Week 5

see bcs101.fantake.com for the full post

Week 4 BCS Update -- Licking the Wounds

In the year of our lord two thousand and seven, I was presented with a dilemma.

For the 2004, 2005 and 2006 seasons, I had been diligently preparing BCS updates on Longhorn boards (2004 was by far the most interesting, for obvious reasons). But on September 29, 2007, I stood in the stands of DKR, drenched by a brutal rain storm, glaring at the unthinkable on the scoreboard: KSU 41, Texas 21. What a shitty day. The morning's tailgating had gone atrociously. My brother, seated to my right, was still visibly shaking from his rage unleashed about an hour before, when he had yelled, flailed, and nearly tore his own shirt off from frustration of seeing the Bobino/Derry/Killebrew trotted out series after series after series.

So having seen Texas completely piss away any shot of a national title, I began to think... this BCS stuff, why the hell should I even bother? I certainly didn't care anymore. And I knew no Longhorn fan really cared about the BCS, when the gravitational pull of San Diego and the Holiday Bowl can be felt thousands of miles and three months away.

I was a weak man. I should have stuck with it. Looking back in my archive of BCS musings, 2007 sits there as a gaping hole. I'm not proud of it.

So here we are again. And yes, if the analogy isn’t abundantly clear, to be perfectly blunt: Texas has pissed away any shot of a national title in 2010. I don’t think most Horn fans were expecting this season to pan out with an invite to Glendale for all the marbles, but I am pretty sure none of us expected a 22 point ass-kicking at the hands of a 1-2, middle of the road Pac10 team, either.

Anyhoo, for the love of the game, I’m going to try and stick with it as long as I can. Ultimately, I’d like to get more interest “nationally,” meaning I would be very excited if Tide or Husker or Duck fans would ever want to take a look at what I might project on a given week. So if this is really the end goal, that means I need to bite the bullet and still post an update. Fight through it. Do it for the kids.

I really don’t expect many on BC to read this, and that’s perfectly cool, I understand. But again. It’s for the kids.

Luckily, on this difficult weekend there is little to say. The conferences, by and large, remain generally in their form from the prior week. The SEC went 3-0 in its limited OOC action. The Big XII went 5-1 (GEE… I WONDER WHO THE “1” IS??). The Big10 went 6-2 against a slate of MAC crap. The Pac10 went 2-1 with UCLA suddenly giving the league some unexpected credibility.

The WAC, however, did its best to snub Boise’s toe on the evening of its “big” (whatever) win against Oregon State, as the WAC went a lousy 2-6 on out-of-conference games. As a result, the WAC has fallen to the bottom half of the 11 FBS conferences, and their mediocre 0.360 winning percentage out of conference will be the albatross for Boise we’ve come to expect year by year.

The MWC went 4-1. Good for them. They are still not putting together anything near the impressive record they had in 2009, and ultimately, TCU is going to be held back greatly by the weakness of its league.

So other than licking our wounds as Longhorn fans, is there any broader national implications from the stunning Texas loss? Possibly. I think Nebraska (which saw its SOS fall from 25th to 33rd nationally) really could have used having an undefeated Longhorn team in Lincoln. Or at least one with a semblance of credibility. So although the Huskers may have really enjoyed the ass-kicking in Austin, the more intelligent (or at least those that try to see the big picture) already know this doesn’t help Nebraska if they are having to compete against an undefeated Ohio State in December.

OU is in prime position as well, but I can say with some conviction that they also have shown multiple red flags on the field as the season has progressed. So the notion of the Sooners winning out seems a little.... um.... out there right now. I guess crazier things have happened.

Florida and Alabama have the best position (as usual) to get to Glendale, and that probably includes getting there as a one loss team. S-E-C! S-E-C!

TCU and Boise are simply not getting enough help from their leagues to make NC runs. Boise’s schedule is too weak, and the VT victory remains tainted by JMU. And TCU suffers from a ceiling known as Boise State – they seem unlikely to jump Boise at any point. After all, TCU got hurt indirectly by Boise beating their best quality opponent (Oregon State). TCU also suffers from the voter perception that Boise beat TCU head-to-head on a neutral field less than 12 months ago. Yes, that was a different season, but many of the players returned for both teams involved. You and I both know plenty of voters will keep that in the back of their minds.

Bottom Line: The horrific Longhorn loss is a major demerit for the BigXII. Along with other BigXII teams struggling mightily (OU vs. Cincy, USU and AF, A&M vs. FIU, etc.), I think the perception of the BigXII is hurting despite the numbers suggesting it is the second strongest league. My thesis from last week that Ohio State may get leapfrogged by a solid BigXII team no longer seems true. The SEC champ and Ohio State "controlling their destiny" at this point, with the Ducks and Huskers/Sooners waiting in the wings. Boise/TCU remain long-shots.

Week 3 BCS Update -- Buckeyes Beware

BUCKEYES BEWARE

After a rather uneventful weekend of college football (Iowa’s loss to Arizona is probably the only notable upset, effectively eliminating the Hawkeyes from national title contention), Ohio State fans should start to be getting concerned about their resume. The Buckeyes rank very near the bottom among top 10 contenders in terms of their projected strength of schedule.

Why is this happening? It is not really the fault of their conference, as the Big 10 has a solid third place position among the eleven conferences (0.760 winning percentage OOC). In fact, Ohio State manages to have the very worst projected SOS among all eleven teams in the Big 10.

Ohio State’s OOC schedule is certainly not helping. Marshall and Eastern Michigan are both 0-3 (and the latter may well lose their next nine, if previous seasons are any indication). Ohio has yet to beat an FBS foe. Even the “marquee” win against Miami (FL) is inflicting some collateral damage to Ohio State, as the ACC severely lags among the power conferences.

Ohio State’s in-conference slate is also hurting, at least thus far. The Buckeyes will not play undefeated Michigan State or 3-0 Northwestern. And games that previously appeared to have mega-game potential, Iowa and Penn State, are both diminished given early season road losses for the Hawkeyes and Lions. And neither Wisconsin or Michigan has looked impressive enough, thus far, to make it very believable that they will maintain their undefeated records.

Make no mistake: Ohio State is the de facto #2 in the human polls, and that is a powerful edge to have in their corner. But Ohio State should get very nervous if an undefeated Big XII team builds momentum, as an outright jump in the BCS standings is very possible.

BITTERSWEET FROGS

TCU is rightfully earning the nation’s respect after posting solid victories over AQ-conference opponents, even if Oregon State and Baylor are not necessarily among the nation’s elite. Unfortunately, TCU’s title chances took a body blow given the Mountain West’s performance out-of-conference this weekend. Wyoming, Air Force, SDSU, CSU, BYU, and UNLV all lost their OOC games. Ouch. The Mountain West was an impressively strong conference in 2009, but they now rank 9th out of 11 conferences so far this year.

I think TCU is a near-lock to get an at-large BCS bid if they continue to win so impressively, but they remain a long shot to get to the championship game.

NOW THAT'S JUST "WAC"

Conversely, the Mountain West’s loss is Boise’s gain. Boise dominated Wyoming and Idaho clobbered UNLV to make an impressive statement on the MWC vs. WAC debate. Even more amazing was Nevada’s stomping of Cal, giving the WAC some credibility as they now clock in at #5 in the conference rankings.

If James Madison hadn’t embarrassed Virginia Tech (and East Carolina gave the Hokies everything they could handle as well), Boise really could be making things interesting. But in the meantime, Boise has little chance to go to the NC game. Give every major AQ conference team a loss, and it’s worth revisiting (but still unlikely).

BIG XII POWER

It may not always be pretty (A&M over FIU, Missouri over SDSU, OU over AF), but the Big XII has really put together a strong start out of the gate, and the window for differentiation among the conferences is closing fast as we head to conference play.

The Big XII’s winning percentage is slightly behind the SEC, but the Big XII has also posted far more victories over FBS teams than the SEC. These victories in September are really going to help the team that emerges from the Texas, Oklahoma and Nebraska trifecta. Bear in mind, my team rankings for SOS have yet to factor in a conference title game boost as well. Bottom line, the Big XII contenders couldn’t have asked for a better start to the season.

Believe it or not, Texas (on paper) now holds the second strongest schedule in the country. Even a game that looked doomed to be a loss turned into a major coup, as UCLA upset undefeated (and ranked) UH. Let’s face it, Texas’ OOC opponents are precarious and will be lucky to win week-by-week, but Texas is getting major benefits from the strength of its conference.


In a couple more weeks, as more season/data gets put in the books, we can start taking a closer look at the computers and BCS rankings.

Assessing the BCS race after Week 2

2008 All Over Again? -- It’s incredibly early, but the Big XII is highly outperforming expectations in out-of-conference games, and the soon-to-be-downsized league is now at the top of the conference standings. The Big XII's conference strength is fueling projected SOS for Oklahoma (#2 overall SOS right now), Texas (#7 SOS) and Nebraska (#16).

Oklahoma in particular is in prime shape if they win out, given a well-rounded schedule and marquee games against Texas and potentially Nebraska. Texas is not as strong as Oklahoma, but like OU, Texas still benefits from the fact that the Big XII South has been starting strong.

The SEC teams are slightly behind the Big XII in technical numbers, but human perception of the SEC will probably trump the Big XII when push comes to shove. Bama's solid pounding of PSU adds validation to the SEC's perceived strength. If current trends continue, we could see a third consecutive season where the SEC and Big XII seem on a path of destiny to meet in the national title game.

But What About Ohio State? -- Given their solid #2 ranking in the human polls, an undefeated Ohio State would seem a default choice to play the SEC winner, but clearly that conflicts with what I just said about the Big XII. How exactly is this going to get resolved? Obviously, a lot of football remains to be played, and these BCS nightmares often get solved on their own. But if I’m a Buckeye fan, I should be a little alarmed that Ohio State’s SOS ranks 73rd (out of 120 FBS teams) after two weeks of action. Consider:

• Marshall lost a heartbreaker to WVU,
  
• Ohio lost to Toledo,
  
• EMU has started 0-2,
  
• Illinois/Indiana/Purdue have yet to win a FBS game
  
• Minnesota lost to South Dakota
  
• PSU was embarrassed by Bama.
  

The only saving grace to Ohio State might be the way they finish the year, with big games against Iowa and Michigan. If Ohio State wants to ensure they don’t get leapfrogged by an undefeated Big XII team as the year plays out, they should want the Hawkeyes and Wolverines to come into those games as strong as possible.

If Ohio State, the SEC winner, and the BigXII winner all go undefeated, we could have a real mess on our hands in early December.

Buh-Bye, Boise State -- There’s really not too much to say about Boise’s devastating setback by virtue of Virginia Tech losing to sub-FBS team James Madison. I believe the VT loss is pretty much a deal killer for Boise, as it clearly takes off almost the entire luster from the Labor Day win. The WAC is generally flailing as expected in out-of-conference games, and I previously postulated Boise would need a perfect storm of VT and Oregon State putting forward highly impressive records.

I suppose we can put Boise back in the running if VT rallies to win the ACC and go 10-2, but absent that kind of miracle, I believe Boise is now a long shot for the national title game, even though they could very well stay entrenched at a #3 or #4 ranking in the human polls for the rest of the year. Boise’s only hope is if the stronger conferences (Big XII, SEC, Big10) all have two losses and the weaker conferences (ACC, Pac10) all have one loss. An undefeated Boise is highly likely to get an automatic berth as an at large, however.

Thoughts on Other Contenders -- No need to get too granular being so early in the year, but Iowa and Wisconsin can make strong moves if they win out. Oregon has quickly moved up to a #6 ranking in the coaches poll, but the Pac10 has had a lukewarm start to the year… they will be an interesting team to keep an eye on. TCU still lacks a big game on its schedule outside the victory over Oregon State; although Utah could be a platform game in early November, TCU closes the year with SDSU and New Mexico.

Brief Week 1 BCS Update

We still have yet to see the biggest BCS related match up of the weekend (Boise/VT), but that game is pretty clear cut as far as NC implications. As I've said previously, I believe Boise can make a serious NC game run as an undefeated team if: a) teams from the big boy conferences (SEC, Big 10, Big XII, and ACC) all have at least one loss, b) VT puts together a solid 10-2 type of season after losing to the Broncos, c) Oregon State puts together an 8-4 type of season after losing to the Broncos (a win over TCU sure would have helped), and d) the WAC can win a few OOC match-ups to make the conference perceived as at least mediocre in the pecking order of leagues.

So the Boise/VT game is what it is. I'm not going to let the game's unusual Monday night timing prevent us from taking a look at how the initial weekend went for the key conferences. There is no better way in these early days to assess what is happening than to look at how the out-of-conference battles are shaping up. The Big XII posted a surprisingly solid 9-1 record in the initial weekend of action (this counts only FBS wins and all losses... so for instance, A&M's win over SFA is not included in the victory tally). The SEC also delivered with an 8-2 mark. The bizarre irony is that both of these leagues sit atop the Week 1 conference standings despite the fact that they each suffered a major black eye, as Ole Miss and Kansas proceeded to embarrass themselves by losing outright to their FCS patsies. The Big 10 was the only other conference to maintain a winning record. The ACC posted only two games that qualified for our rankings, as the league played 10 games against FCS opponents (um, what the hell??) Maryland and VT still play games tomorrow. The MAC and CUSA went completely winless, which may not be all that surprising. The Big East suffered an embarassing 1-4 weekend, punctuated by Pitt's notable loss at Utah. The Pac-10 also seems to be continuing its recent trend of slow starts, with a lackluster 3-4 record.

Now let's look at developments from an individual team perspective. One may think it's foolish to look at strength-of-schedule this early in the year, but these games that were just played, although early, still count in December. Just ask any Texas or Oklahoma fan in 2008, given the minuscule final margin between them, how important each week was in the scheme of things. Looking at the win/loss records of all opponents on each teams schedule, Iowa again appears to have a great jump on the strength-of-schedule front, with eight of its future opponents winning their games, and zero losing. Texas, Florida and Oklahoma also saw fairly solid performances by their future opponents. While Oregon's absurd 72-0 victory drew a lot of attention, the Ducks have problems in the BCS computers looming given the pathetic 2-5 performance of their future opponents (obviously highly related to the Pac-10's weakness described above). And at the absolute bottom, as we would expect, we see TCU and Boise State's schedules have started quite poorly.

At this ridiculously early stage of the year, the season has a 2008 feel to it. The Big XII and SEC contenders can benefit greatly if their leagues continue the momentum. Keep an eye on Iowa.... if they can knock off Ohio State later in the year, they might create some noise in the BCS standings much like they did a year ago. I continue to believe TCU has remote odds to get into the NC picture barring absolute chaos (think 2007 where two loss teams are still contending for the NC).

BCS Breakdown - Preseason Edition

With the first slate of Thursday games mere days away, I thought I would provide some thoughts on how the BCS race might unfold during the upcoming season. Much of this discussion is driven by our natural biases about what teams are expected to do in 2010 based on how good they looked in 2009, and that alone makes this kind of preseason analysis dangerous (anyone been in touch with sure-fire Heisman candidate Jevan Snead and his NC-contending Rebels lately?) With that devastating caveat stated, let's start making some ridiculous assumptions and take a look at the key contenders for the national championship game.


THE BOISE ISSUE
Boise State begins as the true hot-button topic of our preseason BCS breakdown. Many of us suspected Boise was going to make some noise in the preseason polls as they wrapped up an undefeated 2009 season with a solid win over TCU. We've now had some time to digest that reality, as there sits Boise perched at #5 in the coaches' poll, along with a staggering #3 AP ranking. Without a doubt, Boise has shattered the glass ceiling on non-AQ teams, garnering by far the best preseason ranking ever (the polls would typically toss a bone to an up-and-coming Boise/TCU/Utah/BYU team with a preseason ranking somewhere in the low-teens... at best).

Before I decompose Boise's chances to truly make a run for playing in Glendale at the end of the year, I want to make clear I have a I high degree of respect for their program. As I have posted previously, Boise has the distinction of being the greatest outperformer (by a healthy margin) when it comes to how their final ranking compares to their preseason ranking. Boise can also claim the best winning percentage among all FBS teams during the decade of the "Aughts" (2000-2009), edging out Texas' 110-19 record with their own 112-17 record. Although they have achieved this success in weaker conferences, they have maintained the excellence under two different head coaches. Boise State has also tended to win a decent amount of games against the "big boys" (see #4 TCU and #16 last year, #17 Oregon in 2008, #10 Oklahoma in 2006), although they have had their share of big game flubs as well (see the close bowl loss to TCU in 2008, the implosion against Georgia in 2005, the Liberty Bowl loss to Louisville in 2004, the lopsided loss to South Carolina in 2001, two losses to Arkie in 2002 and 2000, etc.). Overall, I feel like Boise's big game reputation has been built on the fantastic win over Oklahoma. I also suspect Boise's big game reputation has been inflated somewhat by lazier impressions among the media, as they have a hard time remembering whether it was Boise State or Fresno State winning all of those big games at the turn of the millennium (it was the latter, for the record).

Has Boise earned its reputation to be seeded in the top 10? Absolutely. Should we immediately castigate them for playing in a weak conference? I don't think so... for example, how many years did the Noles get national championship opportunities after running the table in a diluted ACC. I will say that if Boise wants to pull this off, they cannot afford to be putting up conference game stinkers like their unimpressive 45-35 win against La Tech (they were only up 2 in the 4th quarter) or the mediocre 44-33 victory over Nevada.

So what do we really think about their chances in 2010? I think Virginia Tech is a powerful platform game, as it represents the highest quality opponent (at least by ranking) that Boise has ever had as an opportunity. It is the sole college football game being broadcast on Labor Day evening, and I am confident it will have a high level of viewership. If Boise State can defeat Virginia Tech and emerge from September with another victory over Oregon State, there is no question that they are a bona fide national title contender. Anyone who tries to argue otherwise is not being fair or honest.

Clearly, the real problem becomes the rest of the season. To be somewhat crude, Boise basically will have shot their wad (if Lee Corso can say it, so can I) too early in the year. While those intriguing Big 10, SEC and Big XII races are heating up, Boise will become somewhat of an afterthought against the San Jose States and Idahos. I project Boise's schedule strength at about 84th, even with the games against VT and Oregon St, which will create serious problems for Boise in the computers as the year goes on. Boise will also be constantly fighting a pervasive voter prejudice that they aren't as good as the top AQ-conference contenders, even if the lofty preseason rankings may indicate that prejudice is subsiding.

Bottom line, a schedule as weak as Boise's will make it impossible for them to take precedence over an undefeated SEC, Big 10 or Big XII team. But I do not at all subscribe to the consensus that they cannot jump one-loss teams from those conferences; after all, the humans still control 2/3 of this argument when all is said and done. If Boise makes its case on the field, the voters can do their best to send them to Glendale.

However, to pull it off, they will need a near perfect storm in terms of help from other teams. Obviously, key contenders like Bama, Florida, OU, Texas, etc. must all lose a game. Virginia Tech must post an impressive (if not ACC-winning) 10-2 type record, and Oregon State must at least match their 8 win type of year. And it wouldn't hurt if the "stronger" teams in the WAC could win a big out-of-conference game, to help improve the reputation of the conference. Fresno State has some interesting possibilities against Cincinnati, Illinois and Ole Miss. Nevada can try and win a big game or two against Cal, Colorado State and UNLV. La Tech gets shots at Texas A&M, Navy, and Southern Miss. So in summary, if the powerhouses all rack up a loss, if VT and Oregon State can post impressive years, and if Fresno State, Nevada, La Tech and the rest of the WAC can give the conference more of a "MWC feel," I think Boise could very much be in the thick of the national title picture. It sounds outlandish now, but you never know (who thought Butler would be ever-so-close to winning the basketball championship?)

SEC AT THE FOREFRONT
Alabama and Florida control their own destiny. Until we see evidence to the contrary in September, Alabama belongs to the most powerful conference in football and appears to have another extremely difficult schedule ahead of it (#4 most difficult in the country), including a marquee out-of-conference game against Penn State. They are #1 in most polls and as the defending national champions will rightfully get a tremendous amount of support if they continue to win. Florida also enjoys significantly strong perception, and while their schedule doesn't appear nearly as strong (#38 ss), their SEC membership and marquee conference games make them a shoo-in. The rivalry game against Florida State could certainly help Florida's cause if the Noles outperform. Bama and Florida are also highly relevant in the BCS discussion if they sustain an early-to-mid season loss (obviously).

THE STRONGEST NON-SEC CONTENDERS
Virginia Tech (#15 schedule strength) and Oklahoma (#10 ss) both appear to be optimally positioned to take on the role of strongest contenders (based on their schedule and poll positions, not speaking to their teams) after the SEC juggernauts are considered. VT would not only end the Boise discussion out of the gate with an opening victory, but they would send a strong opening signal about their own NC aspirations. Their schedule also entails out-of-conference games against a solid East Carolina squad (granted with a coaching change) and a strong team in Central Michigan. They play a grueling 3 game stretch against ACC competition (GT, UNC and Miami) and have the potential ACC title game as a cap. While this may sound like a strong and unexpected statement to many, I think VT basically is guaranteed a NC bid if they go undefeated. Oklahoma has a similar path and seems highly assured of getting to the title game if they can navigate through a challenging OOC slate (Florida State, Air Force and Cincinnati), although I'll be honest that I think the difficulty of these games looks harder "on paper" than the reality (particularly with Cincy). OU will also have the benefit of the RRS and a potential top 10 matchup against Nebraska on the final weekend. If it came down to VT and OU both winning out, I like VT's chances better, as I think their resume may look more impressive when push comes to shove.

THE NEXT TIER OF CONTENDERS
Make no mistake, Texas (#45 ss) and Ohio State (#50 ss) can be in prime position for the NC game if they go undefeated, but I do think they will need a little help in making sure a team of VT or OU's caliber sustains a loss (Texas can obviously have direct control over the OU side of the equation). Texas has the monumental games against OU and Nebraska, but little else beyond that (unless UCLA puts together a season way ahead of expectations). Texas would also have the oddity of getting a mixed bag of accolades if they were to win in a rematch against Nebraska in Arlington. But the Longhorn's reputation, preseason ranking, and numbers of the way their schedule strength comes together would probably get the job done if they win out. If the Big XII south restored its amazing strength from 2008 (when OkSt and TTU became top 10 teams along with Texas and OU), Texas can make waves even with an early/mid season loss. Looking to the Big 10, Ohio State has several key games against teams that appear to be top 20 quality (Miami, Wisconsin, PSU, Iowa), but none of those games at least from this early preseason perspective have the same cache as Texas/Oklahoma. Ohio State is also somewhat vulnerable by not having a conference title game, especially with the Michigan game consistently losing its luster year-by-year.

THE HUSKERS
Nebraska appears to be a notch below most of the non-Boise contenders already mentioned (schedule #73), as they play in the weaker Big XII north and they don't sport a particularly impressive OOC schedule (unless you are buying the Jake Locker/Washington love, which I know many are). They do, however, have the opportunity to post big wins against Texas and Oklahoma, if the Big XII plays out right for them. I don't like Nebraska to jump VT or Ohio State if they all go undefeated, and I think Nebraska has a hard time getting back into contention if they sustain an early loss. But yes, if Nebraska truly is ready to return to its mid-1990s (or even early 2000s) form, then they have the ingredients for a NC run.

THE IRRELEVANT
I think TCU is at best a long-shot for NC contention barring complete chaos among the other contenders. Their schedule is Boise-ish as far as its strength (#84), but without any kind of sexy matchup. The only intriguing games (at least from what we know now) are Oregon State and Utah. TCU is basically guaranteed to be stuck in its current ranking without any kind of platform game to help its cause. If your TCU, keep the at-large BCS bowls on speed dial.

THIS YEAR'S IOWA?
One final observation: who could be this year's Iowa? After all, Iowa came out of nowhere to create a lot of noise in the BCS standings during the mid-to-late parts of the 2009 season, as their undefeated record against a difficult schedule propelled them to a consensus #1 computer ranking at one point. I'll throw out a name (but not give them the honor of having their logo included in this post... that would just be silly)... Pittsburgh has a schedule that looks good on paper (#23) and features some big early matchups against Utah, Miami and Notre Dame. If Pitt is able to run the table in those games, I think they become a less-conventional BCS contender.

And obviously, yes, if teams such as LSU, Auburn, Oregon, Miami, Iowa, Penn State, and Wisconsin make impressive runs for winning their leagues, they will be in the thick of things as well.

The Coaches Poll -- Comparing Start to Finish

Friday's release of the preseason coaches poll got me thinking. When I saw the Virginia Tech Hokies sitting there at #6, I immediately thought, "man, yet again, Virginia Tech is over-rated." But then I thought rather than rely on my own recollections and biases, I should see if my reaction was true.... that Virginia Tech does, in fact, start the year ranked higher than where they finish. As you will see, I couldn't have been more wrong on the inaccuracy of preseason voters when it comes to VT.

I began by collecting the coaches poll rankings as far back as readily available (ESPN's complete poll archive goes back to 2003), pulling in the preseason rankings and the final (post-bowl) rankings. I have seen some lazier analysis that used average rank; this, in my view, is not appropriate. I instead use the "points" awarded on a ballot, which allows us to measure stronger rankings (a consensus #1 is stronger than a divided #1). Points also allow us to measure those teams that fall into the "others receiving votes" category. Teams that don't show up in a poll at all get a big fat zero (which I think is fair for this exercise), and their average poll position/points will suffer as a result. I also divided the points by the total number of voters, to eliminate the fluctuation in how many coaches completed ballots. Basically, if a team ranked a perfect #1 on every single ballot, they get 25 points, and if they ranked a perfect #25 on every ballot, they get 1 point.

We begin by looking at the best finishing teams from the 2003 to 2009 seasons. Southern Cal truly dominated this time series, and edged out Texas for the #1 spot. USC's 20.6 "points" means that on every final ballot from 2003-2009, they had an average of 20.6 points, which means they were, on average, ranked about fifth (26 minus 20.6 equals 5.4). Ohio State, LSU and OU round out the top 5. In the top twenty, there are five SEC teams, five Big 10 teams, two Big XII teams, two Pac 10 teams, two Big East teams, and four from other less powerful conferences.

To help frame the discussion on which teams are beating or failing to meet expectations, we also need to see how the typical preseason rankings look. We see a lot of similar names on this preseason list when compared to the final rankings, but some names such as Notre Dame, Louisville, California, Florida State and Tennessee also show up, suggesting these teams fail to hold onto loftier preseason rankings in the final rankings.

With these two lists compiled, we can take the next step to figure out which teams appear to be perpetually overrated in the preseason. Basically, we can compare the average final ranking against the average preseason ranking to arrive at a list of teams that tend to be the most overrated. Oklahoma tops this list, averaging almost 7 ranks below their preseason ranking. Florida State, Michigan, Miami and Cal round out the top five "disappointers." All of these disappointing teams come from so-called "power conferences."

Looking at the reverse phenomenon, the best "outperformer" compared to its typical preseason rank is Boise State, which tends to climb about 9 spots in the polls during the typical season. TCU, Utah, Alabama and Cincinnati round out the top 5. It will be interesting to see how Boise fares this year, as they have usually been a teens/twenties ranked team in the preseason polls, but the pollsters seem to have finally given them some respect to start off the season.

And yes, Virginia Tech ranked with an average of 12.3 points in the preseason, and an average of 12.3 points in the final poll. I guess the preseason polls couldn't have had them more right.

A Decade in Review

When it comes to measuring a college football program's success, I think there is no better increment of time than the decade. Fixating on year-by-year results is too short-sighted, as there can just be too much natural variation in results, with significant effects from attrition, injuries, and just plain luck. If we look at a full 10 year body of work, however, we have a powerful long-term indicator of each team's standing.

It is with that introduction we look at the ten best teams for the decade ending 2009 (the "Aughts"). Congratulations to Boise State for putting together an amazing 112 win and 17 loss record to take the top spot. There are many haters out there that will say Boise's schedule is a farce, and while I will grant you it is much weaker than most of the other teams on this list, I think it is a hell of an accomplishment to put together that kind of elite winning consistency at a mid-level school, no matter what the competition. And Boise has had its share of big-name victories when the time has arisen. Texas and Oklahoma check in at #2 and #3, as both have been the clear elite of the Big XII. The rest of the names probably surprise no one, although TCU has quietly become a dominant program with a 0.766 winning percentage.

Then there's the losers. This, too, is an unsurprising list, a who's who of cellar dwellers. Another useful feature of the decade time increment is you can divide all of the wins and losses by 10 to get your average season performance, meaning Duke has not even averaged 2 wins per season. Vandy and Baylor are other perennial losers in power conferences, while the rest of the teams (ignoring independent Army) tend to be in weaker conferences. These teams are not only losing, they are losing consistently.

You can see the entire list ranking at the excellent stassen.com website

As I looked at this data, particularly the bottom ten, I thought it would be useful to see how these teams have done against expectations. I have no doubt Baylor and Buffalo have been underperformers, but no one expects an Eastern Michigan to play well. I thought one objective way to gauge fan "expectations" would be stadium attendance. This captures not only the amount of fans willing to pay money to support the team, but it also embeds the existing infrastructure investment made in previous years for the football program (in order to have 100,000 fans see your game every week, you must have spent a lot of money to build a stadium to hold them). After gathering stadium attendance for every year available, I wanted to confirm there was a relationship. Below is a scatterplot, graphing attendance for all 115 schools against winning percentage.


As you can see, there is a definite relationship. Higher attendance is significantly correlated with higher winning percentages. The equation on the graph is a least-squares regression line (indicated with the black line) to best "fit" the relationship between the two variables. I'll use this as my definition of "expectations." If a program is reasonably close to that line, they are meeting expectations. So, with that in mind, what programs are deviating most from the expectations line?

The "Model" column indicates the expected winning percentage using the attendance of the school as the x-variable in the regression equation above. We've sorted this list by how much the actual winning percentage exceeds the model. Three of the four outperformers make complete sense: Boise, TCU and Utah are getting good bang for their buck with exceptional winning percentages relative to small attendance (a reflection of their smaller school size). Miami, on the other hand, is a reflection of a higher level of disinterest among its fan base (think of how many empty seats you have seen at Miami games), and their winning percentage was heavily influenced by the early part of the decade (including a huge winning streak from 2000 to 2002). Virginia Tech and Boston College appear to be winning more than their expectations would indicate. Large successful programs include Texas, Oklahoma, and USC.

The most fascinating list might be those programs that are failing to meet expectations. This is the same concept, but looks at the bottom twenty programs sorted by greatest negative difference from the "model." Some programs are so bad (i.e. Eastern Michigan and Buffalo) that they show up on this list despite very low attendance. But some major programs pop up on the list as well, including Mississippi State, Illinois, Michigan State, Texas A&M, Alabama and Arizona. The Crimson Tide are clearly on the right path, but fans of those other programs (in some cases averaging nearly 80,000 fans per game) should ask themselves whether a mere 0.500-type winning percentage is really getting the job done relative to how much support they are getting from the university and fans.

2010 Pre-season look at schedule and conference strength

As performed last year, I've analyzed the schedules of every college football team, building a hypothetical strength-of-schedule ("SOS") using the 2010 schedule for each team, but assuming their opponents posted records identical to their 2009 win/loss record. For example, when looking at Texas' 12 opponents in 2010, we are using UCLA's 7 win 6 loss record as one of the 12 pieces of Texas' SOS.

Obviously, there are mathematical imperfections and qualitative flaws in such an analysis (teams that were 12-1 last year may have lost a lot to graduation, etc., and they may end up being much worse in 2010), but I think it still gives a good pre-season feel for how each team's schedule stacks up.


As you can see, I've ranked the contenders' schedules from strongest to weakest in two clusters... the presumed top 10 (strong national title contenders) and the presumed 11-25 (potential teams that can make a move, not unlike OU in 2000). I've used the collegefootballpoll.com survey of available preseason magazine rankings to group the two clusters.A few observations on the above. Alabama, Oklahoma, and Virginia Tech will obviously be in prime position if they put together undefeated seasons. Florida, Texas and Ohio State rank in the middle of the pack. Nebraska's schedule is fairly poor, althought the 73th place ranking would be improved by a likely conference title game. TCU and Boise St, despite all of the pre-season hoopla, continue to be hamstrung by particularly weak schedules.

I find the offseason to also be a good time to "keep score" on how the eleven FBS conferences performed in out-of-conference ("OOC") games. The SEC continues to dominate, but we saw a lot of changes below the top dog. The Big 10 and Pac 10 saw improvements in their OOC winning percentage, while the Big XII, MWC and ACC all took significant steps back.

The OOC games can have huge impacts on BCS posturing, but much of the impact comes via strength of the conference. Even if Texas schedules creampuffs on its own OOC schedule, if the Big XII is winning 80% of its games against OOC opponents, Texas will stand to benefit tremendously by playing in a stronger conference. After all, you play twice as many conference games as you do OOC games, and it helps more if your conference is "strong" than it might if your OOC schedule is strong. Basically, this phenomenon happened for Texas in 2008... despite not really playing anyone all that great OOC, the Big XII had a banner year. To me, this is why the month of September is so fascinating and critical. It can help set the stage for so many important developments down the road.

Only 8 weeks until the madness starts again. Giddy up.

Note: All of the above analysis uses the convention of counting all sub-FBS (FCS, DivII, DivIII, etc.) losses in the strength of schedule calculation, but ignoring wins against sub-FBS foes. Strength of schedule is calculated with 2/3 weighting derived from opponents' win-loss records, and 1/3 weighting derived from opponents' opponents' win-loss records.

BCS Projection/Analysis Week 14

This was originally posted on Orangebloods.com "Inside the 40 Acres," so it obviously focuses on the BCS from the perspective of Texas fans.

12:30p Update with Coaches poll

Texas did 20-30 points better than my intentionally conservative estimate. Even if TCU gets every single #2 vote in the Harris, and even if the computers don't break Texas' way in the computers on the ones I mention below, Texas still has a healthy lead over TCU and Cincy. Same is true if Cincy got every #2 in Harris and Texas got #3 (but that's REALLY far fetched anyway).

Texas is going to Pasadena.

9:08 Update with Sagarin

I can't say I'm entirely surprised, but Texas came in one notch lower than I expected in Sagarin. This is usually the only poll we have clarity on before the BCS is released, so we won't see a lot else from the computers this morning/afternoon (although you can get a pretty good feel on Colley). Sagarin has been punishing to Texas all year, but I really thought they would jump TCU. It's little surprise to me Florida stayed ahead of Texas, but I am surprised they were #2 despite the loss.

If this is the only disappointing computer result for Texas, it should be fine, since the lowest score gets dropped anyway. But at the margin, this may be indicative of Texas remaining weaker in several other computers, particularly Wolfe and Massey. I'll stick with the projection from last night, but areas where Texas could be vulnerable relative to my forecast:

1. Texas doesn't jump Florida in AH
2. Texas doesn't jump TCU in Massey


Even if that doesn't pan out as stated above, Texas should still have a decent lead on Cincy/TCU, but it would make them more vulnerable to a groundswell against Texas in the human ballots. TCU may also be able to jump Cincy, given the stronger than expected possibilities in the computers.

Overall, still not worried, but the coaches poll will be crucial. I would also expect the coaches poll to be more pro-Texas than the Harris will.

