance to beat them to Oregon, but that doesn't really make sense for anyone involved for Oregon to end up in New Orleans.
But the Fiesta Bowl can't take Oregon if they end up as Pac-12 champions. There shouldn't be any SEC teams left at that point; one will likely be in the title game, and the Sugar Bowl will get the first replacement pick and likely take another SEC team. Conferences can't have any more than two teams, so that eliminates Texas A&M. Oklahoma would be an interesting pick for a rematch with Kansas State, and I wouldn't normally think them to do that...but who is left? Clemson to Tempe? Rutgers? Oregon State would have three losses in this scenario so they're out, Texas would as well. This scenario probably won't happen but it's definitely feasible...that would be an interesting decision to make. If I had to guess, I'd probably say Oklahoma, but the Fiesta Bowl folks can't be liking that too much. They just can't expect Clemson to draw across the country, and you can say the same for Rutgers in light of the UConn experience a few years ago.
- I suppose you could make the argument for a two-loss Georgia (or maybe Florida) team in the Sugar Bowl instead of LSU. Georgia would have made the SEC title game and had a better in-conference record, but (1) LSU is the home-state team and (2) it's not like the Sugar Bowl has looked to find the best remaining teams to fill their slots in the past (see: Michigan, 12 months ago).
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
2009 Gus Rankings: Week 7
Here are this week's Gus Rankings. Of note:
- Note that Virginia Tech, with two losses, is still ranked very high (#4). Recall that their losses are to teams that are a combined 12-1. Losing to good teams does little harm in the Gus Rankings.
- There are seven undefeated teams left, and the lowest is ranked #11.
- As the season presses on, there is more spread in the rankings-- 39 points between the highest and lowest-- but also more opportunity for larger movements for individual teams due to the fact that your score is a function of the performance of more and more teams (namely, the ones you've already played).
The BCS rankings just came out for the first time this week; don't worry, we're watching how Gus stacks up to it and others as the season progresses...
- Note that Virginia Tech, with two losses, is still ranked very high (#4). Recall that their losses are to teams that are a combined 12-1. Losing to good teams does little harm in the Gus Rankings.
- There are seven undefeated teams left, and the lowest is ranked #11.
- As the season presses on, there is more spread in the rankings-- 39 points between the highest and lowest-- but also more opportunity for larger movements for individual teams due to the fact that your score is a function of the performance of more and more teams (namely, the ones you've already played).
The BCS rankings just came out for the first time this week; don't worry, we're watching how Gus stacks up to it and others as the season progresses...
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
2011 Gus Rankings: Week 8
Here are this week's Gus Rankings. LSU remains at the top, followed by Alabama and Oklahoma State, with Boise State and Clemson tied for the fourth spot.
There are 8 undefeated teams left in college football; the first seven spots in the Gus rankings are occupied by undefeated teams. In the six spot is Stanford followed by Houston at seven. The lowest ranked team still without a loss is Kansas State at #12.
At the other end of the rankings, Idaho has taken over the final spot from UAB, winners of their first game last weekend.
Conference rankings are as follows (average team points):
1. Big 12: 8.60
2. SEC: 7.42
3. ACC: 3.17
4. Big 10: 3.17
5. Pac-12: 2.42
6. Big East: 0.88
7. Mountain West: -2.50
8. Conference USA: -3.92
9. Sun Belt: -5.33
10. Mid-America: -6.14
11. WAC: -8.75
There are 8 undefeated teams left in college football; the first seven spots in the Gus rankings are occupied by undefeated teams. In the six spot is Stanford followed by Houston at seven. The lowest ranked team still without a loss is Kansas State at #12.
At the other end of the rankings, Idaho has taken over the final spot from UAB, winners of their first game last weekend.
Conference rankings are as follows (average team points):
1. Big 12: 8.60
2. SEC: 7.42
3. ACC: 3.17
4. Big 10: 3.17
5. Pac-12: 2.42
6. Big East: 0.88
7. Mountain West: -2.50
8. Conference USA: -3.92
9. Sun Belt: -5.33
10. Mid-America: -6.14
11. WAC: -8.75
Monday, October 31, 2011
2011 Gus Rankings: Week 9
Here are this week's Gus Rankings. Oklahoma State finds itself on top after both LSU (2) and Alabama (3) had byes. Oklahoma (4) and Stanford (5) round out the top 5.
There is an equally ferocious fight for the bottom spot. One-win Tulane and UAB are currently tied for the final spot, outpacing winless Idaho and Indiana.
At this point, it is fun to see how the BCS stacks up against the Gus Rankings. The top 5 teams with the biggest gains in the BCS compared to Gus are as follows (i.e., Gus says are overrated BCS-wise):
1. Wisconsin (11 spots)
2. Arkansas (7)
3. Arizona State (6)
3. Oregon (6)
5. Kansas State (5)
And the top 5 teams with the biggest gripe against the BCS vis a vis Gus (i.e., Gus says are underrated BCS-wise):
1. Penn State (6 spots)
2. Auburn (5)
2. Houston (5)
4. Clemson (4)
4. Michigan (4)
There is an equally ferocious fight for the bottom spot. One-win Tulane and UAB are currently tied for the final spot, outpacing winless Idaho and Indiana.
At this point, it is fun to see how the BCS stacks up against the Gus Rankings. The top 5 teams with the biggest gains in the BCS compared to Gus are as follows (i.e., Gus says are overrated BCS-wise):
1. Wisconsin (11 spots)
2. Arkansas (7)
3. Arizona State (6)
3. Oregon (6)
5. Kansas State (5)
And the top 5 teams with the biggest gripe against the BCS vis a vis Gus (i.e., Gus says are underrated BCS-wise):
1. Penn State (6 spots)
2. Auburn (5)
2. Houston (5)
4. Clemson (4)
4. Michigan (4)
Sunday, October 17, 2010
2010 Gus Rankings: Week 7
Ahead of today's initial BCS Rankings, here are this week's Gus Rankings.
A few notes:
- The top two teams this week-- Auburn and LSU-- square off next Saturday. Gus likes Auburn.
- Oregon, anticipated to be the #1 team in the human polls any minute now, is the lowest ranked undefeated team in the Gus Rankings, at #30 with 6 points. Many remember the win over Stanford (good for 4 points), but wins over Arizona State (1), Tennessee (1), New Mexico (0) and Washington State (0) don't help too much.
- On the other end of the spectrum, San Jose State sits at 0-5 but with -3 points, easily the highest rated team without a win at #78. Of course, those five losses-- to Wisconsin (lose 1 point), Utah (0), Nevada (1), Boise State (0) and Alabama (1) -- don't hurt too much.
A few notes:
- The top two teams this week-- Auburn and LSU-- square off next Saturday. Gus likes Auburn.
- Oregon, anticipated to be the #1 team in the human polls any minute now, is the lowest ranked undefeated team in the Gus Rankings, at #30 with 6 points. Many remember the win over Stanford (good for 4 points), but wins over Arizona State (1), Tennessee (1), New Mexico (0) and Washington State (0) don't help too much.
- On the other end of the spectrum, San Jose State sits at 0-5 but with -3 points, easily the highest rated team without a win at #78. Of course, those five losses-- to Wisconsin (lose 1 point), Utah (0), Nevada (1), Boise State (0) and Alabama (1) -- don't hurt too much.
Friday, October 02, 2009
2009 Gus Rankings: Week 4
I apologize for the late release (blame the travel), but here are the Gus Rankings for Week 4.
A few brief notes:
- As expected, the variation in scores continues to increase. The top of the list, Iowa and Virginia Tech, have 7 points, and there is a consistent spread all the way to -5 points. Ties in points and record are becoming less frequent; Gus produces individual rankings for the top 7 teams.
- Washington is still strong despite two losses; USC's success and, more surprisingly, Idaho's success-- three wins each-- are driving their high ranking. Of the two games they've lost-- Stanford and LSU-- only Stanford has lost one other game.
Playing successful teams is how you do well in this ranking system. Washington, at 2 losses, is ranked higher than 9 other teams that don't have a D-IA loss yet.
- Rice has taken a sizable lead as the team #120, with -8 points, three "ahead" of #119 at -5 points. Rice hasn't won any games this year, so the following statement holds for the Owls: Rice has lost four games to D-IA opponents that, combined, have lost 8 other games to D-IA teams. Rice is one degree of separation from 12 losses only 4 weeks into the season.
- I didn't realize this until recently, but the Gus rankings also serve as a quick check to determine bowl eligibility, since only D-IA games count. Get to 6 wins and you're eligible!
