Wins over top 25 teams matter
Verdict: TRUE
After seeing TCU drop from third to sixth in the final poll, I took to Facebook in confusion:
In terms of basic football reasoning, my logic is sound. Yes, Georgia Tech is clearly a better opponent than Iowa State (FSU and TCU's final week opponents, respectively), and this can make it difficult to compare what different teams accomplished in a given week. That said, we can use tools like the Vegas line or other projections to compare what the teams did versus what we would expect them to do to an opponent of that caliber. Since TCU destroyed Iowa State, and Florida State collected their seventh one-score victory of the year, it doesn't make sense that Florida State should now be ranked higher. Of course, what I describe above is what should happen, which is not always what the committee actually does.
After thinking about this some more, I think I understand the main reason that Florida State ended up leaping TCU in the final week. That reason is top-25 wins. With the victory over Georgia Tech, the Seminoles now have three wins against teams that ended up in the final rankings, while TCU has just two. Arguing that this makes Florida State a better choice breaks down when you realize a few things:
1. Oklahoma fell out of the top-25 in the final week when they lost to Oklahoma State. Sure, this hurts one of TCU's big wins, but it also helps one of their other wins against Oklahoma State. It's bizarre that conference games (especially in the conference with a true round robin) can affect the committee's opinion of TCU.
2. Oklahoma should still be ranked anyway (13th in Sagarin, 13th in F/+), but the committee just had to get Minnesota in there, I guess.
In the end, this criterion appears to be one of the main things the committee will base its decisions on. Teams that beat a lot of top-25 teams are generally going to be among the best teams, but simply compiling total wins against a subset of teams is overly-simplistic and doesn't account for a lot of the oddities that populate college football.
Conference titles matter
Verdict: HALF-TRUE
The most common reaction from pundits after the selection show was that the four playoff participants benefitted from playing in and winning their respective conference title games, while Baylor and TCU just played 12 games. I think that sentiment is true to a degree, but I also think we should wait more than one year to declare that it's a major advantage for the larger leagues.
There are a couple of reasons for this. First, see the previous section. More than anything else, I think the bump that Florida State and Ohio State saw was more from getting a quality win than winning their conference more definitively than Baylor/TCU. This just happened to be a year where all of the participants in the titles games were good teams.* Most other years, we'll probably see a bad team or two that won't benefit the victor in the committee's eyes. Second, the whole concept of being the one conference without a title game is inherently a bit of a risk/reward. Sure, there will be years where all of the other conferences submit a worthy champion. More often than not though, that will not be the case. Had Georgia Tech made one more play against Florida State, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation right now. That the winner of the Big 12 avoids the extra game will probably end up benefitting the league most of the time. Time will tell.
*Historically, most awful division champions are the result of the best team being on probation. Since there aren't currently any teams on probation, we have a temporary break from that, so that could explain part of it.
The committee is looking for the "best" teams and not the most "deserving" teams
Verdict: HALF-TRUE
Before the season began, there seemed to be some chatter that the committee would be looking for the "best" teams as opposed to the "most deserving." I've talked about the distinction before; basically, deserverism (as I call it) can be seen as a short-hand for using simple heuristics (head-to-head trumping all, for instance) to evaluate teams instead of doing the hard work to actually figure out who is better. While there were some indications that the committee thought this way (Florida State falling below some one-loss teams), the previous sections indicate that the committee still heavily weights some deserver arguments. Baylor finishing ahead of a superior TCU team because of the head-to-head win only further displays the committee's tendencies towards these heuristics. This deserverism streak shouldn't come as too much of a surprise, as this passage shows up in the committee's charter:
"Under the current construct, polls (although well-intended) have not expressed these values; particularly at the margins where teams that have won head-to-head competition and championships are sometimes ranked behind non-champions and teams that have lost in head-to-head competition. Nuanced mathematical formulas ignore some teams who “deserve” to be selected."
Hey look, the committee uses quotes around deserve just like I do....maybe we're not that different, you and I. In all seriousness, the line between "best" and "deserving" isn't as black and white as I often make it out to be; like most things, it exists on a spectrum. While I lean towards 80/20* best/deserve, the committee appears to be something like 50/50. I hope they come around to my line of thinking at some point, but at least there are signs of an appreciation for picking the "best" teams.
*I say this because a college football season is inherently a small sample. No metric we create is going to perfectly describe who exactly the best teams are, and the margin of error will typically be larger than the margins between similar teams. If all else seems reasonably equal, then I have no problem using things like to head-to-head to break ties.
Number of losses trumps most everything else
Verdict: VERY TRUE
This was a concern for me since the first poll came out, when we saw mediocre one-loss teams ranked above superior two-loss teams. Ever since then, the poll has been ordered by number of losses, with only a few exceptions. While ordering teams by number of losses often provides a decent ranking, the variances in schedule strength and actual performance make it far from perfect. The most egregious example in the final poll comes at #8 and 9, with a solid but unspectacular 10-2 Michigan State team ranked above a 9-3 Ole Miss team that is in the top five in many quantitative models. Ole Miss has clearly had a tougher road (#6 SOS according to Sagarin, compared with Michigan State's 60th), and also has a painstakingly close loss to Auburn that should be counted as a tie for evaluative purposes. In short, it's difficult to make an argument that Michigan State is better than Ole Miss. While the committee indicated that it would highly value good strength of schedules, it appears that that only matters between teams with the same record. I worry that this may lead to teams weakening their non-conference schedules even further so as to increase their odds of being 12-0 or 11-1. We shall see.
In summation, the selection committee appears to be a little better than the polls, which still have FSU above Oregon. I will happily take whatever improvements I can. The committee also appears to be a touch better than its basketball equivalent, as there at least is no dreadful RPI to worry about. There are legitimate concerns about the metrics the committee is using, the lack of diversity on the committee (in terms of age and experience - almost everyone is a football coaching and/or administrating lifer), and unconscious biases towards the blue bloods of the sport. That said, we at least have a framework that allows for a more reasonable number of teams to compete for a title, and a methodology for arriving there that most people are at least somewhat happy with. All in all, I think the first year of the playoff went pretty well, and I'm excited for the future.
Now onto the bowls. As I've done for the past three years, I'll go through all of the bowls and make my picks, attaching a confidence from 1 to 38 (yeah there's 38 bowls now) to each game. Rather than forcing comments on each bowl, I'll just write about the ones that are the most interesting. Instead of ordering the bowls by chronology or confidence or something else, I have used Bill Connelly's watchability rankings, which are a novel way to sort out the ever-expanding bowl landscape. I have also included some basic info about each team at no extra charge. Next to the team name are three different rankings: The first is the Sagarin pure points rating (I use this since it seems to be the most predictive), the second is the Football Outsiders' F/+ ranking, and the third is the rank from the Massey Composite. I'm not as high on the composite ratings as the others, namely because it includes a lot of odd-looking ratings that have Florida State #1. Still, it's a good gut check for the other two ratings: Because it includes so many different inputs, it's unlikely that a team is significantly better or worse than their ranking. Finally, I have included the Vegas spread (as of December 13), the F/+ spread, and the implied Sagarin spread from the pure points ratings.
#38: Utah State (57,59,47) vs. UTEP (87,94,82)
Sagarin: Utah State by 8
F/+: Utah State by 18
Vegas: Utah State by 10.5
Mike's Pick: Utah State (30 confidence points)
The defending WAC champions have had a nice season in spite of terrible injury luck (they're currently down three quarterbacks and four linebackers). In theory, this should make it a closer game than the numbers suggest, but save for a blowout loss to a very good Boise team, the Aggies have persevered.
#37: Houston (69,79,75) vs. Pitt (45,39,59)
Sagarin: Pitt by 7.5
F/+: Pitt by 23
Vegas: Pitt by 3
Mike's Pick: Pitt (12 points)
Well, at least Pitt's used to playing with an interim coach. Soon, you too can be the Panthers' coach.
#36: Nevada (68,64,63) vs. Louisiana-Lafayette (88,86,74)
Sagarin: Nevada by 4.5
F/+: Nevada by 11
Vegas: ULL by 1
Mike's Pick: ULL (11 points)
The Ragin Cajun seniors literally don't know life without a season-ending trip to the New Orleans bowl, so I imagine that that is playing into the Vegas line. I would call this the actual least exciting bowl matchup, but there have a few exciting versions of this game recently, so you never know.
#35: Illinois (75,78,70) vs. Louisiana Tech (38,48,45)
Sagarin: Louisiana Tech by 11.5
F/+: Louisiana Tech by 15
Vegas: Louisiana Tech by 6
Mike's Pick: Louisiana Tech (23 points)
#34: Miami (35,24,43) vs. South Carolina (36,56,48)
Sagarin: Pick
F/+: Miami by 17
Vegas: Miami by 3
Mike's Pick: Miami (31 points)
This game's excitement ranking is probably a touch low, but South Carolina's defense is so awful that I'm not sure it actually is underrated. Assuming the Hurricane's late season malaise doesn't carry over, they should be able to roll.
#33: Washington (37,51,35) vs. Oklahoma State (58,68,55)
Sagarin: Washington by 6.5
F/+: Washington by 11
Vegas: Washington by 5.5
Mike's Pick: Washington (32 points)
Even if both of the offenses are awful, this game should be worth watching, mostly because of Shaq Thompson and Hau'oli Kikaha. Their relentless pass rush was the only thing that kept Chris Peterson's first Huskie squad from being awful (compare the front seven havoc rank (16th) to the DB havoc rank (117th)).
#32: Navy (67,50,64) vs. San Diego State (76,66,73)
Sagarin: Navy by 2
F/+: Navy by 10
Vegas: San Diego State by 2.5
Mike's Pick: Navy (22 points)
#31: Texas A&M (22,53,31) vs. West Virginia (23,34,30)
Sagarin: Pick
F/+: West Virginia by 13
Vegas: West Virginia by 3.5
Mike's Pick: West Virginia (25 points)
Because of the insane relative strength of the SEC West, computer models had a bit of trouble processing this season's results. This led to some models that said it was the best division ever, while others were a little more modest. Texas A&M is the poster child for this, as they are 30 spots higher in Sagarin than in F/+. While there were signs of life from the young Aggies, I think West Virginia is slightly more complete and has the better chance of victory.
#30: South Alabama (100,93,92) vs. Bowling Green (106,104,94)
Sagarin: South Alabama by 2
F/+: South Alabama by 6
Vegas: South Alabama by 2.5
Mike's Pick: Bowling Green (10 points)
These teams are both awful, so let's go with the team that should have been better this year, in the hopes that they figure it out. The Jaguars do have the excitement of playing in their first bowl on their side, but I'm not sure that means anything towards picking the game.
#29: Central Michigan (91,77,85) vs. Western Kentucky (73,65,67)
Sagarin: WKU by 5
F/+: WKU by 5
Vegas: WKU by 3
Mike's Pick: Western Kentucky (24 points)
#28: Maryland (51,45,51) vs. Stanford (19,23,28)
Sagarin: Stanford by 11
F/+: Stanford by 13
Vegas: Stanford by 14
Mike's Pick: Stanford (37 points)
#27: Fresno State (90,101,84) vs. Rice (82,95,77)
Sagarin: Rice by 2.5
F/+: Rice by 3
Vegas: Rice by 1
Mike's Pick: Rice (17 points)
#26: Rutgers (80,73,57) vs. UNC (62,74,60)
Sagarin: UNC by 4.5
F/+: Pick
Vegas: UNC by 3
Mike's Pick: Rutgers (4 points)
#25: Toledo (77,63,68) vs. Arkansas State (65,75,79)
Sagarin: Arkansas State by 2.5
F/+: Toledo by 7
Vegas: Toledo by 3
Mike's Pick: Toledo (18 points)
#24: Arkansas (11,20,27) vs. Texas (40,57,42)
Sagarin: Arkansas by 15
F/+: Arkansas by 21
Vegas: Arkansas by 6
Mike's Pick: Arkansas (36 points)
#23: Marshall (30,15,26) vs. NIU (66,72,49)
Sagarin: Marshall by 11.5
F/+: Marshall by 34 (what)
Vegas: Marshall by 10
Mike's Pick: Marshall (38 points)
#22: Boston College (41,29,41) vs. Penn State (53,54,62)
Sagarin: Boston College by 4
F/+: Boston College by 13
Vegas: Boston College by 2.5
Mike's Pick: Boston College (35 points)
This is probably too much confidence to give against a team that's got to be incredibly excited to be in a bowl. That said, BC has been sneaky good all season, and I have to show confidence in someone.
#21: Iowa (44,55,50) vs. Tennessee (24,43,39)
Sagarin: Tennessee by 8
F/+: Tennessee by 6
Vegas: Tennessee by 3.5
Mike's Pick: Tennessee (19 points)
Very tempted to pick the upset here, but in theory, Tennessee has far too much talent to lose this game. Here's a good summary of where Iowa football is right now.
