Home » Miscellany, News, Statistics

2009 Elite Selection Playoff: Week Nine

By · November 2nd, 2009 · 0 Comments · 1,302 views
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars
2009 Elite Selection Playoff: Week Nine

There was a bit of shuffling at the top of the rankings this week. Florida remains atop the ESP but Texas jumped an idle Alabama squad with their win over Oklahoma State. There were some other teams in top 10 that shuffled around as well. Check out the latest BCS rankings for comparison purposes.

As most teams have played eight games, the AV Ranking nearly has enough data to begin being a good predictor of wins and losses. As was the case last week, Iowa holds the top spot in Clashmore Mike’s computer ranking. Florida holds on to the second spot but is quite a bit below the Hawkeyes in points. The Irish barely missed the top 25 coming at number 26.

Washington holds on to the number one strength of schedule ranking. The Huskies are followed by a host of rather poorly performing teams with one major exception (Virginia Tech). The Irish strength of schedule took a tumble from 25th down to 65th with their game against Washington State and losses by several former opponents, most notably USC and Michigan.

Nota bene, the AV Ranking strength of schedule calculation only includes games played, i.e. it does not give credit—or debit—for future opponents. The impending contest with Pittsburgh should bolster the schedule difficulty while future games against Navy, Connecticut and Stanford may act to lower the schedule difficulty.

Elite Selection Playoff (ESP)
RankTeamAP PollCoach's PollAV RankingPoints
1Florida1121
2Texas2230.959
3Alabama3370.878
4Iowa8610.851
4Cincinnati4740.851
6Boise St5560.837
7TCU6480.81
8Oregon7850.783
9Georgia Tech1011100.635
9LSU99130.635
11Penn State1110110.621
12Pittsburgh141490.554
13Southern Cal1213160.5
14Houston1315140.486
14Ohio State1512150.486
16Miami FL1617120.445
17Utah1716180.364
18Oklahoma St1818240.243
18Oklahoma2020200.243
20Virginia Tech2224170.202
21Wisconsin2422190.175
22Arizona2119270.162
22Notre Dame1921260.162
24Brigham Young2525220.081
24California2323280.081
AV Ranking
RankTeamPointsStrength of ScheduleQuality Wins/LossesAdjusted Win PercentageMargin of VictoryTeam Performance Ratio
1Iowa0.93740142817
2Florida0.905447533
3Texas0.8963414511
4Cincinnati0.88150161118
5Oregon0.866212141011
6Boise St0.85711132210
7Alabama0.8486216785
8TCU0.8319327246
9Pittsburgh0.773701610137
10Georgia Tech0.764791682214
11Penn State0.757652954
12Miami FL0.742323194824
13LSU0.7255752101723
14Houston0.7258821101842
15Ohio State0.712531117621
16Southern Cal0.7122513193031
17Virginia Tech0.706212472512
18Utah0.79734103240
19Wisconsin0.6652652263916
20Oklahoma0.65422224772
21Clemson0.651188471625
22Brigham Young0.6477832173346
23Rutgers0.647536294515
24Oklahoma St0.645252242338
25South Florida0.6359252191918
Adjusted Win Percentage (AWP)
RankTeamPoints
1Cincinnati0.873
2Boise St0.858
2TCU0.858
4Iowa0.854
5Florida0.849
5Texas0.849
7Alabama0.84
8Georgia Tech0.773
9Penn State0.765
10Pittsburgh0.758
Strength of Schedule (SOS)
[table "133" seems to be empty /]
Team Performance Ratio (TPR)
RankTeamPoints
1Texas0.891
2Oklahoma0.878
3Florida0.862
4Penn State0.819
5Alabama0.814
6TCU0.809
7Pittsburgh0.805
8Cincinnati0.804
9Air Force0.773
10Boise St0.761
Margin of Victory (MOV)
RankTeamPoints
1Texas0.902
2Boise St0.89
3Florida0.853
4TCU0.839
5Penn State0.837
6Ohio State0.802
7Oklahoma0.782
8Alabama0.78
9Texas Tech0.756
10Oregon0.75
Quality Wins/Losses (QWL)
RankTeamPoints
1Iowa1
2Oregon0.851
3Miami FL0.666
3Boise St0.666
5North Carolina St0.592
6Washington0.522
7Florida0.518
8Clemson0.49
9UTEP0.481
10Purdue0.47

Furthermore

Similar Posts

If you enjoyed this article, odds are you'll love the following as well.

Subscribe

Enter your e-mail address to receive new articles and/or comments directly to your inbox. Free!

  •  
  •  

This article is © 2007-2017 by De Veritate, LLC and was originally published at Clashmore Mike. This article may not be copied, distributed, or transmitted without attribution. Additionally, you may not use this article for commercial purposes or to generate derivative works without explicit written permission. Please contact us if you wish to license this content for your own use.