A few brief notes:
- As expected, the variation in scores continues to increase. The top of the list, Iowa and Virginia Tech, have 7 points, and there is a consistent spread all the way to -5 points. Ties in points and record are becoming less frequent; Gus produces individual rankings for the top 7 teams.
- Washington is still strong despite two losses; USC's success and, more surprisingly, Idaho's success-- three wins each-- are driving their high ranking. Of the two games they've lost-- Stanford and LSU-- only Stanford has lost one other game.
Playing successful teams is how you do well in this ranking system. Washington, at 2 losses, is ranked higher than 9 other teams that don't have a D-IA loss yet.
- Rice has taken a sizable lead as the team #120, with -8 points, three "ahead" of #119 at -5 points. Rice hasn't won any games this year, so the following statement holds for the Owls: Rice has lost four games to D-IA opponents that, combined, have lost 8 other games to D-IA teams. Rice is one degree of separation from 12 losses only 4 weeks into the season.
- I didn't realize this until recently, but the Gus rankings also serve as a quick check to determine bowl eligibility, since only D-IA games count. Get to 6 wins and you're eligible!
Monday, September 17, 2012
2012 Gus Rankings: Week 3
Week 3 of the Gus Rankings are here. This week, Gus crowns a new #1-- Stanford, fresh off it's victory over USC. Stanford's 3 wins come over USC (2 other wins), Duke (1 other win) and San Jose State (1 other win). Their 4 points lead the other 123 FCS teams.
At the other end of the spectrum, Massachusetts joins Akron at the bottom of the rankings. Massachusetts is enjoying their first season as a FBS member, and thus their first season in the Gus Rankings. This year's other first timers are Texas State, Texas-San Antonio and South Alabama.
At the other end of the spectrum, Massachusetts joins Akron at the bottom of the rankings. Massachusetts is enjoying their first season as a FBS member, and thus their first season in the Gus Rankings. This year's other first timers are Texas State, Texas-San Antonio and South Alabama.
Monday, November 11, 2013
2013 Gus Rankings: Gus+ Week 11
Here are this week's Gus Rankings. Alabama tops the rankings, followed by Stanford, Florida State, Missouri and Ohio State. And, in what has become a weekly certainty, Miami (OH) holds a nearly 10 point lead on the bottom spot in the rankings.
As the end of the season is approaching, it's time for our first foray into the Gus BCS projections! Should the season end today and the Gus+ were used in place of the BCS, which teams would go to which BCS bowls?
The champions of the following conferences automatically qualify for the following bowls:
• Atlantic Coast Conference - Orange Bowl
• Big Ten Conference - Rose Bowl
• Big 12 Conference - Fiesta Bowl
• Pac-12 Conference - Rose Bowl
• Southeastern Conference - Sugar Bowl
The BCS Bowls choose to fill their at-large spots in the following order: Orange, Sugar, Fiesta. Further, a team taken from an automatic bowl qualification to play in the National Championship Game gets replaced before the at-large slots are filled in the order of finish in the final rankings.
So, without further ado...
National Championship Game: Alabama (SEC champion) vs. Stanford (Pac-12 champion)
Orange Bowl: Florida State (ACC champion) vs. Oregon (At-large #1)
Sugar Bowl: Missouri (NCG replacement #1) vs. Brigham Young (At-large #2)
Fiesta Bowl: Baylor (Big 12 champion) vs. Houston (At-large #3)
Rose Bowl: Ohio State (Big 10 champion) vs. Clemson (NCG replacement #2)
Alabama and Stanford are the top two teams in the rankings; Florida State, Baylor and Ohio State are the remaining conference champions (as they are the highest ranked in either of their conferences), and fall into their assigned slots. Houston-- the highest ranked team from the AAC-- qualifies automatically but it chosen as an at-large for a bowl. The Sugar Bowl, having lost Alabama, choose its replacement first and goes with the highest ranked eligible un-claimed team-- and that's #4 Missouri. The Rose Bowl selected next to fill the void created by Stanford, and they select #7 Clemson. The Orange Bowl gets the first at-large choice and selects #8 Oregon. Teh Sugar bowl chooses next and is forced to pass on #9 Texas A&M (no more than two teams from the SEC), #10 Virginia Tech (no more than two teams from the ACC), #11 Auburn (no more than two teams from the SEC), and settles on #12 Brigham Young. The Fiesta Bowl chooses last and must choose the champion from the AAC, #18 Houston.
