Projected BCS Standings: Week 5

We are another step closer to BCS standings season. But just because they don’t want to reveal the whole analysis right now doesn’t mean we can’t play with the numbers to figure out where teams are likely to rank.

Not all the pieces of the puzzle are available. Two computer algorithms, those of Anderson & Hester and Peter Wolfe, are missing for another couple of weeks. So too is the Harris Poll.

What we do have are four of the six computer rankings utilized by the BCS; the USA Today coaches’ poll; and, filling in for the Harris, the former second human poll from the AP.

Who would come out on top, likely, if the powers that be were to start crunching numbers now?

Alabama continues to distance itself from the pack. Oregon maintains the shotgun seat. LSU moved back up (largely thanks to the rankings of the coaches, Jeff Sagarin and Richard Billingsley) into 3rd at Florida State’s expense.

Who comprises the rest of the top 25? Who all has received any points toward the rankings? Which powerhouses are best positioned? Which minnows? The chart below provides at least a glimpse into the answers…

 

PV     CM JS RB KM   COACH AP   BCS 
1 1 Alabama 22 24 25 18 0.890 1472 0.9980 1500 1.0000 0.9627
2 2 Oregon 13 17 23 10 0.630 1403 0.9512 1430 0.9533 0.8448
3 4 LSU 12 25 24 13 0.740 1327 0.8997 1310 0.8733 0.8377
4 3 Florida State 21 16 13 12 0.620 1301 0.8820 1349 0.8993 0.8005
5 9 Georgia 18 22 19 14 0.730 1227 0.8319 1252 0.8347 0.7988
6 7 South Carolina 20 19 22 20 0.810 1161 0.7871 1152 0.7680 0.7884
7 8 Notre Dame 24 20 21 24 0.890 915 0.6203 1043 0.6953 0.7352
8 6 Kansas State 19 14 20 17 0.700 1050 0.7119 1123 0.7487 0.7202
9 11 West Virginia 14 11 18 16 0.590 1137 0.7708 1066 0.7107 0.6905
10 10 Florida 23 23 22 0.680 883 0.5986 937 0.6247 0.6344
11 12 Texas 15 18 6 19 0.580 981 0.6651 932 0.6213 0.6221
12 15 Oregon State 25 15 17 25 0.820 453 0.3071 647 0.4313 0.5195
13 19 Ohio State 17 21 10 21 0.690 0.0000 793 0.5287 0.4062
14 16 TCU 4 10 15 0.290 749 0.5078 608 0.4053 0.4010
15 13 USC 16 0.160 784 0.5315 703 0.4687 0.3867
16 5 Stanford 10 12 11 11 0.440 452 0.3064 509 0.3393 0.3619
17 14 Oklahoma 5 9 0.140 684 0.4637 581 0.3873 0.3304
18 18 Clemson 1 6 5 0.120 626 0.4244 608 0.4053 0.3166
19 20 Louisville 9 0.090 524 0.3553 404 0.2693 0.2382
20 21 Mississippi State 11 3 4 4 0.220 422 0.2861 306 0.2040 0.2367
21 28 Texas Tech 16 13 3 23 0.550 108 0.0732 39 0.0260 0.2164
22 25 Nebraska 0.000 415 0.2814 240 0.1600 0.1471
23 22 Rutgers 3 4 2 5 0.140 206 0.1397 160 0.1067 0.1288
24 48 Washington 8 12 0.200 65 0.0441 159 0.1060 0.1167
25 31 Northwestern 8 0.080 202 0.1369 143 0.0953 0.1041
26 24 Boise State 7 14 0.210 83 0.0563 53 0.0353 0.1005
27 37 Cincinnati 5 1 2 0.080 175 0.1186 72 0.0480 0.0822
28 30 UCLA 2 7 0.090 58 0.0393 122 0.0813 0.0702
29 29 Louisiana Tech 7 6 0.130 56 0.0380 37 0.0247 0.0642
30 17 Michigan State 2 8 0.100 45 0.0305 43 0.0287 0.0531
31 23 Iowa State 15 0.150 0.0000 3 0.0020 0.0507
32 27 Baylor 8 0.080 41 0.0278 31 0.0207 0.0428
33 32 Michigan 7 0.070 11 0.0075 38 0.0253 0.0343
34 44 Missouri 9 1 0.100 0.0000 0.0000 0.0333
35 36 Purdue 9 0.090 6 0.0041 0.0000 0.0314
36 35 Ohio 6 0.060 11 0.0075 30 0.0200 0.0292
37 39 Texas A&M 0.000 61 0.0414 51 0.0340 0.0251
38 41 Arizona State 0.000 40 0.0271 15 0.0100 0.0124
39 34 Arizona 3 0.030 0.0000 4 0.0027 0.0109
40 38 Miami (FL) 1 0.010 17 0.0115 4 0.0027 0.0081
41 46 Louisiana-Monroe 0.000 8 0.0054 0.0000 0.0018
42 26 Wisconsin 0.000 6 0.0041 0.0000 0.0014
43 47 San Jose State 0.000 4 0.0027 0.0000 0.0009
44 33 Oklahoma State 0.000 3 0.0020 0.0000 0.0007
45 43 Tennessee 0.000 0.0000 3 0.0020 0.0007
46 42 Virginia Tech 0.000 1 0.0007 0.0000 0.0002
47 NR Toledo 0.000 1 0.0007 0.0000 0.0002
48 NR Tulsa 0.000 1 0.0007 0.0000 0.0002

Dropping out: Minnesota, Western Kentucky

Tiny URL for this post:
 

Comments

comments

3 Comments

  1. EJ,

    I understand how this mishmash of numbers could be confusing. Here’s how it all breaks down, from left to right. I won’t skip any columns for the sake of being as clear as possible:

    • Current ranking
    • Last week’s ranking
    • Did they move up, down or stay in place from last week?
    • School name
    • Computer 1: Colley Matrix
    • Computer 2: Jeff Sagarin
    • Computer 3: Richard Billingsley
    • Computer 4: Kenneth Massey
    • Computer score (The numbers in the four computer columns are issued 25 for 1st place in the ranking, 24 for 2nd, 23 for 3rd, etc. on down to one point for 25th. These four — eventually six when the BCS rankings release, but only four issue rankings before October — are totaled up and then divided by 100 to get the percentage score in this column.)
    • Coaches Poll: total number of points in the ballot
    • Coaches Poll percentage: points from previous column divided by 1475 (the total number of points possible to earn by getting 1st-place votes on every pollster’s ballot)
    • AP Poll: total number of points (Harris poll is used in BCS, but since it doesn’t release for two weeks I use the AP for comparison sake)
    • AP Poll percentage: points from previous column divided by 1500 (the total number of points possible to earn by getting 1st-place votes on every pollster’s ballot)
    • BCS percentage: computed by taking computer score, coaches poll percentage and AP poll percentage, adding them together and then dividing by 3 — just like the BCS does with its computer average and two human polls
    • I understand it can be confusing, but that’s the basic breakdown of the chart you see above. Hope it helps shed more light on the BCS system!

2 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. BCS Buster Power Rankings: 2012 Week 5 Rankings « 7poundbag.com
  2. BCS Buster Power Rankings: 2012 Week 5 Rankings | Bigalkistan

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*