c/cfb Poll Season II
docs.google.com
Make sure that you haven't repeated any teams! Honor system 1 ballot per voter per week (I don't want to collect email addresses to limit it on my end)
  • @olmec@lemm.eeEnglish
    6•1 month ago
    1. Texas
    2. Ohio State
    3. Oregon
    4. Penn State
    5. Miami
    6. Georgia
    7. Iowa State
    8. BYU
    9. Alabama
    10. Boise State
    11. Clemson
    12. Ole Miss
    13. Tennessee
    14. Missouri
    15. Utah
    16. Texas A&M
    17. LSU
    18. Oklahoma
    19. Notre Dame
    20. Indiana
    21. Kansas State
    22. Pitt
    23. Army
    24. Navy
    25. Liberty

    A quick overview of my methodology. I’m sure you can find contradictions, but I do try to stick to this.

    At this point in the season, I try to make the ranking 25% how good I think the team actually is, and 75% what the resume says. As we go on, the resume gets more bias.

    A few principles that I try to apply.

    1. If you are 5-0 or better, I’ll put you in. It is hard enough to get there, that even with an easier schedule, it should get you ranked. I do this for 2 reasons. First, I want to reward winning. Second, if greater 6 teams never get ranked despite what they do on the field, why bother to say they are apart of the league? Even if all these greater 6 drop a game, I’ll still try to put one or two of them up there, if I can justify it.
    2. I try to use a blind resume, where you consider the resume’s content regardless of the name. The biggest effect that this has is that I effectively ignore head to head. You can look at my poll, and complain that I ranked Georgia above Alabama, and cry afoul that Alabama beat Georgia, and should be ahead. I don’t care, because Georgia has a better resume than Alabama. You can make the same complaint against my Texas A&M/Notre Dame ranking. It doesn’t change my results.
    3. I value bad losses more than I do good wins. Again, going with Alabama and Georgia, I put more weight on the fact that Alabama lost to Vanderbilt, then I do that Alabama beat Georgia. I value reliability. If you can’t show up for the “easy wins”, then I will punish you much more than I will reward you for showing up for the big games.
    • @ToasterOverlordMEnglish
      3•1 month ago

      I like your reasoning and appreciate the explanation, so please don’t interpret this comment as me taking issue with your ballot. I am curious about Missouri at 14 and LSU at 17 though. What on their resumes pushes them up that high, especially considering the bad losses factor? By your logic, it seems like some of the undefeated teams should be ahead of them (especially Indiana given that they have a common opponent with LSU and beat them much more decisively). SMU’s absence feels conspicuous also when you have BYU as high as 8.

      • @olmec@lemm.eeEnglish
        3•1 month ago

        No, please poke holes in my poll. I spend time on it, but this is the first real year I have actually put pen to paper.

        For LSU and Missouri, the cop out answer is that is the 25% of the ballot I give to supposed team quality. Realistically, it shouldn’t have that big of an effect though. Those are 2 teams that, after looking at their schedule just now, I was surprised how weak all their opponents were . I feel a bit bad, because using my metrics, they should be lower. Maybe 3-5 spots each, some where in that range. The good news is, at least LSU will have a chance to make a point this weekend against Ole Miss. That game will make a much bigger difference than me re-evaluating.

        Indiana I still feel fine on. Their schedule hasn’t been impressive. I think the Nebraska game in 2 weeks is the first real challenge they will face. If they perform well, they will see a jump.

        SMU was on the short list to get ranked, but with my rule of ranking 5-0 teams, they got cut. Kansas state is the lowest ranked one loss team in my ranking, and I would take them over SMU.