Week 9 Poll Challenge
Monday, October 30th 2006
Uncategorized
| Ranking To Date | Rating System | Score |
| 1 | Sagarin (Predictor) | 65* |
| 2 | Sagarin | 67 (128) |
| T-3 | Wolfe | 69 (104) |
| T-3 | Colley Matrix | 69 (107) |
| 5 | Massey | 78 |
| 6 | Anderson | 115 |
| 7 | Harris | 116 |
| 8 | AP | 118 |
| 9 | Coaches’ | 120 |
| 10 | BCS | 122 |
| 11 | Billingsley | 144 |
Sagarin, Wolfe, Massey, and Colley Matrix benefited mightily as none of those ranking systems had Nebraska in the Top 25. This was especially true for Sagarin’s Elo-Chess which had a 61 point differential between Oklahoma State and Nebraska. Seeing as this was supposed to be a measurement using Top 25 upsets, they didn’t suffer from Oklahoma State’s win and now are clearly running away with the competition.
The numbers in parathensis are their point totals if the Oklahoma State upset counted against them. There are however too many non-top 25 upsets to calculate the points, and so if a rating system doesn’t think enough of a team to rank them in the top 25 it will continue to not count against them.
It should be noted that that doesn’t apply to Sagarin’s predictor model, who although I “theorized” what it might’ve scored last week (remember I didn’t have the numbers for it last week) is still clearly the most accurate ratings system so far. Even though it had Nebraska in its top 25, it trounced the competition especially in terms of its estimation of Virginia Tech (who upset Clemson).
The human polls were devestated, more by their overestimation of Nebraska than the USC loss actually. Billingsley shot himself in the foot with an abysmal ranking of Oregon State and especially of Oklahoma State. It’s going to take something special to recover.
Leave a comment
*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture.