Home » Miscellany, News, Statistics

2010 Elite Selection Playoff: Final Rankings

By · January 17th, 2011 · 0 Comments · 2,268 views
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars
2010 Elite Selection Playoff: Final Rankings

Editor’s note: The previous week’s results can be found here: week 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7 and 6.

The dust has settled on the 2011 season, and the Auburn Tigers came out on top. It was quite the turnaround for head coach Gene Chizik. Auburn finished the 2009 season in relatively pedestrian fashion. The Tigers compiled an 8-5 record, including a dubious 3-5 mark in conference play, edged out Northwestern in their bowl game, and finished the year ranked 34th in the AVR.

But behind the arm—and, perhaps more importantly, feet—of Cam Newton, Auburn reeled off 14 consecutive victories and hoisted the national championship hardware for the first time since 1957. Detractors of the BCS system can and will argue that TCU was cheated out of a shot to play for the title, but there is virtually no argument about which team had the more impressive resume.

Auburn played the 14th most difficult AVR strength of schedule (SOS), TCU the 95th. Sagarin notes a similar trend—the Tigers faced the 13th most difficult SOS while the Horned Frogs faced the 76th toughest slate of teams. Moreover, Auburn ranked first in quality wins/losses (QWL), i.e. they beat more AVR top 25 teams than any other squad in the country.

TCU had a great year and was a great team, but what they accomplished during the season pales in comparison to the gauntlet of teams Auburn went through on the road to Glendale. Additionally, the Tigers played and won one more game than the Horned Frogs. Although that doesn’t seem like much, when that game is a conference championship against a quality opponent, it makes running the table far more difficult.

The final season’s rankings (ESP, AVR, and top 10 AWP, SOS, TPR, MOV and QWL) are published in the tables below. There is plenty of information to scour and digest, but here are a few highlights:

  • The top 10 teams in the AVR are Auburn, TCU, Boise State, Oklahoma, Ohio State, Oregon, Stanford, LSU, Oklahoma State, and Wisconsin. As was noted throughout the year, several played weak schedules. The Horned Frogs, Ducks, Cardinal and Badgers all faced a slate of competition that ranked in the bottom half of the FBS and only Auburn, Oklahoma, and LSU played a schedule ranked in the top 15.
  • Comparing the final ESP and BCS rankings yields some interesting observations. One, two teams in the top 25 of the final BCS standings—West Virginia and Hawaii—do not appear in the top 25 of the ESP. Instead, Tulsa and Maryland round out the ESP top 25.
  • And two, the average ranking delta between the ESP and BCS is 2.68 spots with a standard deviation of 1.7. The two ranking systems only agreed exactly on two teams—Auburn and Stanford—with six other squads—Oregon, TCU, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Nebraska, and South Carolina—sitting only one place apart. Florida State (6 spots different), Arkansas (5), Michigan State(5), and Alabama(5) were the largest deltas.
  • While the ESP and BCS mostly agree on the teams in the top 25, if not entirely on their exact placement, the AVR and Sagarin have more disagreement. Six teams—Mississippi State, North Carolina State, Iowa, USC, Arizona State, and Florida—appear in the Sagarin top 25 but not in the top 25 of the AVR. Instead, the AVR puts Michigan State, Nebraska, Utah, Northern Illinois, Tulsa, Hawaii, and Notre Dame in the top 25.
  • As might be expected, there is also larger aggregate disagreement between Sagarin and the AVR. The average ranking delta between the two is 3.88 with a standard deviation of 2.51—both higher than the respective values for the ESP and BCS. The two ranking systems agree on Auburn at number one and LSU at number eight, but fail to match the relative placement of any other teams. The largest disparities include Stanford (7th in AVR, 2nd in Sagarin), Alabama (13th, 5th), Oklahoma (4th, 10th), Mississippi State (not ranked, 11th), Nevada (11th, 16th), North Carolina State (not ranked, 18th), Notre Dame (25th, 19th), and Iowa (not ranked, 21st).
  • The Irish rank 25th in the AVR with the 1st ranked SOS, 22nd ranked QWL metric, 42nd ranked adjusted win percentage (AWP), 42nd ranked margin of victory (MOV), and 32nd best team performance ratio (TPR). The Irish finished the season ranked 64th in offensive TPR and 18th in defensive TPR. Notre Dame ranked 62nd in the latter category in 2009, and the 44-spot jump was the largest of any team from last season to this year.
Elite Selection Playoff (ESP)
RankTeamAP PollCoaches PollAV RankingPoints
1Auburn1111
2TCU2220.96
3Oregon3360.88
4Ohio State5550.84
4Stanford4470.84
6Oklahoma6640.826
7Boise St9730.786
8LSU8880.72
9Wisconsin78100.706
10Oklahoma St131090.613
11Alabama1011130.586
12Nevada1113110.573
13Arkansas1212120.56
14Michigan St1414150.466
15Virginia Tech1615160.413
16Missouri1818140.373
17Florida St1716180.36
18Texas A&M1921170.28
19Nebraska2019190.266
19Mississippi St1517270.266
21South Carolina2222210.173
22Central Florida2120290.146
23UtahNR23200.12
24Maryland2324320.066
24Tulsa24NR230.066
AV Ranking (AVR)
RankTeamPointsStrength of ScheduleQuality Wins/LossesAdjusted Win PercentageMargin of VictoryTeam Performance Ratio
1Auburn11412106
2TCU0.8999526123
3Boise St0.8985820311
4Oklahoma0.8737281212
5Ohio State0.8675585742
6Oregon0.8668111339
7Stanford0.8587859354
8LSU0.8331212102415
9Oklahoma St0.829351691111
10Wisconsin0.80773101087
11Nevada0.80311386726
12Arkansas0.80294171814
13Alabama0.7941991965
14Missouri0.779236191713
15Michigan St0.7796214123824
16Virginia Tech0.761601915168
17Texas A&M0.72955263027
18Florida St0.7072566222118
19Nebraska0.704613221528
20Utah0.6987082162044
21South Carolina0.69467343416
22Northern Illinois0.6761178513917
23Tulsa0.67510659172525
24Hawai`i0.6748513221420
25Notre Dame0.674122424232
Adjusted Win Percentage (AWP)
RankTeamPoints
1TCU1
2Auburn0.997
3Oregon0.931
3Boise St0.931
3Stanford0.931
6Nevada0.926
7Ohio State0.915
8Oklahoma0.847
9Oklahoma St0.846
10Wisconsin0.839
Strength of Schedule (SOS)
RankTeamPoints
1Notre Dame1
2Oregon St0.951
3UNLV0.913
4Minnesota0.848
5Texas A&M0.842
6South Carolina0.824
7Oklahoma0.815
8Cincinnati0.805
9Arkansas0.791
10Washington0.776
Team Performance Ratio (TPR)
RankTeamPoints
1Boise St1
2Ohio State0.944
3TCU0.925
4Stanford0.918
5Alabama0.917
6Auburn0.904
7Wisconsin0.861
8Virginia Tech0.861
9Oregon0.86
10Iowa0.829
Margin of Victory (MOV)
RankTeamPoints
1Boise St1
2TCU0.956
3Oregon0.934
4Ohio State0.872
5Stanford0.847
6Alabama0.834
7Nevada0.816
8Wisconsin0.814
9Northern Illinois0.808
10Auburn0.774
Quality Wins/Losses (QWL)
RankTeamPoints
1Auburn1
2Oklahoma0.663
3Nebraska0.648
4Arkansas0.609
5Texas A&M0.542
6Missouri0.529
7South Carolina0.459
8Nevada0.45
9Alabama0.448
10Wisconsin0.431

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 © 2007-2014 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.