.
Advertisement


Compu-Picks 2013 Analysis: Week 10_01

Mr Pac Ten
Posted Nov 5, 2013


Compu-Picks 2013 Analysis: rating all of the teams in college football after week ten

Article originally appeared at Compu-Picks.com.

As of the end of the games on Saturday November 2nd, these are the full list of Compu-Picks ratings. Remember that this is a predictive model, designed to pick games and show how good a team actually is. Its results can be very different from what you'll see elsewhere. Also, please note that the model does not consider games against AA teams; the * marks for result and schedule rankings designate that these are results and schedules solely counting games against fellow 1-A programs.


Please note that this article is continued here.


Rank BCS Rank Vegas Rank Team League Rating Result Rank * Schedule Rank *
1 2 2 Oregon Pac-12 0.97 3 17
2 3 3 Florida State ACC 0.92 2 30
3 1 1 Alabama SEC 0.87 4 40
4 6 4 Baylor Big 12 0.83 1 55
5 8 NR Missouri SEC 0.71 8 20
6 4 6 Ohio State Big Ten 0.66 5 53
7 7 13 Clemson ACC 0.60 14 21
8 22 9.5 Arizona State Pac-12 0.60 23 10
9 5 5 Stanford Pac-12 0.59 17 15
10 24 9.5 Wisconsin Big Ten 0.58 10 43
11 13 7 Louisiana State SEC 0.55 13 31
12 14 15 Oklahoma State Big 12 0.50 16 45
13 15 11 Texas A&M SEC 0.49 19 37
14 9 23 Auburn SEC 0.48 22 34
15 20 23 Louisville American 0.48 6 89
16 12 12 South Carolina SEC 0.47 32 19
17 NR NR Washington Pac-12 0.47 49 4
18 11 NR Miami (Florida) ACC 0.45 35 18
19 NR 8 Georgia SEC 0.44 56 2
20 19 20 UCLA Pac-12 0.43 24 39
21 NR NR Brigham Young Indep 0.42 26 38
22 17 18 Michigan State Big Ten 0.42 9 85
23 NR 18 Mississippi SEC 0.40 55 5
24 NR 15 Southern California Pac-12 0.39 40 23
25 21 NR Central Florida American 0.37 11 73
26 . . Arizona Pac-12 0.36 31 46
27 10 15 Oklahoma Big 12 0.36 20 64
28 . . Kansas State Big 12 0.36 33 41
29 . . Florida SEC 0.35 53 12
30 . . Georgia Tech ACC 0.34 46 26
31 . . Texas Big 12 0.34 37 52
32 . . Oregon State Pac-12 0.34 36 49
33 25 NR Texas Tech Big 12 0.33 29 56
34 . . Houston American 0.32 15 84
35 . . Utah Pac-12 0.28 75 3
36 . . Virginia Tech ACC 0.26 58 16
37 . . Iowa Big Ten 0.24 59 25
38 23 23 Notre Dame Indep 0.23 44 58
39 . . Michigan Big Ten 0.20 34 70
40 . . Utah State Mountain West 0.18 41 69
41 . . Duke ACC 0.17 43 67
42 . . Tennessee SEC 0.17 93 1
43 18 NR Northern Illinois MAC 0.15 7 126
44 . . Washington State Pac-12 0.14 85 7
45 . . East Carolina C-USA 0.14 18 112
46 . . Boise State Mountain West 0.13 45 74
47 . . Ball State MAC 0.12 12 118
48 . . Vanderbilt SEC 0.10 68 24
49 . . Maryland ACC 0.10 52 61
50 . . Buffalo MAC 0.09 25 110
51 . . Northwestern Big Ten 0.09 64 44
52 . . Boston College ACC 0.08 80 14
53 . . North Carolina ACC 0.08 69 29
54 . . Minnesota Big Ten 0.08 48 78
55 . . North Texas C-USA 0.07 30 108
56 . . Nebraska Big Ten 0.07 38 99
57 16 NR Fresno State Mountain West 0.03 21 120
58 . . Pittsburgh ACC 0.04 65 51
59 . . Indiana Big Ten 0.04 72 35
60 . . Marshall C-USA 0.03 28 113
61 . . Texas Christian Big 12 0.02 81 28
62 . . Toledo MAC 0.02 51 80
63 . . West Virginia Big 12 0.02 90 13
64 . . Penn State Big Ten 0.02 54 68
65 . . Mississippi State SEC 0.00 79 36
66 . . Rice C-USA -0.01 50 96
67 . . Ohio MAC -0.03 39 114
68 . . Syracuse ACC -0.04 77 48
69 . . Wake Forest ACC -0.05 74 54
70 . . Louisiana-Lafayette Sun Belt -0.05 47 111
71 . . Navy Indep -0.07 70 63
72 . . Iowa State Big 12 -0.07 103 8
73 . . Bowling Green State MAC -0.07 42 117
74 . . Cincinnati American -0.08 27 125
75 . . Florida Atlantic C-USA -0.11 78 62
76 . . Illinois Big Ten -0.11 84 50
77 . . North Carolina State ACC -0.13 83 59
78 . . UTSA C-USA -0.13 76 82
79 . . South Alabama Sun Belt -0.14 57 105
80 . . San Jose State Mountain West -0.14 73 75
81 . . Tulane C-USA -0.15 62 94
82 . . Arkansas SEC -0.16 101 27
83 . . Western Kentucky Sun Belt -0.16 61 101
84 . . Rutgers American -0.17 67 92
85 . . Kentucky SEC -0.17 98 33
86 . . San Diego State Mountain West -0.19 66 100
87 . . Virginia ACC -0.20 111 11
88 . . Colorado Pac-12 -0.20 114 6
89 . . Colorado State Mountain West -0.23 71 98
90 . . Middle Tennessee State C-USA -0.23 92 60
91 . . Memphis American -0.24 88 71
92 . . Louisiana-Monroe Sun Belt -0.26 87 83
93 . . South Florida American -0.26 105 42
94 . . California Pac-12 -0.30 119 9
95 . . Arkansas State Sun Belt -0.31 94 77
96 . . Southern Methodist American -0.32 95 72
97 . . Texas State Sun Belt -0.32 60 121
98 . . Nevada Mountain West -0.31 99 65
99 . . Wyoming Mountain West -0.35 63 123
100 . . Nevada-Las Vegas Mountain West -0.36 86 104
101 . . Temple American -0.39 97 86
102 . . Old Dominion Indep -0.40 116 32
103 . . Kansas Big 12 -0.40 112 47
104 . . Troy State Sun Belt -0.42 82 115
105 . . Akron MAC -0.42 102 88
106 . . Army Indep -0.46 96 106
107 . . Tulsa C-USA -0.46 100 97
108 . . Connecticut American -0.48 113 57
109 . . Hawaii Mountain West -0.49 110 66
110 . . Kent MAC -0.50 108 76
111 . . New Mexico Mountain West -0.51 89 119
112 . . Purdue Big Ten -0.54 126 22
113 . . Alabama-Birmingham C-USA -0.56 104 102
114 . . Central Michigan MAC -0.56 106 103
115 . . Air Force Mountain West -0.57 109 95
116 . . Louisiana Tech C-USA -0.60 91 124
117 . . Georgia State Sun Belt -0.64 120 87
118 . . Western Michigan MAC -0.67 118 81
119 . . Umass MAC -0.68 115 91
120 . . Texas-El Paso C-USA -0.73 107 122
121 . . Florida International C-USA -0.78 117 107
122 . . Idaho Indep -0.78 122 90
123 . . Eastern Michigan MAC -0.82 125 79
124 . . Southern Mississippi C-USA -0.83 124 93
125 . . Miami (Ohio) MAC -0.88 121 116
126 . . New Mexico State Indep -0.88 123 109

