Hi everyone! I've been trying my luck at previewing the MLB season for a few years now, trying to take a stab at how teams will fare, which players will outperform or underperform expectations, and who will be taking home the hardware - both individually and as a team - come the end of the year. I've always published my NL predictions on one day and my AL predictions shortly after, but last year I decided that the preview should be a 3-part series, the first part of which isn't preview at all! In short, if I go making predictions, I at least ought to check how well I did last year before asking you to view my picks with any level of confidence.
As a review of my review:
For the 2011 season, my mean error on predicted # of wins was 9, and median was 7.
For the 2012 season, my mean error on predicted # of wins was 9.7, and median was 9.
Drumroll:
For the 2013 season, my mean error on predicted # of wins was 7.7, and median was 7.
Basically, I'm getting smarter. A few comparisons, in increasing order of how much I respect the publication:
For 2013, Robert Knapel at Bleacher Report had a mean error of 8.3 and median of 7.
For 2013, Sports Illustrated's Baseball Preview had a mean error of 7.3 and median of 5.
For 2013, Grantland's Jonah Keri had a mean error of 6.7 and median of 6.
I'll take that. Seeing as I'm, you know, a full-time student, and also lazy, I'll call my 2013 unspectacular but respectable, and go ahead and predict I'll be even better this year.
Like last year, I'll go through division-by-division, letting you know where I effed up, where I feel I was particularly clairvoyant, and what should have been obvious in hindsight. After that, we'll take a look at how I did forecasting the awards.
NL EAST
Braves: 96-66, predicted 89-73
Nationals: 86-76, predicted 96-66
Mets: 74-88, predicted 74-88
Phillies: 73-89, predicted 83-79
Marlins: 62-100, predicted 61-101
This is my "home division," as it were, being a Phillies fan, and was one of the two that I clearly did better than the experts on. My 96 wins for the Nationals were actually fewer than most people were picking (I saw 100+), and I was able to leverage some good old hometown pessimism into a Phillies pick that was more in line with reality than expectation. I had hoped, at least, that Giancarlo Stanton would be as much of a bright spot for the Marlins as many were predicting. I ventured .280/40/120. Instead, he hit .249/24/62 and missed 46 games due to injuries. One more season of getting banged up and we'll have to put him in the "injury prone" box. That would be really sad for all of baseball.
NL CENTRAL
Cardinals: 97-65, predicted 88-74
Pirates: 94-68, predicted 72-90
Reds: 90-72, predicted 93-69
Brewers: 74-88, predicted 85-77
Cubs: 66-96, predicted 71-91
When I made my NL Central picks, I was not as optimistic about the Pirates as most people. That turned out to be a big, big mistake. No one had them in the 90s, but I saw a lot of 82s and 85s and so, and that struck me as generous. Instead, McCutchen snagged an MVP award that he definitely deserved, Starling Marte established himself as a force for a long time to come, Russell Martin and A.J. Burnett each put up their best season since their pre-Yankee years, and the bullpen performed at a ridiculous level. I don't think anything else was particularly ill-informed. Meh, probably the Brewers' pick. I've always overrated them, for some reason.
NL WEST
Dodgers: 92-70, predicted 92-70
Diamondbacks: 81-81, predicted 84-78
Giants: 76-86, predicted 86-76
Padres: 76-86, predicted 67-95
Rockies: 74-88, predicted 77-85
The Dodgers finished with the record I predicted, although if you had asked me about the trajectory of their season, I don't think I would've given you a 40-8 stretch. I tried to tell people that the World Series-defending Giants wouldn't be heading back to the playoffs, but no one listened, projecting them for 92 and 94 and 97 wins. They just didn't have that much talent. Nothing else in this division was particularly exciting, although the Padres showed flashes of young development a little earlier than I thought they might. They should continue to build.
AL EAST
Red Sox: 97-65, predicted 87-75
Rays: 91-71, predicted 90-72
Yankees: 85-77, predicted 83-79
Orioles: 85-77, predicted 73-89
Blue Jays: 74-88, predicted 86-76
Believe it or not, with all those misses by 10+, this is actually the other division where I beat most experts. The highest predicted win total I saw for the Red Sox was 82, but this is the other side of the Giants coin: they were just far too talented to be a .500 team. Everyone either said "the Yankees will be the Yankees," or went all doom and gloom on them, meaning every other prediction was off by 10 or so in one direction or the other. Once again, the Orioles continued to produce with Five Guys Burgers and Fries as their starting rotation, and the Blue Jays (who I was more pessimistic on at 86 wins than most writers, who predicted them to win the division) proved that if you ship a core of losers from Miami to Toronto, you'll just end up with a bunch of Canadian losers.
AL CENTRAL
Tigers: 93-69, predicted 95-67
Indians: 92-70, predicted 73-89
Royals: 86-76, predicted 80-82
Twins: 66-96, predicted 64-98
White Sox: 63-99, predicted 83-79
We all knew the Tigers were going to be really good, and the Twins were going to be really bad. But if you had asked me which of the other three teams would push the Tigers for the division all year, I would've guess the Indians fifth. What no one accounted for was a top 5 rotation for Cleveland, with Ubaldo Jimenez, Justin Masterson, Scott Kazmir, and the loved-by-SABR-nerds-duo of Danny Salazar and Corey Kluber all seeming to outperform expectations. Look for a long discussion of Salazar in the AL Predictions. The Royals finally got a winning record in the one season I didn't pick them to have a winning record in.
AL WEST
Athletics: 96-66, predicted 83-79
Rangers: 91-71, predicted 91-71
Angels: 78-84, predicted 94-68
Mariners: 71-91, predicted 74-88
Astros: 51-111, predicted 54-108
Really whiffed on the Athletics (who I expected to fall, not rise, after their surprising run to the playoffs in 2012) and the Angels (who, for the second season in a row, majorly disappointed). At least I nailed the Rangers on the head. And let's take a moment to consider that I was among the most optimistic about the Astros. I saw predictions as low as 44-118. Yikes.
AWARDS
NL MVP
1. Troy Tulowitzki - When I picked him for MVP, I said "if he's healthy. Well, Tulo was back to his popping self when he was healthy, and snagged .312/25/82. He only played in 126 games, though. This was still good enough for 17th in the MVP voting. If he had been healthy enough to play in 150, you're looking at .312/30/99. Those are real MVP numbers, and would have put him 3rd to 5th in last year's race. When I picked him for MVP, I said "if he's healthy.
2. Joey Votto - Sixth in MVP voting. Playing all 162 games for the first time in his career, Votto continued to be more valuable to his team than he appeared. Old-school MVP voters look at .305/24/73 from a 1B and just don't see that as MVP numbers, but more are coming to realize that his .435 OBP is truly an MVP number.
3. Jason Heyward - Didn't receive votes. We all thought this would be the year Heyward exploded, but his joints actually did most of the exploding. Only played in 104 games. Rumor has it that Atlanta offered Freeman's 8/110 to Heyward first, but Heyward feels that if he can stay healthy a whole season that offer will appear a mere pittance compared to what teams will be lining up to give him. .254/14/38 in two thirds of a season.
4. Giancarlo Stanton - see above. Again, hurt. Man.
5. Ryan Braun - hahahahahahahaha. Sigh.
AL MVP
1. Miguel Cabrera - I mean, come on. The best hitter in the game. .348/44/137 - actually a better offensive line than his 2012 MVP campaign - and he was fighting a core injury for the last month. Do yourself a favor: go to fangraphs, and type "Miguel Cabrera inside pitches." There are pitches that would actually hit some batters that Cabrera smashes into the bleachers.
2. Prince Fielder - Didn't get votes. I expected that Fielder would be able to capitalize on Cabrera's success. Instead, he had a terrible year by his standards, his worst since 2006, and put up a career-low 25 HRs. .279/25/106, with plummeting peripherals, isn't good enough for a no-defense-no-speed 1B who really should be DHing.
3. Dustin Pedroia - Again, I was higher on the Red Sox than most, and felt Pedroia would lead the charge. He finished 7th in MVP voting (probably a little higher than he deserved, boosted by the Red Sox regular season success), getting back above 5 WAR and playing 160 games for the first time in his career. .301/9/84 is pretty damn good from a 5'8" second baseman.
4. Robinson Cano - 5th in MVP voting. That 2013 wasn't spectacular by Cano's standards doesn't mean that it wasn't spectacular. In fact, it means the most spectacular thing about him is his ridiculous consistency. In the last 7 years, he's missed a total of 14 games. He's gone 5 straight years with 25+ HRs. And now he appears to be playing +, or at least run-neutral, defense, which was something he had to learn over the first few years of his career. Did he deserve 10 years and $240 million? No. But he's as close to deserving as almost anyone not named Trout or Cabrera.
5. Adam Jones - 13th in MVP voting. Jones was just good-not-great, continuing to be the kind of guy that's more valuable in fantasy (because he does everything fantasy cares about pretty well) than in real life (because he virtually never walks and is pretty bad in CF, despite those really incredibly undeserved Gold Gloves he earned).
NL Cy Young
1. Zack Greinke - Ended up in 8th place, boosted by the Dodgers' high-profile success and great offense even though he actually had his worst statistical season since 2010 or 2007, depending on how you look at it. The measurables were quite good - 15-4, 2.63 ERA - but his strikeout rate plummeted and his strand rate was unrepeatably high.
2. Stephen Strasburg - Hit something of a sophomore slump (if we call 2012 his first real season), going 8-9 with a 3.00 ERA and 191 Ks. Seemed to get very little run support. Still had the 2nd-highest average fastball velocity, behind Matt Harvey.
3. Cole Hamels - Was not the Phillies' pitcher who finished 6th in Cy Young voting (that would be Clifton Phifer Lee). I actually saw 4 games he pitched in person, and the Phillies scored a combined 4 runs in those games. He remained a very good pitcher with a nasty changeup but, like Strasburg, got very little help or luck. Had fewer quality starts than only Clayton Kershaw and Adam Wainwright in the NL.
4. Johnny Cueto - I took him as an upside pick and, well, he did all right when he played. Mr. Cueto only managed 11 games, though, as he was sidelined with injuries for most of the year. He did go 5-2 with a 2.82 ERA in those games, but after a strong 2012, his '13 campaign was a lost year.
5. Clayton Kershaw - Saying he was "too talented not to include," and that "he might be top-3 for the next 5 years," I tacked on the eventual Cy Young winner at the end. The then-25-year-old managed an ERA of 1.83, put up 232 Ks, and amassed a 16-9 record to win the trophy and earn himself a huge contract extension. Like Felix Hernandez, it seems like he's been in the league forever because he started when he was so young.
AL Cy Young
1. Justin Verlander - Dude puts up 5.2 WAR and that's an off year. Amazing. He was overshadowed by the more measurable success of his teammate (more on him to come), but the difference between his Cy Young campaigns and 2013 was almost entirely explainable by a spike in BABIP, much of which can be contributed to the Tigers rolling out an historically bad defense. There's no cause for alarm in the Verlander camp.
2. Yu Darvish - Finished 2nd in the voting. Last April, fangraphs.com published this article demonstrating, visually, why Darvish is a monster on the mound. The fastest of the pitches shown is a 97 mph fastball. The slowest is a 64 mph curve. And the delivery for all of them looks identical. Darvish led the majors in strikeouts by a wide margin (277 to Scherzer's 240), and although his win total dropped from 2012 (16 to 13), so did his ERA (3.90 to 2.83).
3. Chris Sale - An example of a very good player on a very bad team. Sale went 11-14 last year, although his numbers were very good (3.07 ERA, 226 Ks, 5.1 WAR). The voters realized it, and he came in 5th in Cy Young voting despite the losing record.
4. David Price - No repeat for the '12 winner, as his ERA was up, his Ks were down, and he put up only half as many wins as the year before (10 in '13, 20 in '12). It didn't keep him from being the biggest trade target this offseason (and, as we found out, the most difficult piece to acquire), nor did it keep the Rays from snagging a Wild Card spot fairly easily. It did keep Price off the voters' ballots, though.
5. Max Scherzer - Once again, the last name on my short list brings home the hardware. I said of the dichromatic hurler "he has the pieces, just needs to put them together" after a 2012 campaign that saw a huge jump in strikeouts (8.03 per 9 in 2011 to 11.08 per 9 in 2012). A jump in strikeouts is often an indicator of future success, and Scherzer managed to get more than 10 strikeouts per 9 while lowering his walk and home run rates to the lowest of his career. All of that added together, plus a very good offense behind him, means a 21-3 season that looked for a while like it might end up 25-1 or so. Brilliant performance for a good guy.
So, there you have it. Three of the four award winners were on my shortlists, and my picks were, if not sterling, at least informed.
NATIONAL LEAGUE 2014 PREDICTIONS OUT TOMORROW!!!
Showing posts with label Analysis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Analysis. Show all posts
Friday, March 28, 2014
Friday, December 6, 2013
College Football: Preview of the Conference Championship* Games!!!