#20: East Carolina (61,58,56) vs. Florida (18,41,34)
Sagarin: Florida by 14.5
F/+: Florida by 10
Vegas: Florida by 7
Mike's Pick: Florida (33 points)
#19: Notre Dame (32,36,36) vs. LSU (12,18,18)
Sagarin: LSU by 11.5
F/+: LSU by 12
Vegas: LSU by 7.5
Mike's Pick: LSU (28 points)
The impulse here is to ready for a beatdown, but with LSU plod-tastic offense, and a few Irish defenders returning from injury, there is a chance of respectability here. That said, that probably won't happen, and I will quite luckily be in a car for the duration of the game.
#18: Cincinnati (49,46,40) vs. Virginia Tech (47,32,54)
Sagarin: Virginia Tech by 1
F/+: Virginia Tech by 10
Vegas: Cincinnati by 3
Mike's Pick: Cincinnati (3 points)
This is a bit of a toss-up, so we'll go with the team that got better over the course of the year. Which means Tech will probably win by three scores.
#17: NC State (55,49,52) vs. UCF (56,52,46)
Sagarin: NC State by 1
F/+: NC State by 2
Vegas: UCF by 2
Mike's Pick: UCF (6 points)
#16: Utah (33,38,29) vs. Colorado State (52,30,33)
Sagarin: Utah by 6
F/+: Colorado State by 4
Vegas: Utah by 4.5
Mike's Pick: Colorado State (15 points)
This is one of my favorite matchups of bowl season, with Utah's insane defensive line going up against the dynamic Ram offense. Utah's offense minus Dres Anderson was so painful to watch that I just can't pick them against a team that can score. Be sure to enjoy Garrett Grayson before he gets drafted preposterously high next May (looking at you, Bears).
#15: Georgia (6,7,10) vs. Louisville (25,16,24)
Sagarin: Georgia by 12.5
F/+: Georgia by 10
Vegas: Georgia by 7
Mike's Pick: Louisville (2 points)
I have to go against the grain somewhere. Hutson Mason against a terrifying defense (9th in havoc) makes this a decent bet for an upset.
#14: Oregon (5,3,2) vs. Florida State (17,8,6)
Sagarin: Oregon by 10.5
F/+: Oregon by 11
Vegas: Oregon by 9
Mike's Pick: Oregon (29 points)
The injury to Ifo Ekpre-Olomu* hurts, as FSU's Rashard Greene-heavy offense matches up poorly against teams with elite corners, but the Ducks are still a lot better than the Noles. If nothing else, this will be a beautifully uniformed game.
*We're at the point of the season where I didn't even have to look up the spelling.
#13: WMU (71,47,72) vs. Air Force (84,44,53)
Sagarin: WMU by 3
F/+: Air Force by 1
Vegas: WMU by 1
Mike's Pick: Air Force (5 points)
You might be asking why this bowl is ranked one spot above one of the national semi-finals. I would too, but it's actually a pretty good game when you examine more closely. Both teams made huge strides over poor 2013s, so there's a certain amount of excitement on each side. It also should be a pretty even matchup, with none of the above spreads wider than 3 points. Finally, PJ Fleck will be there. In the end, I'll take the Falcons to wear down the Broncos, much like NIU did to end the regular season.
#12: Kansas State (14,21,12) vs. UCLA (20,19,14)
Sagarin: Kansas State by 5.5
F/+: UCLA by 2
Vegas: Kansas State by 1.5
Mike's Pick: Kansas State (14 points)
#11: Arizona State (29,26,19) vs. Duke (42,28,38)
Sagarin: Arizona State by 5.5
F/+: Arizona State by 3
Vegas: Arizona State by 8
Mike's Pick: Arizona State (21 points)
#10: Missouri (26,31,17) vs. Minnesota (34,35,32)
Sagarin: Missouri by 4.5
F/+: Missouri by 1
Vegas: Missouri by 5.5
Mike's Pick: Minnesota (9 points)
Sure, Missouri is a decent team, but their biggest strength is rushing the passer. Since Minnesota doesn't like to pass if they don't have to, I think they'll be able to neutralize that. This should be one of the more enjoyable minor bowls, provided that the offenses don't completely embarrass themselves.
