ADVERTISEMENT

Blind Resume article

This is a very interesting article on the remaining undefeated teams. I tend to agree with the writer.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2582855-blind-resumes-for-top-college-football-playoff-contenders

I like the analysis, but I think too little emphasis is on SoS in the comparisons. Anyone w/ a 102 SoS should not be in consideration for a Top 10 spot, IMO.

Based on weaker SoS to date, anything >50 for schedule strength should have a greater impact on a top ranking (if your schedule is worse than top 50, you should be in the lower half of the Top 10 at best).

This includes Teams B, F, I, J, K.
Or, Baylor, MSU, Ohio St, TCU, OK St. I realize many of these teams will play better competition (and one another) later in the season, but having two unproven teams with poor schedules playing one another really doesn't tell you much, because neither has faced good competition. Only when one of those teams plays another good team can you really tell if they are worthy.

I would also not make the Offense/Defense YPP vs. 'Top 25 Teams'; I'd make that comparison vs. Top 25 offenses/defenses - base those numbers (or add the numbers) vs. top offenses/defenses of the competition, regardless of the competition's record. If you play a Top 25 team that has a weak defense, you will rack up good statistics, which are meaningless when you play a team that may be Top 50, but has a very solid defense.

Additionally, expand that stat for Off/Def vs. Top 25 and vs. top 26-50 and see how the numbers fall off.

That said, I REALLY like the analysis method of hiding the team names and looking more objectively at the data, because there is far too much emphasis on 'how a team did last year' or 'who is a media darling/traditional power'; unless a team brings back >80% or 90% of it's roster from the previous year, you cannot presume they are top ten until they start playing games on the field. A Top Ten team from last year should certainly be Top 50 the following year, but the early season 'rankings' put WAY too much human bias that continues through most of the season....
 
Funny. The article writer talks about blind resumes, but cherry picks some information.

For some teams he uses the current rankings when posting top 25 wins, and others he uses rankings at the time of the game.

Baylor's lone top 25 win on their resume was against #22 West Virginia. They aren't even ranked anymore

MSU he has their only top 25 win over #2 Oregon; who isn't ranked anymore. At the same time, he omits the Michigan win who is currently ranked in the top 20.

Iowa says their only top 25 win is against #25 Pitt. Again, he omits the Wisconsin and NW wins who were in the top 20 at the time.

Stanford. He is counting the win over USC as a top 25 win.

All I'm saying is that the guy was inconsistent
 
Funny. The article writer talks about blind resumes, but cherry picks some information.

For some teams he uses the current rankings when posting top 25 wins, and others he uses rankings at the time of the game.

Baylor's lone top 25 win on their resume was against #22 West Virginia. They aren't even ranked anymore

MSU he has their only top 25 win over #2 Oregon; who isn't ranked anymore. At the same time, he omits the Michigan win who is currently ranked in the top 20.


Iowa says their only top 25 win is against #25 Pitt. Again, he omits the Wisconsin and NW wins who were in the top 20 at the time.

Stanford. He is counting the win over USC as a top 25 win.

All I'm saying is that the guy was inconsistent

Maybe he's not so much inconsistent as he is a bad journalist. Michigan was ranked when they played MSU and stayed ranked after the loss. In fact, Michigan is the highest ranked two-loss team in the country. Michigan is clearly their best win right now.
 
Funny. The article writer talks about blind resumes, but cherry picks some information.

For some teams he uses the current rankings when posting top 25 wins, and others he uses rankings at the time of the game.

Baylor's lone top 25 win on their resume was against #22 West Virginia. They aren't even ranked anymore

MSU he has their only top 25 win over #2 Oregon; who isn't ranked anymore. At the same time, he omits the Michigan win who is currently ranked in the top 20.

Iowa says their only top 25 win is against #25 Pitt. Again, he omits the Wisconsin and NW wins who were in the top 20 at the time.

Stanford. He is counting the win over USC as a top 25 win.

All I'm saying is that the guy was inconsistent

Just one of the many reasons bleacherreport is terrible.
 
When the facts are not used in a consistent manner, then the entire article become fairly useless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TankHawk
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT