Maryland vs NC State – final rankings support need for computerized selection system

'10 Football College Football38

NC State finished the 2010 college football season ranked #25 in both the final Associated Press and USA Today/ESPN Coaches Poll.  The Wolfpack finished the season 9-4 after scoring more points against (then ranked #22) West Virginia  than the Mountaineers had allowed all season en route to a 23-7 win in the Champs Sports Bowl.

When reviewing the final polls, I noticed that fellow ACC member – Maryland – finished just ahead of the Wolfpack ranked #24 (AP) and #23 (USA Today).

Good for the Terps and the ACC!

Bad for common sense, facts, reality and fair analysis. 

NC State and Maryland both finished the season with 9-4 records.   Maryland beat NC State in the last weekend of the year with a controversial ending in College Park.  I recognize that short sighted voters, fans and observers will take the easy way out and proclaim that ‘Maryland beat NC State on the field’ and therefore should have an advantage over the Wolfpack;  but, I never hear those people say that NC State should be ranked ahead of Florida State because the Wolfpack defeated the Seminoles ‘on the field’?  

Newsflash to the world – both of these schools played 13 games this season.   I don’t mind if you choose to weigh 7.7% of the season heavier than the other 92.3% of the year…but head to head has got to have its limits. 

In this entry published before the bowls were selected, we laid out an obvious case through strength of schedule and performance of why NC State had clearly produced a better season than Maryland.  Since that data was compiled, NC State defeated a Top 25 Bowl opponent in Florida that had previously waxed the Terrapins 31-7; while Maryland waxed the worst defense in college football history in a game played a few miles from their campus.  (Note: that awful defense did squeak by NC State in overtime in a rivalry game played in a poorly scheduled match-up in middle of the conference season in October.)

All of this has created a situation where in the well-respected Sagarin Computer Rankings provided by USA Today NC State finished the season a very strong #18 while Maryland finished the season ranked #38 . 

Folks, that isn’t even close.  I would give you a little bit of wiggle room if the two programs finished within 5 or 7 spots of each other, but when using an objective formula to normalize an objective set of criteria, NC State finishes a clear TWENTY SPOTS ahead of Maryland in one of the most well-respected computer rankings available.  TWENTY SPOTS!   Yet the genius ‘voters’ in the world couldn’t get close to figuring out the full body of work turned in by these two programs.

Please note, I am not just self selecting one set of computer rankings to make my case.  A quick review of the 130+ rankings consolidated by Massey shows that NC State finished higher than Maryland in approximately 115 of 130+ different ranking services/metrics available.

Yet, only the subjective voters of the polls couldn’t accurately analyze or figure out the obvious.

——————————————————————

I don’t blame the voters for these mis-steps.  They have jobs, lives, priorities and it would be absurd to think a voter in Kansas could remotely have the time, resources and ability to dive as deep as we dove in the NC State-Maryland example.

And…THAT^ is the point!

For years, I have been a firm believer that building a fantastic computer model that omits all of ‘subjective polls’ is the most fair and accurate way to ultimately ‘select’ the two teams for the BCS Championship Game.   Of course the media and all of those around college football would never institute such an obvious answer to the annual controversy of who should advancing to the BCS Game because they would then have nothing about which to talk &/or complain all season.  But, how else do we FAIRLY analyze what actually happens in thousands of games spread thousands of miles apart over a four month period? 

Seriously…with a well-defined, completely transparent computer formula, what in God’s name is there to bitch about?

EVERY SCHOOL knows exactly what the formula for success is heading into the year.  EVERY SCHOOL can work to craft their schedules and their seasons.  There is no ‘subjectivity’ to ‘strength of schedule’ as the SOS can’t be argued as it is calculated by actual results on the field.  EVERY SCHOOL is held to the exact same standards.   Period.

The key to success is to get the formula right and then let it do its magic.  There would be NO INCONSISTENCIES. in rankings. For example, if the impact of ‘margin of victory’ is capped at 28 points, schools like Wisconsin this year (and USC, Texas, Florida and others in past years) can’t influence some voters who like to see 70 points on the board against the mothers of the poor while other voters choose to penalize the schools for running up the score.  Nobody cares that “Alabama” is on one set of jerseys while Nevada is on another set.

EVERY SCHOOL would be judged exclusively on their PERFORMANCE ON THE FIELD.   Isn’t this EXACTLY the mantra of all of the playoff supporters every year –  ‘Settle it on the field!!!’  Under ANY scenario – including a pie-in the sky-playoff-pipedream – it is next to impossible to ‘settle it on the field’ when humans get to apply their inconsistent and often inaccurate observations to process of choosing/ranking teams.  With a ‘master computer formula’ there would be no doubt that every school gets a fair shake and it would be settled on the field; it would simply be settled BY a computer using an objective set of criteria.

I don’t care what some media member in New Mexico ‘thinks’ about teams.  You shouldn’t either.  I don’t care what Lee Corso ‘thinks’.  If anyone’s ‘thoughts’ of what teams were better than others were actually accurate, they would be living in Las Vegas and never losing a bet.  It doesn’t matter what people ‘think’ about teams; it only should matter what those teams actually do on the field!  I only care WHAT HAPPENED ON THE FIELD, not what team you ‘think’ is better than others.  