Base Case
Team       Coach  Score  Harris  Score   AH RB CM KM JS PW  Score    BCS
Alabama     1475  1.0000  2850   1.0000  25 25 25 25 25 25  1.0000  1.0000
Texas       1382  0.9369  2670   0.9369  23 24 24 22 21 22  0.9100  0.9280
Cincy       1315  0.8915  2541   0.8915  24 21 23 24 23 24  0.9400  0.9077
TCU         1374  0.9315  2655   0.9315  21 22 21 21 22 21  0.8500  0.9044
Boise St   (computers only)              20 20 19 20 19 20
Florida    (computers only)              22 23 22 23 24 23

Original message from very early Sunday morning

Tomorrow, I expect the following rankings:

1. Alabama
2. Texas
3. Cincy
4. TCU

I think there's a few key elements to think about as we await the official confirmation from tomorrow:

(1) The Texas win, while brutally tight, was legitimate. I was at the game in person, so I didn't have the benefit of seeing how controversial the decision to put a second back on the clock might have been. Based on what I've heard, and listening to national pundits (including Mel Kiper as I type), there is no appearance whatsoever that the media view the Texas win as illegimate. A close win means Texas loses some sponsorship on the ballots, but by and large they keep enough to stay ahead of TCU and Cincy. An illegitimate win means voters work hard to keep Texas out of the game, because they should have lost.

(2) Most voters know Texas got jobbed in 2008, and they also are hearing most experts tonight say it's a foregone conclusion Texas will go to Pasadena. Thus, Texas will tend to get the benefit of the doubt on a lot of ballots.

(3) Cincy does not have a lot to hang their hat on. They won by virtue of a missed extra point. The tendency should be for more voters to keep them behind Texas and TCU. This is crucial, because Cincy probably continues to outrank Texas in the computers tomorrow, but they won't have enough juice to jump Texas in the overall BCS.

(4) TCU will pick up some votes, but they did not play today. Their computer score will suffer impairment, and the gap is simply too big relative to Texas for them to make it close. The computer detriment will be so bad that they will likely fall behind Cincinnati in tomorrow's final BCS.

I think "open code" is the right way to approach this thing, hopefully to help us all sleep tonight. I know many posters follow the polls and computers closely, so I welcome any feedback. Let me first put forth my "base case," where I am at the margin trying to be conservative. This means I am keeping Florida ahead of Texas in several polls where SOS is highly important, and I'm also being "conservative" on how Texas' human votes play out.

Base Case
Team       Coach  Score  Harris  Score   AH RB CM KM JS PW  Score    BCS
Alabama     1475  1.0000  2850   1.0000  25 25 25 25 25 25  1.0000  1.0000
Texas       1382  0.9369  2670   0.9369  23 24 24 22 22 22  0.9100  0.9280
Cincy       1315  0.8915  2541   0.8915  24 21 23 24 24 24  0.9500  0.9110
TCU         1374  0.9315  2655   0.9315  21 22 21 21 21 21  0.8400  0.9010
Boise St   (computers only)              20 20 19 20 20 20
Florida    (computers only)              22 23 22 23 23 23

Guys, I think this is pretty conservative. Note how close the Texas and TCU votes are. It assumes Texas outgains TCU in 2nd place votes 35 to 20, and TCU is a solid #3 beyond those ballots. I'd be shocked if it were that close tomorrow, but I'd still rather be conservative, especially after last year.

Debunking TCU

Let's give TCU the best shot they have, hypothetically. If you want to assume that TCU jumps Texas and is ranked #2 on every single ballot, but keep the above computer assumptions stable, yes, TCU would jump Texas ever so slightly. If you assume a mere 4 coaches (and equivalent Harris voters) kept Texas #2 and TCU #3, but the overwhelming majority put TCU #2 and Texas #3, you get the following:

2. Texas 0.9185
3. TCU 0.9182

TCU simply lacks the computer strength to pull it off.

Debunking Cincy

I can come up with a hairy scenario where Cincy edges out Texas, but it puts rational voting behavior on its head. It involves Cincy taking significant #2 and #3 votes from TCU and Texas when they don't really have a leg to stand on after a soft performance against Pitt. You need to assume two things: a) voters intentionally want Texas not to go to Pasadena, and b) voters are actually smart enough to realize that they need to vote for Cincy, not TCU. I just don't see either of these happening to any meaningful degree. TCU is a fine football team that has has a solid year, and deserves to be higher than Cincy on most ballots (and heck, after tonight, maybe higher than Texas on a few ballots, too). Cincy does not deserve any meaningful amount of #2 votes.

Nonetheless, if you want the hairy scenario, here's one. It's not very logical, but it gives you an idea of the math necessary.

Votes/Place      1      2      3      4
Alabama         59                          1475
Texas                  28     20     11     1374
TCU                    14     20     25     1346
Cincy                  17     19     23     1351

Resulting BCS

2. Cincy   0.9273
3. Texas   0.9244

Bowl Projections

I'm basically keeping them the same as my projections from last week. I can re-paste my logic on the selections if anyone has any thoughts:

NC: Alabama vs. Texas
Sugar: Florida vs. Cincy
Orange: Georgia Tech vs. TCU
Fiesta: Iowa vs. Boise State
Rose: Oregon vs. Ohio State

Final Thoughts

I feel pretty at peace with this working out all right tomorrow, and I suspect when the coaches poll comes out, we'll feel really confident.

I've really appreciated everyone's interest this year. I still feel terrible, as much as I hedged it and called it a toss-up in 2008, that I got the initial call wrong on Texas/OU. That makes one gun shy when the big night comes a year later, but I'm really not worried. It should be all good.
This post was edited on 12/6 7:24 AM by SynTex1
This post was edited on 12/6 9:26 AM by SynTex1
This post was edited on 12/6 12:36 PM by SynTex1

Posted on 12/6 12:52 AM | IP: Logged

BCS Projection/Analysis Week 13

Note: this was originally posted on Orangebloods.com "Inside the 40 Acres," so it obviously focuses on the BCS from the perspective of Texas fans.

Projection for tomorrow

I don't expect any change in the rankings tomorrow.
1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Texas
4. TCU
5. Cincy
6. Boise

Looking Ahead to the Final Week

Absent a stunning upset in Arlington, it will be Texas versus the Florida/Alabama winner for the national championship game in Pasadena. Thankfully, we don't need to focus on the scenario of a one-loss SEC conference champ going to the NC anymore.

So is there any way at all Texas could get hosed next week? One should never assign a zero percent possibility when human judgment may be a factor, but I see no scenario that will keep an undefeated Texas team from the national championship game with any meaningful plausibility. I understand how many of us are still paranoid, after the three-way tie debacle from 2008. Believe me, I understand. But there is just no way.

What if TCU jumps Texas?
TCU already has a weaker computer score than the Horns, and it's going to get worse. TCU also is done with its season, meaning they can't boost their stock with the voters. For TCU to have any chance whatsoever, they must have Cincinnati lose to Pitt, to ensure that TCU is not seeing its votes diluted by the Bearcats. Then, TCU needs the one-loss SEC team to not fall below Texas in the majority of the computers. This might allow TCU to stay within 0.01 of Texas in the computers. Then, TCU must see about 6 out of 10 human voters, all of whom already have Texas ranked ahead of them, switch their vote from Texas to TCU. The odds for this perfect storm are astronomical.

What if Cincy jumps Texas?
Cincy would have a better shot than TCU of edging Texas in the computers (they still outrank Texas in 3 of them), but I do expect Cincy's advantage to diminish tomorrow. However, there are two really big problems for Cincy in the final week. First, the Pitt game has lost a lot of its luster given the Panthers' loss to West Virginia. More importantly, TCU is taking a lot of their votes, and TCU is done for the year. Cincinnati cannot jump Texas.

What if the SEC loser stays ahead of Texas?
Yes, Florida and Alabama both have amazing schedule strength which will translate in the computers. The SEC has had an incredible year, and it really will benefit both of these teams. One could project that the loser of the SEC title game may stay ahead of Texas in several (if not a majority) of the computers. Even with this potential advantage, it would take abnormal voting behavior for the SEC runner-up to stay ahead of Texas. Let's use Alabama as the loser in this scenario (since they would be the greater threat). Even if Alabama remains ahead of Texas in every single computer poll (unlikely), and Cincinnati serves as a wedge between Bama and Texas in several computers (unlikely), AND Alabama received every #3 vote (putting them ahead of undefeated TCU, Cincy, and Boise on every single ballot), they would still be a full 0.01 behind Texas in the final BCS. You would need to start thinking about voter shenanigans, where voters would be putting a one-loss Bama ahead of Texas. That's not going to happen, especially when the coaches' ballots will be made public. I think my computer assumption above is extreme, so Texas would have a good amount of buffer to withstand voter manipulation, should any occur (which I don't think it will).

If Texas wins in Arlington, they are going to Pasadena.

Included below is the updated strength of schedule projections. Texas had a good weekend, and will likely have a top-20 schedule when all is said and done. Alabama and Florida are off the charts. The other three remain very weak.

TEAM       CUR SOS  Rk  PROJSOS  Rk
Florida     0.528   15   0.555    6
Bama        0.536   12   0.563    2
Texas       0.518   26   0.530   17
TCU         0.477   63   0.477   63
Cincy       0.465   80   0.487   52
Boise       0.453   91   0.440   93

Seeding the BCS Bowls

Now that we are in the homestretch, the easiest way to discuss the way the bowls might play out is to look at the BCS pecking order:

(1) Sugar
Pick: SEC runner-up
Reason: No brainer.