Some thoughts on the list:


1) One fun thing I've done in prior years is track the "Compu-Picks Curse," whereby teams that Compu-Picks thinks the BCS has substantially overrated have a strong tendency to have embarrasingly bad performances (blowout losses to strong teams or outright upsets to teams they outrank in the BCS). One special highlight of this process was in 2010, when Michigan State was a regular on the list and managed to get blown out twice by two teams ranked lower in the BCS, Iowa and Alabama.

These teams are identified by the difference between their rating and the rating of the team whose Compu-Picks rank matches their BCS rank. So for instance, Stanford is BCS #5, so their Compu-Picks score of 0.59 is compared to the Compu-Picks 5th ranked Missouri, who has a score of 0.71. Since the difference is at least 0.10, they qualify for the "Compu-Picks Curse." The following teams make this week's list:

Alabama; Ohio State; Stanford; Auburn; Miami; Oklahoma; Notre Dame; Northern Illinois; Fresno State

Results so far:

After week 9 (2-4): Ohio State (L, blasted Purdue); Miami (W; got blasted by Florida St); Oklahoma (N/A, did not play); Michigan (W; lost decisively to Michigan St); Notre Dame (L, though almost lost to Navy); Northern Illinois (L, blasted UMass); and Fresno State (L, beat Nevada).

After week 8 (1-5): Ohio State (L); Oklahoma (L); Oklahoma State (L); Michigan (N/A); Nebraska (W); Northern Illinois (L); and Fresno State (L).


2) One consistent theme that pops up when I've done these analyses the past few years is that Compu-Picks gives a lot more weight to schedule strength and dominance than does the BCS, and a lot less weight to simple W/L record and head to head. The same thing is true this time around.


3) Probably the most obvious part of this list is that Compu-Picks has Alabama #3, behind both Oregon and Florida State by a fairly decent margin. This is primarily because the Tide simply haven't hit the hardest part of their schedule, and are to at least some degree a wild card. If they can keep up their dominance after facing LSU, Auburn and the SEC Championship game (plus Miss St), then their rating should improve.
That said, there's no guarantee they will do this. To date, the Tide has played one very tough game (at A&M) two other legitimate challenges (Ole Miss and VA Tech), plus a Tennessee team with a pulse. They've also played a bad Colorado State team, an awful Georgia State team, plus the two worst teams in the SEC, Kentucky and Arkansas. That's a fine schedule but hardly an elite one. And when you add in the fact that the Tide is the only team among the top three to be seriously pushed, winning close at Texas A&M, you can start to see why Compu-Picks, while overall quite impressed by Alabama's resume, thinks Oregon's and FSU's are currently better.


4) Speaking of Florida State, talk about a leader in the clubhouse. The 'Noles have basically achieved what they are going to; while Florida and the ACC title game loom as threats, they basically get the next three weeks off, facing pretty easy Wake and Syracuse teams before getting an awful Idaho team in basically a pre-Florida bye week. Compared to Alabama's slate of LSU, Auburn and the SEC title game, or Oregon's slate of Stanford, Arizona, and the Pac-12 title game (with the "off weeks" as home games against solid Utah and Oregon State teams) there's a big gap. Fortunately for Florida State, there's a pretty decent chance one or both of the Tide and Ducks falter before the year is done. There's enough tests remaining that one of them should be failed at some point.


5) I'm sure Ohio State fans will be less than thrilled to see Compu-Picks continuing its "disrespect", but the simple truth is that the Buckeyes' resume, while pretty good, is far from elite. The Top 25 performance list has exactly zero Ohio State showings, compared to two for Missouri (including a fantastic 15 point win at Georgia) and three for Baylor. At this point, the Buckeyes' best showing is their dominant win over Penn State, which is certainly a good performance but not a truly elite one (mainly because Penn State just isn't all that good).
Looking at things at a higher level doesn't change the story. Ohio State has been very dominant but not at the level of the top four, and their schedule has been frankly non-descript. An elite team SHOULD have run that table, with only Wisconsin registering as a solid test. And an elite team should have dominated that slate, instead of only doing so sometimes.
And a bunch of their performances just weren't that great. Wisconsin and Michigan State both did better against Iowa (and both in Iowa City), Wisconsin did light years better against Northwestern (though that was a home game for the Badgers), and Baylor did light years better against Buffalo. And then there's the Cal game. Compared to Ohio State, Oregon and Oregon State were way more dominant against Cal, UCLA was a good deal more dominant, and Wazzu and Washington were a bit more dominant. At some point, if you're truly elite, you simply shouldn't have a bunch of performances where people can make those kinds of remarks. Ohio State has those, without anything close to a true elite level performance. The resume just isn't there to consider the Buckeyes elite at this point in time.


