Boise's Schedule: A Comparison
by PeteHoliday on Sep 6, 2010 11:57 PM CDT
Email
PrintAs we prepare to spend the next 14 weeks listening to ESPN (et al.) talk about how brave Boise State is for scheduling two (TWO!!) BCS conference teams, I thought it'd be worth looking to see how their scheduling stacks up to, say, our schedule. I pulled the Sagarin predictive numbers for the season so far (doesn't include the VT/Boise game, I don't think), so we could do a little comparing.
If we just look at averages (which includes our game against 244th ranked Georgia State), the average Alabama opponent is around 62nd, while the average Boise State opponent is around 79th. Of course, averages are notorious for being able to be dragged away by outliers, and two of the ways to get rid of those are with trimmed means (only averaging the middle X%) and medians. In this case, rather remarkably, the 90% trimmed mean and the Median are actually identical for both teams: Alabama's is 34 while Boise's is 62. (Which goes to show you that the Georgia State game kinda kills our strength of schedule).
Of course, it's so early that those numbers are pretty worthless (for example: Mississippi State is ranked #18 while Penn State is only 23rd and Arkansas is 46th), so I thought a more fun way to measure would be strength on strength! I sorted the teams by their sagarin rating so we can see how they compare down the stretch. These are also somewhat skewed by the rankings, but as you'll soon see, it hardly matters:
- South Carolina -- Virginia Tech
- Florida -- Fresno State
- LSU -- Oregon State
- Mississippi State -- Idaho
- Penn State -- Utah State
- Tennessee -- Nevada
- Auburn -- Hawaii
- Arkansas -- Louisiana Tech
- Duke -- Wyoming
- Ole Miss -- San Jose State
- Georgia State -- Toledo
So, if you take a look at that, you can see some places where the sagarin right now doesn't match reality, but outside of the Georgia State game, I'm not sure there's a single time the team on the left wouldn't be a tougher match up than the team on the right.
Virginia Tech might have the edge over South Carolina, although after tonight's game I doubt it.
I'll keep the list up to date from week to week since the numbers will get significantly more accurate as the season progresses, but, gosh, if you can't go undefeated with Boise's schedule, do you even deserve a crappy bowl game?
It all serves to illustrate one of the more frustrating points of schedule arguments: people looove to toss out the conference schedule as unimportant and focus on the 3-4 games a year that aren't written in stone, which is silly, because your conference slate comprises 75% of your games.
PS: Next time you hear someone say "It's not boise's fault they have a crappy conference" ask them this: if they can't be blamed for being a part of the WAC, how can they be given credit for "moving up" the MWC? Bottom line is that Boise was in the WAC by choice, so, yeah, you can blame them for playing a crappy schedule.
FanPosts are just that; posts created by the fans. They are in no way indicative of the opinions of SBN and the authors of Roll Bama Roll.
132 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I also love seeing bloggers bust our chops for scheduling San Jose State without the full disclosure that San Jose State is in Boise’s conference.
I'm wrong all the time.
Oh my god.
You freaking nailed it. Boise’s schedule is the exact inverse of ours (2-3 mid-level/hard games vs 2-3 pansies) yet the media can’t stop themselves. It was terribly difficult to hear the game commentary last night seeing that Brent and Herbie’s had their mouths were full. Boise is a fine football team, but they shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near the BCSCG with that embarrasing schedule.
Some people say "If you can't beat them, join them". I say "If you can't beat them, beat them", because they will be expecting you to join them, so you will have the element of surprise.
by BamaHadMeAtHello on Sep 7, 2010 9:11 AM CDT up reply actions
I just think that, if BSU really wants to move up and prove they're as good as BCS teams
they should be scheduling every one of their non-conference games against BCS teams. They claim they shouldn’t be held back by their conference, well you know what, they have 4 games a year that they are free to do what they want. They shouldn’t be playing Wyoming and Toledo. They should schedule BCS teams, even if they’re not marquee top-of-the-conference teams. Play the Wisconsins and South Carolinas at least. I think they could make this happen if they really wanted to. But they don’t. They want to have 1 or 2 real games each year. arrgghhh
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
No they don't
They play the “nobody wants to play us” card. Which in reality is the “nobody wants to dignify us by giving us a home and home” card. Tough cookies, you feast on cupcakes all year long. Go on the road for all of your OOC games and beat some quality opponents and then maybe you’ll have earned the right for decent teams to give you that luxury.
Some people say "If you can't beat them, join them". I say "If you can't beat them, beat them", because they will be expecting you to join them, so you will have the element of surprise.
by BamaHadMeAtHello on Sep 7, 2010 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions
Probably so.
I’m just saying, their entire OOC schedule should be those type of games, not just 1 or 2.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
if these rankings reflect real actual current SOS
shouldn’t the 1-0 Georgia St Panthers(?) be ranked ahead of Ol Miss? they both have only played 1 D1AA opponent each….
The beauty of The Process is that you have never arrived, so you get to continue being perpetually awesome... -Espyonage
This is sagarin, so it uses its own formula to compute which, early in the season, kind of hit or miss, especially if you start looking at individual rankings. It does an okay job of putting a team in the same general area that it should be in, but it’s not perfect. It gets better as the season goes on for sure.
I'm wrong all the time.
...no, they weren't.
Shorter University is NAIA. So not even actually a NCAA school. I’m not clear on if they have scholarship athletes or not. (Trying to look this up on wikipedia, but not seeing anything.)
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
Good call
In any event, I don’t think these polls even treat that like a game.
I'm wrong all the time.
Found it.