Hey everyone! Next week is the vaunted Week 15, the perennial last week of regular-season football for every team except Army and Navy. That means that all of the conferences with 12 or more teams - this year, the ACC, Big 10, C-USA, MAC, Mountain West, Pac 12, and SEC - will play their Conference Championship games in the coming days. Indeed, both the AAC and Big 12 titles are up for grabs, which means that, of the ten FBS conferences this weekend, nine have either official or unofficial Champion-determining games this weekend (that's what the * in the title of the post is for!). Only the Sun Belt is wrapped up, with the #58 Louisiana-Lafayette Ragin' Cajuns having locked up a trip to... the New Orleans Bowl... to play Tulane... which gives you an idea of what a Sun Belt Championship is worth these days. Ultimately, though, of the 14 games this weekend, 10 of them have title implications on the line. It's all up for grabs here, and THAT'S WHY YOU NEED TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
I'll take you through conference-by-conference, tell you who's got the inside track to the BCS, and let you know what SEC team each conference championship loser will be playing in their bowl game! (because... like... there are so many SEC teams that are good it seems like... every bowl game... has an SEC team... in it... #dontexplainthejoke)
All rankings used are the Ruby Rankings, available HERE, unless otherwise noted.
The AAC
Possible Champions (No Championship Game):
#20 UCF
#56 Cincinnati
#19 Louisville at #56 Cincinnati
Basically, this is a match-up to determine whether Cincinnati is technically in the hunt (I say technically because Cincinnati would have to pass UCF in the BCS rankings too, and the computers aren't going to buy that) for a BCS bid if UCF somehow messes up at home against #96 SMU (for the reasons this is more likely than you might think, read on). Both of these teams are 6-1 in the AAC, but the comparisons just about stop there.
Louisville was a Top Ten AP squad coming into the season, and their AAC loss was to UCF, a team that is virtually ranked even with them and gave possible BCS participant #11 South Carolina all it could handle in a 28-25 loss. Louisville hasn't really been tested (I have Louisville's adjusted strength-of-schedule as 6th-easiest in the country), but the talent is easy to see: Teddy Bridgewater, a possible Top 5 draft pick, leads an offense that can be inconsistent quarter-to-quarter but hasn't thrown up a dud all year (fewest points scored are 20), and the team has three legitimate running threats.
Cincinnati, on the other hand, has had a far easier schedule than Louisville (you read that right), having played what might be considered a good tough schedule for an FCS team (the only team in the Ruby Rankings with a worse strength-of-schedule is #99 Old Dominion, a transitional team that isn't actually an FBS team until next year by some accounts). Cincinnati's two losses are against #95 Illinois and #105 South Florida. Ouch. All that being said, this team actually really came together, and is a better team than their ranking indicates. After losing star QB Munchie Legaux in Week 2, I thought these guys were toast. But after the silly loss to USF, they've ran the AAC table - avoiding UCF, who wasn't on their schedule this year - and managed to find a way to still be alive at this point. And you can't fault them for that.
But the rankings can:
#19 Louisville 41, #56 Cincinnati 30
#20 UCF at #96 SMU
In this battle of three-letter squads, one might think that UCF should waltz to the finish line - and a BCS berth. One would be right. However, if you maintain that UCF will waltz to the finish line, well, you might want to take a second - just a second - to wonder.
As I mentioned earlier, UCF pushed South Carolina to 28-25. Coaches can have their crap about "never being a bad win or a good loss" on the field and in the locker room, but from a true predictive standpoint, that 3-point loss to a top-notch SEC squad is the most impressive game any AAC team has played this year. UCF jumped out to a 10-0 halftime lead against the Gamecocks, and then surrendered 28 straight points. To score twice more in the 4th quarter and almost beat such a good team showed great effort. All that is the good news. Now the bad news: South Carolina beat UCF by the same margin (3) that UCF beat #114 Temple and #105 South Florida by over the last 3 weeks, needing a miracle catch and last-second FG to edge the Owls in Philadelphia. That is to say, UCF has looked good against good teams and bad against bad teams.
For better or worse, then, SMU is a bad team. Sure, they're 5-6, and are playing for a bowl berth, which can fire-up any team. But their five wins have been over an FCS team and four teams that have fewer wins among them than UCF (Temple, USF, #111 Connecticut and #90 Memphis. Dear lord, the AAC is terrible). SMU is toward the bottom of the country in rushing yards per game, and allow 34.8 points per game. This team just got blown-out 34-0 against #38 Houston, and there's no reason they should be anywhere near UCF. But who knows what's going to happen when they get on the field?
Answer: the Ruby Rankings do.
#20 UCF 35, #96 SMU 10
The ACC
Championship Game: #1 FSU vs. #32 Duke
All along, I've been telling everyone that Florida State is the best team in the country (well, ever since they drubbed #17 Clemson 51-14). With #7 Alabama's loss in the Iron Bowl, however, the Polls and BCS finally agree with me. Clearly, they're the most deserving of the #1 ranking (which has less to do with being the best team than you might think), and at any rate, the biggest obstacle between them and being BCS Champions is probably Jameis Winston's legal situation. Assuming Winston stays on the field, it's hard to find a weakness in this bunch: they're 2nd in points scored (53.7, just behind #3 Baylor) and 1st in points allowed (11.0). I tried to find a stat they're bad at, but it's hard. Hell, their field goal unit is 18 for 19 this year. All right: they're middle of the road in penalties against. If I had as much talent as they did, I'd be chomping at the bit for the play to start too.
Now, Duke is a helluva story, but I'm not sold. They're good at everything, sure - they're the kind of team that could find a way to exploit a better-but-less-balanced squad. They've lost only two games this year, all the way back in weeks 3 and 4, to #28 Georgia Tech and #57 Pittsburgh. If they played those games again now, the Blue Devils would probably win them. But good-at-everything-great-at-nothing is simply not going to get it done against the Seminoles.
The Ruby Rankings Say:
#1 Florida State 49, Duke 17
The Big 12
Possible Champions (No Championship Game):
#3 Baylor
#12 Oklahoma State
#30 Texas
This is the same situation as the AAC: OK State gets in if they win; the other two play each other, and the winner of that game gets in if OK State falters.
#30 Texas at #3 Baylor
Obviously, my Ruby Rankings are a little higher on Baylor than your average pure W-L system (because my system takes stats into account, and Baylor wins stats any way you slice it. Baylor just... wins stats). I wrote about Baylor at length two weeks ago, when they remained at #2 in the Ruby Rankings even after losing to Oklahoma State by 32 points. So, at any rate, their stats haven't gotten any less silly. The Bears aren't what I would call a BCS Championship contender, but they're firmly in that next class, and if they can beat Texas, they deserve one of the 6 (or maybe 5, #16 NIU-pending) BCS at-large bids even if OK State beats #14 Oklahoma and wins the Big 12.
Texas, on the other hand, was just about ready to send Mack Brown out onto the street when they were sitting at 1-2 (the losses to #21 BYU and #27 Ole Miss don't look so bad in hindsight), and especially after they only managed to escape from Iowa State with a 31-30 win (a win that looks just as bad now as it did then; recall the Iowa State coach complaining that the refs took the upset away from the Cyclones on a bad fumble call). But then they beat Oklahoma in something of a must-win, and kept winning until, just like Baylor, they ran into Oklahoma State. I could just about copy-and-paste my analysis of Duke here for the Longhorns: good at everything, better than they were early, and probably not going to win against a superior team (unlike Duke, they have to go on the road).
The Ruby Rankings <3 Baylor:
#3 Baylor 37, #30 Texas 21
#14 Oklahoma at #12 Oklahoma State
Even if this isn't an actual "championship game," because OU can't win the Big 12 regardless of this result, it kind of feels like one. Oklahoma State doesn't like older brother getting all the spotlight all the time, and Oklahoma is wondering why that other team from the state keeps showing up and trying to actually win. Oklahoma is a run-first team; they're 100th in the country in passing and 15th in rushing. Indeed, they have a veritable stable of running backs, with 5 guys (burgers and fries?) over 250 rushing yards. They haven't been burying teams, though, and they're only outscoring their opponents by an average of 10 points per game. That's very good, but not elite.
Oklahoma State is the inverse of Oklahoma; they air it out, using the run to keep defenses honest. OKST has also been outscoring opponents by 23, and that is elite. Their one loss is a pretty bad one - 30-21 to #94 West Virginia in the first Big 12 game of the year - but that can and will be forgiven if you can beat Baylor, Texas, and Oklahoma in the same year. This team's on a 7-game winning streak, and you could make a legitimate argument that every single one of those wins was better than the one before.
The Ruby Rankings think this will be closer than the pundits say, but they still like Orange to squeak past Red:
#12 Oklahoma State 21, #14 Oklahoma 19
The Big 10
Championship Game: #2 Ohio State vs. #10 Michigan State
Ohio State is like Oklahoma on speed. Or... with speed. Or something. But #2 in the country in rushing, #3 in scoring, this is the type of team that is deceptively difficult to deal with: they are not always flashy, but the second they get a lead, they will grind... you... down... with run after run after run. In fact, that's traditional Big 10 football in a nutshell. We all know about Urban Meyer, and Braxton Miller, and whatnot, but Carlos Hyde has been the hero of this team. He's 6th in the nation in rushing, and is 2nd in yards-per-carry among guys with 150 carries or more. When both halves of your read-option gain 7 per play, it'll take a tremendous defense to even have a chance to stop you.
And, what do you know? Michigan State has just that. Sparty is far and away the best rushing defense in the country, allowing fewer than 70 yards per game on the ground (about a total of 9 Carlos Hyde rushes), and they figure, "you know what? Just for kicks, let's go ahead and slot in at 9th in the country in passing defense too. You know... just to be cool like that." I could keep going - 6th in turnover margin, 6th-toughest to score a TD on in the red zone, etc. - but that would just be harping on the unbeatable object against the undefeated force metaphor. Or, something like that. Ultimately, the question is whether MSU's offense will be able to score on the Buckeyes. They're only averaging 29.4 ppg (64th), but OSU's allowed a lot of points recently: an even 90 over the last 3 weeks.
Ultimately, the Ruby Rankings like the Buckeyes to earn their Title Game bid:
#2 Ohio State 24, #10 Michigan State 17
C-USA
#37 Marshall vs. #47 Rice
The Marshall Thundering Herd, named after the movie starring Matthew McConaughey (kidding, kidding), earned their spot here by defeating #36 East Carolina in what was a de facto semifinal. As I mentioned in this week's Ruby Rankings, Marshall is the epitome of balanced, ranking 21st in the country in both rushing and passing. No C-USA team is going to blow you away with its schedule, but these guys pushed #24 Virginia Tech to triple overtime on the road in week 4. They're 7-1 since then, and are led by junior QB Rakeem Kato, who's carved up in-conference competition to the tune of 25 TDs and 4 INTs.
The Rice Owls, on the other hand, run a lot. In fact, they run so much that they feel justified in keeping a 4'9" walk-on RB, Jayson Carter, on the roster (listen, if you're 4'9" and anywhere near an FBS football field, you've gotta be one tough, hard-working sumbit). This team has 10 more rushing TDs than passing TDs (somewhat unusual in college football these days). They even love the run game so much that they've bulked up their pass defense - 12th in the nation - to get the other team to run more (probably). The good news for them is that Marshall is from Kentucky, and the only teams to beat Rice this year are from their home state of Texas: #26 Texas A&M, #38 Houston, and #44 North Texas.
The Ruby Rankings are Thundering with the Herd:
#37 Marshall 27, #47 Rice 24
Note: The winner of the C-USA goes to the Liberty Bowl to play the 8th-selected team from the SEC, probably #53 Vanderbilt or #45 Mississippi State.
The MAC
#16 Northern Illinois vs. #42 Bowling Green
All debates about whether Northern Illinois is worthy of a BCS-bid aside, this is a special team to watch. And an exciting team, if their average game score (43-24) is to be believed. The Huskies are fourth in the nation in rushing, with two 1,000 yard runners. The more prolific of the duo, Jordan Lynch, just happens to be their QB. He's passed for over 2,400 and ran for over 1,700 this year, which should tell you a couple things: 1) Don't. Miss. Watching. This. Kid. Play. He's got two games left in his career. Catch one of them, at least. 2) If this kid gets hurt, these guys are in big, big trouble.
Bowling Green is another one of those teams like... how do I say this... like the MAC version of Duke and Texas (see above), who are pretty good at most things and pretty unspectacular. Well, their 13.8 points against per game is 5th in the country, and that's spectacular, but they've been doing that against MAC competition, which is decidedly unspectacular. The upshot of all this is: the MAC's not very good, but it's got a damn good player and team (Jordan Lynch and Northern Illinois) and... these guys are the best of the rest.
The Ruby Rankings say the best of the rest can't touch the best:
#16 Northern Illinois 42, #42 Bowling Green 32
Note: If they don't get a BCS bid, the winner of the MAC will play the #2-selected Sun Belt team, very likely #68 Arkansas State or #67 Western Kentucky, in the godaddy.com bowl.
The Mountain West Conference
#39 Fresno State vs. #41 Utah State
This was supposed to be the game that would seal Fresno State's 13-0 season and BCS berth (they were ranked ahead of Northern Illinois until Fresno's surprising loss to #76 SJSU last weekend), but we can forget all that now, and this game has the Las Vegas Bowl - and a date with the 5th-selected Pac 12 team, probably #18 Washington - on the line. The Bulldogs lead the nation in passing yardage, putting up 410 per game on the arm of Derek Carr, who's twelve years younger than his older brother David Carr (who similarly put up huge passing numbers for Fresno State). The Bulldogs aren't a terrible running team, by any means, with a 700 yard rusher and a 600 yard rusher, but they're clearly a pass-first unit. As you might expect from a team that airs it out to score 47 points a game, they also allow a bunch of pass yards and points: 280 per game (9th-worst in the country) and 30.2 per game (85th in the nation) respectively. A huge part of this team's success is its offensive line: for passing the ball the 6th-most times in the country, they've only allowed 8 sacks on the year, which is the 2nd-fewest in the nation. That's an almost unbelievable stat; before writing that, I had to double-check to make sure it was true.
