Question about Sagarin rankings

[MeetTheFerentz]

Ok, I don't put too much stock in any rankings of any kind at this time of year, but I try to at least understand the computer rankings. From what I understand, computer rankings are 100% objective and put a lot of weight on strength of schedule and record against high-quality opponents. So, I was looking at the Sagarin rankings for this week, and wanted to do a little comparison among a few teams:

Let's look at - Baylor, Iowa, Ohio St, Okla, Okla St, TCU

Records - Iowa, Ohio St, Okla St, TCU - 8-0; Baylor 7-0; Okla 7-1

Strength of schedule - Iowa 47; Okla 52; TCU 53; Ohio St 68; Okla St 70; Baylor 104

Record vs. top 10 - All 0-0

Record vs. top 30 - Iowa, Okla - 1-0; all others 0-0

Sagarin ranking - Baylor 3; TCU 4; Okla 5; Ohio St 6; Okla St 14; Iowa 15

So, there you have it. There must be other factors in the computer rankings that I don't understand. Is there a "Blue blood factor" or "Geography quotient" or "Preseason hype derivative" or "ESPN air time index" or "Total points scored by both teams in a game dividend"? Maybe for TCU, there's a "Cool win by catching a tipped ball super duper special component."

Obviously, this is all tongue-in-cheek, but if someone can explain to me how all the objective criteria can result in the above rankings, please do so as if I were 6 years old.

 

[ichawk24]

Sagarin is only one ranking, and all rankings are problematic.

The Massey Ranking Composite of 100+ rankings is a more balanced look, and has Iowa 9th, Baylor 10th.

http://www.masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm

 

[Clifford C. Clavin]

M

Ok, I don't put too much stock in any rankings of any kind at this time of year, but I try to at least understand the computer rankings. From what I understand, computer rankings are 100% objective and put a lot of weight on strength of schedule and record against high-quality opponents. So, I was looking at the Sagarin rankings for this week, and wanted to do a little comparison among a few teams:

Let's look at - Baylor, Iowa, Ohio St, Okla, Okla St, TCU

Records - Iowa, Ohio St, Okla St, TCU - 8-0; Baylor 7-0; Okla 7-1

Strength of schedule - Iowa 47; Okla 52; TCU 53; Ohio St 68; Okla St 70; Baylor 104

Record vs. top 10 - All 0-0

Record vs. top 30 - Iowa, Okla - 1-0; all others 0-0

Sagarin ranking - Baylor 3; TCU 4; Okla 5; Ohio St 6; Okla St 14; Iowa 15

So, there you have it. There must be other factors in the computer rankings that I don't understand. Is there a "Blue blood factor" or "Geography quotient" or "Preseason hype derivative" or "ESPN air time index" or "Total points scored by both teams in a game dividend"? Maybe for TCU, there's a "Cool win by catching a tipped ball super duper special component."

Obviously, this is all tongue-in-cheek, but if someone can explain to me how all the objective criteria can result in the above rankings, please do so as if I were 6 years old.

Margin of victory is where Iowa would lag behind those teams somewhat.

 

[thirdandpunting]

Here is a Sagarin approximation using scoring margin and then adjusting scoring margin by average opponent scoring margin:

He does some version of this... opponent adjusted scoring margin.

Hawks have fewer possessions per game, fall in a point ranking system like this

 

[Chewback]

There is no question the Blue blood factor weighs heavily in all the rankings. We ain't got it.

 

[thirdandpunting]

There is no question the Blue blood factor weighs heavily in all the rankings. We ain't got it.