According to this, NAIA football teams are allowed 24 scholarships. Makes a lot more sense that a new team (with only 25 scholarship players on hand, I guess) would be able to whip them so thoroughly.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
Only NCAA Division III
teams are not allowed scholarships (i.e. Hundington College in Montgomery)
"There's a lot of blood, sweat, and guts between dreams and success" - Coach Bryant
Within the NCAA.
But this is not NCAA, so I wasn’t sure. But there you go.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
I was trying to say...
that anywhere in collegiate athletics, whether JUCO, NCAA, or NAIA; NCAA Div III is the only program that prohibits scholarships.
"There's a lot of blood, sweat, and guts between dreams and success" - Coach Bryant
hmm... OK, if you say so.
I didn’t know that.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
how many personal fouls did we have vs VT
last season opener? and how much did that game resemble
The beauty of The Process is that you have never arrived, so you get to continue being perpetually awesome... -Espyonage
crap. i hat this commenting system sometimes guys
i really do…
The beauty of The Process is that you have never arrived, so you get to continue being perpetually awesome... -Espyonage
look...
i was “hatin” on Boise last night. I really have nothing against that team in general aside from that blue field…i just cant imagine a team with that kind of schedule going to the BCS. it is total FUBAR.
I will admit they are a decent team who can pull out a win. but nothing more. VT with their O Line ineptness and 1st quarter shennigans and piss poor officiating on boise’s version of “the drive” ( ours was betta. IMHO)…made the bronchos look better than they were.
I admit…bama has had to channel some freaky mojo to pull some wins out of their asses before, also. but then again, Alabama actually play 5 to 7 or so RANKED opponents year in and year out.
Herbstriet is a damn moron. he is too young to be going senile now. did anyone else hear him talking about how impressive boise has to be now and run up the scores against the rest of their east popcorn state opposition. I guess bama should have kept trent, gmac, and julio in until 3 min left in the game against boise’s CONFERENCE opponent and hung 120 on them…accordind to herbie, thats how you win championships.
If boise makes it to the show then so be it, but it had better not be them over a one loss SEC champion to face ohio st or whomever…
If all this means anything…it gives the tide one more reason to defy odds, go undefeated, win the SEC again…and give us a chance to kick those smufs back under the rock or mushroom house they came from.
P.S. im am fully aware of Utah Utes, circa 2008…and i would pick them over the 2010 bronchos anyday.
Tigers Hide and rooooll that TIDE!
Damn straight, but wait --
guess bama should have kept trent, gmac, and julio in until 3 min left in the game against boise’s CONFERENCE opponent and hung 120 on them…accordind to herbie, thats how you win championships.
Should Boise beat SJSU by more than 45, then we’ll hear how much they clearly deserve to be ranked higher… Heads they win, tails everyone else loses.
It’s all very reminiscent of the pre-Big East Miami Hurricanes hype from the 80s.
im so mad about last nights game..
any response at this moment would be incoherent..
Alabama football....The only addiction God wholeheartedly approves of..
I hate Boise
and the Boise hype. They beat the number 5 team in the ACC by 3 whole pts. The ACC!! VT was over ranked. FSU, Miami, GT, and Clemson are all better teams. Beamer can not beat ranked teams, never has, never will. His going conservative when they had the ball with 5 mintues to go and needed a few 1st downs is just another example. All they needed to do was put the ball in Taylors hands put him on the edge and let him break containment. But no they had to run 34 right up the middle. Why did he think that would work?
Now Boise has to beat the #5 team in the PAC and they are in the BCS game.
What I really hate is that now if you are in the SEC or the Big 12 you really can not lose a game because Boise is going to be there along with OSU if they can win their conference.
I could write a whole post on why Boise is deserving of nothing but I’ll let it go for now.
Me new favorite teams beside Bama- #1. Whomever is playing UT. #2. Whomever is playing Auburn. #3. Whomever is playing Boise St. And number 3 is moving up fast.
Go Oregon St.
As much as I hate Auburn I hate Tenn. that much more.
FSU, Miami, GT, and Clemson are all better teams.
Well now we have to hope that all 4 of those teams beat VT (and hopefully a couple more also). Hopefully VT ends up about 6-6.
I hate it for BSU, I really do. But with the system the way it is now, someone gets F’ed. I’d rather it be BSU than us or another SEC team.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
good point..
if VT falls apart, last nights game means little….
Alabama football....The only addiction God wholeheartedly approves of..
At least you guys can probably make it back to the MNC with one loss
The SEC’s reputation (founded or not) can give a one-loss ’Bama squad a shot. Now, if someone like Ohio State slips up (like that wonderful loss to Purdue last season) in conference play, the buckeyes are out of it with undefeated media darling Boise.
What I’m trying to say is, if they go undefeated and you win your conference championship game an undefeated team from the Big 12 or Big Ten is could be on the outside looking in.
"I told him point blank, I wouldn’t trade January 2, 1987 straight up for Michigan’s entire football tradition." jesse.
"This was the greatest game in the history of college football." Rambler
I hold these truths to be self evident
by ChrisHarrell's_stache05 on Sep 7, 2010 8:51 AM CDT reply actions
Actually
with Boise almost in right now I contend no one in the SEC can slip up and lose a game. Odds are someone else will make it through undefeated. Ohio St., Texas, and Oregon are teams that seem to me to have a good shot at being undefeated. A one loss SEC Champion is going to need a lot of help. A one loss SEC team will not jump any undefeated team even a team like Boise that plays a weak schedule.
(And I’m not even considering that FSU, GT & Miami also have decent shots at being undefeated.)
As much as I hate Auburn I hate Tenn. that much more.
Soon enough you'll have a conference championship
This is why you’re smarter than the big XII
"You know, we had a lot of fun tonight. But there's nothing funny about vapor lock! It's the third most common cause of cars stalling. So please, take care of your car and get it checked!" -Joe Namath
I just think it’s a shame that:
1) We have a moronic system where we have to worry about . . .
2) A team has such a hype machine and such a weak schedule that they can play two real football games and 10 cupcakes and be in the driver’s seat.
I'm wrong all the time.
by PeteHoliday on Sep 7, 2010 9:04 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Preseason polls
is the devil
"I told him point blank, I wouldn’t trade January 2, 1987 straight up for Michigan’s entire football tradition." jesse.
"This was the greatest game in the history of college football." Rambler
I hold these truths to be self evident
by ChrisHarrell's_stache05 on Sep 7, 2010 9:06 AM CDT up reply actions
That is not going to happen.
A team has such a hype machine and such a weak schedule that they can play two real football games and 10 cupcakes and be in the driver’s seat.
Let’s assume for a moment that at the end of the regular season there are three undefeated teams: Iowa, LSU, and Boise State. Iowa has wins over Wisconsin, Penn State, and once #1 Ohio State. LSU has taken on what is considered the best conference in college football and come away without a blemish. Boise State has only one good win.
I do not believe Boise State would make the MNC game if all of the above were to take place. Obviously this is all totally up for debate, but in my opionion they are not in the driver’s seat and they won’t be until they’re the pre-season number 1.
by ReadingRambler on Sep 7, 2010 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions
I know.
But I couldn’t go with Auburn (That would just be jerky).
by ReadingRambler on Sep 7, 2010 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions
jerky is better than unfathomable.
"Orators are most vehement when their cause is weak" Marcus Tullius Cicero
by Stuck in the Plains on Sep 7, 2010 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions
I would've gone with Georgia or South Carolina myself.
But no big deal.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
wisconsin doesn't matter
homeboy has beaten a grand total of 1 ranked team in the regular season over the past three years.
"Orators are most vehement when their cause is weak" Marcus Tullius Cicero
by Stuck in the Plains on Sep 7, 2010 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Conjecture is great and all
But I’m not sure how you figure Boise is going to fall father this year with a stronger SOS than they had last year.
You have to keep in mind that they’re starting off ranked very, very high and unless they lose, they’re going to stay there. Even as their SOS plummeted last year, they still only lost a slot or two in the computer rankings and only went up in the human polls.
If LSU and and Iowa are the other two undefeateds, Boise will be #1 in 2/3rds of the BCS formula, and somewhere between first and fourth in the computer polls. Even fourth likely wouldn’t be enough to push them down to #3, if last year is any indication.
I'm wrong all the time.
How is their SOS stronger?
Last year they beat the Pac10 Champ. VT could be 6 or 7 win team. Oregon State could be the same.
Some people say "If you can't beat them, join them". I say "If you can't beat them, beat them", because they will be expecting you to join them, so you will have the element of surprise.
by BamaHadMeAtHello on Sep 7, 2010 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, first and foremost, as bad as VT looked last night, there’s no guarantee they won’t go on to win the ACC. Likewise with Oregon State.
The computers weren’t really in love with Oregon last year (they don’t care about conference titles, really). Second, most of the SOS rankings tend to be a few levels deep. SJS’s SOS will be helped by the fact that they played us, which will help mitigate their record (for example, if SJS goes 9-3, they’re going to look like a pretty strong opponent, having only lost to pretty decent teams).
Bottom line is that the computers don’t really care about things like conference championships, how a team looked when they played, or how much they won or lost by. VT looked awful, yes, but if they go on to win 9 or 10 games, the computers aren’t going to care that they didn’t win their conference. Likewise with Oregon State.
But, still, proportionally, even if Boise’s schedule is weaker, it’d have to be a lot weaker to create the sort of drop folks are talking about here. If you’re already playing one of the weakest schedules in D-IA, dropping a few more spots means nothing.
My point is that there’s not enough difference from last year to be so sure that Boise will take a 5+ point hit in the computer polls, when that wasn’t what happened last year.
I'm wrong all the time.
If LSU and and Iowa are the other two undefeateds, Boise will be… somewhere between first and fourth in the computer polls.
How do you arrive at that conclusion? I don’t see any way they would be ahead of those teams in the computers. So I would think their ceiling would be #3 in that scenario. Looking at last year, they were 6th, right? But you think the lowest they could be is fourth this year?
It’s all a lot of conjecture of course, but I just don’t think the computers are likely to have them that high.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
If they’re #3 in the computers, and they’re #1 in both human polls, they’re going to be in the top two of the final tally.
Last year’s numbers were pretty heavily stratified, the top two SEC teams combined for ONE loss (and that was in the game between them), Alabama was undefeated and by some estimates had a top 5 SOS.
Boise could drop completely out of the computer rankings if the lose 6 games, but if we’re assuming they win out, and assuming the rest of the schedule plays out in a relatively non-remarkable way, I think it’s difficult to place them any lower than they were last year, and if you combine last year’s numbers with #1 rankings in both human polls, you’re going to get something approaching, if not better than, 2nd place in the BCS.
Especially true if one of the undefeateds is from a conference that the computers think played poorly this year.
It’s all a mess.
PLAYOFF.
I'm wrong all the time.
If they’re #3 in the computers, and they’re #1 in both human polls, they’re going to be in the top two of the final tally.
Agreed, most likely. (I’m not sure if, say, they were #1 in the human polls by just a very slim margin over #2 AND #3 but were a distant 3rd in the computers, then maybe not. But most likely, yes.)