As the end of the season is approaching, it's time for our first foray into the Gus BCS projections! Should the season end today and the Gus+ were used in place of the BCS, which teams would go to which BCS bowls?
The champions of the following conferences automatically qualify for the following bowls:
• Atlantic Coast Conference - Orange Bowl
• Big Ten Conference - Rose Bowl
• Big 12 Conference - Fiesta Bowl
• Pac-12 Conference - Rose Bowl
• Southeastern Conference - Sugar Bowl
The BCS Bowls choose to fill their at-large spots in the following order: Orange, Sugar, Fiesta. Further, a team taken from an automatic bowl qualification to play in the National Championship Game gets replaced before the at-large slots are filled in the order of finish in the final rankings.
So, without further ado...
National Championship Game: Alabama (SEC champion) vs. Stanford (Pac-12 champion)
Orange Bowl: Florida State (ACC champion) vs. Oregon (At-large #1)
Sugar Bowl: Missouri (NCG replacement #1) vs. Brigham Young (At-large #2)
Fiesta Bowl: Baylor (Big 12 champion) vs. Houston (At-large #3)
Rose Bowl: Ohio State (Big 10 champion) vs. Clemson (NCG replacement #2)
Alabama and Stanford are the top two teams in the rankings; Florida State, Baylor and Ohio State are the remaining conference champions (as they are the highest ranked in either of their conferences), and fall into their assigned slots. Houston-- the highest ranked team from the AAC-- qualifies automatically but it chosen as an at-large for a bowl. The Sugar Bowl, having lost Alabama, choose its replacement first and goes with the highest ranked eligible un-claimed team-- and that's #4 Missouri. The Rose Bowl selected next to fill the void created by Stanford, and they select #7 Clemson. The Orange Bowl gets the first at-large choice and selects #8 Oregon. Teh Sugar bowl chooses next and is forced to pass on #9 Texas A&M (no more than two teams from the SEC), #10 Virginia Tech (no more than two teams from the ACC), #11 Auburn (no more than two teams from the SEC), and settles on #12 Brigham Young. The Fiesta Bowl chooses last and must choose the champion from the AAC, #18 Houston.
Tuesday, December 01, 2009
2009 Gus Rankings: Week 13
Here are this week's Gus Rankings. Texas keeps the top spot, but should relent the position next week to the winner of Florida and Alabama regardless of their performance. The winner of the SEC title game adds 11, compared to Texas' potential 9 point gain, and both Florida and Alabama stand to gain an additional point if Florida International wins their game against Florida Atlantic.
Random fun fact: There are no one-loss teams in the Gus Rankings, nor in I-A college football.
At this point, the four BCS at-large teams, according to Gus, are the Florida/Alabama loser, TCU, Boise State and Iowa (with Texas, Oregon and Cincinnati winning their respective games). If those teams win, I do think those are the four that will be selected. Of course, that's a big if when dealing with 20-year olds and a lot of pressure. Check back next week to see how it all shakes out. But at this point, Gus predicts the following:
Championship: Alabama/Florida winner vs. Texas
Rose: Oregon (Oregon State) vs. Ohio State
Fiesta: TCU vs. Iowa
Sugar: Alabama/Florida loser vs. Boise State
Orange: Cincinnati (Pittsburgh) vs. Georgia Tech
Gus would likely suggest Cincinnati for an at-large position if they lose--taking Iowa's spot--though I (surprisingly) haven't heard much on this margin from those in the know.
Should be interesting to see how it all falls!
Random fun fact: There are no one-loss teams in the Gus Rankings, nor in I-A college football.
At this point, the four BCS at-large teams, according to Gus, are the Florida/Alabama loser, TCU, Boise State and Iowa (with Texas, Oregon and Cincinnati winning their respective games). If those teams win, I do think those are the four that will be selected. Of course, that's a big if when dealing with 20-year olds and a lot of pressure. Check back next week to see how it all shakes out. But at this point, Gus predicts the following:
Championship: Alabama/Florida winner vs. Texas
Rose: Oregon (Oregon State) vs. Ohio State
Fiesta: TCU vs. Iowa
Sugar: Alabama/Florida loser vs. Boise State
Orange: Cincinnati (Pittsburgh) vs. Georgia Tech
Gus would likely suggest Cincinnati for an at-large position if they lose--taking Iowa's spot--though I (surprisingly) haven't heard much on this margin from those in the know.
Should be interesting to see how it all falls!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)