|
What is a Moon Poll, exactly? A moon poll is a goon-created computer ranking of college football teams. In past years, my understanding is that they usually limited their focus to teams in FBS, but there's enough data for at least some systems to be able to rate pretty much every college with a varsity football team (except that one New England conference in DIII that doesn't play OOC games). I'll warn you that if you do this you're likely to see undefeated teams from lower divisions sneaking into the overall top 40, though. Being computer rankings, they're usually all over the map in a hilarious fashion for much of the season but will settle on something close to a consensus near the end. Incidentally, I have no idea who coined "moon poll" but I love the phrasing. Last year's thread is here and I don't think it's sunk into the archives yet. How do I make a Moon Poll? You're almost certainly going to need an algorithm of some sort. You can program it yourself, or work out something in Excel (a number of people in last year's thread seemed to be doing this, myself included). As for your criteria, you can really pick anything you like. More conventional systems tend to rely on who beat who and by how many points, but as an example wa27's rather unique poll uses VegasInsider data. David Wilson has a pretty substantial listing of a bunch of existing systems; most of them keep their formulas secret but some of them clearly explain the math behind what they're doing, if you want something to work from and can follow it. Once you get something going, post your rankings in this thread each week! Where do I get data? The NCAA has a page you can get .csv files from. Look for "Schedules and Results". This page, maintained by Peter Wolfe (whose rankings the BCS uses), will be updated throughout the season with a list of game results. Wolfe includes every division which is nice provided you want to rate every division. I know there are other places to get this stuff from but it's been a while since I've looked into this kind of thing so I can't remember what they are. Again, please let me know if you've got any sources to add -- the two links I have now only have win-loss and points data, which isn't very helpful if you want to base your rankings on yardage or turnover margin or cumulative number of fans played in front of per official attendance numbers or something. Anything else? I'll be doing weekly compilations of rankings throughout the season, like I did last year. These come complete with deviation measures, BCS comparisons, a Bottom Ten just for fun, and of course big tables with tiny football helmets in them. It's worth noting, however, that for mathematical reasons a lot of systems rely on all of the teams you want to rank being "connected" to one another and consequently don't even produce results for the first couple of weeks. Basil Hayden fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Aug 20, 2013 |
# ? Aug 20, 2013 20:19 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 03:46 |
|
I've got my poll from last year ready for new data! I meant to tweak the formula in the offseason but I didn't and probably won't.
|
# ? Aug 20, 2013 21:19 |
|
Thanks Basil! I'm looking forward to the new year.JesustheDarkLord posted:I've got my poll from last year ready for new data! I meant to tweak the formula in the offseason but I didn't and probably won't. I tried to tweak my formula from last year over the summer but everything I changed made the results worse I'm still working on it but I'll probably end up using the same formulas again.
|
# ? Aug 20, 2013 21:28 |
|
I am super hype to deploy The Son Of The Mukai Moon Poll (as seen here!). It is going to be The Hindenberg Mark II, but I am excited to be in the center of the firestorm even so.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2013 03:13 |
|
I did one a few years back and just stumbled on this thread again. Perhaps I will check my old tables and see if I can't reincarnate the old system.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2013 05:15 |
|
I don't think I even watched a snap last year, yet I still goose stepped around the thread like a psychopath, declaring myself the one true voice of reason. Always a good time. How little attention did I pay last year? I didn't know Notre Dame played in the title game until today. This year I plan to actually watch CFB, however I'll tone down the ego, just for you's guys.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2013 22:28 |
|
MC Fruit Stripe posted:I don't think I even watched a snap last year, yet I still goose stepped around the thread like a psychopath, declaring myself the one true voice of reason. Always a good time. How little attention did I pay last year? I didn't know Notre Dame played in the title game until today. MCFS no longer sports his Fruit Stripe Gum logo av, all creditability lost.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2013 22:39 |
|
Well that's just unfair. I didn't have any credibility in the first place.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2013 23:28 |
|
My poll produces spurious results before all teams are connected via actual games, but as a quirk on top of that it does produce a technically meaningful Week 1 result: 1-T. Every Division 1 team that won against a Division 1 opponent in week 1. 2-T. Every Division 1 team that lost against a Division 1 opponent in week 1.