I think it’s difficult to place them any lower than they were last year
OK, but they were 6th last year before the bowls. Combine that with #1 in the human polls and what do you get? Maybe #2. Maybe not.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
I didn’t say they would be in the same spot, I said I don’t think you can put them any lower.
My guess is that we’ll see Boise with a stronger SOS this year and, as a result, a better computer ranking. I’d also need to look at how the other computer algorithms work for a refresher, but fewer undefeated teams would really shake things up, if I’m recalling the methodology correctly.
I'm wrong all the time.
I think they COULD possibly end up lower
(and yes still assuming they win out). It’s all just speculation right now. But up above you put their possible computer ranking range as #1 to #4, right? In my mind (under the assumptions that Iowa, LSU, and BSU are undefeated), their possible range would be more like #3 to #7. I don’t think they would be #1. And I definitely think they could be below #4.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
What I’m trying to say is, if they go undefeated and you win your conference championship game an undefeated team from the Big 12 or Big Ten is could be on the outside looking in.
What? No, an undefeated Big XII or Ten champ should jump over BSU pretty easily. It’s if you lose a game, that’s when you have to worry.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
Don’t be so sure — remember, the human polls are 2/3 of the BCS rankings. If Boise wins out, the only two teams who could really be ahead of them at the end of the year are an undefeated Alabama and an undefeated Ohio State.
Boise would have to drop to, what, 5th or 6th in the computer polls before anyone would jump them in the BCS standings?
I'm wrong all the time.
I wouldn't be shocked to see BSU that low in the computers.
It depends on how things play out of course, but I would expect it to happen. Where did they end up last year?
And as for the polls, I think a large contingent of voters would have any undefeated BCS team ranked above BSU by the end of the season. And keep in mind that they don’t actually have to pass BSU in the polls, they just have to be close. The BCS formula uses POINTS from the polls, not the actual rankings.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
I don't think they ever
got above 6th in the computer polls (at least before the bowl games). And that was with the Pac 10 champ’s pelt on the wall. Given that VT will probably be worth a lot less than Oregon was last year. I just don’t see them cracking the top 2.
Some people say "If you can't beat them, join them". I say "If you can't beat them, beat them", because they will be expecting you to join them, so you will have the element of surprise.
by BamaHadMeAtHello on Sep 7, 2010 10:21 AM CDT up reply actions
That’s not really how the polls work in practice.
Winners almost never drop in the polls, regardless of how crappy the win was or how weak the opponent. That’s one of the big problems.
Boise State was ranked #3 in the Sagarin rating that the BCS uses at the end of last season.
I'm wrong all the time.
I seem to remember Boise dropping as the year went on because they had no strength in the back end. By the end of the year, they were begging for any BCS game.
Some people say "If you can't beat them, join them". I say "If you can't beat them, beat them", because they will be expecting you to join them, so you will have the element of surprise.
by BamaHadMeAtHello on Sep 7, 2010 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions
Yes, but that’s because they started at 14th and 16th in the human polls. They moved up an average of 9 spots there.
They started at 4th in the BCS and (at which point they were 4th and 6th in the human polls) and dropped to 6th by the end of the year (at which point they were 4th in both human polls).
Simply put: they might drop, but they’re not going to drop MUCH without losing.
I'm wrong all the time.
I don't think they'll drop much,
and they shouldn’t. But I do think that they could easily be jumped (or at least be close to being jumped, as I said above) late in the season by an undefeated BCS team. Then the computers would do the rest.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
Boise State was ranked #3 in the Sagarin rating that the BCS uses at the end of last season.
Are you sure that’s not the score that takes into account Margin of Victory? I’m looking at the final BCS standings from last year and Boise St. is ranked no higher than 6th in any of the 6 computer polls. Their averaged computer score was .780, which was tied with 2-loss Oregon and well behind 1-loss Florida at .910
Yep. Check for yourself.
They were 11th in the predictor (factors MOV), 3rd in the elo chess (used by the BCS).
I'm wrong all the time.
I'm surprised that the non-MOV rating favors them,
but OK. Regardless, that has to be one of their highest computer rankings from last year. As you said above, their computer average at the end of the regular season was #6.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
That doesn’t really help your point.
Fact is, they didn’t move much from the initial ranking. That means if they get a favorable ranking in this years computer polls, they’re likely to keep it, and (therefore) likely to have a nearly unassailable position in the top 2.
As for the predictor not favoring them: the way it is calculated factors score AND opponent strength, which means eeking by against crappy teams can actually lower your rank compared to losing to high-quality opponents.
I'm wrong all the time.
Fact is, they didn’t move much from the initial ranking. That means if they get a favorable ranking in this years computer polls, they’re likely to keep it, and (therefore) likely to have a nearly unassailable position in the top 2.
I don’t understand. Are we talking just about computer rankings? I can’t find where anything has been said (or shown) about how their computer rankings varied from week to week last year. (Forgive me if I’m wrong.)
My memory and intuition say that they would’ve started a little higher in the computer polls (early in the season, whenever they first came out) because they played Oregon early. Then they dropped later in the season as BCS teams played tougher foes and jumped over them. Again, talking just computer rankings. I don’t see any reason to think that “if they get a favorable (computer) ranking, they’re likely to keep it”. Computers don’t keep a team high just because that’s where they were the previous week.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
See my avatar for my current emotional status re: this conversation.
Last year: Boise started low, had a weak SOS that only got worse as the season went on. They dropped, it looks like, two spots between the first week of the BCS computer rankings and the pre-bowl rankings.
This year: Boise will start high, have a weak (but stronger SOS), and people are suggesting that, somehow, they’re going to drop five or six spots? I don’t really see that happening, nor do I see a reason to believe it would.
I'm wrong all the time.
