cartman's FOFC College Football Top 25 poll, Week 3 open for voting

[cartman]

Hello all,

Another great week of games is in the books! Time to open up this week's poll for voting. Submissions are due by 6pm Central on Thursday, Sept. 23rd. Here's how the denizens of last week's poll fared:


Team Rec. Weekend Result
1. Alabama 3-0 beat Duke 62-13
2. Ohio State 3-0 beat Ohio 43-7
3. Texas 3-0 beat #23 Texas Tech 24-14
4. Boise State 2-0 beat Wyoming 51-6
5. Oregon 3-0 beat Portland State 69-0
6. TCU 3-0 beat Baylor 45-10
T7. Florida 3-0 beat Tennessee 31-17
T7. Oklahoma 3-0 beat Air Force 27-24
9. Nebraska 3-0 beat Washington 56-21
10. Iowa 2-1 lost to #22 Arizona 34-27
11. Wisconsin 3-0 beat Arizona State 20-19
12. Arkansas 3-0 beat Georgia 31-24
13. South Carolina 3-0 beat Furman 38-19
14. LSU 3-0 beat Mississippi State 29-7
15. Auburn 3-0 beat Clemson 27-24(OT)
16. Utah 3-0 beat New Mexico 56-14
17. Miami (FL) 1-1 Bye
18. Stanford 3-0 beat Wake Forest 68-24
19. USC 3-0 beat Minnesota 32-21
20. Penn State 2-1 beat Kent State 24-0
21. Michigan 3-0 beat Massachusetts 42-37
22. Arizona 3-0 beat #10 Iowa 34-27
23. Texas Tech 2-1 lost to #3 Texas 24-14
24. West Virginia 3-0 beat Maryland 31-17
25. California 2-1 lost to Nevada 52-31

[duckman]

Alabama
Boise State
Ohio State
Florida
Texas Christian
Oregon
Oklahoma
Texas
Nebraska
Arkansas
Miami (FL)
Wisconsin
Auburn
Southern California
Iowa
South Carolina
Stanford
Utah
Louisiana State
West Virginia
Penn State
Arizona
Oklahoma State
Northwestern
Missouri

[JonInMiddleGA]

1. Alabama
2. Texas
3. Ohio State
4. TCU
5. Florida
6. Nebraska
7. Boise State
8. Oklahoma
9. Oregon
10. Arkansas
11. Wisconsin
12. LSU
13. South Carolina
14. Penn State
15. Utah
16. Auburn
17. Stanford
18. Arizona
19. Iowa
20. USC
21. Michigan
22. Miami (FL)
23. Oregon State
24. West Virginia
25. Michigan State

[cartman]

Here's the Top 25 from Solecismic's Football Frontier:

1. Boise State
2. Nebraska
3. Texas
4. Florida
5. Arizona
6. Auburn
7. Oregon
8. LSU
9. Stanford
10. TCU
11. Iowa
12. Alabama
13. South Carolina
14. California
15. USC
16. Temple
17. Virginia Tech
18. Georgia
19. Michigan State
20. Oklahoma
21. Wisconsin
22. Northwestern
23. Utah
24. Ohio State
25. Michigan

[MJ4H]

really?

edited to add: i mean, are you sure that isn't from a different season or something? I mean there are some really stupid things in there, but amongst them, let's just examine #18 Georgia and unranked Arkansas for a second and consider their respective records and head-to-heads.

You know just for starters.

If it is that flawed, I certainly wouldn't include it in anything I was using.

[JonInMiddleGA]

If it is that flawed, I certainly wouldn't include it in anything I was using.

If you think what you saw is bad, you don't want to see the whole thing.

At #31, the Hawgs are also behind #28 GT (you know, the powerhouse that got beat by mighty Kansas). On the bright side, it think you might be just a tad better than the winless Tar Heels at #33.

