All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > College Football > 2012 BPI Sports CFB Rankings
10/1/2012 7:24 PM
Mine is whacky this early as well.

Oregon St 3 0
Stanford 3 1
Notre Dame 4 0
Florida St 5 0
Oregon 5 0
Florida 4 0
Georgia 5 0
South Carolina 5 0
Alabama 5 0
Ohio St 5 0
Kansas St 4 0
UCLA 4 1
Iowa St 3 1
Texas Tech 4 0
LSU 5 0
Washington 3 1
Michigan St 3 2
Texas 4 0
Iowa 3 2
Arizona 3 2
West Virginia 4 0
Missouri 3 2
Boise St 3 1
LA Tech 4 0
Louisville 5 0
Ohio 5 0
Clemson 4 1
Miami 4 1
Cincinnati 3 0
Mississippi St 4 0
Utah St 4 1
Arizona St 4 1
Nebraska 4 1
Wisconsin 3 2
Minnesota 4 1
C Michigan 2 2
Toledo 4 1
Kent St 3 1
LA Lafayette 3 1
Duke 4 1
Ball St 3 2
South Florida 2 3
Tennessee 3 2
NC St 3 2
TCU 4 0
Virginia 2 3
Oklahoma St 2 2
W Kentucky 4 1
Penn St 3 2
Kentucky 1 4
Northwestern 5 0
Rutgers 4 0
Tulsa 4 1
W Michigan 2 3
Pittsburgh 2 2
N Illinois 4 1
VA Tech 3 2
Nevada 4 1
Wake Forest 3 2
Utah 2 2
SJ St 4 1
Connecticut 3 2
MTSU 3 1
Fresno St 3 2
Baylor 3 1
North Carolina 3 2
BYU 3 2
GA Tech 2 3
Illinois 2 3
Troy 3 2
USC 3 1
Michigan 2 2
Auburn 1 3
UCF 2 2
Purdue 3 1
UNLV 1 4
Washington St 2 3
Texas A&M 3 1
Colorado 1 4
Mississippi 3 2
Colorado St 1 4
East Carolina 3 2
Texas SA 5 0
Texas St 2 2
Oklahoma 2 1
Marshall 2 3
Houston 1 3
Air Force 2 2
Miami (OH) 3 2
LA Monroe 2 2
Maryland 2 2
New Mexico 2 3
Rice 1 4
FIU 1 4
UTEP 1 4
N Texas 2 3
Arkansas St 2 3
Indiana 2 2
Bowling Green 2 3
SD St 2 3
Wyoming 1 3
Akron 1 4
Vanderbilt 1 3
Hawaii 1 3
SMU 1 3
Navy 1 3
Boston College 1 3
Temple 1 2
New Mexico St 1 4
Arkansas 1 4
Buffalo 1 3
California 1 4
Kansas 1 3
Syracuse 1 3
S Alabama 1 4
FAU 1 4
Massachusetts 0 5
Southern Miss 0 4
Tulane 0 4
UAB 0 4
Memphis 0 4
E Michigan 0 4
Idaho 0 5
Army 0 4


10/1/2012 7:26 PM
My old system seems more sane: But still weird!