|
# ? Sep 2, 2013 22:17 |
|
JesustheDarkLord posted:I've got my poll from last year ready for new data! I meant to tweak the formula in the offseason but I didn't and probably won't. This is me exactly. I meant to spend some time in the Summer improving my spreadsheet, but actually doing outdoor things took precedence. I'll probably do one poll with last year's formula and work on a brand new spreadsheet and tweak as the year goes by. I won't post anything until at least week 4 though.
|
# ? Sep 3, 2013 19:46 |
|
I tried using Sagarin as a quick SOS adjuster and got something resembling an order of teams by how badly they blew out a FBS opponent - 1. Washington 2. Oklahoma State 3. Alabama 4. Bowling Green 5. Florida State 6. Oklahoma 7. Cincinnati 8. Louisville 9. Florida 10. Notre Dame 11. Baylor 12. McNeese State 13. Michigan 14. Arizona 15. South Carolina 16. San Jose State 17. Miami (FL) 18. Wisconsin 19. Texas 20. Eastern Illinois 21. Georgia Tech 22. Maryland 23. UCF 24. North Texas 25. NC State And a bottom 10 consisting of everyone who lost to FCS teams: 10. Miami (OH) 9. Idaho 8. Kansas State 7. South Alabama 6. Oregon State 5. Iowa State 4. Georgia State 3. UConn 2. San Diego State 1. South Florida Which is kinda garbage considering the best wins of the week belong to #60 Clemson, #44 LSU, and #50 Eastern Washington. Regular Washington at #1 works dirty shrimp money fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Sep 3, 2013 |
# ? Sep 3, 2013 19:59 |
|
I would make a poll-like substance if I could get the stats, the NCAA appears to be being slow about uploading them to http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/download.jsp?year=2013&div=IA
|
# ? Sep 4, 2013 02:36 |
|
It looks like they moved the stats to a new site this year, and it is much less convenient to use: http://stats.ncaa.org/rankings/change_sport_year_div edit: Also, week 1 is always hilarious. Since I weigh Away wins higher than home wins, and wins over FCS teams don't count for anything, my top 10 is pretty much any team that handily won an away game. My poll has UTSA ranked in 4th place, for going on the road to beat New Mexico, and Texas State at 5th for beating Southern Mississippi on the road. As the season goes on the poll will recognize that those teams are probably awful, but for now the poll is very impressed! Tad SG fucked around with this message at 01:01 on Sep 5, 2013 |
# ? Sep 5, 2013 00:53 |
|
Tad SG posted:It looks like they moved the stats to a new site this year, and it is much less convenient to use: Jesus christ, that's USELESS. Looks like this moon poll might be dead in the water.
|
# ? Sep 5, 2013 02:02 |
|
Mukaikubo posted:Jesus christ, that's USELESS. Looks like this moon poll might be dead in the water. Looks like the only way to automate it is via page scrapes. If you go over to "Teams" you can create a URL with the team number and then increment the index for the stat you want. Download the whole page, pull out the numbers of interest, then download the next one. It's still going to be incredibly slow to get 125 teams x 6 or 8 pages per team.
|
# ? Sep 5, 2013 02:10 |
|
Deteriorata posted:Looks like the only way to automate it is via page scrapes. If you go over to "Teams" you can create a URL with the team number and then increment the index for the stat you want. Download the whole page, pull out the numbers of interest, then download the next one. In 'Misc Reports' there is a WLT report that has all the teams on the same page. Also Toughest Schedule is there (not filled yet) Also if you go to 'Trends' then sort by Institution, you can get all the teams on the same page, but you still have to choose the stat category you want. Its not great but you might be able to get what you need after a few copy and pastes. Some schedule specific algos could still be hosed though.
|
# ? Sep 5, 2013 02:41 |
|
Uncle Jam posted:In 'Misc Reports' there is a WLT report that has all the teams on the same page. Also Toughest Schedule is there (not filled yet) Yeah, that works if all you care about are wins and losses, but if you're trying to evaluate on stats there doesn't seem to be any recourse but scraping. I was thinking about resurrecting mine, but at this point I would have to rewrite it completely so I'm probably not going to.
|
# ? Sep 5, 2013 02:46 |
|
Deteriorata posted:Yeah, that works if all you care about are wins and losses, but if you're trying to evaluate on stats there doesn't seem to be any recourse but scraping. Trends is the stats page. They're not all on ONE page but its not as ridiculous as going through all 110 teams or whatever. It also copies fine into notepad for easy delimiting too.
|
# ? Sep 5, 2013 03:02 |
|
For those whose polls only need team names, scores, dates, and home/away, they're available in CSV here: http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/Resources/Stats/Football/schedules.html
|
# ? Sep 5, 2013 20:04 |
|
Last I checked those CSVs don't contain the score.
|
# ? Sep 5, 2013 20:09 |
|
Captain von Trapp posted:For those whose polls only need team names, scores, dates, and home/away, they're available in CSV here: I found that, actually, but I can't see that they've updated it with the week 1 scores anywhere.
|
# ? Sep 5, 2013 20:10 |
|
Huh, you're right, they don't contain the score. I hope that just means they don't contain the score yet. I used these files last year and assumed that "Download 2013 Schedule and results listing as CSV file" meant that I could download the 2013 schedule and results listing as a CSV file. NCAA
|
# ? Sep 5, 2013 20:15 |
|
I use this page as the input for my poll - contains home/away, win/loss, and scores. http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/Sked2013.htm
|
# ? Sep 5, 2013 21:50 |
|
Captain von Trapp posted:For those whose polls only need team names, scores, dates, and home/away, they're available in CSV here: Update: They removed the part where they claim results will be in that csv file too. So it's official. Unless something changes in the next few weeks, no moon poll from me this year, I really don't want to figure out another parsing method for another data tool after the assache getting this one down was.
|
# ? Sep 6, 2013 23:18 |
|
Mukaikubo posted:Update: They removed the part where they claim results will be in that csv file too. So it's official. Unless something changes in the next few weeks, no moon poll from me this year, I really don't want to figure out another parsing method for another data tool after the assache getting this one down was. They also removed their 'Trend' page from the current stats page, those fuckers. I just built a read in function for that poo poo too.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2013 00:44 |
|
That is friggin' infuriating. I need some kind of machine-readable data for the poll to work, and I'm sure everyone else does too. I've googled around to see if anyone else has a spreadsheet, but so far there's nothing very good. I'd assume some website somewhere will have some data - the betting sites maybe - but you'd expect that the NCAA wouldn't go out of their way to kill a useful resource. Here's some score data at least, but it mixes NAIA data in and it'll be irritating to disentangle: http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/scores.htm
|
# ? Sep 7, 2013 02:00 |
|
Here's the closest I can find to the old format for the NCAA stats pages. Stats: http://www.cfbstats.com/2013/national/index.html
|
# ? Sep 7, 2013 07:14 |
|
Tad SG posted:Here's the closest I can find to the old format for the NCAA stats pages. Ok, this is usable. It's formatted in a kind of screwball way, so I'll actually have to read in three separate files: the one that associates team names with team numbers, the one that associates team numbers with game codes, and the one that associates game codes with game scores. But it's CSV, which is at least vastly easier to do than trying to write some website scraper. If there's interest, I can try to whip up some code to convert the cfbstats.com file to the old NCAA CSV format.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2013 17:25 |
|
Captain von Trapp posted:Ok, this is usable. It's formatted in a kind of screwball way, so I'll actually have to read in three separate files: the one that associates team names with team numbers, the one that associates team numbers with game codes, and the one that associates game codes with game scores. I found most of the stats I want in team-game-statistics, but where are the W-L records or game scores? It'd be nice to not have to compile them from the game statistics or however you could retrieve them. Even with team-game-statistics, I'd like to have the aggregate over the season, which isn't bad to do but still.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2013 18:28 |
|
Uncle Jam posted:I found most of the stats I want in team-game-statistics, but where are the W-L records or game scores? It'd be nice to not have to compile them from the game statistics or however you could retrieve them. team-game-statistics.cvs has a "points" stat buried somewhere in the middle (in column AJ if you open it in Excel). So you can extract data along the lines of "Team #21 played in Game #52 and scored 14 points". It's awkward, but usable.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2013 18:42 |
|
After a really embarrassingly long time of coding, I wrote a Python script to convert the cfbstats.com files to the NCAA csv format. Please spot-check it to make sure I haven't borked the coding somewhere. Sadly it's just FBS. If someone finds this kind of data for FCS let me know and I'll include it as well. This is the result from cfbstats.com's data on their website now, which does not yet include this weekend's games. When it does I'll post that as well.code:
|
# ? Sep 8, 2013 22:25 |
|
I'll be doing my poll this year; the first few weeks are always too close to last year's results to be interesting though.Captain von Trapp posted:After a really embarrassingly long time of coding, I wrote a Python script to convert the cfbstats.com files to the NCAA csv format. Please spot-check it to make sure I haven't borked the coding somewhere. Sadly it's just FBS. If someone finds this kind of data for FCS let me know and I'll include it as well. This is the result from cfbstats.com's data on their website now, which does not yet include this weekend's games. When it does I'll post that as well. I don't use this data but thanks for doing that! I hope everyone can get their polls up and running again this year.
|
# ? Sep 8, 2013 22:31 |
|
Captain von Trapp posted:After a really embarrassingly long time of coding, I wrote a Python script to convert the cfbstats.com files to the NCAA csv format. Please spot-check it to make sure I haven't borked the coding somewhere. Sadly it's just FBS. If someone finds this kind of data for FCS let me know and I'll include it as well. This is the result from cfbstats.com's data on their website now, which does not yet include this weekend's games. When it does I'll post that as well. Thanks for this! The only difference I can find is that the ncaa csv didn't list FBS vs FCS twice. It would have an entry with FBS VS FCS but there wouldn't be a reverse entry FCS vs FBS like there is for FBS vs FBS. Hopefully that makes sense! I was using that to figure out which teams were FBS/FCS. But my program did load your list and do it's thing which is awesome. Came out pretty crazy though which I think will settle down with a little tweaking + a few more weeks data.
