Game by game, no upsets, SMU makes Playoff, not Virginia
With the Committee rankings out for week 13, we look at our projected rankings and add a column for projected finish game by game, or, if everything goes to plan. Also called "chalk" where no surprises occur.
Other than some shuffling in the projected top 10—which corresponds to the current CFPC standings—the same teams make it. Indiana and Ohio State both get byes along with Texas Tech, who finishes #2 instead of the simulation average #3 (since Ohio State moves down), and up from the Committee's current #5. The SEC winds up a terrible mess with 11-2 Alabama at #6, one spot behind 12-1 Texas A&M whom they just beat in the title game, and both behind 11-1 Georgia who didn't make the title game. That's a confusing scenario where those three could be in any order (likely with Alabama and Georgia flipped, but who knows).
Oregon, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Notre Dame follow in their current order, down 1 spot to accommodate the rising Tide. Miami is first team out at #11, an interesting result if they finish right behind Notre Dame whom they beat early in the year. BYU, twice losers to Texas Tech, and Utah also of the Big Twelve are next. USC finishes #14.
Then the twist comes. Currently Virginia is projected as most likely Playoff team from the ACC, since they make the title game more often. But if SMU and Virginia both win this weekend as expected, they play in the title game and SMU wins, finishing #15 while Virginia falls to #20. North Texas beats Tulane and gets the final nod from the Committee.
CFPC Record Rnk Team Curr Conf Curr Chalk 1. Indiana 2 *B10 11-0 13-0 2. Texas Tech 5 *B12 10-1 12-1 3. Ohio State 1 B10 11-0 12-1 4. Georgia 4 SEC 10-1 11-1 5. Texas A&M 3 SEC 11-0 12-1 6. Alabama 10 *SEC 9-2 11-2 7. Oregon 6 B10 10-1 11-1 8. Mississippi 7 SEC 10-1 11-1 9. Oklahoma 8 SEC 9-2 10-2 10. Notre Dame 9 Ind 9-2 10-2 11. Miami FL 12 ACC 9-2 10-2 12. Brigham Young 11 B12 10-1 11-2 13. Utah 13 B12 9-2 10-2 14. Southern Cal 17 B10 8-3 9-3 15. SMU 21 *ACC 8-3 10-3 16. North Texas 16 *AAc 10-1 12-1 17. Tennessee 19 SEC 8-3 9-3 18. Texas 16 SEC 8-3 8-4 19. Arizona 25 B12 8-3 8-4 20. Virginia 18 ACC 9-2 10-3 21. Vanderbilt 14 SEC 9-2 9-3 22. Michigan 15 B10 9-2 9-3 23. James Madison -- *SUNe 10-1 12-1 24. Arizona St 20 B12 8-3 8-4 25. South Florida -- AAc 8-3 9-3 -- Pittsburgh 22 ACC 8-3 8-4 -- Georgia Tech 23 ACC 9-2 9-3 -- Tulane 24 AAc 9-2 10-3
Tennessee is 17th, having beaten Vanderbilt who finishes #21. Texas and Michigan both lose to undefeated teams and finish #18 and #22, while Arizona beats Arizona State and moves up to #19 while the Sun Devils drop to #24. James Madison falls short at #23, and South Florida manages a re-entry at #25.
The fact that the Committee doesn't rank James Madison is holding the team back from a projected Playoff finish; the fact that the AP does rank the Dukes keeps them in the running. Tulane (from the American) being the only non-Power conference team rated gives them (and North Texas) a big edge, but the fact that they didn't move up from #24 leaves the door open for James Madison. Both of these developments (James Madison unranked, Tulane ranked low) help the ACC a lot, and it now seems pretty certain the ACC will get a team in under normal circumstances.
Below is the list in context of the current simulation odds.
Ave. CFPC Record Simulation Odds
CFPC Team Curr Chalk Conf Curr Chalk Playoff chg Bye Champ% chg
1. Indiana 2 1 *B10 11-0 13-0 >99.9 0.0 99.3 36.4 +1.6
2. Ohio State 1 3 B10 11-0 12-1 >99.9 0.0 86.4 23.5 +1.4
3. Texas Tech 5 2 *B12 10-1 12-1 99.5 +0.3 80.5 13.0 -0.6
4. Texas A&M 3 5 *SEC 11-0 12-1 99.4 -0.1 53.3 3.3 -0.8
5. Georgia 4 4 SEC 10-1 11-1 99.7 +0.2 48.1 2.7 -2.4
6. Oregon 6 7 B10 10-1 11-1 78.7 +25.0 8.5 7.9 +2.9
7. Mississippi 7 8 SEC 10-1 11-1 80.3 +1.9 9.6 0.7 -0.4
8. Oklahoma 8 9 SEC 9-2 10-2 83.4 +20.8 4.0 1.3 +0.3
9. Notre Dame 9 10 Ind 9-2 10-2 92.8 +2.2 0.2 8.1 +3.0
10. Alabama 10 6 SEC 9-2 11-2 70.1 -7.8 5.3 1.6 -0.5
11. Brigham Young 11 12 B12 10-1 11-2 61.0 +0.9 4.8 0.8 -0.2
12. Miami FL 12 11 ACC 9-2 10-2 27.7 -8.1 0.0 0.3 -0.1
13. Utah 13 13 B12 9-2 10-2 10.1 -38.0 0.0 0.5 -4.1
14. Vanderbilt 14 21 SEC 9-2 9-3 0.1 -0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0
15. Southern Cal 17 14 B10 8-3 9-3 0.0 -2.1 0.0 0.0 -0.1
16. Texas 16 18 SEC 8-3 8-4 <0.1 -0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
17. Michigan 15 22 B10 9-2 9-3 0.4 +0.3 0.0 <0.1 0.0
18. Virginia 18 20 *ACC 9-2 10-3 28.9 +4.7 0.0 <0.1 0.0
19. North Texas -- 16 *AAc 10-1 12-1 64.6 +15.9 0.0 <0.1 0.0
20. Tennessee 19 17 SEC 8-3 9-3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
21. James Madison -- 23 *SUNe 10-1 12-1 55.6 +3.4 0.0 <0.1 0.0
22. South Florida -- 25 AAc 8-3 9-3 2.0 -0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0
23. Tulane 24 -- AAc 9-2 10-3 12.1 +6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
24. SMU 21 15 ACC 8-3 10-3 11.2 +0.7 0.0 <0.1 0.0
25. Arizona St 20 24 B12 8-3 8-4 1.0 +0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
30. Arizona 25 19 B12 8-3 9-3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
The difference in the order above is that instead of using one snapshot—the expected snapshot—to make the rankings, it considers all possible snapshots and averages them, weighted by the more likely ones. So it's a fuzzy ranking that has teams roughly in the middle of their possible range. The strength of the simulation is that it accounts for what happens to other teams; the weakness is that it doesn't really make a final decision. Simulations are more useful early in the season when the situation is unclear; as the number of games left reaches 1 or 2, the snapshot approach is clearer—but it will invariably be wrong about some games, and thus be incorrect. The simulation is never "wrong" because it doesn't really say what is going to happen—just how likely it is to happen!
Comments
Post a Comment
Comments will be moderated! So don't put your spam here! And only clever insults allowed.