As many of you remember, before the season started I published picks against the books' Game of the Year lines. This article represents a status update on how those picks are doing.
The table below represents an evaluation of each pick Compu-Picks made against the Game of the Year lines. Picks are separated by confidence level (1 lowest, 4 highest). Here is how the system stands so far:
| Confidence | W | L |
| 1 | 7 | 4 |
| 2 | 0 | 4 |
| 3 | 9 | 0 |
| 4 | 8 | 0 |
| Total | 24 | 8 |
And below is the full list of each game of the year line as well as Compu-Picks' picks against these lines. Please note that many games didn't merit a pick from Compu-Picks.
| Team1 | Team2 | Line | Confidence | Pick | W/L |
| Miami (Florida) | Kansas State | 7.5 | 0 | | |
| Washington | Louisiana State | 21.5 | 2 | Washington | L |
| Georgia | Missouri | -4.5 | 1 | Missouri | L |
| Florida | Texas A&M | -4 | 1 | Florida | L |
| Iowa State | Iowa | 7.5 | 0 | | |
| Southern California | Syracuse | -24 | 1 | Syracuse | W |
| Nebraska | UCLA | -6.5 | 3 | UCLA | W |
| Pittsburgh | Cincinnati | 2.5 | 0 | | |
| Oklahoma State | Arizona | -9.5 | 1 | Oklahoma State | L |
| Washington State | Nevada-Las Vegas | -16 | 1 | Nevada-Las Vegas | W |
| Alabama | Arkansas | -5 | 1 | Alabama | W |
| Florida | Tennessee | -4 | 1 | Florida | W |
| Southern California | Stanford | -12 | 4 | Stanford | W |
| Notre Dame | Michigan State | 2.5 | 0 | | |
| Louisiana State | Auburn | -9.5 | 4 | Auburn | W |
| Clemson | Florida State | 10.5 | 0 | | |
| Kansas State | Oklahoma | 16.5 | 1 | Oklahoma | L |
| Missouri | South Carolina | 5 | 0 | | |
| California | Southern California | 24 | 1 | California | W |
| Michigan | Notre Dame | 2.5 | 2 | Michigan | L |
| Mississippi | Alabama | 30.5 | 0 | | |
| Tennessee | Georgia | 11.5 | 0 | | |
| Ohio State | Michigan State | 2.5 | 3 | Ohio State | W |
| Texas | Oklahoma State | 1.5 | 3 | Texas | W |
| Arkansas | Texas A&M | -3.5 | 1 | Texas A&M | W |
| Baylor | West Virginia | 12 | 0 | | |
| Wisconsin | Nebraska | 3 | 1 | Nebraska | W |
| Southern California | Utah | -14 | 4 | Utah | |
| Arkansas | Auburn | -4.5 | 4 | Auburn | |
| Louisiana State | Florida | -4.5 | 3 | Florida | |
| Kansas | Kansas State | 20 | 1 | Kansas | |
| Washington | Oregon | 20 | 0 | | |
| Georgia | South Carolina | -2 | 1 | South Carolina | |
| West Virginia | Texas | 6.5 | 1 | Texas | |
| Miami (Florida) | Notre Dame | 10 | 0 | | |
| Nebraska | Ohio State | 4.5 | 0 | | |
| Nevada | Nevada-Las Vegas | -16 | 3 | Nevada-Las Vegas | |
| Alabama | Missouri | -14 | 1 | Missouri | |
| Southern California | Washington | -17 | 3 | Washington | |
| Texas | Oklahoma | 7 | 2 | Texas | |
| Stanford | Notre Dame | 5.5 | 3 | Stanford | |
| Stanford | California | -4 | 2 | Stanford | |
| South Carolina | Florida | 5 | 0 | | |
| Florida State | Miami (Florida) | -11 | 1 | Florida State | |
| Michigan State | Michigan | 5.5 | 0 | | |
| Alabama | Tennessee | -14 | 0 | | |
| Baylor | Texas | 14 | 2 | Texas | |
| Louisiana State | Texas A&M | -10 | 1 | Texas A&M | |
| Colorado | Southern California | 36 | 1 | Southern California | |
| Kansas State | West Virginia | 7 | 0 | | |
| Nevada-Las Vegas | Boise State | 35.5 | 0 | | |
| Brigham Young | Notre Dame | 7.5 | 3 | Brigham Young | |
| Cincinnati | Louisville | 5 | 1 | Cincinnati | |
| Mississippi State | Alabama | 23.5 | 2 | Mississippi State | |
| Southern California | Arizona | -16 | 0 | | |
