Fiu, Cirminiello, Mitchell on TV - Campus Insiders | Buy College Football Tickets

Compu-Picks 2013 Analysis: Week 11_01

Mr Pac Ten
Posted Nov 11, 2013


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

Article originally appeared at Compu-Picks.com.

As of the end of the games on Saturday November 9th, 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. Data supporting this article comes from cfbstats.com, , Pinnacle Sports, and others.


Rank BCS Rank Vegas Rank Team League Rating Result Rank * Schedule Rank *
1 2 3 Florida State ACC 0.93 1 42
2 1 1.5 Alabama SEC 0.90 3 30
3 6 1.5 Oregon Pac-12 0.88 4 13
4 5 4 Baylor Big 12 0.86 2 50
5 9 24 Missouri SEC 0.70 8 28
6 3 6 Ohio State Big Ten 0.68 6 52
7 4 5 Stanford Pac-12 0.64 20 9
8 22 9.5 Wisconsin Big Ten 0.62 10 31
9 19 9.5 Arizona State Pac-12 0.59 27 6
10 8 14 Clemson ACC 0.57 15 29
11 7 15.5 Auburn SEC 0.56 18 27
12 11 12 Texas A&M SEC 0.51 17 32
13 21 7 Louisiana State SEC 0.51 28 16
14 12 18 Oklahoma State Big 12 0.50 11 57
15 10 12 South Carolina SEC 0.48 31 18
16 NR NR Washington Pac-12 0.47 36 12
17 NR NR Kansas State Big 12 0.46 25 33
18 13 18 UCLA Pac-12 0.45 24 36
19 20 NR Louisville American 0.44 5 100
20 25 8 Georgia SEC 0.41 55 3
21 16 18 Michigan State Big Ten 0.41 9 84
22 NR 12 Southern California Pac-12 0.41 30 34
23 NR NR Brigham Young Indep 0.40 37 26
24 NR 20 Mississippi SEC 0.40 51 8
25 NR NR Virginia Tech ACC 0.38 54 11
26 . . Georgia Tech ACC 0.36 46 22
27 17 NR Central Florida American 0.36 16 70
28 24 NR Texas Big 12 0.36 32 48
29 23 NR Miami (Florida) ACC 0.35 47 21
30 . . Oregon State Pac-12 0.34 33 49
31 . . Arizona Pac-12 0.33 40 37
32 . . Houston American 0.31 23 63
33 18 15.5 Oklahoma Big 12 0.31 34 53
34 . . Utah Pac-12 0.30 75 2
35 . . Iowa Big Ten 0.26 50 40
36 . . Texas Tech Big 12 0.25 44 56
37 . . Florida SEC 0.24 58 17
38 . . Duke ACC 0.22 35 67
39 . . Vanderbilt SEC 0.21 63 19
40 . . East Carolina C-USA 0.18 13 113
41 . . Notre Dame Indep 0.17 48 59
42 . . Buffalo MAC 0.16 19 108
43 . . Utah State Mountain West 0.15 39 76
44 15 NR Northern Illinois MAC 0.15 7 124
45 . . Nebraska Big Ten 0.14 38 81
46 . . Minnesota Big Ten 0.14 42 68
47 . . North Carolina ACC 0.14 59 41
48 . . Washington State Pac-12 0.14 86 5
49 . . Michigan Big Ten 0.13 41 69
50 . . Boise State Mountain West 0.13 43 75
51 14 NR Fresno State Mountain West 0.12 14 118
52 . . Northwestern Big Ten 0.12 67 38
53 . . Pittsburgh ACC 0.10 61 45
54 . . Ball State MAC 0.10 12 122
55 . . Tennessee SEC 0.09 97 1
56 . . Boston College ACC 0.07 73 35
57 . . North Texas C-USA 0.06 22 114
58 . . Marshall C-USA 0.06 21 117
59 . . Indiana Big Ten 0.06 69 44
60 . . Syracuse ACC 0.05 70 54
61 . . Mississippi State SEC 0.05 84 20
62 . . Texas Christian Big 12 0.02 79 43
63 . . Toledo MAC 0.00 52 80
64 . . West Virginia Big 12 -0.01 92 14