Your right
they won’t drop. There is now no wiggle room for Alabama. One loss, and we very well could be the best 12-1, SEC Champion the Sugar Bowl has seen in the BCS era.
As long as we win it won’ t matter. But the odds of us going 13-0 are longer than the odds of Boise being in the NCG.
As much as I hate Auburn I hate Tenn. that much more.
See my avatar for a picture of a kid that would be saying
“WTF?” if he wasn’t afraid his Aunt Bee was listening.
First off, my standard Pete disclaimer: I’M NOT TRYING TO ARGUE WITH YOU!
I was just trying to figure out where you are getting your numbers from. Now that I looked up this week’s Sagarin, I see that BSU is #1. I don’t think you mentioned that before, but is that why you keep saying that they’re going to start high? And does “high” mean #1? And so based on that and the fact that they only dropped a couple of positions over the course of last season (I still don’t know where to find that info), you’re extrapolating to say that they’ll finish this season in the top 3? I’m sorry Pete, but that math doesn’t really make sense. (And yeah, I’m a math guy. Please excuse me for trying to make sense of this.)
You said yourself that
Of course, it’s so early that those numbers are pretty worthless
So I don’t see how you can base much of anything off of where they are ranked right now. So what if they only dropped a couple of positions last season, that’s because they didn’t have as far to fall. They’re ranked high right now because they’re one of the few teams that played a decent team in Week 1. I wouldn’t be surprised to see them drop a few spots in the next couple of weeks alone, as more teams play some decent opponents. Overall, their schedule isn’t likely to end up that much stronger than last season’s, so I don’t see a reason to expect they’ll perform significantly better in the computers than they did last season, when they finished #6 and tied with a 2-loss BCS team that they beat.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
Additionally, the argument seems to based on Boise being ranked #1 by the human voters, something I don’t see happening (even if the SEC champ has 1 loss). If Boise only had a #2 ranking in the human polls and the cpus have them floating at 5-6, I don’t see how they get into the game.
Some people say "If you can't beat them, join them". I say "If you can't beat them, beat them", because they will be expecting you to join them, so you will have the element of surprise.
by BamaHadMeAtHello on Sep 7, 2010 4:03 PM CDT up reply actions
Well I'm only trying to speculate on the computers
here.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
I understand
but the computers are only a third. If Boise isn’t #1 in the human polls, it’s quite possibly a moot point.
Some people say "If you can't beat them, join them". I say "If you can't beat them, beat them", because they will be expecting you to join them, so you will have the element of surprise.
by BamaHadMeAtHello on Sep 7, 2010 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Boise is already getting #1 votes. If ‘Bama and OSU lose even one game, Boise is #1. The number of times that a winning #1 team has been jumped by another team you can count on one hand, and usually it’s after a big scare on national TV. By the time this becomes an issue, Boise will be past their two real football games, and nobody will really be watching Boise except to look at the box scores.
I'm wrong all the time.
So I don’t see how you can base much of anything off of where they are ranked right now.
No, really. Just read the comments. I’ve already written about this in four or five other places in this thread.
You’re putting words in my mouth. Them being #1 right now has nothing to do with what their rank will be in the BCS. A quick read of the sagarin page notes that.
For the elebeninth time: Regression to the mean in terms of number of undefeated teams plus a SOS that is likely to be as good or better by year’s end.
I'm wrong all the time.
Sorry. As I quoted above, this was the part that was confusing me:
Fact is, they didn’t move much from the initial ranking. That means if they get a favorable ranking in this years computer polls, they’re likely to keep it, and (therefore) likely to have a nearly unassailable position in the top 2.
And then you said:
Last year: Boise started low, had a weak SOS that only got worse as the season went on. They dropped, it looks like, two spots between the first week of the BCS computer rankings and the pre-bowl rankings.
I guess that’s where I went off course thinking you were saying that the # of spots they dropped last year would correlate to the same # for this year.
As far as regression to the mean on # of undefeateds, last year there were 4. In our LSU/Iowa example above, we’re assuming there are at least three.
The SOS is the big question mark of course.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
Sorry, Cincinatti was undefeated too, weren’t they. So 5 undefeateds last year. And we’re assuming 3 up above. So yes, that would be grounds for BSU to easily be a couple of spots higher even with the same basic SOS.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
Florida, while not technically undefeated, was probably treated by the computer like they were given that their loss was to ’Bama.
I'm wrong all the time.
But on the other hand,
while there were a large number of undefeated teams, the other weird thing last year was that UF was the ONLY 1 loss team going into the bowls. So it’s difficult to say how BSU would’ve been ranked by the computers compared to 1 loss BCS teams. As it was, they were behind UF and also tied with 2 loss Oregon. That just doesn’t seem to bode well for them, IMO.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
Disagree. you’re not going to find many one loss teams with anything near the SOS that florida had last year, and most of them won’t have their one loss to such a strong team.
A better, though still lofty, comparison would be florida in 2008 after the ole miss loss.
I'm wrong all the time.
you’re not going to find many one loss teams with anything near the SOS that florida had last year, and most of them won’t have their one loss to such a strong team.
That’s true, but it still doesn’t change the fact that there weren’t any other 1-loss teams to compare last year’s BSU to (in the computer rankings). Would BSU have been ranked ahead of other hypothetical one-loss teams? We don’t know. We do know that they were ranked behind that one. And also tied with a 2-loss team.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
“We don’t know” is a pretty weak excuse for not thinking about it, considering this entire discussion is about things we don’t know.
So if “we don’t know” is your test for things you’re not going to speculate about, you probably need to rescind every comment you’ve made in this thread.
But we do know this: if Boise had been ranked ahead of Florida before the SECCG, they’d have passed Florida in the BCS standings.