6) I usually don't comment much on the Vegas ranks, keeping them as a point of interest and sometimes showing how Compu-Picks correlates better to those than the BCS, but I have to note Missouri, who the Don Best linemakers keeps outside the top 25. The Tigers have faced a very strong slate and have done very well against it. They lost a close overtime game to a Vegas top 15 team, South Carolina, won convincingly at Vegas top 10 Georgia, beat up Vegas top 20 team Florida, and slaughtered the same Tennessee team who's shown at least some competence against most other SEC opponents. I'm sure they have a reason for that rating but I simply think they're wrong. Even without Franklin, the Tigers continue performing at a very high level, and I can't think of another reason to drop them so low.


7) It's been said before that schedule strength gets rewarded by Compu-Picks, and Arizona St, Washington, Georgia and Ole Miss are continued proof of this. Each of them has a 1-A schedule rated in the top 10, and each of them is in Compu-Picks' top twenty five while being unranked by the BCS.
Arizona St has played an elite schedule and done very well against it. They (controversially) beat Wisconsin, beat up USC, smoked Washington and won very comfortably at Washington State. They also lost to Notre Dame and by 14 at Stanford in a game that wasn't even that close, but overall there's a lot of resume heft there.
Ole Miss obviously has some poor showings to their name, especially the 25-0 shutout loss to Bama, but an 8 point loss to Auburn and a 3 pointer to A&M are hardly marks of shame. And a 3 point win over LSU and 44-23 blowout win at Texas are legitimately impressive, and the (close) win at Vandy was nice too. This isn't an elite resume, but it is a quality one. Obsessing about W-L record and ignoring everything else is a funamentally flawed way of looking at a team, and Ole Miss is a great example.
Washington is another good example. The Huskies annihilated a legitimately decent Boise team, won a cross-county trip to Illinois, blew out Arizona and very nearly won at a top 10 Stanford team. Their Oregon and ASU losses were obviously ugly, but otherwise this has been a solid resume.
Georgia's story feels almost repetitive at this point. A solid 11 point win over South Carolina, a win over a very good LSU team, a win over Florida and a win at Tennessee (which surprisingly means something this year) are all nice add-ons to the resume. A 15-point loss at Mizzou and a 4-point loss at Vandy definitely don't help, but there's no shame at all in a 3-point loss at Clemson (who's been very good this year, just not good enough to hang with FSU). 3 losses is 3 losses, but this is still a good team. Not quite top 10 as Vegas shows them, but still top 25.


8) Another thing Compu-Picks rewards is dominance, and Louisville is a clear example of this. Even with their (very close) loss to UCF, on average the Cardinals have been extremely dominant. Two 14-point wins, a 23-point win, a 31-poit win, a 42-point win and a 72-0 obliteration. That's a lot of ass-kicking, and while the Cardinals' schedule hasn't been good, it's still not a monumental embarrassment. Kentucky has had some good moments (such as pushing South Carolina very hard on the road), UCF has obviously been good, Rutgers has a clear pulse, and Ohio has been one of the better non-AQ's this year.


9) On the flip side, it's unclear exactly what the BCS sees in Oklahoma. The Sooners have played an utterly average schedule and have been far from dominant, beating West Virginia by just 9, TCU by just 3, Kansas by just 15, and they lost by 16 to Texas. It's easy to see why Vegas has made Baylor solid favorites, and the way the two teams have been playing, even two touchdowns seems light. The Sooners seem like they're on borrowed time, and that time will run out sooner or later.
Fresno State and Northern Illinois have played utter embarrsasment schedules and only NIU has actually dominated. Neither has any individual performances close to elite level, and both have struggled in games that contenders for BCS at-large spots shouldn't, such as Fresno nearly finishing a collapse at awful Hawaii (won by 5), needing overtime to beat Rutgers by just one point (the same Rutgers that almost lost at home to Temple, that Louisville beat by 14 and that Houston obliterated), and getting taken to overtime by San Diego State. Or Northern Illinois beating awful Idaho by just 10, and Akron by just 7 at home. Neither of these teams has any business heading ot the BCS. Barring a major improvement, if either runs the table and makes the BCS, it looks like 2007 Hawaii all over again.


This article is subject to the Compu-Picks terms of use

Related Stories
Oklahoma Game Prep Part 2
 -by BearsIllustrated.com  Nov 5, 2013
Collins Has Chance To Make Big Plays
 -by BamaMag.com  Nov 5, 2013
App State Week: Tuesday Practice Report
 -by DawgPost.com  Nov 5, 2013














Advertisement