65 . . Penn State Big Ten -0.01 65 61
66 . . Rice C-USA -0.01 49 95
67 . . Maryland ACC -0.01 60 65
68 . . Bowling Green State MAC -0.03 26 120
69 . . Louisiana-Lafayette Sun Belt -0.05 45 112
70 . . Navy Indep -0.07 68 73
71 . . Iowa State Big 12 -0.08 102 10
72 . . Florida Atlantic C-USA -0.10 80 60
73 . . Wake Forest ACC -0.11 87 46
74 . . Cincinnati American -0.11 29 125
75 . . UTSA C-USA -0.13 74 83
76 . . Ohio MAC -0.13 53 110
77 . . Arkansas SEC -0.14 99 23
78 . . San Diego State Mountain West -0.14 64 96
79 . . Illinois Big Ten -0.14 90 47
80 . . San Jose State Mountain West -0.14 77 72
81 . . North Carolina State ACC -0.16 91 55
82 . . South Alabama Sun Belt -0.16 56 105
83 . . Tulane C-USA -0.16 71 91
84 . . Rutgers American -0.16 72 88
85 . . Middle Tennessee State C-USA -0.18 76 78
86 . . Kentucky SEC -0.19 104 25
87 . . Western Kentucky Sun Belt -0.19 57 109
88 . . Colorado State Mountain West -0.19 66 104
89 . . Memphis American -0.21 89 66
90 . . Arkansas State Sun Belt -0.21 82 82
91 . . Colorado Pac-12 -0.24 117 4
92 . . Virginia ACC -0.27 112 15
93 . . South Florida American -0.29 105 51
94 . . Southern Methodist American -0.30 93 71
95 . . Old Dominion Indep -0.31 96 74
96 . . Nevada-Las Vegas Mountain West -0.31 88 94
97 . . California Pac-12 -0.31 119 7
98 . . Louisiana-Monroe Sun Belt -0.34 94 87
99 . . Nevada Mountain West -0.37 101 64
100 . . Texas State Sun Belt -0.38 62 123
101 . . Troy State Sun Belt -0.39 85 111
102 . . Kansas Big 12 -0.40 114 39
103 . . Wyoming Mountain West -0.41 78 119
104 . . Temple American -0.41 98 86
105 . . Akron MAC -0.44 100 89
106 . . Tulsa C-USA -0.47 103 85
107 . . Hawaii Mountain West -0.47 111 62
108 . . Army Indep -0.48 95 107
109 . . New Mexico Mountain West -0.48 83 121
110 . . Kent MAC -0.50 107 77
111 . . Connecticut American -0.50 113 58
112 . . Purdue Big Ten -0.53 126 24
113 . . Louisiana Tech C-USA -0.57 81 126
114 . . Central Michigan MAC -0.57 106 99
115 . . Alabama-Birmingham C-USA -0.58 110 90
116 . . Air Force Mountain West -0.61 108 103
117 . . Umass MAC -0.63 116 79
118 . . Georgia State Sun Belt -0.65 118 93
119 . . Western Michigan MAC -0.68 115 92
120 . . Texas-El Paso C-USA -0.71 109 116
121 . . Idaho Indep -0.81 121 97
122 . . Eastern Michigan MAC -0.81 122 98
123 . . New Mexico State Indep -0.82 124 101
124 . . Florida International C-USA -0.85 120 106
125 . . Southern Mississippi C-USA -0.87 125 102
126 . . Miami (Ohio) MAC -0.92 123 115

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 #4, so their Compu-Picks score of 0.64 is compared to the Compu-Picks 4th ranked Baylor, who has a score of 0.86. Since the difference is at least 0.10, they qualify for the "Compu-Picks Curse." The following teams make this week's list:

Ohio State; Stanford; UCF; Oklahoma; Northern Illinois; Fresno State.