Especially given the fact that they scheduled two BCS teams this year (as opposed to one last year), they’re going to have a strong SOS, the number of udefeateds is likely to come down. As that happens, the number of one loss teams is likely to go up, both from undefeated teams losing games and from previous two-loss teams winning them, making for tighter computer rankings, and the more tight the computer rankings are, the more important the human polls are.
…and because the human polls are already starting to get their annual Boise Shift, we’re in for a long year.
I'm wrong all the time.
I don’t know how you can say that BS will have a strong SOS this year just because they are playing 2 BCS opponents. Using the end of season Sagarin scores from last year, they ranked 96th in SOS having played two top 10-ish teams (Oregon and TCU). I think that is a good estimate of the ceiling in terms of raw scores for ELO chess and schedule that BS can attain at the the end of this years regular season, since they’ll have played at most two top 10 teams (VT and Oregon St.)
Now VT could end up a top 10 team, but Oregon St. likely won’t. It’s hard to imagine that the combined raw scores of VT and Oregon St. at the end of the regular season will exceed the combined final scores of Oregon and TCU last year. This leads me to believe that BS’s raw score will be between last year’s end-of-regular season and final scores. I can’t find the regular season Sagarin ratings anywhere, but we know they were ranked 7th going into the bowls. Iowa was ranked 7th after the bowls and had an ELO chess score of 88.17. I think that’s a reasonable estimate for the floor for BS after the regular season this year. So figure that BS will have a raw score between 88.17 and 94.89 with the mean being 91.53. Texas ended up at 91.81 with an SOS rank of 38. So one-loss teams with top 40 SOS could possibly slip in ahead of BS in Sagarin this year.
So some one-loss teams can get ahead of undefeated BS, but no likely more than one or two will have the requisite SOS. I think this strengthens Pete’s argument as long as VT doesn’t slide out of the top 10 and Oregon St. doesn’t end up with a disappointing year well outside the top 25. If that does happen though, you’ll probably see more 1-loss teams jump ahead, maybe even a 2-loss LSU type of team.
I don’t think I’ve suggested any manner in which SOS is factored other than to say there is a positive correlation, though not necessarily linear, between the raw SOS score (not rank) and the ELO chess score. In other words, if two teams have identical records, the one with the higher SOS score will also have a higher rating because that is how ELO chess is designed to work.
I guess I am taking for granted that towards the middle of the list, the SOS rankings from one year to the next will line up closely to the SOS raw score. But I’m not trying to draw any hard conclusions with that assumption, only giving an example of the type of season required to have a similar rating as BS, and, thus, possibly be ahead of them.
I was trying to deal only in facts,
to narrow the argument. Sorry.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
I think you're wrong,
but we’ll just have to leave it at that. We’ll see what happens.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
I think that’s from the end of the bowl season though.
FINAL College Football 2009 through games of 2010 January 7 Thursday the BCS uses the ELO_CHESS from here
So that isn’t the ranking the BCS used to decide who plays in the CG.
My point is that the computers had BS ranked pretty low at the end of last regular season, which is the point at which BCS rankings actually matter. I know you have to take into account that there were a lot of undefeated teams last year, which makes them lower than they would be in a typical year. But I think by looking at Florida’s and Oregon’s computer scores from last year, you can get a feel for the likelihood that BS will be ranked below all 1 loss and maybe some 2 loss major conference teams. They could even be ranked below a 1 loss TCU or Utah.
I don’t think you’ve really made a case for that, short of your own speculation.
They were certainly not ranked BELOW fifth before the bowl games last year, so they dropped two or three spots from where they started.
Problem is that this year they will likely have a stronger strength of schedule, pushing them up. If there are fewer undefeated teams, that pushes them even higher, and then when you add in a potential Coaches/Harris #1 ranking, you’re left with an ugly situation for one or two loss teams.
I'm wrong all the time.
Yes, I’m being somewhat speculative. At this point we all are. But from what I can tell, part of your argument rests on BS being ranked higher than 5th in the computer poll average at the end of the regular season. I’m offering some evidence from last year to show how that will be difficult for them to achieve. There will in all likelihood be fewer unbeaten teams this year, but there will also likely be more 1-loss teams too. Those with a good SOS will be ahead of BS.
Also I don’t understand where you are getting the idea that they weren’t ranked 6th in the computer polls last year. After checking another website, ESPN appears to have the correct rankings.
http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/2009_archive_bcs.html (click on the full pdf version)
But from what I can tell, part of your argument rests on BS being ranked higher than 5th in the computer poll average at the end of the regular season.
My life would be easier if people read what I wrote and didn’t add and assume shit I didn’t say.
I said they were third in the Sagarin at the end of the season, a fact you disputed. I provided a link. You doubted the link’s accuracy despite coming from Sagarin himself. I have no idea who would know better than he would what his computer algorithm ranked a team.
I said they’d likely need to be below 5th in order to pull them out of the top three if they are #1 in both human polls. The fact that they ended up fifth last year with a strength of schedule that really shouldn’t be much different one way or the other this year, and has the potential to be much better.
In short: if they win out, their season, to the computer polls, is likely to look pretty damn similar to last year’s. Combine a great chance to be an easy #1 in the human polls if ’Bama and OSU lose with the fact that there seemed to be an abnormal number of undefeated teams last year, and you wind up with a lot of doubt that an undefeated Iowa or LSU would be able to push Boise to #3.
I'm wrong all the time.
But that's just Sagarin,
not the overall computer average. And also, as pointed out above, that ranking you linked to was from after the bowls, when they had gotten a boost from beating TCU. That’s not necessarily comparable to where they’ll be this year before the bowls.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
What did I say that was incorrect??
