[stupac2]

That is a *lot* of faith in the P12S.  Surely the Big10 is better (at least one division), and at least one half of the ACC needs to be represented ahead of the P12S.

Notre Shame played Stanford very close last year, and they presumably didn't fall off a cliff.  Their losses to Texas and MSU show that they've slipped a bit, but they're still a P5-caliber team, albeit a losing one.  MSU's win over USB, plus MSU's performance last season, tells me that Sparty is doing okay.

People forget that how good the worst teams in a division are matters as much as how good the best teams are. The B1G and ACC are both extremely top heavy, with teams that are barely better than FCS teams filling out the bottoms of each division. Right now the P12S's worst teams don't look like trivial games. Same with the north, except maybe WSU somehow.

[stupac2]

That is a *lot* of faith in the P12S.  Surely the Big10 is better (at least one division), and at least one half of the ACC needs to be represented ahead of the P12S.

Notre Shame played Stanford very close last year, and they presumably didn't fall off a cliff.  Their losses to Texas and MSU show that they've slipped a bit, but they're still a P5-caliber team, albeit a losing one.  MSU's win over USB, plus MSU's performance last season, tells me that Sparty is doing okay.

People forget that how good the worst teams in a division are matters as much as how good the best teams are. The B1G and ACC are both extremely top heavy, with teams that are barely better than FCS teams filling out the bottoms of each division. Right now the P12S's worst teams don't look like trivial games. Same with the north, except maybe WSU somehow.

[BostonCard]

I like Sagarin's win50 metric, which is, "the rating required to win 50% of the games if playing an infinite number of round-robins in the given group at a neutral location."  Especially since all conferences play a round robin within their division.  For the P12N, it is 79.21, which corresponds to roughly the rating that #33 ranked Texas has.  With the caveat that Sagarin doesn't have enough data points to "connect" the teams (and thus still relies a bit on pre-season priors), the P12N teams are:
#3 Stanford 92.37 (predictor)
#8 Washington 87.16
#36 Oregon 76.99
#41 WSU 77.30
#53 Cal 74.23
#77 Oregon State 67.14

Stanford, Washington, and Oregon seem about right.  Cal and WSU are probably swapped.  Oregon State is probably about right.

BC

[BostonCard]

I like Sagarin's win50 metric, which is, "the rating required to win 50% of the games if playing an infinite number of round-robins in the given group at a neutral location."  Especially since all conferences play a round robin within their division.  For the P12N, it is 79.21, which corresponds to roughly the rating that #33 ranked Texas has.  With the caveat that Sagarin doesn't have enough data points to "connect" the teams (and thus still relies a bit on pre-season priors), the P12N teams are:
#3 Stanford 92.37 (predictor)
#8 Washington 87.16
#36 Oregon 76.99
#41 WSU 77.30
#53 Cal 74.23
#77 Oregon State 67.14

Stanford, Washington, and Oregon seem about right.  Cal and WSU are probably swapped.  Oregon State is probably about right.

BC

[Mick]

I like Sagarin's win50 metric, which is, "the rating required to win 50% of the games if playing an infinite number of round-robins in the given group at a neutral location."  Especially since all conferences play a round robin within their division.  For the P12N, it is 79.21, which corresponds to roughly the rating that #33 ranked Texas has.  With the caveat that Sagarin doesn't have enough data points to "connect" the teams (and thus still relies a bit on pre-season priors), the P12N teams are:
#3 Stanford 92.37 (predictor)
#8 Washington 87.16
#36 Oregon 76.99
#41 WSU 77.30
#53 ןɐɔ 74.23
#77 Oregon State 67.14

Stanford, Washington, and Oregon seem about right.  ןɐɔ and WSU are probably swapped.  Oregon State is probably about right.

BC

And just for fun, predictors for the South:

#14 UCLA, 84.68
#25 Southern Cal, 81.86
#37 Utah, 77.98
#43 Colorado, 77.44
#47 Arizona State, 75.81
#70 Arizona, 68.53

[Mick]

I like Sagarin's win50 metric, which is, "the rating required to win 50% of the games if playing an infinite number of round-robins in the given group at a neutral location."  Especially since all conferences play a round robin within their division.  For the P12N, it is 79.21, which corresponds to roughly the rating that #33 ranked Texas has.  With the caveat that Sagarin doesn't have enough data points to "connect" the teams (and thus still relies a bit on pre-season priors), the P12N teams are:
#3 Stanford 92.37 (predictor)
#8 Washington 87.16
#36 Oregon 76.99
#41 WSU 77.30
#53 ןɐɔ 74.23
#77 Oregon State 67.14

Stanford, Washington, and Oregon seem about right.  ןɐɔ and WSU are probably swapped.  Oregon State is probably about right.