Alabama 5 0
Stanford 3 1
Notre Dame 4 0
Oregon 5 0
Georgia 5 0
Ohio St 5 0
Florida 4 0
Oregon St 3 0
Florida St 5 0
South Carolina 5 0
Kansas St 4 0
Texas 4 0
Texas Tech 4 0
West Virginia 4 0
UCLA 4 1
LSU 5 0
Boise St 3 1
Iowa 3 2
Northwestern 5 0
LA Tech 4 0
Ohio 5 0
Iowa St 3 1
Michigan St 3 2
Miami 4 1
Arizona 3 2
Missouri 3 2
Arizona St 4 1
Clemson 4 1
Louisville 5 0
Mississippi St 4 0
Nebraska 4 1
Washington 3 1
Toledo 4 1
Penn St 3 2
Cincinnati 3 0
Nevada 4 1
TCU 4 0
Utah St 4 1
SJ St 4 1
Wisconsin 3 2
Ball St 3 2
Minnesota 4 1
Duke 4 1
N Illinois 4 1
Connecticut 3 2
Kent St 3 1
LA Lafayette 3 1
VA Tech 3 2
Tennessee 3 2
USC 3 1
NC St 3 2
Baylor 3 1
Tulsa 4 1
W Kentucky 4 1
Oklahoma St 2 2
Rutgers 4 0
BYU 3 2
North Carolina 3 2
MTSU 3 1
Troy 3 2
South Florida 2 3
Fresno St 3 2
Kentucky 1 4
Wake Forest 3 2
Texas A&M 3 1
Michigan 2 2
Pittsburgh 2 2
Utah 2 2
W Michigan 2 3
Virginia 2 3
C Michigan 2 2
Texas SA 5 0
Purdue 3 1
UCF 2 2
Auburn 1 3
UNLV 1 4
GA Tech 2 3
Illinois 2 3
Colorado 1 4
Mississippi 3 2
LA Monroe 2 2
Maryland 2 2
East Carolina 3 2
Miami (OH) 3 2
Oklahoma 2 1
Texas St 2 2
New Mexico 2 3
Rice 1 4
Air Force 2 2
N Texas 2 3
Marshall 2 3
Houston 1 3
UTEP 1 4
Washington St 2 3
FIU 1 4
Colorado St 1 4
Arkansas St 2 3
Bowling Green 2 3
Indiana 2 2
SD St 2 3
Wyoming 1 3
Akron 1 4
Vanderbilt 1 3
Hawaii 1 3
SMU 1 3
Navy 1 3
Boston College 1 3
Temple 1 2
New Mexico St 1 4
Arkansas 1 4
Buffalo 1 3
California 1 4
Kansas 1 3
Syracuse 1 3
S Alabama 1 4
FAU 1 4
Massachusetts 0 5
Southern Miss 0 4
Tulane 0 4
UAB 0 4
Memphis 0 4
E Michigan 0 4
Idaho 0 5
Army 0 4


10/1/2012 11:58 PM
gregsimon: Your system was perhaps developed in or around Palo Alto, CA perhaps?  That is a lot of love to give to a team who has lost every away game they have played so far and only beat one ranked team (by a single TD).
10/2/2012 1:17 AM

colonels19,

I think you have the right kind of idea about your computer rankings. I like how you compare your rankings to other computers rather than to humans. You don't want your rankings to EVER just echo what humans can/will already tell you. Because then, what's really the point of it? 

For instance: Humans would want USC ranked ahead of La. Tech. The reasoning behind it wouldn't be based on data that has happened, but on what they believe WOULD happen if those two teams faced each other. I believe that, thus far into the season, your computer's rankings are correct when it comes to La. Tech being ranked above USC.

My suggestion would be that, no matter what adjustments you ever make to the system, try to preserve the right kind of "quirks" in the system. Let data reign over human analysis. Human thoughts are why we have human polls & an ability to abide strictly by data is why the BCS uses some computer rankings in it's system. 

10/2/2012 6:49 AM
Yes, I'm sure that the reason that the Massey composite rankings have USC at 18 and La Tech at 34 is because the only way to rank USC over La Tech is by speculating about what would happen...

Not a knock at your rankings colonels, any computer system is bound to have some quirks - but seriously tripleh...

10/2/2012 9:13 AM
Posted by cydrych on 10/1/2012 11:58:00 PM (view original):
gregsimon: Your system was perhaps developed in or around Palo Alto, CA perhaps?  That is a lot of love to give to a team who has lost every away game they have played so far and only beat one ranked team (by a single TD).
Notice I said "my formula was whacky this early". I KNOW it's faulty. I posted for comparison and for fun.