| Texas A&M | Auburn | 4 | 1 | Auburn | |
| Notre Dame | Oklahoma | 12 | 1 | Oklahoma | |
| Texas Christian | Oklahoma State | 7.5 | 4 | Texas Christian | |
| Tennessee | South Carolina | 6.5 | 0 | | |
| Michigan State | Wisconsin | 5 | 2 | Michigan State | |
| Florida | Georgia | 3.5 | 2 | Florida | |
| Michigan | Nebraska | 2 | 1 | Michigan | |
| Virginia Tech | Miami (Florida) | -6.5 | 1 | Miami (Florida) | |
| Missouri | Florida | 7.5 | 0 | | |
| Oklahoma State | Kansas State | -2 | 0 | | |
| Nebraska | Michigan State | 5 | 2 | Nebraska | |
| Oregon | Southern California | 3.5 | 4 | Oregon | |
| Texas Christian | West Virginia | 6 | 3 | Texas Christian | |
| Pittsburgh | Notre Dame | 13 | 1 | Pittsburgh | |
| Alabama | Louisiana State | 1.5 | 1 | Alabama | |
| Florida State | Virginia Tech | -3 | 1 | Florida State | |
| Pittsburgh | Connecticut | -2.5 | 0 | | |
| Texas A&M | Alabama | 20 | 0 | | |
| Georgia | Auburn | -5.5 | 3 | Auburn | |
| Notre Dame | Boston College | -11 | 4 | Boston College | |
| Mississippi State | Louisiana State | 17 | 3 | Mississippi State | |
| Baylor | Oklahoma | 20 | 1 | Oklahoma | |
| West Virginia | Oklahoma State | 5 | 1 | West Virginia | |
| Arkansas | South Carolina | -2 | 3 | South Carolina | |
| Kansas State | Texas Christian | 5 | 1 | Texas Christian | |
| Missouri | Tennessee | 2.5 | 2 | Missouri | |
| Arizona State | Southern California | 27 | 0 | | |
| Mississippi | Louisiana State | 27.5 | 0 | | |
| Stanford | Oregon | 13.5 | 0 | | |
| Southern California | UCLA | -14 | 3 | UCLA | |
| Ohio State | Wisconsin | 4.5 | 4 | Ohio State | |
| Oklahoma | West Virginia | -3.5 | 1 | Oklahoma | |
| Louisiana State | Arkansas | -3.5 | 0 | | |
| Washington | Washington State | -1 | 2 | Washington | |
| Arizona State | Arizona | 7 | 1 | Arizona State | |
| Auburn | Alabama | 19.5 | 2 | Auburn | |
| South Carolina | Clemson | 2.5 | 0 | | |
| Florida | Florida State | 6.5 | 1 | Florida | |
| Mississippi State | Mississippi | -10 | 0 | | |
| Michigan | Ohio State | 4 | 0 | | |
| Oklahoma State | Oklahoma | 10 | 0 | | |
| Oregon | Oregon State | -17 | 0 | | |
| Texas Christian | Texas | 8.5 | 1 | Texas Christian | |
| Missouri | Texas A&M | 3 | 2 | Missouri | |
| Notre Dame | Southern California | 13 | 1 | Notre Dame | |
| Texas | Kansas State | -6 | 1 | Texas | |
| Oklahoma | Texas Christian | -8 | 2 | Texas Christian | |
| Army | Navy | 3.5 | 1 | Army | |
There are a few important notes and caveats I need to make about this model:
1) Compu-Picks does not endorse implicitly or explicitly any form of illegal gambling. Compu-Picks is intended to be used for entertainment purposes only.
2) No guarantee or warranty is offered or implied by Compu-Picks for any information provided and/or predictions made.
3) This preseason model is primarily based on the main compu-picks model. Essentially, it attempts to predict how well a team will rate given its rating history, as well as a number of other data points, such as returning starters, draft talent lost, turnovers, recruiting, etc. This means, among other things, that the rankings are power rankings based on how good a team projects to be, as opposed to a more cynical (though accurate) model that attempts to project how the BCS will rank a team by making adjustments to favor those with easy schedules and punish those with tough schedules.
2012 Compu-Picks Blog
Questions, comments or suggestions? Email me at cfn_ms@hotmail.com