|
# ? Sep 8, 2013 23:59 |
|
Frolic posted:Thanks for this! The only difference I can find is that the ncaa csv didn't list FBS vs FCS twice. It would have an entry with FBS VS FCS but there wouldn't be a reverse entry FCS vs FBS like there is for FBS vs FBS. Hopefully that makes sense! Ok, cool. I'll probably try to implement that double-listing thing on next week's iteration so it exactly reproduces the old DIVISIONB.CSV. I'm still holding out hope I can find some machine-readable data source for FCS games, which would make this a lot easier and additionally reproduce the old DIVISIONC.CSV which would help some of us (including me) rank FCS teams. Please everyone keep an eye out for FCS data. cfbstats.com just updated their stats file through this weekend, so here's my parsing of it. As pointed out, it's not quite identical to DIVISIONB.CSV yet because it lists all games including FBS/FCS games twice. Apologies for the wall of text - next week I'll find a host. code:
|
# ? Sep 9, 2013 01:00 |
|
Turns out my week 2 poll is even trippy than my last - 1. Washington 2. North Dakota State 3. Alabama 4. Oklahoma 5. Florida State 6. Oregon 7. Towson 8. Arizona 9. Southern Utah 10. Michigan 11. Miami (FL) 12. Nicholls State 13. Louisville 14. Baylor 15. UCF 16. Bowling Green 17. LSU 18. Eastern Washington 19. Stanford 20. Duke 21. Utah 22. Texas Tech 23. Penn State 24. Maryland 25. UCLA Bottom 10 - 10. Miami (OH) 9. Idaho 8. Southern Miss 7. Iowa State 6. UConn 5. San Diego St 4. South Florida 3. UMass 2. Western Michigan 1. Georgia State Conferences - 1. Big 10 2. Pac 12 3. SEC 4. Big 12 5. ACC 6. AAC 7. Sun Belt 8. MWC 9. CUSA 10. MAC
|
# ? Sep 9, 2013 16:11 |
|
Captain von Trapp posted:cfbstats.com just updated their stats file through this weekend, so here's my parsing of it. As pointed out, it's not quite identical to DIVISIONB.CSV yet because it lists all games including FBS/FCS games twice. Apologies for the wall of text - next week I'll find a host. Just use pastebin or something. And thanks for doing this - I might work on my poll this year after all.
|
# ? Sep 9, 2013 18:41 |
|
Tad SG's Week 2 Top 25 - not nearly as crazy as it looked week 1! And with Navy in the top 5, that's saying something...code:
|
# ? Sep 9, 2013 21:59 |
|
Okay! After much heartache and screaming at scripts that should have been a lot simpler than they were to make, I am back online! First I will repost the explanation of the maths that I posted last year when I came up with it, and then the first results! Mukai's ELO-Modified Moon Poll Overview: This moon poll is an attempt to use the Elo method of team ranking, popularized by chess, and apply it to college football while also including margin of victory. No stats other than scores, date, and location are used. Every team starts with 1 (one) point as their ranking. Yes, Akron and Alabama start in the same place, because I wanted to remove subjectivity as much as I could. For each match, the "expected win"% is calculated with a formula that takes into account both rankings. It'll spit out 50% if both teams are equally rated. The expected win percentage for Team A playing Team B: 1/(1+10^( (rating_team_B - rating_team_a)/0.4 ) ) If both are equal, it's always 50%. If team A is 0.2 points better than team B, they'll have if you do the math a 76% of beating them; 0.4 points better, 91%, and so on. Given that, as a special case, non-Division 1A teams are set at an effective rating of 0.6 points no matter who they are; this means that in week 1, I expect 91% of teams to beat their 1-AA opponents. Note that this