Utah State also beats their opponents by 17 points on average, but they do so to a 33.9-16.8 tune (that 16.8 ppg allowed is 9th-best in the nation). This is the second year in a row that the Aggies have been a very solid team; recall their win over Utah early last year (they finished the season 11-2, with losses to Wisconsin and BYU by a combined 5 points). They didn't snag any big wins this year, but pushed Utah to 30-26 and USC to 17-14, both on the road. Note that this is Utah State's first year in the Mountain West; last year, they pounded their way through the now-defunct WAC. This will also be Utah State's chance to exorcise old demons; the last time these teams played, the aforementioned Derek Carr turned a 31-24 halftime deficit into a 41-31 win at the Aggies' expense.
The Ruby Rankings say "Pick 'em":
#39 Fresno State 31, #41 Utah State 30
The Pac-12
#6 Arizona State vs. #8 Stanford
Back in the first Ruby Rankings of the season, the Sun Devils of Arizona State were 8th even though they didn't show up in the BCS rankings. I noted that the pollsters didn't think very highly of them (they were among the "others receiving votes"), they had top-ten statistical and RPI profiles. Basically, my computer recognized how good they were, and the silly voters didn't. It turned out that the other computers also recognized how good they were, at least more than the silly voters: when they first showed up in the BCS rankings in week 11, they were 24th in both polls and 17th on the computers, with their highest ranking at 11th. Coming into this week, the voters have them 13th and the computers have them 6th - finally some agreement between the Ruby Rankings and the BCS Comps! ASU is a very strong team, with a definite pass-heavy slant. A casual observer would be tempted to put them into the whole "Duke, Texas, Bowling Green" category I've created, but that would ignore 1) that, unlike those teams, ASU's combination of good-but-not-great offense and defense translate into a very good points per game spread (43.3-24.8), and 2) the Pac 12 is way, way, way, way better this year than either the ACC or the Big 12. It's not even close. This will be a rematch of the first of ASU's two losses; Stanford took them 42-28 at home in week 3.
We all know about Stanford from their performances busting up #9 Oregon this year and last. This is as close to a smash-mouth football team as you'll get west of SEC country, and coach David Shaw is often cited as one of the brightest minds in the game. While Arizona State isn't as "finesse" as Oregon seems to try to be when they play Stanford, the Cardinal defense should be rearing to go: Arizona State's allowed the 20th-most sacks this season, and Stanford's inflicted the 10th-most sacks. It's worth noting that Stanford's not particularly strong in the red zone; their 26-for-45 TD rate is only good for 86th in the nation.
The Ruby Rankings have been high on Arizona State all year; "why stop now?", they cry!:
#6 Arizona State 25, #8 Stanford 21
The SEC
#4 Missouri vs. #5 Auburn
Missouri's gotta be sitting there saying, "what am I, chopped liver?", a la Daffy Duck or Sylvester or whichever of those Looney Tunes characters said that (I can't remember). Auburn's miraculous win over #7 Alabama in the Iron Bowl (and, hell, Auburn's miraculous win over #25 Georgia a few weeks ago) has thrust them into the spotlight, and the Tigers, whose only loss was in double overtime to #11 South Carolina (for South Carolina giving a team their only loss of the season by 3 points, see also: UCF, above), are flying under the radar despite having been ranked higher than Auburn virtually the entire season. Missouri is a far more balanced team than Auburn, and the big question is at QB. That's not because they don't have someone talented enough - they, in fact, have two guys: James Franklin has nearly 2,000 passing yards, and Maty Mauk racked up 1,000 filling on for Franklin when he was injured - but because Franklin may not be 100% after returning from his shoulder injury, and I'm not entirely convinced he gives this team the best chance to win. Whoever it is, the game will be on his (partially-injured?) shoulders: of all SEC teams, Auburn allows the 2nd-most passing yards per game.
That being said, Auburn's defense is better than the sum of its parts: despite having the 11th total defense in the SEC, they've got the 5th scoring defense. A big part of that is red zone defense, in which Auburn is 7th in the country (and 8th-best at preventing TDs). For as bad as they are at stopping the run, Auburn is even better at running it themselves; their 310 ypg is far and away the best in the SEC (Missouri's in 2nd, 80 ypg behind). Basically, this should be a high-scoring game with lots and lots of running, and lots of Missouri passing, and even more Auburn running, and maybe just enough Auburn passing in the last minute to pull out another miracle.
The Ruby Rankings say 2 miracles are enough:
#4 Missouri 35, #5 Auburn 31
And, just for kicks, and so you know what the affiliations are (I think it's really interesting, so, what the hell):
JOE'S BOWL PREDICTIONS:
Note: There are six more eligible teams than Bowl berths. The eligible teams without bowls will be: Buffalo, Ohio, CMU, Arkansas State, Troy, and Louisiana-Monroe.
December 21
Gildan New Mexico Bowl
UNLV (MWC #4) vs Washington State (Pac-12 #7)
Royal Purple Las Vegas Bowl
Fresno State (MWC #1) vs Washington (Pac-12 #5)
Famous Idaho Potato Bowl
San Diego State University (MWC #6) vs Ball State (MAC #3)
R+L Carriers New Orleans Bowl
Tulane (C-USA #6) vs Louisiana-Lafayette (Sun Belt #1)
December 23
Beef 'O' Brady's St. Petersburg Bowl
Florida Atlantic (Usually AAC #6, AAC has 4 eligible teams) vs North Texas (C-USA #4)
December 24
Sheraton Hawai'i Bowl
San Jose State University (MWC #5) vs East Carolina (C-USA #2)
December 26
Little Caesar's Pizza Bowl
Bowling Green (MAC #2) vs Oregon State (Usually Big Ten #8, Big 10 has 7 eligible teams)
San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl
Boise State (MWC #2) vs Toledo (MAC #4; Army is not bowl eligible or they would be in this spot)
December 27
Military Bowl Presented by Northrop Grumman
Middle Tennessee (C-USA #5) vs North Carolina (ACC #8)
Meineke Car Care Bowl of Texas
Pittsburgh (Usually Big 12 #6, but Big 12 has 6 eligible teams and 2 in BCS) vs Minnesota (Big Ten #6)
Fight Hunger Bowl
BYU (automatic) vs Arizona (Pac-12 #6)
December 28
New Era Pinstripe Bowl
Notre Dame (automatic) vs Houston (AAC #4)
Belk Bowl
Cincinnati (AAC #3) vs Duke (ACC #5)
Russell Athletic Bowl
Louisville (AAC #2) vs Clemson (ACC #2)
Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl
Texas Tech (Big 12 #4) vs Wisconsin (Big Ten #4)
December 30
Bell Helicopter Armed Forces Bowl
Navy (automatic) vs UTSA (C-USA #7)
Franklin American Mortgage Music City Bowl
Vanderbilt (SEC #7) vs Georgia Tech (ACC #6)
Valero Alamo Bowl
Oregon (Pac-12 #2) vs Texas (Big 12 #3)
National University Holiday Bowl
USC (Pac-12 #3) vs Nebraska (Big Ten #5)
December 31
AdvoCare V100 Bowl
Colorado State (Usually SEC #10, but SEC has 10 eligible teams and two in BCS) vs Boston College (ACC #7)
Hyundai Sun Bowl
UCLA (Pac-12 #4) vs Virginia Tech (ACC #4)
AutoZone Liberty Bowl
Marshall (C-USA #1) vs Mississippi (SEC #8)
Chick-fil-A Bowl
Clemson (ACC #2) vs Texas A&M (SEC #5)
January 1
TaxSlayer.com Gator Bowl
Nebraska (Big Ten #5) vs Georgia (SEC #6)
Heart of Dallas Bowl
Iowa (Big Ten #7) vs Rice (C-USA #3)
Capital One Bowl
Michigan State (Big Ten #2) vs Auburn (SEC #2)
Outback Bowl
Michigan (Big Ten #3) vs LSU (SEC #4)
Rose Bowl Game presented by VIZIO
Baylor (Usually Big Ten #1, Ohio State in BCS Championship) vs Arizona State (Pac-12 #1)
Tostitos Fiesta Bowl
Oklahoma State (Big 12 #1) vs Northern Illinois (BCS Non-AQ Auto)
January 2
Allstate Sugar Bowl
Missouri (SEC #1) vs UCF (AAC #1)
January 3
Discover Orange Bowl
Alabama (Usually ACC #1, FSU in BCS Championship) vs Stanford (BCS At-Large)
AT&T Cotton Bowl
Oklahoma (Big 12 #2) vs South Carolina (SEC #3)
January 4
BBVA Compass Bowl
Syracuse (Usually AAC #5, but AAC has 4 eligible teams) vs Mississippi State (SEC #9)
January 5
GoDaddy.com Bowl
Marshall (MAC #1) vs Western Kentucky (Sun Belt #2)
January 6
VIZIO BCS National Championship
Florida State (BCS #1) vs Ohio State (BCS #2)
Note that Tulane, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisville, Cincinnati, BYU, and Navy have already accepted their bids as noted above.
Check back soon for analysis of the bowl games, including the first ever Ruby Rankings Bowl Confidence Challenge!
I'll take you through conference-by-conference, tell you who's got the inside track to the BCS, and let you know what SEC team each conference championship loser will be playing in their bowl game! (because... like... there are so many SEC teams that are good it seems like... every bowl game... has an SEC team... in it... #dontexplainthejoke)
All rankings used are the Ruby Rankings, available HERE, unless otherwise noted.
The AAC
Possible Champions (No Championship Game):
#20 UCF
#56 Cincinnati
#19 Louisville at #56 Cincinnati
Basically, this is a match-up to determine whether Cincinnati is technically in the hunt (I say technically because Cincinnati would have to pass UCF in the BCS rankings too, and the computers aren't going to buy that) for a BCS bid if UCF somehow messes up at home against #96 SMU (for the reasons this is more likely than you might think, read on). Both of these teams are 6-1 in the AAC, but the comparisons just about stop there.
Louisville was a Top Ten AP squad coming into the season, and their AAC loss was to UCF, a team that is virtually ranked even with them and gave possible BCS participant #11 South Carolina all it could handle in a 28-25 loss. Louisville hasn't really been tested (I have Louisville's adjusted strength-of-schedule as 6th-easiest in the country), but the talent is easy to see: Teddy Bridgewater, a possible Top 5 draft pick, leads an offense that can be inconsistent quarter-to-quarter but hasn't thrown up a dud all year (fewest points scored are 20), and the team has three legitimate running threats.
Cincinnati, on the other hand, has had a far easier schedule than Louisville (you read that right), having played what might be considered a good tough schedule for an FCS team (the only team in the Ruby Rankings with a worse strength-of-schedule is #99 Old Dominion, a transitional team that isn't actually an FBS team until next year by some accounts). Cincinnati's two losses are against #95 Illinois and #105 South Florida. Ouch. All that being said, this team actually really came together, and is a better team than their ranking indicates. After losing star QB Munchie Legaux in Week 2, I thought these guys were toast. But after the silly loss to USF, they've ran the AAC table - avoiding UCF, who wasn't on their schedule this year - and managed to find a way to still be alive at this point. And you can't fault them for that.
But the rankings can:
#19 Louisville 41, #56 Cincinnati 30
#20 UCF at #96 SMU
In this battle of three-letter squads, one might think that UCF should waltz to the finish line - and a BCS berth. One would be right. However, if you maintain that UCF will waltz to the finish line, well, you might want to take a second - just a second - to wonder.
As I mentioned earlier, UCF pushed South Carolina to 28-25. Coaches can have their crap about "never being a bad win or a good loss" on the field and in the locker room, but from a true predictive standpoint, that 3-point loss to a top-notch SEC squad is the most impressive game any AAC team has played this year. UCF jumped out to a 10-0 halftime lead against the Gamecocks, and then surrendered 28 straight points. To score twice more in the 4th quarter and almost beat such a good team showed great effort. All that is the good news. Now the bad news: South Carolina beat UCF by the same margin (3) that UCF beat #114 Temple and #105 South Florida by over the last 3 weeks, needing a miracle catch and last-second FG to edge the Owls in Philadelphia. That is to say, UCF has looked good against good teams and bad against bad teams.
For better or worse, then, SMU is a bad team. Sure, they're 5-6, and are playing for a bowl berth, which can fire-up any team. But their five wins have been over an FCS team and four teams that have fewer wins among them than UCF (Temple, USF, #111 Connecticut and #90 Memphis. Dear lord, the AAC is terrible). SMU is toward the bottom of the country in rushing yards per game, and allow 34.8 points per game. This team just got blown-out 34-0 against #38 Houston, and there's no reason they should be anywhere near UCF. But who knows what's going to happen when they get on the field?
Answer: the Ruby Rankings do.
