2010 Elite Selection Playoff: Week Twelve

Home » Miscellany, News, Statistics

2010 Elite Selection Playoff: Week Twelve

By Anthony Pilcher · November 21st, 2010 · 2 Comments · 2,741 views

2010 Elite Selection Playoff: Week Twelve

Three of the top four AVR teams were idle this week, and Boise State blanked Fresno State. Auburn and the Broncos remain one and two while TCU and Oregon flip-flopped. Of all the teams in the top 10, the Ducks have the least impressive resume with the 109th ranked strength of schedule.

The Irish moved from 52nd to 37th with their win over the Black Knights. Entering the away game against the Trojans the Irish have played the nations most difficult AVR strength of schedule (SOS). Notre Dame ranks 19th in quality wins/losses (QWL), 55th in adjusted win percentage (AWP), 50th in margin of victory (MOV), and 39th in team performance ratio (TPR). The Irish rank 68th in offensive TPR but the last three games have the defense all the way up to 18th.

USC, Notre Dame’s final regular season opponent, ranks just two spots ahead of the Irish at 35th.

Elite Selection Playoff (ESP)

Rank	Team	AP Poll	Coaches Poll	AV Ranking	Points
1	Auburn	2	2	1	1
1	Oregon	1	1	3	1
3	Boise St	3	3	2	0.958
4	TCU	4	4	4	0.904
5	LSU	5	6	5	0.849
6	Wisconsin	6	5	10	0.78
7	Ohio State	8	7	8	0.753
8	Nebraska	9	9	7	0.726
9	Stanford	7	8	11	0.712
10	Oklahoma St	12	10	6	0.684
11	Michigan St	11	11	9	0.643
12	Alabama	10	12	12	0.602
13	Arkansas	13	13	14	0.52
14	Missouri	15	16	13	0.465
15	Oklahoma	16	14	16	0.438
16	Virginia Tech	14	15	18	0.424
17	Nevada	19	18	15	0.356
18	South Carolina	17	17	20	0.328
19	Iowa	21	20	17	0.273
19	Texas A&M	18	19	21	0.273
21	Miami FL	24	21	23	0.136
22	Mississippi St	22	22	25	0.123
23	Southern Cal	20	NR	24	0.109
24	Utah	25	24	22	0.095
24	Hawai`i	NR	NR	19	0.095

AV Ranking (AVR)

Rank	Team	Points	Strength of Schedule	Quality Wins/Losses	Adjusted Win Percentage	Margin of Victory	Team Performance Ratio
1	Auburn	1	43	1	4	8	6
2	Boise St	0.971	96	10	1	3	1
3	Oregon	0.949	103	9	2	1	4
4	TCU	0.945	86	23	3	2	3
5	LSU	0.879	31	7	9	19	19
6	Oklahoma St	0.875	37	31	5	12	9
7	Nebraska	0.87	87	2	5	11	20
8	Ohio State	0.867	73	40	11	4	2
9	Michigan St	0.861	57	12	11	24	12
10	Wisconsin	0.858	97	3	9	5	8
11	Stanford	0.832	85	67	5	7	14
12	Alabama	0.82	27	8	14	9	7
13	Missouri	0.803	9	15	20	18	10
14	Arkansas	0.791	48	16	14	13	15
15	Nevada	0.781	113	58	5	6	31
16	Oklahoma	0.76	38	48	19	16	27
17	Iowa	0.76	11	5	33	15	5
18	Virginia Tech	0.759	78	32	14	14	11
19	Hawai`i	0.731	29	11	26	27	13
20	South Carolina	0.722	26	6	33	36	16
21	Texas A&M	0.713	20	13	33	20	24
22	Utah	0.693	104	67	13	10	55
23	Miami FL	0.69	50	67	22	32	18
24	Southern Cal	0.688	45	19	22	43	39
25	Mississippi St	0.682	47	24	33	40	22

Adjusted Win Percentage (AWP)

Rank	Team	Points
1	Boise St	1
2	Oregon	0.994
3	TCU	0.981
4	Auburn	0.972
5	Nebraska	0.885
5	Oklahoma St	0.885
5	Nevada	0.885
5	Stanford	0.885
9	Wisconsin	0.875
9	LSU	0.875

Strength of Schedule (SOS)

Rank	Team	Points
1	Washington	1
2	Notre Dame	0.9
3	Minnesota	0.805
4	Florida	0.76
5	Washington St	0.756
6	Cincinnati	0.745
7	Wake Forest	0.727
8	UCLA	0.721
9	Missouri	0.707
10	Vanderbilt	0.707

Team Performance Ratio (TPR)

Rank	Team	Points
1	Boise St	1
2	Ohio State	0.979
3	TCU	0.964
4	Oregon	0.929
5	Iowa	0.915
6	Auburn	0.85
7	Alabama	0.822
8	Wisconsin	0.804
9	Oklahoma St	0.801
10	Missouri	0.8

Margin of Victory (MOV)

Rank	Team	Points
1	Oregon	1
2	TCU	0.998
3	Boise St	0.965
4	Ohio State	0.912
5	Wisconsin	0.796
6	Nevada	0.785
7	Stanford	0.782
8	Auburn	0.78
9	Alabama	0.771
10	Utah	0.76

Quality Wins/Losses (QWL)

Rank	Team	Points
1	Auburn	1
2	Nebraska	0.944
3	Wisconsin	0.777
4	Texas	0.573
5	Iowa	0.562
6	South Carolina	0.534
7	LSU	0.516
8	Alabama	0.491
9	Oregon	0.472
10	Boise St	0.444

Furthermore

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.