Results so far:

After week 10 (3-4): Alabama (L: beat up LSU) ; Ohio State (N/A: did not play); Stanford (L: upset Oregon); Auburn (L: blasted Tennessee); Miami (W: lost to VA Tech); Oklahoma (W: blasted by Baylor); Notre Dame (W: lost to Pitt); Northern Illinois (N/A: did not play); Fresno State (L: blasted Wyoming)

After week 9 (2-4): Ohio State (L); Miami (W); Oklahoma (N/a); Michigan (W); Notre Dame (L); Northern Illinois (L); and Fresno State (L).

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) The national title race is pretty clearly Alabama and Florida State's to lose. Compu-Picks pegs Oregon and Baylor as being very much in their league, but there's enough of a gap that the popular perception is perfectly fair.


4) 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 four for Oregon and three for Baylor (and each of them has one more in the 26-30 range). 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.


5) 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 20 (and had been outside their top 25 before this week). 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.


6) 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 12, 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.


7) Another thing Compu-Picks rewards is dominance, and Louisville, Baylor and Oregon are clear examples 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.
Baylor continues to just obliterate their schedule even as things theoretically get harder. The Oklahoma Sooners came into Waco, and many thought they could pull the upset. Instead, it was a 41-12 Bear Blowout, joining the rest of the thrashings that Baylor has delivered all year long, with only a 10 point win at Kansas State being remotely close.
Meanwhile, other than their loss at Stanford, the Oregon Ducks have been smoking everyone. Their closest 1-A win was by 21 points at Washington. That's ridiculous, and is a huge part of their high Compu-Picks rating.


9) On the flip side, it's still 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 and 29 to Baylor. The BCS sees something in the Sooners, but damned if I can figure out what.
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.


10) One Compu-Picks rating that some people won't like is UCF being low, especially when they're lower than the Louisville team they beat. What gives? Part of it is Louisville's consistent dominance (the Cards' closest 1-A wins were a pair of 14-pointers), part of it is the fact that a three point head to head win (even on the road) isn't going to swamp the rest of teams' resumes, and part of it is UCF's struggles in a bunch of other games. They're 4-1 in games decided by 7 points or less, and the only times they blew anyone out came against bottom 25 teams Akron, FIU and UConn, (and FIU is currently rated 3rd worst in 1-A). Their resume is littered with okay level performances, and only the Louisville win really stands out at all. Is UCF a top 25 team? You can make a case. Are they better than Lousiville? The evidence just doesn't support it, unless for some reason you go all in on head to head and choose to ignore the rest of the resumes.


11) Another potentially controversial rating is Stanford. They just beat Oregon, and now they're still way behind. Why? Well, as with UCF and Louisville, one fairly close head to head win (and I don't think the score was deceptive; the goal line stand and a fumble right before the goal line that keyed Stanford's big lead are just as random as the blocked field goal for a touchdown that keyed Oregon's late comeback effort) doesn't overwhelm the rest of the resume. And while there's no question Stanford has played an elite schedule, they have struggled at times against it.
The Utah loss stands out to most people, but Stanford played fairly poorly at a bad Army team as well. So they have not one but two games with really bad ratings for a top 10 team. They barely held off Washington, won by just eight at Oregon State, and won close in the aforementioned Oregon game. They've been pretty consistently very good, but they haven't had enough great performances to overcome both of those warts and jump into the top four despite that gret win over Oregon.


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

Related Stories
Auburn Week: Monday Practice Report
 -by DawgPost.com  Nov 11, 2013
Davis Moving Up
 -by DawgPost.com  Nov 11, 2013
Strong previews Houston
 -by CardinalAuthority.com  Nov 11, 2013