#20 UCF 35, #96 SMU 10
The ACC
Championship Game: #1 FSU vs. #32 Duke
All along, I've been telling everyone that Florida State is the best team in the country (well, ever since they drubbed #17 Clemson 51-14). With #7 Alabama's loss in the Iron Bowl, however, the Polls and BCS finally agree with me. Clearly, they're the most deserving of the #1 ranking (which has less to do with being the best team than you might think), and at any rate, the biggest obstacle between them and being BCS Champions is probably Jameis Winston's legal situation. Assuming Winston stays on the field, it's hard to find a weakness in this bunch: they're 2nd in points scored (53.7, just behind #3 Baylor) and 1st in points allowed (11.0). I tried to find a stat they're bad at, but it's hard. Hell, their field goal unit is 18 for 19 this year. All right: they're middle of the road in penalties against. If I had as much talent as they did, I'd be chomping at the bit for the play to start too.
Now, Duke is a helluva story, but I'm not sold. They're good at everything, sure - they're the kind of team that could find a way to exploit a better-but-less-balanced squad. They've lost only two games this year, all the way back in weeks 3 and 4, to #28 Georgia Tech and #57 Pittsburgh. If they played those games again now, the Blue Devils would probably win them. But good-at-everything-great-at-nothing is simply not going to get it done against the Seminoles.
The Ruby Rankings Say:
#1 Florida State 49, Duke 17
The Big 12
Possible Champions (No Championship Game):
#3 Baylor
#12 Oklahoma State
#30 Texas
This is the same situation as the AAC: OK State gets in if they win; the other two play each other, and the winner of that game gets in if OK State falters.
#30 Texas at #3 Baylor
Obviously, my Ruby Rankings are a little higher on Baylor than your average pure W-L system (because my system takes stats into account, and Baylor wins stats any way you slice it. Baylor just... wins stats). I wrote about Baylor at length two weeks ago, when they remained at #2 in the Ruby Rankings even after losing to Oklahoma State by 32 points. So, at any rate, their stats haven't gotten any less silly. The Bears aren't what I would call a BCS Championship contender, but they're firmly in that next class, and if they can beat Texas, they deserve one of the 6 (or maybe 5, #16 NIU-pending) BCS at-large bids even if OK State beats #14 Oklahoma and wins the Big 12.
Texas, on the other hand, was just about ready to send Mack Brown out onto the street when they were sitting at 1-2 (the losses to #21 BYU and #27 Ole Miss don't look so bad in hindsight), and especially after they only managed to escape from Iowa State with a 31-30 win (a win that looks just as bad now as it did then; recall the Iowa State coach complaining that the refs took the upset away from the Cyclones on a bad fumble call). But then they beat Oklahoma in something of a must-win, and kept winning until, just like Baylor, they ran into Oklahoma State. I could just about copy-and-paste my analysis of Duke here for the Longhorns: good at everything, better than they were early, and probably not going to win against a superior team (unlike Duke, they have to go on the road).
The Ruby Rankings <3 Baylor:
#3 Baylor 37, #30 Texas 21
#14 Oklahoma at #12 Oklahoma State
Even if this isn't an actual "championship game," because OU can't win the Big 12 regardless of this result, it kind of feels like one. Oklahoma State doesn't like older brother getting all the spotlight all the time, and Oklahoma is wondering why that other team from the state keeps showing up and trying to actually win. Oklahoma is a run-first team; they're 100th in the country in passing and 15th in rushing. Indeed, they have a veritable stable of running backs, with 5 guys (burgers and fries?) over 250 rushing yards. They haven't been burying teams, though, and they're only outscoring their opponents by an average of 10 points per game. That's very good, but not elite.
Oklahoma State is the inverse of Oklahoma; they air it out, using the run to keep defenses honest. OKST has also been outscoring opponents by 23, and that is elite. Their one loss is a pretty bad one - 30-21 to #94 West Virginia in the first Big 12 game of the year - but that can and will be forgiven if you can beat Baylor, Texas, and Oklahoma in the same year. This team's on a 7-game winning streak, and you could make a legitimate argument that every single one of those wins was better than the one before.
The Ruby Rankings think this will be closer than the pundits say, but they still like Orange to squeak past Red:
#12 Oklahoma State 21, #14 Oklahoma 19
The Big 10
Championship Game: #2 Ohio State vs. #10 Michigan State
Ohio State is like Oklahoma on speed. Or... with speed. Or something. But #2 in the country in rushing, #3 in scoring, this is the type of team that is deceptively difficult to deal with: they are not always flashy, but the second they get a lead, they will grind... you... down... with run after run after run. In fact, that's traditional Big 10 football in a nutshell. We all know about Urban Meyer, and Braxton Miller, and whatnot, but Carlos Hyde has been the hero of this team. He's 6th in the nation in rushing, and is 2nd in yards-per-carry among guys with 150 carries or more. When both halves of your read-option gain 7 per play, it'll take a tremendous defense to even have a chance to stop you.
And, what do you know? Michigan State has just that. Sparty is far and away the best rushing defense in the country, allowing fewer than 70 yards per game on the ground (about a total of 9 Carlos Hyde rushes), and they figure, "you know what? Just for kicks, let's go ahead and slot in at 9th in the country in passing defense too. You know... just to be cool like that." I could keep going - 6th in turnover margin, 6th-toughest to score a TD on in the red zone, etc. - but that would just be harping on the unbeatable object against the undefeated force metaphor. Or, something like that. Ultimately, the question is whether MSU's offense will be able to score on the Buckeyes. They're only averaging 29.4 ppg (64th), but OSU's allowed a lot of points recently: an even 90 over the last 3 weeks.
Ultimately, the Ruby Rankings like the Buckeyes to earn their Title Game bid:
#2 Ohio State 24, #10 Michigan State 17
C-USA
#37 Marshall vs. #47 Rice
The Marshall Thundering Herd, named after the movie starring Matthew McConaughey (kidding, kidding), earned their spot here by defeating #36 East Carolina in what was a de facto semifinal. As I mentioned in this week's Ruby Rankings, Marshall is the epitome of balanced, ranking 21st in the country in both rushing and passing. No C-USA team is going to blow you away with its schedule, but these guys pushed #24 Virginia Tech to triple overtime on the road in week 4. They're 7-1 since then, and are led by junior QB Rakeem Kato, who's carved up in-conference competition to the tune of 25 TDs and 4 INTs.
The Rice Owls, on the other hand, run a lot. In fact, they run so much that they feel justified in keeping a 4'9" walk-on RB, Jayson Carter, on the roster (listen, if you're 4'9" and anywhere near an FBS football field, you've gotta be one tough, hard-working sumbit). This team has 10 more rushing TDs than passing TDs (somewhat unusual in college football these days). They even love the run game so much that they've bulked up their pass defense - 12th in the nation - to get the other team to run more (probably). The good news for them is that Marshall is from Kentucky, and the only teams to beat Rice this year are from their home state of Texas: #26 Texas A&M, #38 Houston, and #44 North Texas.
The Ruby Rankings are Thundering with the Herd:
#37 Marshall 27, #47 Rice 24
Note: The winner of the C-USA goes to the Liberty Bowl to play the 8th-selected team from the SEC, probably #53 Vanderbilt or #45 Mississippi State.
The MAC
#16 Northern Illinois vs. #42 Bowling Green
All debates about whether Northern Illinois is worthy of a BCS-bid aside, this is a special team to watch. And an exciting team, if their average game score (43-24) is to be believed. The Huskies are fourth in the nation in rushing, with two 1,000 yard runners. The more prolific of the duo, Jordan Lynch, just happens to be their QB. He's passed for over 2,400 and ran for over 1,700 this year, which should tell you a couple things: 1) Don't. Miss. Watching. This. Kid. Play. He's got two games left in his career. Catch one of them, at least. 2) If this kid gets hurt, these guys are in big, big trouble.
Bowling Green is another one of those teams like... how do I say this... like the MAC version of Duke and Texas (see above), who are pretty good at most things and pretty unspectacular. Well, their 13.8 points against per game is 5th in the country, and that's spectacular, but they've been doing that against MAC competition, which is decidedly unspectacular. The upshot of all this is: the MAC's not very good, but it's got a damn good player and team (Jordan Lynch and Northern Illinois) and... these guys are the best of the rest.
The Ruby Rankings say the best of the rest can't touch the best:
#16 Northern Illinois 42, #42 Bowling Green 32
Note: If they don't get a BCS bid, the winner of the MAC will play the #2-selected Sun Belt team, very likely #68 Arkansas State or #67 Western Kentucky, in the godaddy.com bowl.
The Mountain West Conference
#39 Fresno State vs. #41 Utah State
This was supposed to be the game that would seal Fresno State's 13-0 season and BCS berth (they were ranked ahead of Northern Illinois until Fresno's surprising loss to #76 SJSU last weekend), but we can forget all that now, and this game has the Las Vegas Bowl - and a date with the 5th-selected Pac 12 team, probably #18 Washington - on the line. The Bulldogs lead the nation in passing yardage, putting up 410 per game on the arm of Derek Carr, who's twelve years younger than his older brother David Carr (who similarly put up huge passing numbers for Fresno State). The Bulldogs aren't a terrible running team, by any means, with a 700 yard rusher and a 600 yard rusher, but they're clearly a pass-first unit. As you might expect from a team that airs it out to score 47 points a game, they also allow a bunch of pass yards and points: 280 per game (9th-worst in the country) and 30.2 per game (85th in the nation) respectively. A huge part of this team's success is its offensive line: for passing the ball the 6th-most times in the country, they've only allowed 8 sacks on the year, which is the 2nd-fewest in the nation. That's an almost unbelievable stat; before writing that, I had to double-check to make sure it was true.
Utah State also beats their opponents by 17 points on average, but they do so to a 33.9-16.8 tune (that 16.8 ppg allowed is 9th-best in the nation). This is the second year in a row that the Aggies have been a very solid team; recall their win over Utah early last year (they finished the season 11-2, with losses to Wisconsin and BYU by a combined 5 points). They didn't snag any big wins this year, but pushed Utah to 30-26 and USC to 17-14, both on the road. Note that this is Utah State's first year in the Mountain West; last year, they pounded their way through the now-defunct WAC. This will also be Utah State's chance to exorcise old demons; the last time these teams played, the aforementioned Derek Carr turned a 31-24 halftime deficit into a 41-31 win at the Aggies' expense.
The Ruby Rankings say "Pick 'em":
#39 Fresno State 31, #41 Utah State 30
The Pac-12
#6 Arizona State vs. #8 Stanford
Back in the first Ruby Rankings of the season, the Sun Devils of Arizona State were 8th even though they didn't show up in the BCS rankings. I noted that the pollsters didn't think very highly of them (they were among the "others receiving votes"), they had top-ten statistical and RPI profiles. Basically, my computer recognized how good they were, and the silly voters didn't. It turned out that the other computers also recognized how good they were, at least more than the silly voters: when they first showed up in the BCS rankings in week 11, they were 24th in both polls and 17th on the computers, with their highest ranking at 11th. Coming into this week, the voters have them 13th and the computers have them 6th - finally some agreement between the Ruby Rankings and the BCS Comps! ASU is a very strong team, with a definite pass-heavy slant. A casual observer would be tempted to put them into the whole "Duke, Texas, Bowling Green" category I've created, but that would ignore 1) that, unlike those teams, ASU's combination of good-but-not-great offense and defense translate into a very good points per game spread (43.3-24.8), and 2) the Pac 12 is way, way, way, way better this year than either the ACC or the Big 12. It's not even close. This will be a rematch of the first of ASU's two losses; Stanford took them 42-28 at home in week 3.
We all know about Stanford from their performances busting up #9 Oregon this year and last. This is as close to a smash-mouth football team as you'll get west of SEC country, and coach David Shaw is often cited as one of the brightest minds in the game. While Arizona State isn't as "finesse" as Oregon seems to try to be when they play Stanford, the Cardinal defense should be rearing to go: Arizona State's allowed the 20th-most sacks this season, and Stanford's inflicted the 10th-most sacks. It's worth noting that Stanford's not particularly strong in the red zone; their 26-for-45 TD rate is only good for 86th in the nation.
The Ruby Rankings have been high on Arizona State all year; "why stop now?", they cry!:
#6 Arizona State 25, #8 Stanford 21
The SEC
#4 Missouri vs. #5 Auburn
Missouri's gotta be sitting there saying, "what am I, chopped liver?", a la Daffy Duck or Sylvester or whichever of those Looney Tunes characters said that (I can't remember). Auburn's miraculous win over #7 Alabama in the Iron Bowl (and, hell, Auburn's miraculous win over #25 Georgia a few weeks ago) has thrust them into the spotlight, and the Tigers, whose only loss was in double overtime to #11 South Carolina (for South Carolina giving a team their only loss of the season by 3 points, see also: UCF, above), are flying under the radar despite having been ranked higher than Auburn virtually the entire season. Missouri is a far more balanced team than Auburn, and the big question is at QB. That's not because they don't have someone talented enough - they, in fact, have two guys: James Franklin has nearly 2,000 passing yards, and Maty Mauk racked up 1,000 filling on for Franklin when he was injured - but because Franklin may not be 100% after returning from his shoulder injury, and I'm not entirely convinced he gives this team the best chance to win. Whoever it is, the game will be on his (partially-injured?) shoulders: of all SEC teams, Auburn allows the 2nd-most passing yards per game.