[cartman]

The formula he uses is above 78% accuracy so far this year:

http://www.solecismic.com/frontier/performance.php

[JonInMiddleGA]

The formula he uses is above 78% accuracy so far this year:

http://www.solecismic.com/frontier/performance.php

Yep. Of course, when the majority of games are obvious, it's hard to miss too many.

[Cuckoo]

Last week's ranking in parentheses

1. Alabama (1)
2. Ohio State (2)
3. Oregon (3)
4. Boise State (4)
5. TCU (5)
6. Florida (6)
7. Nebraska (12)
8. Oklahoma (8)
9. Texas (10)
10. Arkansas (14)
11. LSU (9)
12. Stanford (15)
13. Miami (11)
14. USC (13)
15. Arizona (21)
16. Iowa (7)
17. Utah (16)
18. South Carolina (18)
19. Wisconsin (17)
20. Penn State (19)
21. Auburn (24)
22. Michigan (20)
23. West Virginia (22)
24. Oklahoma State (25)
25. Michigan State (NR)

Dropped out: California

[MJ4H]

The formula he uses is above 78% accuracy so far this year:

http://www.solecismic.com/frontier/performance.php

So you agree that 1-2 Georgia who just lost at home to 3-0 Arkansas should be ranked and Arkansas should not? I mean, I'm not sure how that can be defended.

Or even arrived at.

[cartman]

I'm referring to the aggregate. You are referring to a couple of instances.

[MJ4H]

I'm referring to the aggregate. You are referring to a couple of instances.

I'm referring to the fact that there is no way to arrive at these rankings logically. They make no sense. Are Georgia's uniforms prettier?

[Noop]

As the season progress I am sure the rankings will work out.

[MJ4H]

Why would you be certain of that in this case? 1-2 Georgia is ranked while 3-0 Arkansas that just beat them at home is not. How does logic that leads to that heal itself?

[cartman]

Because obviously whatever logarithms are in use have compared the overall performances of the two teams in each of their three games (plus the carryover stats from last season, which the weight of is reduced each week) and Georgia has come out a little better in however many iterations the formula runs through to compare against all other teams.

[Young Drachma]

My computer ranking for this week:

1. Alabama
2. Ohio State
3. Texas
4. Boise State
5. Nebraska
6. Oklahoma
7. TCU
8. Florida
9. Oregon
10. LSU
11. Arkansas
12. Wisconsin
13. Auburn
14. Arizona
15. Utah
16. USC
17. Stanford
18. South Carolina
19. Michigan
20. Michigan State
21. Iowa
22. West Virginia
23. Oklahoma State
24. Miami
25. Missouri

[SnDvls]

1. Alabama
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Ohio State
5. Boise State
6. Texas
7. Nebraska
8. LSU
9. Arkansas
10. Wisconsin
11. Utah
12. South Carolina
13. Stanford
14. Oklahoma
15. Iowa
16. Miami (FL)
17. Arizona
18. Penn State
19. Florida
20. Oregon State
21. West Virginia
22. Michigan State
23. Mighigan
24. Florida State
25. Texas A&M

[MJ4H]

Because obviously whatever logarithms are in use have compared the overall performances of the two teams in each of their three games (plus the carryover stats from last season, which the weight of is reduced each week) and Georgia has come out a little better in however many iterations the formula runs through to compare against all other teams.

facepalm.jpg

[JonInMiddleGA]

facepalm.jpg

Check your PM's.

[MJ4H]

Yeah I saw. Pretty accurate I think.

[cartman]

MJ4H:

You don't seem to realize how most computer polls work. It is far more than just head-to-head and W/L records.

I'm not passing any judgement on the status of any one single week's poll. We've used the Solecismic poll since 2005, and because you are unhappy with how Arkansas was slotted this week, you've decided that the entire poll is bunk. That is an entirely short-sighted view to take. Early in the season, there is a wide variation in how teams are viewed by computer polls. As more data points and degrees of comparison come in over the course of the season, the variations become much less.

[MJ4H]

MJ4H:

You don't seem to realize how most computer polls work. It is far more than just head-to-head and W/L records.



Oh, I do. I just think it's hilariously bad.