#9: Auburn (8,12,11) vs. Wisconsin (27,17,16)
Sagarin: Auburn by 12
F/+: Auburn by 5
Vegas: Auburn by 6.5
Mike's Pick: Auburn (34 points)
I know shouldn't overweight the Badger's performance against Ohio State. That said, it's really hard not to swap out uniforms and see Auburn doing the same exact thing.
#8: Boise State (39,25,20) vs. Arizona (31,33,15)
Sagarin: Arizona by 2
F/+: Boise State by 5
Vegas: Arizona by 3
Mike's Pick: Arizona (1 point)
This might be my biggest toss-up of bowl season, largely because I have no idea just how good Arizona is. There's a lot to like in Tucson, and Anu Solomon clearly improved over the course of the season, but there's too much variability in the Wildcats' results to have any idea what's going to happen here.
#7: Nebraska (28,27,25) vs. USC (16,22,22)
Sagarin: USC by 3.5
F/+: USC by 3
Vegas: USC by 6.5
Mike's Pick: USC (20 points)
Word of warning: USC was also a 6 1/2 point favorite over my other team, and that didn't turn out well. Not that that means anything, BUT IT TOTALLY DOES.
#6: BYU (50,42,44) vs. Memphis (43,40,37)
Sagarin: Memphis by 2.5
F/+: Memphis by 2
Vegas: Memphis by 1
Mike's Pick: Memphis (7 points)
The tightness of the matchup, the quality of the teams, and the novelty of seeing a vastly-improved Memphis in a bowl make this a surprisingly good game. That said, there's a little bit of the now-injured Taysom Hill baked into BYU's metrics, so I don't think it will be quite as close as the numbers indicate.
#5: Michigan State (10,11,9) vs. Baylor (9,9,5)
Sagarin: Baylor by 1
F/+: Baylor by 5
Vegas: Baylor by 3
Mike's Pick: Baylor (16 points)
Art Briles in FU mode should be fun.
#4: Oklahoma (13,13,23) vs. Clemson (21,14,21)
Sagarin: Oklahoma by 6
F/+: Oklahoma by 2
Vegas: No Line
Mike's Pick: Oklahoma (27 points)
My predictions for the season may not have been particularly great*, but I absolutely nailed Oklahoma being overrated as the pre-season #3 team. Interestingly, the committee seems to have over-corrected, as the Sooners are not even ranked in the season-ending poll. It's looking more and more like Trevor Knight is going to play (and Deshaun Watson won't), so I'm liking Oklahoma to win.
*I did get three of the playoff participants correct, but so did everyone else.
#3: Mississippi State (7,6,8) vs. Georgia Tech (15,10,13)
Sagarin: Mississippi State by 8.5
F/+: Mississippi State by 3
Vegas: Mississippi State by 7
Mike's Pick: Mississippi State (26 points)
Paul Johnson has finally crafted one of the best offenses in the nation (#1 in offensive F/+), but his defense is so bad, that I'm going to pick the team with more balance to pull off the win. If you're betting on who is the mostly likely to pile up 200 yards in a bowl game, you couldn't go wrong with Josh Robinson against the 96th ranked rushing defense by S&P+.
#2: Alabama (1,1,1) vs. Ohio State (4,2,4)
Sagarin: Alabama by 4.5
F/+: Alabama by 3
Vegas: Alabama by 9.5
Mike's Pick: Alabama (13 points)
The spread on this game feels a touch high, and the main reason for that discrepancy seems to be people giving Nick Saban credit for being extra awesome with the extra time to prepare. While he has had some impressive showings in bowls, it's important to remember two things. One, he's had some bad showings, too (see last year). Two, Urban Meyer has been pretty good himself. I'm still siding with the Tide in this one, but the Buckeyes are good enough across the board to potentially pull the upset.
#1: Ole Miss (3,4,7) vs. TCU (2,5,3)
Sagarin: TCU by 1.5
F/+: Ole Miss by 1
Vegas: TCU by 3.5
Mike's Pick: TCU (8 points)
When the bowl announcements came out, this was the bowl I was most excited for. That it ends up as the #1 bowl on this list confirms that the methodology behind this ordering is at least pretty good. The month off will likely help the banged-up Rebels, but I still like the dynamism of TCU's offense to be able to secure the win.
No comments:
Post a Comment