is symmetric- if team A has a 76% chance of beating team B, team B has a 24% chance of beating team A, just like you'd expect. So! I have how much I expect teams to win. The games are played, and sometimes I'm kinda right! But I have to for every match update the stats based on who won what. Using the data presented at http://football.stassen.com/pointspread/ I have a correlation between how often a team favored by X points by Vegas wins. I make the leap that A, Vegas is usually if not the smartest than very near the smartest picker in aggregate, and thus get things about right; I also make the slightly bigger leap that a team that actually wins by X points would win Y% of the time, if teams favored by X points historically win Y% of the time. If you don't trust that leap, you can probably just ignore this moon poll, but it actually works decently well. I take the actual point spread (and correct it for location, using what seems to be a standard 4 point advantage for home teams; I'm equivalently putting everything on a 'neutral field' in hindsight) and determine "actual win%" for the game. Edge case; any margin over 30 points is set to 99%, because I don't believe in no-win scenarios. That's a bit wordy, so I'll go through the math with an example from last season. Coming into Week 3's home game against Arkansas, Alabama's rating is 1.171; they've won both games commandingly. Arkansas's rating, right off the home loss to Louisiana-Monroe, is 1.003; the loss almost canceled their handy win over a 1-AA team. The difference between the two teams' ratings is 0.168; Alabama then, by the formula, is expected to win 72.4% of the time, which correlates to a point margin of just a shade under 9 points on a neutral field. Since Alabama's at home, they're "expected" to beat Arkansas by just under two touchdowns. Playing the game, Alabama actually wins by 52, which is a horrifying number. That's greater than 30, so I declare that Alabama would have won 99% of the time that game was replayed. So, I have an expected win% of 72.4% and an actual win% of 99%... Okay. Once we have that, the next step is to update ratings. It's pretty easy; after a whole lot of trials, I settled on New Rating = Old Rating + 0.2 * (Actual Win% - Expected Win%) for both teams, with the caveat that "you can never lose points by winning or gain points by losing". So, in our example above, for Alabama New Rating = 1.171 + 0.2 * (0.99-0.724) = 1.224 (gain of 0.053 points) and for Arkansas, New Rating = 1.003 + 0.2 * (0.724-0.99) = 0.950 (loss of 0.053 points) And now without further ado: Mukai Moon Poll Week 3: "No, Seriously, UCF" Edition Well, this is awkward. My first new moon poll, and I have: -UCF #6 -Georgia Tech #8 -Alabama #10 (to be fair, there's a bias towards teams that have played more) Well, we'll go with it, it'll sort itself out soon enough. Until then, moon polls will enjoy their traditional bouts of utter madness. At least a sane team's at the top and at the bottom, right? pre:Rank Team Rating 1 'Oregon' 1.308 2 'Louisville' 1.239 3 'LSU' 1.227 4 'Oklahoma St.' 1.214 5 'Oklahoma' 1.213 6 'UCF' 1.209 7 'Arizona' 1.198 8 'Georgia Tech' 1.197 9 'Florida St.' 1.187 10 'Alabama' 1.182 11 'Auburn' 1.177 12 'Michigan' 1.171 13 'UCLA' 1.170 14 'Indiana' 1.160 15 'Northwestern' 1.160 16 'Ohio St.' 1.154 17 'Washington' 1.152 18 'Southern Cal' 1.134 19 'Maryland' 1.130 20 'Navy' 1.130 21 'Minnesota' 1.125 22 'Stanford' 1.125 23 'Texas Tech' 1.122 24 'Ole Miss' 1.122 25 'Penn St.' 1.117 26 'Utah St.' 1.117 27 'Washington St' 1.111 28 'Wisconsin' 1.100 29 'Baylor' 