You’re referencing Sagarin rankings above, but that’s not what’s used by the BCS (not the only thing used anyway).
I think you’re using the wrong numbers here. Simple as that. Please tell me what part I didn’t understand. Thanks.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
I hope this game with Ga State doesn't end up effing us.
Freaking Bill Curry.
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
Someone better talk me off the edge...
Swear to Loki, if Boise gets to a MNC game, I will give up football and make my lifes’ mission the reinstatement of lawn darts as an approved consumer product.
"Orators are most vehement when their cause is weak" Marcus Tullius Cicero
by Stuck in the Plains on Sep 7, 2010 10:03 AM CDT reply actions
Wonder how many of bs's
opponents have two weeks to prepare to play the Smurfettes?
What will be the cummulative record of the teams bs plays?
Let bs play: Arky, FL, SC, Ole miss, Tenn, LSU and Auburn. bs cant handle it.
But they do play the toughest high school schedule in the country!
Face it, bs is all but in the NCG. And I thought Musberger and Herbstreit were on the verge of blowing the bronco mascot. These guys were in the tank for bs.
A little off topic...
…but last night my wife, who is not from this country, looked at the Boise State mascot and said “So the blue team’s mascot is a donkey?”
check out the EDSBS factor five five factor preview
Great pic/discussion of that crazy (and kind of creepy, actually) mascot
"You know, we had a lot of fun tonight. But there's nothing funny about vapor lock! It's the third most common cause of cars stalling. So please, take care of your car and get it checked!" -Joe Namath
by billycthulhu on Sep 7, 2010 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions
During the math part...
…you sounded like Charlie Brown’s teacher to me, but that’s because math is a scary, scary b#^&h.
Thank you for putting into words the reason why last night’s game and the inevitable bu@##$*&T media hype to follow make me so incredibly angry. I hope they lose to some crappy team and shut Herbie & Co. the hell up.
by Queen of the Universe on Sep 7, 2010 11:16 AM CDT reply actions
The playoff proponents
may use BSU as ammo to shoot down this archaic “system” we use to pick the National Champion…last year, they got it right….this year may be the year everyone gets fed up with sending cupcake-playing pretenders to the title game…I just hope they don’t fook us in the process.
"...because you've got your mind right, and that's the way we like it." Nick Saban
Last year the BCS got it right because a comatose chipmunk could’ve figured out who the best two teams were. You had two undefeated champions of major, competitive conferences. It wasn’t even remotely controversial.
I'm wrong all the time.
But you're saying that this year
if we have two undefeated champions of major, competitive conferences again that comatose chipmunk won’t be able to make the call?
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
The best two teams in the country last year didn’t play for the BCS CG. They played for the SEC CG.
Some people say "If you can't beat them, join them". I say "If you can't beat them, beat them", because they will be expecting you to join them, so you will have the element of surprise.
by BamaHadMeAtHello on Sep 7, 2010 1:25 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Someone will get fooked. There will be blood.
BSU drinks your shake. :(
If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.
I am just saying
that if there is a way that a comatose chipmunk can screw the SEC, they will….period.
"...because you've got your mind right, and that's the way we like it." Nick Saban
You and 5026 should start a club or something.
When the SEC is playing well, they get a huge edge in the BCS (see, e.g., 2-loss LSU).
I'm wrong all the time.
by PeteHoliday on Sep 7, 2010 12:57 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
You know
like I know, that the ‘pundits’ have their grubby ‘lil fingers all over this. All this talk about 5-straight BCS appearances by SEC teams…if any conference team struggles against a conference foe, that’ll (wrongly) justify teams like BSU’s weak-ass schedule. BSU has a good team…how good?…we won’t know until they make whatever bowl game they are already guaranteed, at this point…lol.
"...because you've got your mind right, and that's the way we like it." Nick Saban
The pundits don’t really have an incentive to drag SEC teams down. They have an incentive to poke their fanbase with sticks, but they also recognize that a Texas/Bama bowl game is going to bring their corporate overlords a zillion more viewers than a Boise/TCU bowl game is going to.
I'm wrong all the time.
+1
We absolutely get the benefit of the doubt, b/c in OOCs and bowl season (and especially the MNC) we take care of business about 70% of the time.
"Orators are most vehement when their cause is weak" Marcus Tullius Cicero
by Stuck in the Plains on Sep 7, 2010 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions
Hey I don't think
the BCS screws the SEC. In fact I agree, the SECCG gives us an edge.
For example if Bama and Texas both end up with 1 loss, and BSU is #1 undefeated, if we beat UF in the SECCG we would be in.
But what I do think is that BSU now sits in a very good position without having to play much a schedule and I think that is wrong.
As much as I hate Auburn I hate Tenn. that much more.
Ummmm...
I had a dream last night that Alabama played Boise in the CG. In that dream, Kellen Moore turns to the camera, takes his helmet off and reveals he is really Colt McCoy, then his arm turned into a vagina. I woke up laughing but could taste bile.
Fook BSU. The odds of them going undefeated are less than we all think.
RTR
U of U? Never...lol
by UtahBammer on Sep 7, 2010 5:32 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Awesome Y! Article up...
A season remains to be played, and a sloppy 33-30 victory over Virginia Tech, no matter how stirring or resilient, remains a game Boise State still could have lost. And that does little to separate it from Alabama or Ohio State or even prove the Broncos belong in the national championship discussion.
Boise will now linger next week in Wyoming and then at home against Oregon State and all the way through Toledo and Louisiana Tech and Fresno State, an invisible buzz coming from out west while the best teams in the important conferences smack away at each other every weekend.
"Orators are most vehement when their cause is weak" Marcus Tullius Cicero
by Stuck in the Plains on Sep 7, 2010 5:48 PM CDT reply actions
I now interrupt this discussion to bring you a choice quote from an auburn grad from a Facebook conversation. This quote was not intended with irony:
Hate to break it to you all, but Bama didn’t get a chance last year to prove that they were the best team. They faced Texas’ 2nd string. Texas’ 2nd string would have lost to a lot of teams. So if you say disqualify Texas because they weren’t deep enough, might the next best team (who also would have been better than Texas’ 2nd string) had a chance at beating Bama? We will never know. Kind of like Auburn going 13-0 and being kept out of the nat’l champ game because of unethical happenings in the coaches poll (2 coaches with votes from OK voted them 25th. If either had voted Auburn 15, Auburn would have placed higher than OU). Who was the best team that year? Nobody knows because the two best teams didn’t face each other. Who was the best team last year? Nobody knows because the two best teams didn’t face each other. If I were a Bama fan I would have been extremely disappointed.
I'm wrong all the time.
is this from a conversation
you were having with him? cause god i hope you unleashed hell on that d-bag…
Alabama football....The only addiction God wholeheartedly approves of..
I was actually having a conversation with a few other ‘Bama fans about Boise. I didn’t really respond because, you know, what’s the point?
I don’t stop in the mall at Christmas time and tell the little kids that Santa isn’t real. Might as well let the barners live in their delusions, too.
I'm wrong all the time.
by PeteHoliday on Sep 7, 2010 8:58 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
rec'd like hell
apparently Texas’ 1st string consists entirely of one player
"You know, we had a lot of fun tonight. But there's nothing funny about vapor lock! It's the third most common cause of cars stalling. So please, take care of your car and get it checked!" -Joe Namath
this shit is beyond delusional...
it’s just LULZ.
"Orators are most vehement when their cause is weak" Marcus Tullius Cicero
by Stuck in the Plains on Sep 7, 2010 9:55 PM CDT up reply actions
As far as I am concerned
Boise State is just another school in blue and orange that should be hated!
by BamaGirlinDallas on Sep 7, 2010 6:41 PM CDT reply actions
How is it that nobody has done this yet?
Current Sagarin ratings, which are (admittedly) weird this early in the season:
1. LSU (5) – Fresno State (15)
2. Florida (10) – Virginia Tech (21)
3. South Carolina (12) – Oregon State (35)
4. Penn State (24) – Nevada (55)
5. Auburn (33) – Hawaii (67)
6. Mississippi State (36) – Utah State (70)
7. Tennessee (49) – Idaho (80)
8. Arkansas (58) – Louisiana Tech (90)
9. Duke (66) – Wyoming (105)
10. San Jose State (107) – San Jose State (107)
11. Ole Miss (114) – Toledo (148)
12. Georgia State (244) – New Mexico State (150)
In short,
Our top 9 are all better than Boise’s #5. Alabama’s 10, 11, and 12 are not demonstrably better than Boise’s, but they’re certainly not much worse. Georgia State is a huge drag on our average but, ultimately, there’s little doubt that Boise’s schedule can’t hold a candle to Bama’s.
I’m going to chart this week by week, if I remember to, just because I think it’ll be interesting, there will probably be some re-shuffling as the season wears on, especially once all of the teams are “connected” in Sagarin’s algorithm and he stops including the initial seeding in the calculations.
I'm wrong all the time.
also forgotten in this equation
since we’re still using data based on last year’s returns; of the above teams on our scheddie, we beat 5 of the top 60 by double digits…
"Orators are most vehement when their cause is weak" Marcus Tullius Cicero
by Stuck in the Plains on Sep 7, 2010 11:54 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, don't look now,
but, 5 of our next 6 games are ranked opponents….
I wonder how many of them will still be ranked at seasons end?
"...because you've got your mind right, and that's the way we like it." Nick Saban
Not arkansas...
Until they get a defense, that is a 4-5 loss team.
Seriously, screw these flash in the pan guys. Arkansas is Mumme-era Kentucky with a better coach.
"Orators are most vehement when their cause is weak" Marcus Tullius Cicero
by Stuck in the Plains on Sep 9, 2010 12:28 AM CDT up reply actions
Since we have such a limited data set on this year’s Boise team against legitimate competition, I think the only fair thing to do is judge them based on that competition. Since the game the other night showed that they were only slightly better than VT, they shouldn’t be ranked more than 3-5 spots ahead of them all year. So, if VT finishes #20, BSU should be ranked in the 16-18 area. Once they play OSU we’ll have to take that game into account too. But they shouldn’t even be in the conversation for the championship game unless VT finishes as a top 5 team (OSU can’t finish that high since a loss to BSU would give them at least 2 losses). At least, that’s how I’d vote. And while there won’t be very many who vote them that low, there will be at least some voters who feel like we do and will never vote them as 1 or 2 without having played a real schedule. How many vote them low and how low they vote them will determine if BSU makes the championship game.
For what it’s worth, I don’t see any way Boise stays ahead of an undefeated team from one of the major conferences. They may or may not end up ahead of a one loss team, likely dependent on that team’s reputation with the voters and strength of schedule. The first of those two would probably favor us more than any other team in America right now. The second, well, I guess you have to at least acknowledge the possibility that our game against GSU may be a painful memory for a long time.
No worries...
we play 5 ranked teams in the next two months. I know, we’re not like BSU and don’t have the benefit of getting up for one ranked team a year, but that’s still got to count for something.
"Orators are most vehement when their cause is weak" Marcus Tullius Cicero
by Stuck in the Plains on Sep 9, 2010 12:29 AM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