(2) Fiesta
Pick: Iowa
Reason: The Fiesta knows they will probably get stuck with a non-BCS school on their other slot, so I think they will jump on a BCS at large contender. OkSt losing means that Iowa may be the choice (as the Big 10 is really the last man standing for at-large candidates). If it were simply about which Big 10 team deserves it, there is no doubt: it's Iowa. Iowa has played a much tougher schedule, and of course, they beat PSU head-to-head. Some might say that PSU would be better for ratings and attendance. I'm not so sure. PSU has been a major disappointment in 2009, and has not exactly been electrifying in winning against weak competition. Conversely, Iowa has exceeded expectations significantly in 2009. Also, Iowa could bring better potential fan turnout based on their history. They had 20,000 fans come to a regular season game at AzSt in 2004, and they set an Orange Bowl record in 2003 with 47,000 tickets sold. Geographically, the Fiesta isn't that much of a stretch for Iowa either. I think Iowa makes the most sense at this point.

(3) Orange
Pick: TCU
Reason: This is a tough one. Maybe the Orange would think about taking Cincy, but then again, the Orange just had Cincy last year, which is probably just enough reason for the Orange to go with TCU. Geographically, TCU isn't as good of a fit here as they would be in either the Sugar or Fiesta. The Orange is hungry for taking a quality team after having been stuck with some really lousy/uninspiring match-ups the last few years. TCU is clearly a much higher quality team than the other undefeateds outside of the NC game (and it's not even close, in my view).

(4) Fiesta
Pick: Boise State
Reason: A few years ago in the Fiesta, BSU played in one of the most exciting games of all time, stunning OU in overtime. The Fiesta may hope to relive that experience by inviting Boise again. There is a slight shot USC could inch into the top 14 if they win out, and the Fiesta could be tempted to go with a higher ratings/fan base play. But that seems pretty slim to me.

(5) Sugar
Pick: Cincinnati
Cincinnati becomes the "plug" team after the other at larges have been set. They would be thrilled to have the opportunity to make their case against a high quality SEC team.

So this sequence of events would give us:

NC: Texas vs. SEC winner
Sugar: SEC runner-up vs. Cincy
Fiesta: Iowa vs. Boise
Orange: Georgia Tech vs. TCU
Rose: Ohio State vs. Oregon

BCS Projection/Analysis Week 12

This was originally posted on Orangebloods.com "Inside the 40 Acres," so it obviously focuses on the BCS from the perspective of Texas fans.

final update with real standings

Wow. Bama scored very well in the computers, getting a perfect 1.00 (only Andersen Hester has them lower than #1, and that gets dropped out of the calculation). They could become #1 after beating Auburn, but obviously, it doesn't really matter too much. Cincinatti, despite not playing a game, saw a spike in their computer rating. I really don't know why, but there it is. They have played the 61st most difficult schedule in the country (Texas has played the 26th most difficult), yet Massey, Sagarin Elo Chess and Wolfe have Cincy solidly ahead of Texas. By the way, those three computers are the ones I've had the hardest time forecasting lately. None of this changes my view that Texas is golden if they win out, but I am now beginning to wonder if TCU can hold Cincinatti off. In the event the Horns get stunned, I'm wondering if Cincy will be the primary beneficiary, getting the chance to play for the NC. Hopefully it's a moot point.

1:45p update with coaches and Harris polls

TCU scoring a little bit better than expected in both polls, but the gap between Texas and TCU will remain comfortable. Actually, that looks to be true throughout the top 6, where decent gaps exist between #1/#2, #2/#3, etc. Still think BCS should be unchanged for the top 6. Oklahoma State will be close to cracking the top 10 (maybe #11), and if Pitt falls below them after a potential loss to Cincy, OkSt may be top-10 in the final BCS poll. I really like their chances if they can pull it out in Norman.

Original post from last night

Overview

Fairly brief update this late night, as there's really not much to say. It's still looking like a destiny-match between the SEC winner and Texas. I do not expect the BCS to change meaningfully this week. Therefore, tomorrow's BCS should look like:

1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Texas
4. TCU
5. Cincy
6. Boise

I was slightly disappointed by Louisiana Monroe and UTEP losing to weak opponents (particularly the latter), but it really doesn't matter. Texas will have a top 20-ish schedule when all is said and done, which will ensure there will not be any threat from TCU or Cincy. If Texas wins out, they will be in Pasadena. TCU and/or Cincy will simply not be able to get enough votes, even if Texas struggles somewhat against A&M or Nebraska. If Texas has a "fluke" win where a bad call clearly should have resulted in a Texas loss, then sure, maybe TCU can leap Texas, but otherwise, I just don't see it. I also am not at all worried about the other scenario some posters have thrown out, where the loser of the SEC title game still stays ahead of Texas in the final BCS poll. There is no precedent for that kind of voting behavior, and I would be completely shocked. The SEC loser could have a slight computer edge over Texas, but they will not have any kind of edge over Texas in the human polls, which is 2/3 of the BCS score.

Bottom line, to reiterate -- Texas wins out, they go to Pasadena.

Here's the updated SOS data on the six undefeateds:

TEAM    CUR SOS   RNK    PROJ SOS   RNK
FLA      0.511     28     0.540     14
ALA      0.530     15     0.559      4
TEX      0.515     26     0.525     20
TCU      0.508     36     0.477     60
Cincy    0.478     61     0.487     51
Boise    0.434     95     0.435     92

At-Large and Bowl Seeding

The picture has become more clear-cut for the at-large bids, with only a handful of teams really in play at this stage. As mentioned in previous weeks, the SEC runner-up and TCU are virtual locks, leaving two at-large spots open. Boise State, Oklahoma State, and a Big 10 two loss team (Penn State and Iowa) are the key contenders. I think Iowa should be the favorite to be a potential Big 10 at large. Penn State has better fan support, but they also lost to Iowa head-to-head, and Iowa's played the better schedule.

Right now, I think Oklahoma State is in good shape if they can beat the Sooners in Norman (hungry fan base that's never been to a bowl game; technically rated higher in BCS than Big 10 contenders; respectable schedule). I would actually seed them ahead of BSU and the Big 10 in the at-large pecking order. If OkSt loses, then Boise and Big 10 become the defacto teams. If OkSt wins, I think Boise may still edge out the Big 10, but this really becomes less about BCS "science" and more about back-room bowl committee dealings, which are impossible to handicap. Having two non-BCS teams is still really a burden, and Boise is ending its season fairly unimpressively (mediocre competition). I'll still give the edge to Boise for now, but I have been wavering on this week by week. Interesting if we start to hear any bowl committee stories leak out to the press in the next week or two.

BCS Bowl Projections
NC: SEC winner vs. Texas
Sugar: SEC runner-up vs. Boise State
Fiesta: TCU vs. Oklahoma State
Rose: Oregon vs. Ohio State
Orange: Georgia Tech vs. Cincy
This post was edited on 11/22 1:52 PM by SynTex1
This post was edited on 11/22 3:46 PM by SynTex1

BCS Projection/Analysis Week 10

This was originally posted on Orangebloods.com "Inside the 40 Acres," so it obviously focuses on the BCS from the perspective of Texas fans.

3p update with coaches and harris

TCU didn't get as much support as I expected in the Harris poll. I'll stick with them being #4 and Cincy #5, but there's a shot Cincy edges out TCU for #4. Still feel comfortable that Texas will fall to #3.

Original message from Saturday night

Overview

Texas fans can now be fully assured that an undefeated Longhorn team will be playing in Pasadena for the national title. Iowa's loss was clearly the big news, but the Hawkeyes were going to be in trouble, anyway, with some devastating developments on their schedule. The NC title picture is now clear as day, with the only real contenders (barring absolute chaos) being the six undefeated teams: Florida, Alabama, Texas, TCU, Cincy and Boise. The losses by Oregon, Penn State and ND really make the BCS bowl seeding outside of the NC game a lot more complicated. Two at large bids are wide open.

Projected BCS Standings

Alabama will jump Texas tomorrow, after Texas had narrowly jumped Alabama last week. Rick Tellshow, Sam Chi, and yours truly all mis-forecast that Bama would stay #2 last week... a sliver of an edge for Texas in Colley was what sealed the deal... by the narrowest of margins. Won't matter and won't be nearly as close this week, as Alabama will see significant computer re-strengthening by virtue of the win against LSU, as well as other games that favored their schedule. TCU was only slightly behind Cincy last week, and I think there's a good shot they jump Cincy this week. The #4 through #6 spots will be fairly tight, so it wouldn't be surprising if Cincy jumps to #4, for instance.