But for clarity the reason Stanford is getting a boost this early is:

SJ state is 4-1, their lone loss coming at the hands of Stanford.
Duke is 4-1, their lone loss coming at the hands of Stanford.
USC is 3-1, their lone loss coming at the hands of Stanford.
Stanford's one loss was AT Washington(3-1), whose only loss came at the hands of LSU in Baton Rouge.

I'm pretty certain they are the only team after 5 weeks, that can take credit for being the reason that three different teams aren't undefeated.
I also am quite certain that Duke and SJ state will have more than one loss fairly soon, and those wins for Stanford won't be worth as much as they are today.


10/2/2012 9:38 AM
Its all good, man.  I was just busting your chops.  At least you have a system.  I am forced to make **** up as I go.  I am particularly impressed that you understand and can defend your system.  greg > cydrych
10/2/2012 10:01 AM
I wouldn't go that far.
I cannot defend all of it. I can't really "defend" Stanford at 2, I can only explain why the math spits out that result.
I know LSU is better than 16 at this point of the season, and shouldn't be behind UCLA. Or a two loss Iowa at 18.

If I were actually turning in a poll that counted (like the writers or whatever) it'd go more like:

Alabama
Oregon
Florida St
LSU
Oregon St
Georgia
Florida
South Carolina
Notre Dame
Ohio St

And I'm not terribly impressed with Ohio St nor Notre Dame yet but they both beat Michigan ST, and I believe MSU is a pretty solid team, so...
10/2/2012 4:10 PM
I'm delightfully surprised with the candor here...stern but civil...keep it up...hopefully I'll have another set of rankings or something up soon.
10/2/2012 4:58 PM (edited)
Posted by AlCheez on 10/2/2012 6:49:00 AM (view original):
Yes, I'm sure that the reason that the Massey composite rankings have USC at 18 and La Tech at 34 is because the only way to rank USC over La Tech is by speculating about what would happen...

Not a knock at your rankings colonels, any computer system is bound to have some quirks - but seriously tripleh...

Ok.. What criteria do you use to justify Massey's Composite Rankings? Does USC have a better record so far? No. Has USC played a significantly tougher schedule up to this point? No. Did USC lose their only big game thus far? Yes. So, what makes USC 18th & La. Tech 34th? Only the notion from the start that USC is better. That is all.

How do I know this? Because if you go back to the preseason on Massey's Composite Rankings, they had USC 5th & Louisiana Tech 50th. That's the only reason USC is so far ahead or ahead at-all. The only thing holding USC up is the notion from the start that they are better, not what has HAPPENED thus far.

In that way, colonels19's rankings are a step above the rest, clearly. Data > notions. Yes, seriously.

10/2/2012 6:08 PM
Posted by tripleh595 on 10/2/2012 4:58:00 PM (view original):
Posted by AlCheez on 10/2/2012 6:49:00 AM (view original):
Yes, I'm sure that the reason that the Massey composite rankings have USC at 18 and La Tech at 34 is because the only way to rank USC over La Tech is by speculating about what would happen...

Not a knock at your rankings colonels, any computer system is bound to have some quirks - but seriously tripleh...

Ok.. What criteria do you use to justify Massey's Composite Rankings? Does USC have a better record so far? No. Has USC played a significantly tougher schedule up to this point? No. Did USC lose their only big game thus far? Yes. So, what makes USC 18th & La. Tech 34th? Only the notion from the start that USC is better. That is all.

How do I know this? Because if you go back to the preseason on Massey's Composite Rankings, they had USC 5th & Louisiana Tech 50th. That's the only reason USC is so far ahead or ahead at-all. The only thing holding USC up is the notion from the start that they are better, not what has HAPPENED thus far.

In that way, colonels19's rankings are a step above the rest, clearly. Data > notions. Yes, seriously.