That being said, Auburn's defense is better than the sum of its parts: despite having the 11th total defense in the SEC, they've got the 5th scoring defense. A big part of that is red zone defense, in which Auburn is 7th in the country (and 8th-best at preventing TDs). For as bad as they are at stopping the run, Auburn is even better at running it themselves; their 310 ypg is far and away the best in the SEC (Missouri's in 2nd, 80 ypg behind). Basically, this should be a high-scoring game with lots and lots of running, and lots of Missouri passing, and even more Auburn running, and maybe just enough Auburn passing in the last minute to pull out another miracle.
The Ruby Rankings say 2 miracles are enough:
#4 Missouri 35, #5 Auburn 31
And, just for kicks, and so you know what the affiliations are (I think it's really interesting, so, what the hell):
JOE'S BOWL PREDICTIONS:
Note: There are six more eligible teams than Bowl berths. The eligible teams without bowls will be: Buffalo, Ohio, CMU, Arkansas State, Troy, and Louisiana-Monroe.
December 21
Gildan New Mexico Bowl
UNLV (MWC #4) vs Washington State (Pac-12 #7)
Royal Purple Las Vegas Bowl
Fresno State (MWC #1) vs Washington (Pac-12 #5)
Famous Idaho Potato Bowl
San Diego State University (MWC #6) vs Ball State (MAC #3)
R+L Carriers New Orleans Bowl
Tulane (C-USA #6) vs Louisiana-Lafayette (Sun Belt #1)
December 23
Beef 'O' Brady's St. Petersburg Bowl
Florida Atlantic (Usually AAC #6, AAC has 4 eligible teams) vs North Texas (C-USA #4)
December 24
Sheraton Hawai'i Bowl
San Jose State University (MWC #5) vs East Carolina (C-USA #2)
December 26
Little Caesar's Pizza Bowl
Bowling Green (MAC #2) vs Oregon State (Usually Big Ten #8, Big 10 has 7 eligible teams)
San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl
Boise State (MWC #2) vs Toledo (MAC #4; Army is not bowl eligible or they would be in this spot)
December 27
Military Bowl Presented by Northrop Grumman
Middle Tennessee (C-USA #5) vs North Carolina (ACC #8)
Meineke Car Care Bowl of Texas
Pittsburgh (Usually Big 12 #6, but Big 12 has 6 eligible teams and 2 in BCS) vs Minnesota (Big Ten #6)
Fight Hunger Bowl
BYU (automatic) vs Arizona (Pac-12 #6)
December 28
New Era Pinstripe Bowl
Notre Dame (automatic) vs Houston (AAC #4)
Belk Bowl
Cincinnati (AAC #3) vs Duke (ACC #5)
Russell Athletic Bowl
Louisville (AAC #2) vs Clemson (ACC #2)
Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl
Texas Tech (Big 12 #4) vs Wisconsin (Big Ten #4)
December 30
Bell Helicopter Armed Forces Bowl
Navy (automatic) vs UTSA (C-USA #7)
Franklin American Mortgage Music City Bowl
Vanderbilt (SEC #7) vs Georgia Tech (ACC #6)
Valero Alamo Bowl
Oregon (Pac-12 #2) vs Texas (Big 12 #3)
National University Holiday Bowl
USC (Pac-12 #3) vs Nebraska (Big Ten #5)
December 31
AdvoCare V100 Bowl
Colorado State (Usually SEC #10, but SEC has 10 eligible teams and two in BCS) vs Boston College (ACC #7)
Hyundai Sun Bowl
UCLA (Pac-12 #4) vs Virginia Tech (ACC #4)
AutoZone Liberty Bowl
Marshall (C-USA #1) vs Mississippi (SEC #8)
Chick-fil-A Bowl
Clemson (ACC #2) vs Texas A&M (SEC #5)
January 1
TaxSlayer.com Gator Bowl
Nebraska (Big Ten #5) vs Georgia (SEC #6)
Heart of Dallas Bowl
Iowa (Big Ten #7) vs Rice (C-USA #3)
Capital One Bowl
Michigan State (Big Ten #2) vs Auburn (SEC #2)
Outback Bowl
Michigan (Big Ten #3) vs LSU (SEC #4)
Rose Bowl Game presented by VIZIO
Baylor (Usually Big Ten #1, Ohio State in BCS Championship) vs Arizona State (Pac-12 #1)
Tostitos Fiesta Bowl
Oklahoma State (Big 12 #1) vs Northern Illinois (BCS Non-AQ Auto)
January 2
Allstate Sugar Bowl
Missouri (SEC #1) vs UCF (AAC #1)
January 3
Discover Orange Bowl
Alabama (Usually ACC #1, FSU in BCS Championship) vs Stanford (BCS At-Large)
AT&T Cotton Bowl
Oklahoma (Big 12 #2) vs South Carolina (SEC #3)
January 4
BBVA Compass Bowl
Syracuse (Usually AAC #5, but AAC has 4 eligible teams) vs Mississippi State (SEC #9)
January 5
GoDaddy.com Bowl
Marshall (MAC #1) vs Western Kentucky (Sun Belt #2)
January 6
VIZIO BCS National Championship
Florida State (BCS #1) vs Ohio State (BCS #2)
Note that Tulane, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisville, Cincinnati, BYU, and Navy have already accepted their bids as noted above.
Check back soon for analysis of the bowl games, including the first ever Ruby Rankings Bowl Confidence Challenge!
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
RUBY RANKINGS Week 14!!! College Football FBS Rankings!!!
Was the Alabama-Auburn game the greatest NCAA Football game I've ever seen? No. But it was damn close. There's only one I can think of that I recall as definitively better: the 2007 Fiesta Bowl, when Boise State snagged the hook-and-ladder to tie it against Oklahoma, and then scored on the Statue of Liberty play to win 43-42 in OT. That's it.
So, Auburn takes care of Alabama. Ohio State barely holds on against Michigan. Baylor just staves off a lowly TCU squad. Oh, and Fresno State finally showed that they didn't belong anywhere near the BCS. What crazy stuff will happen in the rankings?
The basics of the RUBY RANKINGS are as follows:
1) The 126 FBS teams are roughly scaled from 0 (a bottom-five, roughly winless team) to 1000 (a BCS Championship Favorite).
2) The ranking takes into account wins/losses, strength of schedule, and statistics.
3) The rankings are updated weekly.
WEEK 13 RUBY RANKINGS:
Ranking #. Team (W-L): Score (RANK Change from Last Week)
1. Florida State (12-0): 944 (=)
2. Ohio State (12-0): 903 (+1)
3. Baylor (10-1): 884 (-1)
4. Missouri (11-1): 874 (+2)
5. Auburn (11-1): 859 (+3)
6. Arizona State (10-2): 856 (-1)
7. Alabama (11-1): 843 (-3)
8. Stanford (10-2): 818 (+3)
9. Oregon (10-2): 809 (=)
10. Michigan State (11-1): 783 (+3)
11. South Carolina (10-2): 771 (+3)
12. Oklahoma State (10-1): 770 (=)
13. Wisconsin (9-3): 752 (-6)
14. Oklahoma (9-2): 737 (+1)
15. UCLA (9-3): 730 (+6)
16. Northern Illinois (12-0): 724 (+2)
17. Clemson (10-2): 713 (-7)
18. Washington (8-4): 708 (+4)
19. Louisville (10-1): 698 (+1)
20. UCF (10-1): 694 (-4)
21. BYU (8-4): 680 (+9)
22. LSU (9-3): 675 (+1)
23. USC (9-4): 673 (-6)
24. Virginia Tech (8-4): 667 (-5)
25. Georgia (8-4): 664 (+1)
26. Texas A&M (8-4): 651 (-2)
27. Mississippi (7-5): 642 (-2)
28. Georgia Tech (7-5): 635 (+3)
29. Iowa (8-4): 631 (+7)
30. Texas (8-3): 629 (+9)
31. Notre Dame (8-4): 626 (-4)
32. Duke (10-2): 622 (=)
33. Miami (FL) (9-3): 617 (+1)
34. Arizona (7-5): 613 (-1)
35. Michigan (7-5): 612 (=)
36. East Carolina (9-3): 605 (-8)
37. Marshall (9-3): 604 (+7)
38. Houston (8-4): 601 (+2)
39. Fresno State (10-1): 589 (-10)
40. Minnesota (8-4): 579 (+1)
41. Utah State (8-4): 572 (+4)
42. Bowling Green (9-3): 566 (+9)
43. Nebraska (8-4): 566 (-5)
44. North Texas (8-4): 565 (+4)
45. Mississippi State (6-6): 564 (-2)
46. North Carolina (6-6): 551 (-9)
47. Rice (9-3): 549 (+7)
48. Penn State (7-5): 545 (+8)
49. Boise State (8-4): 534 (=)
50. Ball State (10-2): 525 (-9)
51. Kansas State (7-5): 522 (+6)
52. Vanderbilt (8-4): 518 (-1)
53. Navy (7-4): 513 (+9)
54. Utah (5-7): 510 (+5)
55. Toledo (7-5): 509 (-6)
56. Cincinnati (9-2): 505 (-1)
57. Pittsburgh (6-6): 501 (-10)
58. Louisiana-Lafayette (8-3): 501 (-5)
59. Boston College (7-5): 478 (-3)
60. Syracuse (6-6): 476 (+10)
61. UTSA (7-5): 470 (+4)
62. Tennessee (5-7): 467 (+4)
63. Texas Tech (7-5): 466 (-16)
64. Indiana (5-7): 459 (=)
65. Florida Atlantic (6-6): 450 (+5)
66. Buffalo (8-4): 449 (-5)
67. Western Kentucky (8-4): 448 (+7)
68. Arkansas State (7-5): 448 (-4)
69. Middle Tennessee (8-4): 447 (+4)
70. Maryland (7-5): 444 (-2)
71. Northwestern (5-7): 443 (+1)
72. Washington State (6-6): 424 (-12)
73. Florida (4-8): 423 (-2)
74. Tulane (7-5): 419 (+1)
75. Oregon State (6-6): 415 (-8)
76. San Jose State (6-6): 398 (+1)
77. UNLV (7-5): 382 (+4)
78. TCU (4-8): 381 (-2)
79. Colorado State (7-6): 374 (+4)
80. Nevada (4-8): 371 (+11)
81. Ohio (7-5): 352 (+3)
82. San Diego State (7-5): 336 (-3)
83. South Alabama (5-6): 330 (+14)
84. Arkansas (3-9): 319 (+5)
85. Wake Forest (4-8): 318 (=)
86. Louisiana-Monroe (6-6): 317 (+9)
87. Troy (6-6): 314 (+7)
88. Rutgers (5-6): 309 (-10)
89. Akron (5-7): 308 (+7)
90. Memphis (3-8): 296 (-10)
91. Colorado (4-8): 293 (-5)
92. Virginia (2-10): 291 (-2)
93. North Carolina State (3-9): 288 (-11)
94. West Virginia (4-8): 283 (-6)
95. Illinois (4-8): 281 (-8)
96. SMU (5-6): 264 (-4)
97. Texas State (6-6): 262 (+1)
98. Kent State (4-8): 256 (+3)
99. Old Dominion (8-4): 254 (-6)
100. Tulsa (3-9): 238 (-1)
101. Central Michigan (6-6): 225 (+3)
102. Kentucky (2-10): 225 (=)
103. Wyoming (5-7): 216 (-3)
104. Iowa State (3-9): 209 (+2)
105. South Florida (2-9): 207 (+5)
106. Kansas (3-9): 206 (-3)
107. New Mexico (3-9): 175 (+4)
108. California (1-11): 152 (+1)
109. Army (3-8): 149 (-4)
110. UAB (2-10): 132 (-2)
111. Connecticut (2-9): 130 (+6)
112. Purdue (1-11): 128 (-5)
113. Hawai'i (1-11): 115 (-1)
114. Temple (2-10): 106 (+2)
115. Louisiana Tech (4-8): 92 (-2)
116. Air Force (2-10): 77 (-2)
117. Idaho (1-11): 52 (-2)
118. UTEP (2-10): 50 (=)
119. Western Michigan (1-11): 32 (+1)
120. Southern Mississippi (1-11): 6 (+3)
121. New Mexico State (2-10): -4 (-2)
122. Eastern Michigan (2-10): -10 (-1)
123. Massachusetts (1-11): -12 (-1)
124. Florida International (1-11): -71 (+1)
125. Miami (OH) (0-12): -97 (+1)
126. Georgia State (0-12): -100 (-2)
CONFERENCE POWER RANKINGS
1. SEC: 607 (=)
2. PAC 12: 583 (=)
3. BIG 10: 557 (+1)
4. ACC: 539 (-1)
5. BIG 12: 509 (=)
6. AAC: 381 (=)
7. MOUNTAIN WEST: 345 (+1)
8. INDEPENDENT: 329 (-1)
9. C-USA: 325 (=)
10. SUN BELT: 315 (=)
11. MAC: 294 (=)
Welcome to the Top 40: #37 Marshall. In a de facto C-USA semifinal (both teams were 6-1 in-conference), Marshall convincingly defeated #36 ECU on Friday night, hanging a 59-spot on the Pirates. The Thundering Herd have only lost two games in regulation, by a combined 5 points: by 3 to #81 Ohio and by 2 to #69 Middle Tennessee (51-49!). Additionally, they pushed #24 Virginia Tech to 2OT before falling 29-21. These guys have one of the most potent, balanced offenses in the country; they score the 6th-most points per game (44.6) and are actually 21st in rushing and 21st in passing. They face the less-than-balanced #47 Rice Owls (also 9-3 (7-1 C-USA), very run-heavy) on Saturday for the Conference Title, with the right to play the 8th-selected SEC team - likely #45 Mississippi State or #52 Vanderbilt - in the Liberty Bowl.