I'm not passing any judgement on the status of any one single week's poll. We've used the Solecismic poll since 2005, and because you are unhappy with how Arkansas was slotted this week, you've decided that the entire poll is bunk.


Yeah, I just happened to look in the thread and see that going on the road and beating Georgia means they should be ranked at #18 while Arkansas is unranked. Meanwhile Georgia is 1-2 and Arkansas is 3-0. I'm sorry, no amount of explanation of algorithms makes this ok. It is broken. End of story.


That is an entirely short-sighted view to take. Early in the season, there is a wide variation in how teams are viewed by computer polls. As more data points and degrees of comparison come in over the course of the season, the variations become much less.

There aren't many data points that point to any reasonable point of view with Arkansas unranked at 3-0 while Georgia is 1-2 after Arkansas just beat them at Georgia. Sorry. If there has ever been a clearer indication to go back to the drawing board, I haven't seen it. Then again, I don't normally look.

I don't care if it gets better later in the season. I don't care if you or anyone else think there is some nebulous reason this is ok. It's not, and the poll is completely broken if this is the result it spits out.

Sorry, I don't even understand how this can be defended. I'm actually shocked you are trying.

[cartman]

Sorry, I don't even understand how this can be defended. I'm actually shocked you are trying.

As I mentioned, we've used this poll since 2005, so I've seen what it spits out every week for 5+ seasons. Yes, there are occasional head scratchers. But to condemn the entire poll based on what you glanced in and saw this week regarding the team you most closely root for is homerism.

[MJ4H]

Nonsense. It just happens to be the team I'm looking at. I'd say the same thing, if, for instance, another 1-2 team were ranked while a 3-0 team that beat them at home were not ranked.

It's stupid and broken. Bringing homerism into it is a red herring. It doesn't matter what the teams are. Any algorithm that gets things that wrong is worthless.

[MJ4H]

Anyway, use whatever lolcomputer poll you want to. I will remain baffled on the sidelines.

Enjoy.

[BishopMVP]

So you agree that 1-2 Georgia who just lost at home to 3-0 Arkansas should be ranked and Arkansas should not? I mean, I'm not sure how that can be defended.

Or even arrived at.Georgia will be an interesting case starting next week... they are certainly a better team when AJ Green is playing, and arguably he could have been the difference in one or both of their losses to date. So how much weight do you give to a resume that was achieved by this version of UGA, versus the potential of a full-strength UGA going forward?

As for Jim's poll, I think I was noting some weird results a season or two ago even beyond the normal early-season aberrations of a computer poll, but since it's Cartman's choice to use the poll, I stopped caring.

[Atocep]

Nonsense. It just happens to be the team I'm looking at. I'd say the same thing, if, for instance, another 1-2 team were ranked while a 3-0 team that beat them at home were not ranked.

It's stupid and broken. Bringing homerism into it is a red herring. It doesn't matter what the teams are. Any algorithm that gets things that wrong is worthless.

Claiming a computer poll is broken after 3 weeks is ridiculous. A computer poll will become more and more accurate as the season progresses and polls 3 games into the season are inaccurate whether a human made them or a computer spit them out. Not to mention the fact that they're meaningless and serve no purpose right now other than fun and bragging rights.

Check back at the end of the season and judge it then.

[mauchow]

I think there are a lot of head scratchers in there but I won't go the lengths of arguing it because it is what it is.

[JonInMiddleGA]

As for Jim's poll, I think I was noting some weird results a season or two ago even beyond the normal early-season aberrations of a computer poll, but since it's Cartman's choice to use the poll, I stopped caring.

This. I've always considered that poll flawed to the point of being a joke, but I've also never spent much time worrying about it either.

If C-man wants to include a poll from Athens Montessori pre-school in his tabulation, that's fine by me, I participate largely because it gives me an excuse to focus my own thoughts about ranking teams (and can now be reused for easy blog content as well).