1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Texas
4. TCU
5. Cincy
6. Boise

Iowa Was Already Doomed

Even if Iowa was able to squeak out another win against a mediocre Big 10 team, their ability to position themselves in the NC picture was greatly impaired. The "strong SOS" that Iowa had earlier in the year (a perfect 1.00 computer score a few weeks ago) was a paper tiger. They benefited from lousy teams exceeding expectations (Iowa State, Arizona, etc.). They also had a big boost by not having the two weakest Big 10 teams on their schedule (Illinois and Purdue). Unfortunately, both benefits came crashing to earth, including Illinois and Purdue starting to beat some of Iowa's opponents. Iowa's top 5 SOS is no more (now down to #26). Even if they win out, they are completely irrelevant in the NC discussion.

SEC Picture Coming Into Focus

Alabama and Florida are on track to meet as undefeated divison winners for what would be a guaranteed NC game seed. Alabama seems highly unlikely to lose before the conference title game (@ MissSt, Chattanooga, @Auburn). Florida may have a potential trap game or two, but also looks likely to remain undefeated (@ South Carolina, FIU, FSU). We're getting late in the year, so if one of these two lost a game but then won the conference, it could get a little dicier to jump the other undefeated teams, but I think they would have a very good shot (Alabama in particular).

Sizing Up the Six Undefeated Teams

With the Hawkeyes out of the picture, the "pecking order" is pretty cut and dry. We are not going to see teams' computer strength change too much as the year goes on, although the SEC teams will strengthen slightly, Texas and TCU will weaken slightly, and Cincy may gain a little ground.

TEAM      CUR SOS  (RNK)   PROJ SOS  (RNK)
FLORIDA    0.535    (21)    0.538     (16)     
ALABAMA    0.562     (7)    0.557      (6)
TEXAS      0.533    (25)    0.521     (32)
TCU        0.502    (42)    0.477     (59)
CINCY      0.454    (67)    0.487     (54)
BOISE      0.431    (90)    0.432     (95)

So if Texas and the SEC winner are undefeated, there is no doubt what the NC game will be. If Florida or Bama lose a game but then win the SEC, I think they have a shot to jump into the #2 spot to play Texas, but I'll admit this is going to get harder to pull off with time running out in the season. If Texas loses, I can't believe I'm saying this, but either TCU or Cincy will play for the NC game (not sure which one... right now I'm thinking TCU, but Cincy may be able to jump ahead as the year goes on). If Texas, TCU and Cincy all lose a game, then Boise has a good shot to play for it all.

BCS Bowl Projections

A lot of teams keep shooting themselves in the foot for BCS bids. I really didn't think it was probable Notre Dame would climb high enough to be a factor in the BCS at large dialogue, but obviously, their stunning loss to Navy means complete elimination. Boise State did not really help their cause with a sloppy win over Louisiana Tech, and I still believe TCU (if they win out), will earn the sole automatic berth for "non-BCS" conferences. Boise is becoming a funky topic. I still think the bowl committees, especially with the difficult economy, are going to emphasize ratings and attendance over looking out for the little guy. Also, the fact Boise has already played in a BCS game may work against them. But there are not a lot of quality at-large contenders out there, and many/most of them have two losses (while BSU would have zero). So, I reluctantly have to acknowledge Boise may be able to secure a BCS bowl bid (unbelievable).

NC: SEC Winner vs. Texas
Fiesta: USC vs. TCU
Sugar: SEC Loser vs. Cincy
Rose: Oregon vs. Ohio State
Orange: George Tech vs. Boise State

Other at large candidates: Oklahoma State, Iowa, Penn State, Miami
This post was edited on 11/8 2:57 PM by SynTex1

BCS Projection/Analysis Week 9

This was originally posted on Orangebloods.com "Inside the 40 Acres," so it obviously focuses on the BCS from the perspective of Texas fans.

7:00p update, with Harris results

Well, my hedge that I declared as being unlikely proved prescient. The win over OkSt did propel Texas higher than I expected in the computers. But the real reason Texas jumped to #2 was less about Texas coming ahead of expectations in the computers, but more about Alabama falling significantly in the computers. The one that really did them in was the surprising three notch drop from #3 to #6 in Wolfe. That basically allowed them to be effectively tied with Texas in the computers.

This may very well be a one-week phenomenon. Alabama, should they defeat LSU next week, will probably jump Texas to go back into the #2 spot. Also, Texas will see its SOS decrease somewhat as the year goes on, while Alabama will see it strengthen.

Glad I was wrong. Very cool for the Horns to be #2 in the BCS for the first time all year, and obviously, very well deserved.

5:00p update, with Harris results

Harris also generally as projected. Doesn't alter my last projection. Really not seeing how Texas jumps to #2. Sometimes, the computers do funky things after a team has a "big" win against a high quality opponent, so I could be underestimating the boost from OKSt, but I don't think it can be enough. Also, maybe Oregon gets slightly more love in the computers than I'm forecasting, which would still mean there's a slight shot they jump Boise. TCU/Cincy at #5/#6 is also a little tight. Big gaps between Florida/Alabama and Texas/Iowa.

11:50a update, with coaches poll results

The top three were within one point of my projection, reiterating my view that Texas will not jump Alabama for the #2 spot (which is apparently what Brad Edwards is projecting). If two or three computers break Texas' way, then they may edge out the Tide, but I still view this as unlikely (but never rule anything out completely). Other modest surprises were the fact that TCU jumped to the #4 spot in the coaches poll. The key that the Horned Frogs learned is winning convincingly, even if against a lousy opponent like uNLV, in a week where lots of votes are in play (given previous #4 USC's loss) can pay off big-time. Boise State really now has an uphill battle to ever jump TCU, because once voters put a team higher on their ballot, it is tough to get them moved back down. Boise's administrators better start greasing the wheels for a non-automatic bid, because they are going to have to make a case to the BCS bowl committees that they can make an invite economically viable.

The other modest surprise was that Oregon did not get as much of a boost with the impressive win over USC. I'm pretty surprised. If a team clobbers the #4 team in the country (and a team that many thought was the best overall, even though they lost to Washington), you would think they might be able to edge out one of the weaker undefeateds. This lack of a boost effectively kills Oregon's chances to really be relevant in the NC discussion (and they had a slim chance at best).

Updated projection changes slightly, but only on the bottom half:

1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Texas
4. Iowa
5. TCU
6. Cincy
7. Boise
8. Oregon
9. LSU


Original message from late Saturday night

Overview

A fairly unremarkable Saturday in the NC race, notwithstanding USC's loss to Oregon (which wasn't all that surprising, really). The seven undefeateds remain undefeated. Two from the SEC (Bama and Florida), one from the Big XII (Texas), one from the Big 10 (Iowa), and three from weaker conferences (TCU, Cincy and Boise).

We are still down to the "elite nine," but the Ducks have swapped with the Trojans as the Pac 10 contender. Yet, Oregon faces some substantial hurdles (to be discussed).

My projection as of now:

1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Texas
4. Iowa
5. TCU
6. Boise State
7. Oregon
8. Cincy
9. LSU


There is a modest probability Texas might jump Alabama into the #2 spot. I have projected some modest voter appreciation in favor of the Horns (and to the detriment of the Tide) based on a hugely impressive road win against the #14 team in the country. That said, I have been repeatedly surprised by how sticky the votes have been for the Tide (and the Gators) so far this year, and so when push comes to shove, Alabama probably still edges out Texas. But the margin is going to narrow considerably. Also... there is a shot Oregon could jump Boise (for now) in the BCS standings tomorrow, but it's difficult to assess what kind of boost Oregon will get in the human polls

Oregon?? What do we think??

Boise State fans should be pleased -- the big Oregon win against the Trojans puts the "human voters" in an awkward bind. Oregon, if not for the opening day loss in Boise, would be an incredibly strong one-loss contender. They would be in prime position to step in if some undefeated teams stumbled. They have the third most difficult schedule in the country (both current and projected). But... oh wait... they lost to Boise State. And Boise State is still undefeated. Any voter who puts Oregon ahead of Boise on their ballot should be shot, or at least mildly tortured. Much like we Longhorn fans (rightfully) trumpeted "45-35" last year on this message board to emphasize the meaning of a head-to-head victory, that sentiment must be enforced on Boise relative to Oregon. What a bizarre ceiling that hangs over the Ducks... they'd be in prime position to contend for the NC, if not for that loss. The computers will try to look through it, and give them a lot of benefit, but the human votes will keep them generally out of the NC picture. But it's a really strange dynamic, and the fact Oregon may edge out Boise this week will be a testament to how weird of a situation this will be.

Iowa's Fall From Grace

Iowa played yet another sloppy game, and had yet another "gutsy" come from behind win. Fine, let that be the story on which the media fixates. For those that want to look at the numbers, Iowa had a particularly rough weekend. Their opponents played to date had a very mediocre week, going 2-4 (Iowa State, Arkansas State, Michigan, and Michigan State lost, while PSU and Wisconsin won). Their projected schedule (counting all future opponents as well as opponents played to date) fell slightly, from 4th in the country to a still respectable 8th. I do not expect them to gain as many points as they probably should have from the humans this week, considering a lot of USC votes were in play. Iowa missed a real opportunity, and that effort against Indiana is only going to feed the skeptics. Yes, the Ohio State game could be a platform, but Iowa needs to be converting voters now, not later. I view the gap between Iowa and Texas to be too massive. Iowa should see its perfect 1.00 computer score fall this week. I firmly believe if Texas wins out, Iowa will be playing in Pasadena for the Rose Bowl, and not the national championship.