Welcome to... a BCS Bowl?!: #56 Cincinnati. Not likely, but possible. Cincinnati's been shooting up the rankings ever since the Week 8 ratings slotted them at 82nd, a 5-2 team with the worst strength-of-schedule in the country. Well, the Bearcats have finally defeated a team with a winning record, beating #38 Houston (who's been in free-fall ever since I declared them the leaders in the AAC race) by 7 last week. They'll face their first true test all year in #19 Louisville on Thursday night and, if they win and #96 SMU manages to upset #20 UCF (who's looked very shaky the last few weeks, defeating #114 Temple and #105 South Florida by a field goal apiece), the Bearcats, who lost their best player and name (dynamic QB Munchie Legaux) for the season in Week 2, would find themselves in the BCS.
Welcome to... a BCS Bowl!!!: #16 Northern Illinois. I'm not saying this team belongs there. BUT... they've vastly improved their profile recently, and have another chance to defeat a good-not-great opponent when they play #42 Bowling Green in the MAC Championship on Friday (the "Friday" part of that is how you know it's the MAC). Northern Illinois is a strange team: they haven't allowed fewer than 14 points, and they've allowed more than 30 twice (early in the season). They also haven't scored fewer than 27, and have been on the right side of 50 thrice (later in the season). Any game involving these guys - and their wrecking ball of a QB, Jordan Lynch (42 TDs, 4,212 yards combined rushing and passing this year) - will be exciting, to say the least. Remember, to clinch a BCS spot under the rules, they only need to be in the top 16 of the BCS (they're currently 14th, and will be helped by beating Bowling Green) and stay ahead of the AAC leader (UCF is currently 16th, and shouldn't be helped by beating SMU).
Teams with a bowl berth on the line last week:
Mississippi State (defeated rival #27 Mississippi 17-10 in OT to get to 6-6 and become bowl-eligible)
#101 Central Michigan (defeated rival #122 Eastern Michigan 42-10 to get to 6-6)
#87 Troy (defeated #97 Texas State 42-28 to get to 6-6)
#65 Florida Atlantic (defeated rival #124 Florida International 21-6 to cap a 4-game winning streak and get to 6-6)
#76 San Jose State (defeated #39 Fresno State 62-52 to get to 6-6)
#79 Colorado State (defeated #116 Air Force 58-13 to get to 7-6)
#103 Wyoming (lost to #41 Utah State 35-7 to fall to 5-7 and miss out on a bowl game)
#60 Syracuse (defeated #59 Boston College 34-31 to get to 6-6)
#86 Louisiana-Monroe (defeated rival #58 Louisiana-Lafayette 31-28 to get to 6-6)
So, under win-you're-in-lose-you're-out pressure, teams went 9-1 this week, including three clear upsets (MSST, SJSU, and ULM). Cool stuff.
CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIP PREVIEW TO COME OUT TODAY/TOMORROW!!!
So, Auburn takes care of Alabama. Ohio State barely holds on against Michigan. Baylor just staves off a lowly TCU squad. Oh, and Fresno State finally showed that they didn't belong anywhere near the BCS. What crazy stuff will happen in the rankings?
The basics of the RUBY RANKINGS are as follows:
1) The 126 FBS teams are roughly scaled from 0 (a bottom-five, roughly winless team) to 1000 (a BCS Championship Favorite).
2) The ranking takes into account wins/losses, strength of schedule, and statistics.
3) The rankings are updated weekly.
WEEK 13 RUBY RANKINGS:
Ranking #. Team (W-L): Score (RANK Change from Last Week)
1. Florida State (12-0): 944 (=)
2. Ohio State (12-0): 903 (+1)
3. Baylor (10-1): 884 (-1)
4. Missouri (11-1): 874 (+2)
5. Auburn (11-1): 859 (+3)
6. Arizona State (10-2): 856 (-1)
7. Alabama (11-1): 843 (-3)
8. Stanford (10-2): 818 (+3)
9. Oregon (10-2): 809 (=)
10. Michigan State (11-1): 783 (+3)
11. South Carolina (10-2): 771 (+3)
12. Oklahoma State (10-1): 770 (=)
13. Wisconsin (9-3): 752 (-6)
14. Oklahoma (9-2): 737 (+1)
15. UCLA (9-3): 730 (+6)
16. Northern Illinois (12-0): 724 (+2)
17. Clemson (10-2): 713 (-7)
18. Washington (8-4): 708 (+4)
19. Louisville (10-1): 698 (+1)
20. UCF (10-1): 694 (-4)
21. BYU (8-4): 680 (+9)
22. LSU (9-3): 675 (+1)
23. USC (9-4): 673 (-6)
24. Virginia Tech (8-4): 667 (-5)
25. Georgia (8-4): 664 (+1)
26. Texas A&M (8-4): 651 (-2)
27. Mississippi (7-5): 642 (-2)
28. Georgia Tech (7-5): 635 (+3)
29. Iowa (8-4): 631 (+7)
30. Texas (8-3): 629 (+9)
31. Notre Dame (8-4): 626 (-4)
32. Duke (10-2): 622 (=)
33. Miami (FL) (9-3): 617 (+1)
34. Arizona (7-5): 613 (-1)
35. Michigan (7-5): 612 (=)
36. East Carolina (9-3): 605 (-8)
37. Marshall (9-3): 604 (+7)
38. Houston (8-4): 601 (+2)
39. Fresno State (10-1): 589 (-10)
40. Minnesota (8-4): 579 (+1)
41. Utah State (8-4): 572 (+4)
42. Bowling Green (9-3): 566 (+9)
43. Nebraska (8-4): 566 (-5)
44. North Texas (8-4): 565 (+4)
45. Mississippi State (6-6): 564 (-2)
46. North Carolina (6-6): 551 (-9)
47. Rice (9-3): 549 (+7)
48. Penn State (7-5): 545 (+8)
49. Boise State (8-4): 534 (=)
50. Ball State (10-2): 525 (-9)
51. Kansas State (7-5): 522 (+6)
52. Vanderbilt (8-4): 518 (-1)
53. Navy (7-4): 513 (+9)
54. Utah (5-7): 510 (+5)
55. Toledo (7-5): 509 (-6)
56. Cincinnati (9-2): 505 (-1)
57. Pittsburgh (6-6): 501 (-10)
58. Louisiana-Lafayette (8-3): 501 (-5)
59. Boston College (7-5): 478 (-3)
60. Syracuse (6-6): 476 (+10)
61. UTSA (7-5): 470 (+4)
62. Tennessee (5-7): 467 (+4)
63. Texas Tech (7-5): 466 (-16)
64. Indiana (5-7): 459 (=)
65. Florida Atlantic (6-6): 450 (+5)
66. Buffalo (8-4): 449 (-5)
67. Western Kentucky (8-4): 448 (+7)
68. Arkansas State (7-5): 448 (-4)
69. Middle Tennessee (8-4): 447 (+4)
70. Maryland (7-5): 444 (-2)
71. Northwestern (5-7): 443 (+1)
72. Washington State (6-6): 424 (-12)
73. Florida (4-8): 423 (-2)
74. Tulane (7-5): 419 (+1)
75. Oregon State (6-6): 415 (-8)
76. San Jose State (6-6): 398 (+1)
77. UNLV (7-5): 382 (+4)
78. TCU (4-8): 381 (-2)
79. Colorado State (7-6): 374 (+4)
80. Nevada (4-8): 371 (+11)
81. Ohio (7-5): 352 (+3)
82. San Diego State (7-5): 336 (-3)
83. South Alabama (5-6): 330 (+14)
84. Arkansas (3-9): 319 (+5)
85. Wake Forest (4-8): 318 (=)
86. Louisiana-Monroe (6-6): 317 (+9)
87. Troy (6-6): 314 (+7)
88. Rutgers (5-6): 309 (-10)
89. Akron (5-7): 308 (+7)
90. Memphis (3-8): 296 (-10)
91. Colorado (4-8): 293 (-5)
92. Virginia (2-10): 291 (-2)
93. North Carolina State (3-9): 288 (-11)
94. West Virginia (4-8): 283 (-6)
95. Illinois (4-8): 281 (-8)
96. SMU (5-6): 264 (-4)
97. Texas State (6-6): 262 (+1)
98. Kent State (4-8): 256 (+3)
99. Old Dominion (8-4): 254 (-6)
100. Tulsa (3-9): 238 (-1)
101. Central Michigan (6-6): 225 (+3)
102. Kentucky (2-10): 225 (=)
103. Wyoming (5-7): 216 (-3)
104. Iowa State (3-9): 209 (+2)
105. South Florida (2-9): 207 (+5)
106. Kansas (3-9): 206 (-3)
107. New Mexico (3-9): 175 (+4)
108. California (1-11): 152 (+1)
109. Army (3-8): 149 (-4)
110. UAB (2-10): 132 (-2)
111. Connecticut (2-9): 130 (+6)
112. Purdue (1-11): 128 (-5)
113. Hawai'i (1-11): 115 (-1)
114. Temple (2-10): 106 (+2)
115. Louisiana Tech (4-8): 92 (-2)
116. Air Force (2-10): 77 (-2)
117. Idaho (1-11): 52 (-2)
118. UTEP (2-10): 50 (=)
119. Western Michigan (1-11): 32 (+1)
120. Southern Mississippi (1-11): 6 (+3)
121. New Mexico State (2-10): -4 (-2)
122. Eastern Michigan (2-10): -10 (-1)
123. Massachusetts (1-11): -12 (-1)
124. Florida International (1-11): -71 (+1)
125. Miami (OH) (0-12): -97 (+1)
126. Georgia State (0-12): -100 (-2)
CONFERENCE POWER RANKINGS
1. SEC: 607 (=)
2. PAC 12: 583 (=)
3. BIG 10: 557 (+1)
4. ACC: 539 (-1)
5. BIG 12: 509 (=)
6. AAC: 381 (=)
7. MOUNTAIN WEST: 345 (+1)
8. INDEPENDENT: 329 (-1)
9. C-USA: 325 (=)
10. SUN BELT: 315 (=)
11. MAC: 294 (=)
Welcome to the Top 40: #37 Marshall. In a de facto C-USA semifinal (both teams were 6-1 in-conference), Marshall convincingly defeated #36 ECU on Friday night, hanging a 59-spot on the Pirates. The Thundering Herd have only lost two games in regulation, by a combined 5 points: by 3 to #81 Ohio and by 2 to #69 Middle Tennessee (51-49!). Additionally, they pushed #24 Virginia Tech to 2OT before falling 29-21. These guys have one of the most potent, balanced offenses in the country; they score the 6th-most points per game (44.6) and are actually 21st in rushing and 21st in passing. They face the less-than-balanced #47 Rice Owls (also 9-3 (7-1 C-USA), very run-heavy) on Saturday for the Conference Title, with the right to play the 8th-selected SEC team - likely #45 Mississippi State or #52 Vanderbilt - in the Liberty Bowl.
Welcome to... a BCS Bowl?!: #56 Cincinnati. Not likely, but possible. Cincinnati's been shooting up the rankings ever since the Week 8 ratings slotted them at 82nd, a 5-2 team with the worst strength-of-schedule in the country. Well, the Bearcats have finally defeated a team with a winning record, beating #38 Houston (who's been in free-fall ever since I declared them the leaders in the AAC race) by 7 last week. They'll face their first true test all year in #19 Louisville on Thursday night and, if they win and #96 SMU manages to upset #20 UCF (who's looked very shaky the last few weeks, defeating #114 Temple and #105 South Florida by a field goal apiece), the Bearcats, who lost their best player and name (dynamic QB Munchie Legaux) for the season in Week 2, would find themselves in the BCS.
Welcome to... a BCS Bowl!!!: #16 Northern Illinois. I'm not saying this team belongs there. BUT... they've vastly improved their profile recently, and have another chance to defeat a good-not-great opponent when they play #42 Bowling Green in the MAC Championship on Friday (the "Friday" part of that is how you know it's the MAC). Northern Illinois is a strange team: they haven't allowed fewer than 14 points, and they've allowed more than 30 twice (early in the season). They also haven't scored fewer than 27, and have been on the right side of 50 thrice (later in the season). Any game involving these guys - and their wrecking ball of a QB, Jordan Lynch (42 TDs, 4,212 yards combined rushing and passing this year) - will be exciting, to say the least. Remember, to clinch a BCS spot under the rules, they only need to be in the top 16 of the BCS (they're currently 14th, and will be helped by beating Bowling Green) and stay ahead of the AAC leader (UCF is currently 16th, and shouldn't be helped by beating SMU).
Teams with a bowl berth on the line last week:
Mississippi State (defeated rival #27 Mississippi 17-10 in OT to get to 6-6 and become bowl-eligible)
#101 Central Michigan (defeated rival #122 Eastern Michigan 42-10 to get to 6-6)
#87 Troy (defeated #97 Texas State 42-28 to get to 6-6)
#65 Florida Atlantic (defeated rival #124 Florida International 21-6 to cap a 4-game winning streak and get to 6-6)
#76 San Jose State (defeated #39 Fresno State 62-52 to get to 6-6)
#79 Colorado State (defeated #116 Air Force 58-13 to get to 7-6)
#103 Wyoming (lost to #41 Utah State 35-7 to fall to 5-7 and miss out on a bowl game)
#60 Syracuse (defeated #59 Boston College 34-31 to get to 6-6)
#86 Louisiana-Monroe (defeated rival #58 Louisiana-Lafayette 31-28 to get to 6-6)
So, under win-you're-in-lose-you're-out pressure, teams went 9-1 this week, including three clear upsets (MSST, SJSU, and ULM). Cool stuff.
CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIP PREVIEW TO COME OUT TODAY/TOMORROW!!!
Monday, November 25, 2013
RUBY RANKINGS Week 13!!! College Football FBS Rankings!!!
Welcome back, everyone!
Sometimes, when you're doing stats, something just doesn't come out right. You see the results with your own eyes, and then you look at the numbers, and it just doesn't add up. You hope you've made a mistake in the calculation, but, sure enough, you haven't. You start thinking, "are there other tests I can do to make these numbers come out better?" At that point, you're lost.
Just give me a moment here. It looks like I might be admitting to a loss of all credibility, but that's the opposite of the truth. What I mean to say is this: Despite a 32-point (road) loss on Saturday, the Baylor Bears remain the #2 team in the Ruby Rankings.
How in the world can that be?
There are a lot of answers to that question, but here are the ones that are the most important, interesting, and illustrative of what goes into ranking systems such as my own.
1. The Oklahoma State Cowboys are very good. This doesn't excuse a huge loss by itself, but let's look at the seven other 1-loss teams and see whether the team that beat them was better or worse than Oklahoma State:
Missouri: South Carolina. Even.
Auburn: LSU. Not as good as OKST.
Clemson: FSU. Better than OKST.
Oklahoma State: West Virginia. Wayyy worse than OKST.
Michigan State: Notre Dame. Worse than OKST.
UCF: South Carolina. Split again.
Louisville: UCF. Worse than OKST.
Now, let's be honest: all but one of those games was a lot closer than 32 points. But in terms of pure team ranking (ignoring stats for the moment, like most ranking systems), the only difference between Baylor's loss and the other teams' losses is that Baylor's happened this past weekend.
2. Baylor was already being punished by my system - heavily, I might add - for playing a weak schedule. What that means, though, is that when Baylor plays a good team, their drop in statistics will be offset by a slight reduction in punishment based on strength of schedule. For reference, before Baylor started this 3-game kick against OU, TT, and OKST, their strength of schedule was 116th out of 126. It's now shot up all the way to 65th. Basically, the ratings are reflecting that even though Baylor's profile is worse now than it was, we're a lot more confident in it.
3. The teams around Baylor didn't help themselves. Listen, there's just no scenario in which an RPI/Stats system like mine is going to reward Alabama for beating up on Chattanooga. A game like that means absolutely nothing. Don't worry: Alabama will have plenty of opportunity to pass Baylor (and Ohio State, which jumped the Crimson Tide as well this week). If they can beat Auburn and Missouri, they'll get the #2 ranking they deserve. If they can't, well... we'll see.
4. Baylor's rating did drop dramatically; their rank didn't. This is a key distinction. My rating system is ultimately scaled loosely from 0 to 1000. Baylor's rating fell from 943 to 888 - that's a huge drop - but they had a big enough cushion that they remained, barely, ahead of everyone else. As mentioned above, Alabama dropped too, but has a much better chance that Baylor to climb back up.
Ultimately, my system tries to walk a fine line between being retrodictive and predictive; that is, I'm trying to capture both what a team's done up to this point and what they're likely to do in the future. What that means is that the system can't have a knee-jerk reaction to even a bad loss (or a great win), but it's also not going to perfectly capture the true "essence" of how good a team is, whatever that means. Do I think Baylor is better than Alabama right now? No. Do I think that, by the end of the season, Alabama will be well ahead of Baylor? Yes. But I don't think it's impossible that I'm wrong about that.
Now, onto the rankings!
The basics of the RUBY RANKINGS are as follows:
1) The 126 FBS teams are roughly scaled from 0 (a bottom-five, roughly winless team) to 1000 (a BCS Championship Favorite).
2) The ranking takes into account wins/losses, strength of schedule, and statistics.
3) The rankings are updated weekly.
WEEK 13 RUBY RANKINGS:
Ranking #. Team (W-L): Score (RANK Change from Last Week)
1. Florida State (11-0): 967 (=)
2. Baylor (9-1): 888 (=)
3. Ohio State (11-0): 875 (+2)
4. Alabama (11-0): 857 (-1)
5. Arizona State (9-2): 855 (+2)
6. Missouri (10-1): 843 (=)
7. Wisconsin (9-2): 813 (+4)
8. Auburn (10-1): 812 (+1)
9. Oregon (9-2): 804 (-5)
10. Clemson (10-1): 776 (-2)
11. Stanford (9-2): 770 (-1)
12. Oklahoma State (10-1): 765 (+7)
13. Michigan State (10-1): 753 (+1)
14. South Carolina (9-2): 725 (-1)
15. Oklahoma (9-2): 722 (+2)
16. UCF (9-1): 710 (+6)
17. USC (9-3): 709 (+6)
18. Northern Illinois (11-0): 709 (+7)
19. Virginia Tech (7-4): 706 (+1)
20. Louisville (10-1): 699 (-4)
21. UCLA (8-3): 696 (-6)
22. Washington (7-4): 695 (+4)
23. LSU (8-3): 694 (+5)
24. Texas A&M (8-3): 690 (-12)
25. Mississippi (7-4): 681 (-7)
26. Georgia (7-4): 665 (-2)
27. Notre Dame (8-3): 661 (+5)
28. East Carolina (9-2): 660 (-1)
29. Fresno State (10-0): 660 (=)
30. BYU (7-4): 657 (-9)
31. Georgia Tech (7-4): 633 (-1)
32. Duke (9-2): 617 (+4)
33. Arizona (7-4): 616 (+8)
34. Miami (FL) (8-3): 611 (=)
35. Michigan (7-4): 595 (-4)
36. Iowa (7-4): 595 (+4)
37. North Carolina (6-5): 593 (+12)
38. Nebraska (8-3): 592 (-3)
39. Texas (7-3): 592 (-2)
40. Houston (7-4): 580 (-7)
41. Minnesota (8-3): 562 (-3)
42. Ball State (9-2): 546 (+3)
43. Mississippi State (5-6): 545 (-1)
44. Marshall (8-3): 544 (+8)
45. Utah State (7-4): 536 (+8)
46. Texas Tech (7-4): 532 (+1)
47. Pittsburgh (6-5): 532 (+3)
48. North Texas (7-4): 528 (-9)
49. Toledo (7-4): 528 (-6)
50. Boise State (7-4): 526 (-6)
51. Bowling Green (8-3): 522 (+10)
52. Vanderbilt (7-4): 519 (+3)
53. Louisiana-Lafayette (8-2): 518 (-2)
54. Rice (8-3): 508 (-8)
55. Cincinnati (9-2): 508 (+14)
56. Boston College (7-4): 507 (+6)
57. Penn State (6-5): 505 (=)
58. Kansas State (6-5): 503 (-4)
59. Utah (4-7): 490 (-11)
60. Washington State (6-5): 480 (+8)
61. Buffalo (8-3): 474 (+4)
62. Navy (7-4): 472 (-3)
63. Indiana (4-7): 465 (+4)
64. Arkansas State (7-4): 457 (-4)
65. UTSA (6-5): 455 (+9)
66. Tennessee (4-7): 453 (-3)
67. Oregon State (6-5): 452 (-9)
68. Maryland (6-5): 447 (-4)
69. Florida Atlantic (5-6): 445 (+3)
70. Syracuse (5-6): 437 (-4)
71. Florida (4-7): 425 (-15)
72. Northwestern (4-7): 425 (-2)
73. Middle Tennessee (7-4): 425 (-2)
74. Western Kentucky (7-4): 422 (+6)
75. Tulane (7-4): 417 (=)
76. TCU (4-7): 379 (+1)
77. San Jose State (5-6): 363 (+2)
78. Rutgers (5-5): 361 (-2)
79. San Diego State (7-4): 359 (+7)
80. Memphis (3-7): 358 (+4)
81. UNLV (6-5): 351 (+7)
82. North Carolina State (3-8): 348 (+3)
83. Colorado State (6-6): 341 (-5)
84. Ohio (6-5): 336 (-11)
85. Wake Forest (4-7): 335 (-4)
86. Colorado (4-7): 333 (-3)
87. Illinois (4-7): 321 (+7)
88. West Virginia (4-7): 316 (-1)
89. Arkansas (3-8): 315 (-7)
90. Virginia (2-9): 314 (+3)
91. Nevada (4-7): 311 (+1)
92. SMU (5-5): 305 (+3)
93. Old Dominion (8-4): 286 (-4)
94. Troy (5-6): 283 (+3)
95. Louisiana-Monroe (5-6): 275 (-5)
96. Akron (4-7): 274 (+2)
97. South Alabama (4-6): 272 (+4)
98. Texas State (6-5): 269 (-7)
99. Tulsa (3-8): 253 (+4)
100. Wyoming (5-6): 242 (=)
101. Kent State (4-8): 239 (+7)
102. Kentucky (2-9): 232 (-3)
103. Kansas (3-8): 220 (-7)
104. Central Michigan (5-6): 214 (=)
105. Army (3-7): 207 (-3)
106. Iowa State (2-9): 196 (+4)
107. Purdue (1-10): 177 (-2)
108. UAB (2-9): 171 (+4)
109. California (1-11): 167 (-3)
110. South Florida (2-8): 161 (-3)
111. New Mexico (3-8): 158 (-2)
112. Hawai'i (0-11): 106 (+2)
113. Louisiana Tech (4-7): 101 (-2)
114. Air Force (2-9): 94 (+1)
115. Idaho (1-10): 93 (+1)
116. Temple (1-10): 79 (-3)
117. Connecticut (1-9): 71 (+1)
118. UTEP (2-9): 58 (-1)
119. New Mexico State (1-10): 35 (+1)
120. Western Michigan (1-10): 33 (+1)
121. Eastern Michigan (2-9): 12 (-2)
122. Massachusetts (1-10): -12 (=)
123. Southern Mississippi (0-11): -23 (=)
124. Georgia State (0-11): -65 (+1)
125. Florida International (1-10): -75 (-1)
126. Miami (OH) (0-11): -120 (=)
CONFERENCE POWER RANKINGS:
1. SEC: 604
2. PAC 12: 589
3. ACC: 559
4. BIG 10: 557
5. BIG 12: 511
6. AAC: 383
7. INDEPENDENTS: 344
8. MOUNTAIN WEST: 337
9. C-USA: 319
10. SUN BELT: 304
11. MAC: 289
Moving On Up:
#18 Northern Illinois. Despite having not lost a regular season game since September 1st of last year, the Huskies had been languishing down in the high 30s all season. Even though their stats were there, and no one questioned whether Jordan Lynch was a legitimate threat, they hadn't really proven themselves; their best wins were over #36 Iowa (by 3) and #96 Akron (by only 7). So, an observer - or a ratings system - could be skeptical of both this squad and a ridiculous BCS system that put them anywhere near the top 20. This squad finally encountered some tests over the last two weeks, and proved up to the task, beating #42 Ball State by 21 and #49 Toledo by 18. Their strength-of-schedule is still 7th-worst in the country, but they've at least done what has been asked of them. They won't be taking down any SEC Champions, but at least now we can be pretty sure they're better than a .500 SEC squad.
#37 North Carolina. In the inaugural Ruby Rankings of the year, UNC was sitting at 77th, with a 1-5 record (they were, at least, the highest-ranked 1-win team). Since then, they've rattled off five in a row, with wins over solid #56 Boston College and #47 Pittsburgh squads, the former of which looks a lot better now than they did when these guys played (BC itself has won four straight). The Tar Heels dropped an 80-spot on FBS newcomer #93 Old Dominion this past week to ensure bowl eligibility in what looked at one point like a lost season. If they can beat #32 Duke next week, they'll be among the teams you'd least like to face in a bowl game.
Sliding On Down:
#24 Texas A&M. These guys didn't just get beaten by #23 LSU. They got smacked by LSU. The Tigers had only lost back-to-back games once under Les Miles, and they kept it that way, dropping the Aggies a whopping 12 spots. Take note that spots 16 through 24 are very tightly bunched, and a couple different bounces could've seen A&M settling in the mid-teens. An 8-4 campaign would be a failure for Texas A&M, but they'll need to beat #6 Missouri to keep that from happening.
#71 Florida. Boy, did the steam go out of this weekend's match-up between the Gators and #1 Florida State with the latter's loss to FCS foe Georgia Southern. Listen. It was going to be over by the end of the first quarter, but without Florida having a bowl bid to ostensibly play for, it might be over by the end of the first play. This caps off the worst 6-game stretch, I think it's safe to say, in Florida Gators history. Now, Florida's still got an SEC defense, allowing only 19.6 PPG (good for 16th in the nation, right between Missouri and #16 UCF), but their offense has scored an abysmal 19.9 PPG (good for 15th-worst in the nation, right between #113 Louisiana Tech and #121 Eastern Michigan). Yikes. That. Is. Embarrassing.