1.093 30 'Wyoming' 1.086 31 'Marshall' 1.085 32 'North Texas' 1.078 33 'Michigan St.' 1.072 34 'Texas A&M' 1.065 35 'BYU' 1.063 36 'Missouri' 1.062 37 'Arizona St.' 1.055 38 'Houston' 1.055 39 'Rutgers' 1.052 40 'Ball St.' 1.052 41 'Tennessee' 1.051 42 'Texas St.' 1.050 43 'Notre Dame' 1.049 44 'Arkansas' 1.046 45 'Miami (FL)' 1.043 46 'South Caro' 1.042 47 'Illinois' 1.041 48 'Ohio' 1.038 49 'Virginia Tech' 1.009 50 'Georgia' 1.008 51 'Northern Ill.' 1.008 52 'Pittsburgh' 1.004 53 'Oregon St.' 1.003 54 'Boise St.' 0.999 55 'Kansas St.' 0.984 56 'North Caro.' 0.981 57 'Nebraska' 0.981 58 'Kentucky' 0.979 59 'Utah' 0.976 60 'Bowling Green' 0.973 61 'Duke' 0.973 62 'Arkansas St.' 0.969 63 'Clemson' 0.968 64 'Mississipi St' 0.964 65 'Colorado' 0.957 66 'Tulane' 0.955 67 'Cincinnati' 0.954 68 'Florida' 0.951 69 'Vanderbilt' 0.951 70 'Troy' 0.950 71 'UTEP' 0.948 72 'Rice' 0.947 73 'TCU' 0.941 74 'La.-Monroe' 0.941 75 'South Ala.' 0.940 76 'Syracuse' 0.937 77 'East Carolina' 0.936 78 'Fresno St.' 0.934 79 'West Virginia' 0.933 80 'North Car St.' 0.931 81 'Iowa' 0.925 82 'Virginia' 0.913 83 'UTSA' 0.901 84 'Boston College 0.894 85 'Kansas' 0.889 86 'UAB' 0.885 87 'Western Ky.' 0.879 88 'Texas' 0.876 89 'Memphis' 0.871 90 'UTSA' 0.869 91 'San Jose St.' 0.864 92 'Wake Forest' 0.855 93 'New Mexico' 0.855 94 'Fla. Atlantic' 0.851 95 'Middle Tenn.' 0.849 96 'Colorado St.' 0.849 97 'Nevada' 0.844 98 'La.-Lafayette' 0.837 99 'Toledo' 0.826 100 'UNLV' 0.825 101 'Army' 0.820 102 'Tulsa' 0.807 103 'California' 0.794 104 'Eastern Mich.' 0.788 105 'Louisiana Tech 0.776 106 'Air Force' 0.775 107 'Kent St.' 0.774 108 'Hawaii' 0.774 109 'Southern Miss. 0.766 110 'Purdue' 0.755 111 'Akron' 0.747 112 'Idaho' 0.747 113 'SMU' 0.746 114 'Western Mich.' 0.735 115 'Miami (OH)' 0.729 116 'Iowa St.' 0.729 117 'Buffalo' 0.718 118 'Central Mich.' 0.716 119 'Temple' 0.712 120 'Connecticut' 0.705 121 'New Mexico St' 0.676 122 'San Diego St.' 0.641 123 'Massachusetts' 0.598 124 'South Fla.' 0.579 125 'FIU' 0.565 126 'Georgia State' 0.475
|
# ? Sep 15, 2013 18:20 |
|
Here's my quasi-clone of the old DIVISIONB.CSV file, this time in convenient Pastebin format: http://pastebin.com/A3SqYttG Unfortunately I've been swamped so I haven't yet implemented the non-duplication of the FBS vs FCS games. With some luck I'll have that soon. When that happens I'll probably post both versions just in case someone's poll relies on this current format of mine. As usual, please everybody keep an eye out for machine readable FCS data. We still don't have a good source for that.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2013 04:41 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 03:46 |
|
Poll's looking better this week, the only real glaring Bad Thing is Alabama dropped to 19 after the track meet.pre:Rank LW 1 6 Oregon 2 2 North Dakota State 3 5 Florida State 4 22 Texas Tech 5 4 Oklahoma 6 1 Washington 7 13 Louisville 8 11 Miami (FL) 9 33 Georgia Tech 10 25 UCLA 11 35 Oklahoma State 12 30 Arizona State 13 7 Towson 14 14 Baylor 15 8 Arizona 16 17 LSU 17 15 UCF 18 24 Maryland 19 3 Alabama 20 37 Michigan State 21 10 Michigan 22 27 Ohio State 23 49 Arkansas 24 54 Ole Miss 25 34 Northern Iowa Bottom 10 - 10. Florida International 9. San Diego State 8. New Mexico State 7. Temple 6. Connecticut 5. Iowa State 4. Massachusetts 3. Western Michigan 2. South Florida 1. Georgia State Conferences - 1. Pac 12 2. Big 10 3. SEC 4. ACC 5. Big 12 6. American 7. Sun Belt 8. MWC 9. CUSA 10. MAC dirty shrimp money fucked around with this message at 16:49 on Sep 17, 2013 |
# ? Sep 16, 2013 17:03 |