Or it might just be that USC is better than La Tech.  And USC has played a better schedule than La Tech.  I mean La Tech has 4 wins, but they are against the worst team in the ACC, the worst team in the Big Ten, and the two worst teams in CUSA.
10/2/2012 6:34 PM

Ok, I'll bite.. USC must've beaten somebody of note themselves.. Let me see: Cal? Nope.. Cal has only beaten Southern Utah. Syracuse? You mean the team that only beat Stony Brook & struggled through most of that game? Ok, so Hawaii is the thing that puts them over the top? 

C'mon guys. I know you want to pick on me, but do a better job than this.

10/2/2012 6:53 PM (edited)
Posted by tripleh595 on 10/2/2012 4:58:00 PM (view original):
Posted by AlCheez on 10/2/2012 6:49:00 AM (view original):
Yes, I'm sure that the reason that the Massey composite rankings have USC at 18 and La Tech at 34 is because the only way to rank USC over La Tech is by speculating about what would happen...

Not a knock at your rankings colonels, any computer system is bound to have some quirks - but seriously tripleh...

Ok.. What criteria do you use to justify Massey's Composite Rankings? Does USC have a better record so far? No. Has USC played a significantly tougher schedule up to this point? No. Did USC lose their only big game thus far? Yes. So, what makes USC 18th & La. Tech 34th? Only the notion from the start that USC is better. That is all.

How do I know this? Because if you go back to the preseason on Massey's Composite Rankings, they had USC 5th & Louisiana Tech 50th. That's the only reason USC is so far ahead or ahead at-all. The only thing holding USC up is the notion from the start that they are better, not what has HAPPENED thus far.

In that way, colonels19's rankings are a step above the rest, clearly. Data > notions. Yes, seriously.

Massey's Composite Ratings are a composite of ALL the various ranking systems that get submitted - looks like 91 right now.   A large number of those are computer ratings.  Almost half of the ratings currently being used weren't submitted in the preseason.  That was my only point - there are plenty of computer rankings out there that still put USC over La Tech as opposed to the other way around - computer ratings based on DATA.

Beyond that, why are we comparing USC and La Tech to begin with?  You always come in and argue tangential points that no one has made.   No one really said "OMG, La Tech is ahead of USC, that's terrible!"   They are 7th.  Sure, maybe there's an argument to be made that La Tech ahead of USC based solely on the data is valid.  How about them being ahead of WVU, Oregon, Ohio State, etc? 

10/2/2012 7:11 PM (edited)
AlCheez,

Then let's get to what should've been the main focus of what I said, rather than what you decided to reply to within it. That being: Data > opinions & pre-determined ideas of how teams should be ranked. I was using USC & La. Tech merely as an example & you decided to make out like that was something crazy to do. You decided to discuss USC vs. La. Tech & now you don't want to. You didn't have to reply, you chose to pick USC vs. La. Tech out of that post.
10/2/2012 8:43 PM (edited)
I still think USC vs. La Tech can be supported via the data, and there are a number of computer rankings out there that agree with me.  No, it's not a slam dunk.  But you chose to use La Tech's ranking, something that colonels openly admits that HE doesn't see as right with the rankings in an illustration of a selling point.  Sorry, I find that to be BS.  If La Tech was #1, they would still be ahead of USC - is that still a selling point of the system?

Like I said, you can make an argument that La Tech belongs ahead of USC based purely on the data (I think, for instance, that Syracuse might be a better win than anything La Tech has  - yes they struggled against Stony Brook, but they also lost two games by a combined 8 points to 2 teams that have 1 loss between them) - though I think it's less than iron clad.  There are any number of those teams they are also ranked ahead of that they have no business being ahead of - so La Tech's ranking is NOT a highlight at the moment, whether they are ranked ahead of one particular team you believe is merited based on the results.

I agree with you, for the most part, on the overall point - but find a better illustration - La Tech at #7 doesn't support your point.  I will make one caveat - with so few results at this point, I think there is still very much to be said for the eye test relative to computer rankings - I'm sure that's one of the reasons why they wait a while to release BCS standings.
of 6
All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > College Football > 2012 BPI Sports CFB Rankings

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.