#84 Ohio. The Bobcats have a nagging feeling that they've been here before. Last year, the Bobcats were 7-0 and limped to the finish, dropping 4 of their last 5 to finish 8-4. This year, the Bobcats were at least a respectable 6-2, but have lost their last 3 games (to #61 Buffalo, #51 Bowling Green, and most recently #101 Kent State) by a combined 107 points. This has dropped Ohio a full 26 spots in the ranking, and if they lose Friday's tilt with #122 Massachusetts, they'll be among the teams you'd most like to face in a bowl game.
Sometimes, when you're doing stats, something just doesn't come out right. You see the results with your own eyes, and then you look at the numbers, and it just doesn't add up. You hope you've made a mistake in the calculation, but, sure enough, you haven't. You start thinking, "are there other tests I can do to make these numbers come out better?" At that point, you're lost.
Just give me a moment here. It looks like I might be admitting to a loss of all credibility, but that's the opposite of the truth. What I mean to say is this: Despite a 32-point (road) loss on Saturday, the Baylor Bears remain the #2 team in the Ruby Rankings.
How in the world can that be?
There are a lot of answers to that question, but here are the ones that are the most important, interesting, and illustrative of what goes into ranking systems such as my own.
1. The Oklahoma State Cowboys are very good. This doesn't excuse a huge loss by itself, but let's look at the seven other 1-loss teams and see whether the team that beat them was better or worse than Oklahoma State:
Missouri: South Carolina. Even.
Auburn: LSU. Not as good as OKST.
Clemson: FSU. Better than OKST.
Oklahoma State: West Virginia. Wayyy worse than OKST.
Michigan State: Notre Dame. Worse than OKST.
UCF: South Carolina. Split again.
Louisville: UCF. Worse than OKST.
Now, let's be honest: all but one of those games was a lot closer than 32 points. But in terms of pure team ranking (ignoring stats for the moment, like most ranking systems), the only difference between Baylor's loss and the other teams' losses is that Baylor's happened this past weekend.
2. Baylor was already being punished by my system - heavily, I might add - for playing a weak schedule. What that means, though, is that when Baylor plays a good team, their drop in statistics will be offset by a slight reduction in punishment based on strength of schedule. For reference, before Baylor started this 3-game kick against OU, TT, and OKST, their strength of schedule was 116th out of 126. It's now shot up all the way to 65th. Basically, the ratings are reflecting that even though Baylor's profile is worse now than it was, we're a lot more confident in it.
3. The teams around Baylor didn't help themselves. Listen, there's just no scenario in which an RPI/Stats system like mine is going to reward Alabama for beating up on Chattanooga. A game like that means absolutely nothing. Don't worry: Alabama will have plenty of opportunity to pass Baylor (and Ohio State, which jumped the Crimson Tide as well this week). If they can beat Auburn and Missouri, they'll get the #2 ranking they deserve. If they can't, well... we'll see.
4. Baylor's rating did drop dramatically; their rank didn't. This is a key distinction. My rating system is ultimately scaled loosely from 0 to 1000. Baylor's rating fell from 943 to 888 - that's a huge drop - but they had a big enough cushion that they remained, barely, ahead of everyone else. As mentioned above, Alabama dropped too, but has a much better chance that Baylor to climb back up.
Ultimately, my system tries to walk a fine line between being retrodictive and predictive; that is, I'm trying to capture both what a team's done up to this point and what they're likely to do in the future. What that means is that the system can't have a knee-jerk reaction to even a bad loss (or a great win), but it's also not going to perfectly capture the true "essence" of how good a team is, whatever that means. Do I think Baylor is better than Alabama right now? No. Do I think that, by the end of the season, Alabama will be well ahead of Baylor? Yes. But I don't think it's impossible that I'm wrong about that.
Now, onto the rankings!
The basics of the RUBY RANKINGS are as follows:
1) The 126 FBS teams are roughly scaled from 0 (a bottom-five, roughly winless team) to 1000 (a BCS Championship Favorite).
2) The ranking takes into account wins/losses, strength of schedule, and statistics.
3) The rankings are updated weekly.
WEEK 13 RUBY RANKINGS:
Ranking #. Team (W-L): Score (RANK Change from Last Week)
1. Florida State (11-0): 967 (=)
2. Baylor (9-1): 888 (=)
3. Ohio State (11-0): 875 (+2)
4. Alabama (11-0): 857 (-1)
5. Arizona State (9-2): 855 (+2)
6. Missouri (10-1): 843 (=)
7. Wisconsin (9-2): 813 (+4)
8. Auburn (10-1): 812 (+1)
9. Oregon (9-2): 804 (-5)
10. Clemson (10-1): 776 (-2)
11. Stanford (9-2): 770 (-1)
12. Oklahoma State (10-1): 765 (+7)
13. Michigan State (10-1): 753 (+1)
14. South Carolina (9-2): 725 (-1)
15. Oklahoma (9-2): 722 (+2)
16. UCF (9-1): 710 (+6)
17. USC (9-3): 709 (+6)
18. Northern Illinois (11-0): 709 (+7)
19. Virginia Tech (7-4): 706 (+1)
20. Louisville (10-1): 699 (-4)
21. UCLA (8-3): 696 (-6)
22. Washington (7-4): 695 (+4)
23. LSU (8-3): 694 (+5)
24. Texas A&M (8-3): 690 (-12)
25. Mississippi (7-4): 681 (-7)
26. Georgia (7-4): 665 (-2)
27. Notre Dame (8-3): 661 (+5)
28. East Carolina (9-2): 660 (-1)
29. Fresno State (10-0): 660 (=)
30. BYU (7-4): 657 (-9)
31. Georgia Tech (7-4): 633 (-1)
32. Duke (9-2): 617 (+4)
33. Arizona (7-4): 616 (+8)
34. Miami (FL) (8-3): 611 (=)
35. Michigan (7-4): 595 (-4)
36. Iowa (7-4): 595 (+4)
37. North Carolina (6-5): 593 (+12)
38. Nebraska (8-3): 592 (-3)
39. Texas (7-3): 592 (-2)
40. Houston (7-4): 580 (-7)
41. Minnesota (8-3): 562 (-3)
42. Ball State (9-2): 546 (+3)
43. Mississippi State (5-6): 545 (-1)
44. Marshall (8-3): 544 (+8)
45. Utah State (7-4): 536 (+8)
46. Texas Tech (7-4): 532 (+1)
47. Pittsburgh (6-5): 532 (+3)
48. North Texas (7-4): 528 (-9)
49. Toledo (7-4): 528 (-6)
50. Boise State (7-4): 526 (-6)
51. Bowling Green (8-3): 522 (+10)
52. Vanderbilt (7-4): 519 (+3)
53. Louisiana-Lafayette (8-2): 518 (-2)
54. Rice (8-3): 508 (-8)
55. Cincinnati (9-2): 508 (+14)
56. Boston College (7-4): 507 (+6)
57. Penn State (6-5): 505 (=)
58. Kansas State (6-5): 503 (-4)
59. Utah (4-7): 490 (-11)
60. Washington State (6-5): 480 (+8)
61. Buffalo (8-3): 474 (+4)
62. Navy (7-4): 472 (-3)
63. Indiana (4-7): 465 (+4)
64. Arkansas State (7-4): 457 (-4)
65. UTSA (6-5): 455 (+9)
66. Tennessee (4-7): 453 (-3)
67. Oregon State (6-5): 452 (-9)
68. Maryland (6-5): 447 (-4)
69. Florida Atlantic (5-6): 445 (+3)
70. Syracuse (5-6): 437 (-4)
71. Florida (4-7): 425 (-15)
72. Northwestern (4-7): 425 (-2)
73. Middle Tennessee (7-4): 425 (-2)
74. Western Kentucky (7-4): 422 (+6)
75. Tulane (7-4): 417 (=)
76. TCU (4-7): 379 (+1)
77. San Jose State (5-6): 363 (+2)
78. Rutgers (5-5): 361 (-2)
79. San Diego State (7-4): 359 (+7)
80. Memphis (3-7): 358 (+4)
81. UNLV (6-5): 351 (+7)
82. North Carolina State (3-8): 348 (+3)
83. Colorado State (6-6): 341 (-5)
84. Ohio (6-5): 336 (-11)
85. Wake Forest (4-7): 335 (-4)
86. Colorado (4-7): 333 (-3)
87. Illinois (4-7): 321 (+7)
88. West Virginia (4-7): 316 (-1)
89. Arkansas (3-8): 315 (-7)
90. Virginia (2-9): 314 (+3)
91. Nevada (4-7): 311 (+1)
92. SMU (5-5): 305 (+3)
93. Old Dominion (8-4): 286 (-4)
94. Troy (5-6): 283 (+3)
95. Louisiana-Monroe (5-6): 275 (-5)
96. Akron (4-7): 274 (+2)
97. South Alabama (4-6): 272 (+4)
98. Texas State (6-5): 269 (-7)
99. Tulsa (3-8): 253 (+4)
100. Wyoming (5-6): 242 (=)
101. Kent State (4-8): 239 (+7)
102. Kentucky (2-9): 232 (-3)
103. Kansas (3-8): 220 (-7)
104. Central Michigan (5-6): 214 (=)
105. Army (3-7): 207 (-3)
106. Iowa State (2-9): 196 (+4)
107. Purdue (1-10): 177 (-2)
108. UAB (2-9): 171 (+4)
109. California (1-11): 167 (-3)
110. South Florida (2-8): 161 (-3)
111. New Mexico (3-8): 158 (-2)
112. Hawai'i (0-11): 106 (+2)
113. Louisiana Tech (4-7): 101 (-2)
114. Air Force (2-9): 94 (+1)
115. Idaho (1-10): 93 (+1)
116. Temple (1-10): 79 (-3)
117. Connecticut (1-9): 71 (+1)
118. UTEP (2-9): 58 (-1)
119. New Mexico State (1-10): 35 (+1)
120. Western Michigan (1-10): 33 (+1)
121. Eastern Michigan (2-9): 12 (-2)
122. Massachusetts (1-10): -12 (=)
123. Southern Mississippi (0-11): -23 (=)
124. Georgia State (0-11): -65 (+1)
125. Florida International (1-10): -75 (-1)
126. Miami (OH) (0-11): -120 (=)
CONFERENCE POWER RANKINGS:
1. SEC: 604
2. PAC 12: 589
3. ACC: 559
4. BIG 10: 557
5. BIG 12: 511
6. AAC: 383
7. INDEPENDENTS: 344
8. MOUNTAIN WEST: 337
9. C-USA: 319
10. SUN BELT: 304
11. MAC: 289
Moving On Up:
#18 Northern Illinois. Despite having not lost a regular season game since September 1st of last year, the Huskies had been languishing down in the high 30s all season. Even though their stats were there, and no one questioned whether Jordan Lynch was a legitimate threat, they hadn't really proven themselves; their best wins were over #36 Iowa (by 3) and #96 Akron (by only 7). So, an observer - or a ratings system - could be skeptical of both this squad and a ridiculous BCS system that put them anywhere near the top 20. This squad finally encountered some tests over the last two weeks, and proved up to the task, beating #42 Ball State by 21 and #49 Toledo by 18. Their strength-of-schedule is still 7th-worst in the country, but they've at least done what has been asked of them. They won't be taking down any SEC Champions, but at least now we can be pretty sure they're better than a .500 SEC squad.
#37 North Carolina. In the inaugural Ruby Rankings of the year, UNC was sitting at 77th, with a 1-5 record (they were, at least, the highest-ranked 1-win team). Since then, they've rattled off five in a row, with wins over solid #56 Boston College and #47 Pittsburgh squads, the former of which looks a lot better now than they did when these guys played (BC itself has won four straight). The Tar Heels dropped an 80-spot on FBS newcomer #93 Old Dominion this past week to ensure bowl eligibility in what looked at one point like a lost season. If they can beat #32 Duke next week, they'll be among the teams you'd least like to face in a bowl game.
Sliding On Down:
#24 Texas A&M. These guys didn't just get beaten by #23 LSU. They got smacked by LSU. The Tigers had only lost back-to-back games once under Les Miles, and they kept it that way, dropping the Aggies a whopping 12 spots. Take note that spots 16 through 24 are very tightly bunched, and a couple different bounces could've seen A&M settling in the mid-teens. An 8-4 campaign would be a failure for Texas A&M, but they'll need to beat #6 Missouri to keep that from happening.
#71 Florida. Boy, did the steam go out of this weekend's match-up between the Gators and #1 Florida State with the latter's loss to FCS foe Georgia Southern. Listen. It was going to be over by the end of the first quarter, but without Florida having a bowl bid to ostensibly play for, it might be over by the end of the first play. This caps off the worst 6-game stretch, I think it's safe to say, in Florida Gators history. Now, Florida's still got an SEC defense, allowing only 19.6 PPG (good for 16th in the nation, right between Missouri and #16 UCF), but their offense has scored an abysmal 19.9 PPG (good for 15th-worst in the nation, right between #113 Louisiana Tech and #121 Eastern Michigan). Yikes. That. Is. Embarrassing.
#84 Ohio. The Bobcats have a nagging feeling that they've been here before. Last year, the Bobcats were 7-0 and limped to the finish, dropping 4 of their last 5 to finish 8-4. This year, the Bobcats were at least a respectable 6-2, but have lost their last 3 games (to #61 Buffalo, #51 Bowling Green, and most recently #101 Kent State) by a combined 107 points. This has dropped Ohio a full 26 spots in the ranking, and if they lose Friday's tilt with #122 Massachusetts, they'll be among the teams you'd most like to face in a bowl game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)