BC

And just for fun, predictors for the South:

#14 UCLA, 84.68
#25 Southern Cal, 81.86
#37 Utah, 77.98
#43 Colorado, 77.44
#47 Arizona State, 75.81
#70 Arizona, 68.53

[fullmetal]

[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=15695.msg171848#msg171848 date=1474276790]
That is a *lot* of faith in the P12S.  Surely the Big10 is better (at least one division), and at least one half of the ACC needs to be represented ahead of the P12S.

Notre Shame played Stanford very close last year, and they presumably didn't fall off a cliff.  Their losses to Texas and MSU show that they've slipped a bit, but they're still a P5-caliber team, albeit a losing one.  MSU's win over USB, plus MSU's performance last season, tells me that Sparty is doing okay.

People forget that how good the worst teams in a division are matters as much as how good the best teams are. The B1G and ACC are both extremely top heavy, with teams that are barely better than FCS teams filling out the bottoms of each division. Right now the P12S's worst teams don't look like trivial games. Same with the north, except maybe WSU somehow.
[/quote]

I'm just not sure what to make of the P12S.  Colorado had a good quarter and a half against Michigan but couldn't finish the job.  Does that make them better than Arizona State, which won a shootout with TxTech?  Arizona's only loss was a close one (2pts) against BYU.  And I've just talked myself into seeing your point.  I guess the P12S isn't that bad.

[fullmetal]

[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=15695.msg171848#msg171848 date=1474276790]
That is a *lot* of faith in the P12S.  Surely the Big10 is better (at least one division), and at least one half of the ACC needs to be represented ahead of the P12S.

Notre Shame played Stanford very close last year, and they presumably didn't fall off a cliff.  Their losses to Texas and MSU show that they've slipped a bit, but they're still a P5-caliber team, albeit a losing one.  MSU's win over USB, plus MSU's performance last season, tells me that Sparty is doing okay.

People forget that how good the worst teams in a division are matters as much as how good the best teams are. The B1G and ACC are both extremely top heavy, with teams that are barely better than FCS teams filling out the bottoms of each division. Right now the P12S's worst teams don't look like trivial games. Same with the north, except maybe WSU somehow.
[/quote]

I'm just not sure what to make of the P12S.  Colorado had a good quarter and a half against Michigan but couldn't finish the job.  Does that make them better than Arizona State, which won a shootout with TxTech?  Arizona's only loss was a close one (2pts) against BYU.  And I've just talked myself into seeing your point.  I guess the P12S isn't that bad.

[Hulk01]

Bell-shaped curves come in here.  Alabama is way out on the edge.  Ohio State may have the talent to play with them, but I'd still take Alabama four games in five.

Louisville's QB is stunning.  Before this year, I thought Mac was the greatest play maker I'd ever seen in college football.  He's now number two.  Stunning.  Alabama would overwhelm their front seven.

Clemson can play on both sides--I think.  Watson makes such a difference and he has those now-typical Clemson receivers.

Ohio State has too much talent to leave off the top four.  And Barrett is very very good, too. 

Michigan State looked powerful and, of course, so well-coached.  They certainly could beat Michigan.

We're very good and will get better; our defense and offensive line is still very young.  So many weapons on offense and our wicked secondary.  Watch out for Justin Reid; he's just getting warmed up.  USC seemed to avoid Meeks entirely.  Hoff and Lloyd are captaining that hole group well; a treat, like nothing here ever.

[Hulk01]

Bell-shaped curves come in here.  Alabama is way out on the edge.  Ohio State may have the talent to play with them, but I'd still take Alabama four games in five.

Louisville's QB is stunning.  Before this year, I thought Mac was the greatest play maker I'd ever seen in college football.  He's now number two.  Stunning.  Alabama would overwhelm their front seven.

Clemson can play on both sides--I think.  Watson makes such a difference and he has those now-typical Clemson receivers.

Ohio State has too much talent to leave off the top four.  And Barrett is very very good, too. 

Michigan State looked powerful and, of course, so well-coached.  They certainly could beat Michigan.

We're very good and will get better; our defense and offensive line is still very young.  So many weapons on offense and our wicked secondary.  Watch out for Justin Reid; he's just getting warmed up.  USC seemed to avoid Meeks entirely.  Hoff and Lloyd are captaining that hole group well; a treat, like nothing here ever.