[MJ4H]

Georgia will be an interesting case starting next week... they are certainly a better team when AJ Green is playing, and arguably he could have been the difference in one or both of their losses to date. So how much weight do you give to a resume that was achieved by this version of UGA, versus the potential of a full-strength UGA going forward?

As for Jim's poll, I think I was noting some weird results a season or two ago even beyond the normal early-season aberrations of a computer poll, but since it's Cartman's choice to use the poll, I stopped caring.

The team is the team, with or without one player. Their resume without is weighted equally to their resume with. Quality depth is a feature of a strong team.

[RainMaker]

Computer rankings sometimes put up silly results. Especially in football when you don't have a ton of data to use to get results. It's not as if any real sport actually uses them to help determine their champion though....oh wait.

[cartman]

bump

here's my Top 25:

1. Alabama
2. Ohio State
3. Texas
4. TCU
5. Boise State
6. Oregon
7. Oklahoma
8. Florida
9. Nebraska
10. South Carolina
11. Auburn
12. Arizona
13. Arkansas
14. Utah
15. Stanford
16. LSU
17. Iowa
18. Penn State
19. Miami (FL)
20. USC
21. West Virginia
22. Michigan
23. Nevada
24. Oklahoma State
25. Air Force

[tarcone]

1. Alabama
2. Ohio St.
3. Nebraska
4. Oregon
5. Arkansas
6. Texas
7. Oklahoma
8. Florida
9. Boise St.
10. Wisconsin
11. South Carolina
12. Arizona
13. TCU
14. LSU
15. Utah
16. Stanford
17. Auburn
18. USC
19. West Virginia
20. Iowa
21. Miami FL
22. Michigan St.
23. Oklahoma St.
24. Northwestern
25. Oregon St.

[Butter]

<table width="306" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><col style="width: 230pt;" width="306"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt; width: 230pt;" width="306" height="20">1. Ohio State</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">2. Alabama</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">3. Boise State</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">4. Oregon</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">5. Nebraska</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">6. Texas</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">7. Oklahoma</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">8. Arkansas</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">9. TCU</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">10. Florida</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">11. LSU</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">12. Auburn</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">13. Stanford</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">14. West Virginia</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">15. Arizona</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">16. Utah</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">17. Wisconsin</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">18. South Carolina</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">19. Michigan State</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">20. Penn State</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">21. Florida State</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">22. Air Force</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">23. Miami (FL)</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">24. Nevada</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">25. Iowa</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">Dropped out: (17) Clemson, (24) Georgia</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

[Butter]

The team is the team, with or without one player. Their resume without is weighted equally to their resume with. Quality depth is a feature of a strong team.

I am sure that if Ryan Mallett went down and your team lost on the road at Vandy, your tune would change with regard to the rankings.

But then, I am breaking the long standing rule about arguing the rankings within the rankings thread.

[MJ4H]

Absolutely not. Quality depth is an important feature of a top team. Then again, we have 3 back-up quarterbacks I would be comfortable with playing that I think would be more than adequate to lead us to a win on the road at Vanderbilt. If not, then that's our team and our result.

[BishopMVP]

1. Ohio State
2. Alabama
3. Oregon
4. Oklahoma
5. TCU
6. Texas
7. Nebraska
8. Florida
9. Arkansas
10. Wisconsin
11. Boise State
12. South Carolina
13. Miami
14. Stanford
15. LSU
16. Arizona
17. Auburn
18. Penn State
19. Utah
20. Oregon State
21. Texas A&M
22. Oklahoma State
23. Michigan
24. West Virginia
25. Pitt

[RainMaker]

1. Alabama
2. Boise State
3. Ohio State
4. TCU
5. Texas
6. Oregon
7. Florida
8. Nebraska
9. Oklahoma
10. Arkansas
11. Wisconsin
12. South Carolina
13. Utah
14. Arizona
15. Stanford
16. LSU
17. Auburn
18. Miami (FL)
19. USC
20. West Virginia
21. Penn State
22. Michigan State
23. Iowa
24. Oregon State
25. Nevada