SEC still on track

The SEC schedules got stronger this week. Florida and Alabama remain in prime position (and LSU technically controls its destiny as well). I think even with a loss, the SEC conference winner will be playing for the national title.

What if Texas and Iowa lose

Texas generally held steady for its projected SOS this week, but it's still not good enough to withstand a loss, in my opinion (right now, 30th most difficult schedule in the country). I continue to believe if Texas loses a game, the loss will be too late in the year to overcome, and the North opponent will be too weak to help propel Texas. I also think Iowa has too many perception issues, despite their incredibly strong schedule, to be relevant in the NC discussion should they lose a game. That begs the question... who would play the SEC title winner if both Texas and Iowa stumble? I think TCU and Boise (ugh) would be in good shape, with Cincy not far behind. Do not underestimate how much benefit Boise got by virtue of the Ducks beating the Trojans. Boise's schedule is appalling (94th in the country), but they could become a firm #2/#3 in the event Texas and Iowa lose. TCU has a stronger schedule (68th in the country) and a big match-up against Utah coming up. It's hard to believe, but the BCS-busters may have their say if Texas and Iowa don't take care of business.

Seeding the Bowls

After the 6 BCS conference winners are slotted, that leaves four spots in play. TCU is in prime position to hold off Boise for the automatic "non-BCS" bid, and you have to believe the loser of the Alabama/Florida game also gets a bid. Right now, I think USC and Penn State are probably the other two at-large teams (meaning Boise may get "screwed"). Right now, I would project the bowls as:

NC: Florida vs. Texas
Sugar: Alabama vs. USC
Fiesta: Penn State vs. TCU
Rose: Iowa vs. Oregon
Orange: Georgia Tech vs. Cincy

Below is the way the nine contenders rank as far as "current SOS" (W/L records and opp's opponents W/L records played to date) and "projected SOS" (counting all teams on the schedule). Note I now project Nebraska as the North champion, rather than KSU.

TEAM CUR SOS Rk ProjSOS Rk
Florida 0.577 8 0.541 16
Alabama 0.539 23 0.564 7
Texas 0.545 22 0.523 30
Iowa 0.557 15 0.560 8
TCU 0.494 43 0.466 68
Boise St 0.431 86 0.431 94
Oregon 0.594 3 0.576 3
Cincinnati 0.451 72 0.476 59
LSU 0.518 29 0.532 24


If you remain concerned Iowa poses a threat to Texas, and you want Texas to hold off the Hawkeyes in a worst case scenario.... root for the Big XII South against the North (obvious), but root for Nebraska to win the North. Root for Kansas State not to win the North. KSU has a terrible, terrible SOS, with two of their victories coming against sub-FBS teams, while Nebraska has a better resume. I really am not worried about Iowa, but we have lots of wedges between Texas and Iowa in the polls (Boise, TCU, Cincy, etc.) But if those teams all lose, and Iowa tries to pose any kind of threat, however remote, root for KSU not to go to Arlington.
This post was edited on 11/1 12:17 AM by SynTex1
This post was edited on 11/1 11:58 AM by SynTex1
This post was edited on 11/1 5:18 PM by SynTex1
This post was edited on 11/1 7:07 PM by SynTex1

Regarding Iowa

This was originally posted on Orangebloods.com "Inside the 40 Acres," so it obviously focuses on the BCS from the perspective of Texas fans.

Iowa's perfect 1.00 computer score in today's BCS standings is eye-catching. Some are worried Iowa poses a threat to an undefeated Texas, based mostly on their schedule strength (which as I have noted for weeks, is quite strong). I continue to believe Iowa is not a serious threat to Texas. I will never rule anything out, because anything is possible, and maybe some dynamics unfold over the next few weeks to change the story... but I view it as highly unlikely that Iowa will jump Texas if both teams win out.

1. Iowa has peaked in the computers, and they have nowhere to go but down.

To start, let's use the blunt (but relevant) instrument of strength-of-schedule to understand why Iowa has peaked. The first column is the current SOS through Week 8; the second column is the "projected" SOS counting all opponents on the schedule. The third column is the change, with positive numbers indicating the teams that will strengthen, and negative meaning the opposite. I've sorted it from teams that will strengthen the most to those that will weaken the most. I know some guys (Tellshow in particular) like to forecast how the projected SOS will look if the higher ranked teams win during the rest of the year. I'd rather not make any assumptions, because CFB is inherently an unpredictable game.

TEAM        CUR SOS   PROJ SOS   Chg
Cincinnati   0.406     0.455    0.049 
Southern Cal 0.549     0.566    0.017 
Alabama      0.557     0.564    0.007 
LSU          0.545     0.539   (0.005)
Texas        0.537     0.528   (0.009)
Florida      0.559     0.533   (0.027)
Iowa         0.621     0.582   (0.039)
Boise St     0.464     0.420   (0.043)
TCU          0.526     0.466   (0.060)

Note Iowa's schedule will weaken substantially (0.039 winning percentage points), while Texas will hold generally stable. Also, Texas will eventually jump TCU, USC, etc., in several of the polls. Don't get me wrong.... I expect Iowa will still hold a computer advantage over Texas, but there is no way it will be the massive chasm (1.00 vs. 0.79) it is right now. I also think there is the potential for Alabama to be the #1 team ahead of Iowa if they win out, which further negates Iowa's relative advantage over Texas in the computers.


2. Iowa has played 8 games, while most others have played 7.

That's tangentially related to point 1, because it is slightly inflating Iowa's computer strength, but it's worth pointing out.

3. Iowa can, at best win 12 games, but Texas can win 13.

This is particularly important in Billingsley, based on the way it is computed (it should assure Texas remains ahead of Iowa in Billingsley), but it may help in other computers as well.

4. Iowa will be at home on the couch watching after November 21.

The Big 10 is perpetually hurt by not having late season games. Texas will have the opportunity to play in front of national audiences on Thanksgiving night and in early December in the conference title game. There have been times where a team that has the "last word" hurts themselves by playing poorly (think Cal in 2004 against Southern Miss), but all else equal, you'd like to have the last impression.

5. If you make Iowa a solid #3 because you think teams will lose, this will help Texas in the computers.

I don't think it is going to play out this way, but many are worried that Boise, Cincy, TCU, and USC will all lose a game, making it a clear cut Iowa vs. Texas argument. Clearly, now that Texas no longer has much of a shot to get to the NC game with a loss, we should all put our rally caps on and root for all those contenders, because they are taking votes from the Hawkeyes. But if all those teams lose, that is to Texas' advantage in the computers. As I said earlier, I don't think Iowa will have a perfect 1.00 computer score at the end of the season, but Texas will be much more competitive against Iowa in the computers if there is a scorched earth among the other contenders. And I still don't think Iowa cracks much of a dent in Texas' human vote tally (discussed in the next point). Yes, if Texas is a perfect #2 in the human polls and a perfect #3 in the computers, and Iowa is a perfect #1 in the computers and a perfect #3 in the human polls, it would be a tie. But it's not going to be that clean. Some computers will start going against Iowa (see point 1), and Iowa may not clean up all the #3 votes (think about the Florida/Bama loser... do they throw a wrench into this?).

6. Texas enjoys solid support in the human polls, and votes are very sticky.

Looking at the coaches poll, Texas has 1390 points among 59 voters. We know for a fact that they are getting 4 first place votes. But if you do the math, almost all voters have Texas within the top three of their ballots... almost half of them (about 28 out of 59, by my estimate) have Texas ranked #1 or #2. Some voters will shift based on the latest fad, but a majority of votes are usually pretty sticky, meaning Iowa has an uphill fight in getting much needed support in the human polls. The fact that Iowa ranks a lowly 8th in the coaches poll (behind most of the other contenders) is a reflection of how they are viewed by the voters.

7. Iowa's body of work is... flawed.

It is really hard to get over the near-opening day loss at home against Northern Iowa (blocked FG at the end of the game). UNI is no Appy State. UNI is 5-3 overall, and Southern Illinois and South Dakota State have beaten UNI by more convincing margins than Iowa did. Iowa also played extremely poorly against lowly Arkansas State (2-4). I would like to point out that Louisiana Monroe (a team that Texas thumped) beat ASU by twice the margin that Iowa did, although we know football is not transitive. Iowa has also posted skin of their teeth wins against Michigan and Michigan State, neither of which has really been considered to be strong teams. Maybe Texas stinks up the joint against a KU or an A&M, but in the meantime, Texas' wins have been much more dominating.

8. Everyone believes Texas is the superior team.

There is no mainstream CFB source I am aware of that thinks Iowa goes to the NC unless Texas loses. Because human opinion is crucial in the BCS, when people believe something to be so, they make it so. If we start to hear a meaningful groundswell of people go pro-Iowa, we can start to become concerned.