Take out the ‘choosing’.  Implement a system that TRULY uses the data and performance of all of the teams for all of the season and you can avoid embarrassments like Maryland finishing the season ranked in front of a team that clearly out performed through 13 games.

About StateFans

'StateFansNation' is the shared profile used by any/all of the dozen or so authors that contribute to the blog. You may not always agree with us, but you will have little doubt about where we stand on most issues. Please follow us on Twitter and FaceBook

'10 Football College Football

38 Responses to Maryland vs NC State – final rankings support need for computerized selection system

  1. StateFans 01/11/2011 at 2:50 PM #

    This entry has made the front page of “The Big Lead” (see right panel).

    Great stuff!!

  2. 61Packer 01/11/2011 at 3:20 PM #

    I simply don’t see ANY gain for NCSU football when we play ECU. Pirates fans and NC legislators desperately want this game, which should be two major reasons for Pack fans NOT to want it.

    When did a win over the team from Greenville EVER help our football program?

  3. PoppaJohn 01/11/2011 at 4:20 PM #

    We ended the season ranked, great news! Another sign of progress and a nice reward for a team that busted their butts.

    PS – SFN, I see you are headed toward 2000 posts! I’d bet a bunch you’ll hit 2k before bball season ends. LOL

    Great article, thanks for another fine bit of analysis.

  4. bradleyb123 01/11/2011 at 4:24 PM #

    This blog makes a very good point, and I agree with every word.

    The only problem is that it comes across as sour grapes from the fans of a school that feels slighted by the voters.

    That doesn’t diminish the point it makes, but it might make an objective ready chuckle and not take it quite as seriously.

    If some team names were removed, and this blog was posted in a more objective location, it might gain some steam.

  5. wolfbuff 01/11/2011 at 5:26 PM #

    I do not agree that games early in the season should count just as much as games played later in the season. That goes for computer models and subjective voter polls alike. It absolutely makes a difference because the poll indicates the relative rank of that team right NOW, not over the course of the season. This blog entry is basketball NCAA tournament seeding logic. Who a team plays should be a factor, but that will have taken care of itself in the polls throughout the season. We would/could have been continued to climb through the polls and be ranked higher if we didn’t lose EVERY time we got ranked this year. So, overall, I’m happy with the season, proud of the big bowl win, and glad to see us forever enshrined in the final 2010/2011 poll. And I’m fine with being behind Maryland. Let’s move on. If there is even a case to be made, this argument is for another day, not the day the poll comes out.

  6. novawolf 01/11/2011 at 5:38 PM #

    Agree with statefans points also. One could just change the NCSU references to West Virginia, point out WVU had an identical record with Maryland, beat the Terps by 14, had a higher Sagarin rating, and finished unranked behind the Terps, and send to some Terps fans, and check out their reaction and rationale. It’s easy to get Terps fans riled up.

  7. choppack1 01/11/2011 at 7:09 PM #

    I think it’s great news we ended up in both Top 25s. I’d love to see us ahead of Maryland, but don’t expect much data analysis from those doing the voting.

    I’m more impressed w/ Sagarin ratings – when you combine that w/ the stats I posted last week, it’s pretty obvious, we were a solid football team. I don’t think we were great, but it’s the best damn football team we’ve had at NC State since 2002-2003

  8. hoop 01/11/2011 at 8:39 PM #

    All a computer does is formalize what people ‘think’.

    Maryland beat us on the field – the only place that matters. That trumps every argument anyone can make about SoS, margins, etc. Common sense dictates they should be ranked higher than us.

    We lost to both ECU and Maryland and that’s why I’m happy we’re ranked a deserved 25th. Great improvement Wolfpack!

  9. john of sparta 01/11/2011 at 9:21 PM #

    packalum44: friedgen vs. sendek?
    bigwolfpacker: +1 and much more if possible. +1000?
    boxorice: agreed. from 5 to infinity. no recruit cares.
    finally, lock has the voice of reason. MD beat us.

  10. PackerInRussia 01/12/2011 at 2:38 AM #

    “the media and all of those around college football would never institute such an obvious answer to the annual controversy of who should advancing to the BCS Game because they would then have nothing about which to talk &/or complain all season.”

    You underestimate them. Talking &/or complaining is their job. There will always be something to complain about. If a computer were in charge of all rankings, it would be like an I, Robot/apocalyptic/computers take over the world scenario for them. Plenty to complain about.

    As always, I do appreciate the careful and thoughtful analysis. Too bad it went over some people’s heads.

  11. PackerInRussia 01/12/2011 at 2:52 AM #

    “Think about it, if you are a journalist in Kansas looking through our schedule and see that loss then look at how MD just demolished them….you automatically scratch your head. 10-3 would have been so much sweeter than 9-4.”

    I think you’re giving way too much credit to the journalist in Kansas and the amount of work he/she would have done.

  12. wolfonthehill 01/12/2011 at 7:54 AM #

    Well – to be fair – and if WE had waxed that “worst defense” down in Greenville, the conversation would be moot.

    But I don’t disagree with the premise…

  13. Classof89 01/12/2011 at 11:50 AM #

    “10-3 would have been so much sweeter than 9-4. No more ECU games Debbie!!!”

    Where I come from, the solution to a pesky in-state rival that pretty much holds their own with you on the field is to completely dominate them, not drop them from the schedule…that sounds like something a Tarheel would do…

1 2

Leave a Reply