[yvonne]

No surprise here. We dropped, courtesy of the local writer.

http://www.pollspeak.com/component/optio.../v,35/w,8/

He voted us 10th, lower than any other voter did. He voted Clemson, Auburn, Georgia, and Texas higher than any other voter did. Only one voter ranked Arizona State higher than he did. Only one voter ranked Kansas State lower than he did, and only three voted VaTech lower than he did (They lost to Stanford last winter, so they must suck, right?)

[yvonne]

No surprise here. We dropped, courtesy of the local writer.

http://www.pollspeak.com/component/optio.../v,35/w,8/

He voted us 10th, lower than any other voter did. He voted Clemson, Auburn, Georgia, and Texas higher than any other voter did. Only one voter ranked Arizona State higher than he did. Only one voter ranked Kansas State lower than he did, and only three voted VaTech lower than he did (They lost to Stanford last winter, so they must suck, right?)

[Farm93]

I almost get Wilner's methodology.  He wants to look almost exclusively at SOS, sprinkling in a special formula for team speed and intangibles.  The problem is that he tries to exclude margin of victory, especially against weak opponents.  That's not a big deal on its own, but the computer rankings were prohibited from using margin of victory because it was decided that the pollsters normally overweight that element.

In Wilner's world of polls, the computers really should get to use their original formulas.  The formulas with margin of victory.

Stanford is #15 in Sagarin's BCS margin of victory-free poll.  Ouch!  But when the local guy excludes margin of victory too it really hurts the national perception of the team.  Sagarin's predictor ranking, which includes margin of victory, has Stanford at #5.  Sounds a lot better.  Thankfully, the coaches know that never trailing in the entire season is rather impressive, and seem to be factoring that margin of victory and complete game dominance into their rankings.

Hopefully, Stanford will keep winning big.  I think Clemson, Boise State & Wisconsin can all be taken if Stanford wins impressively.  Still, it looks like all in the 5-8 group would need losses from 3 out of the Big 4 (OK, OKst, Bama, LSU) to get an invite to the game.

In some ways, the #8 BCS ranking and the lack of Wilner love is a blessing because it will help keep the team focused on the upcoming opponent rather than BCS formulas and all of that hype.

[Farm93]

I almost get Wilner's methodology.  He wants to look almost exclusively at SOS, sprinkling in a special formula for team speed and intangibles.  The problem is that he tries to exclude margin of victory, especially against weak opponents.  That's not a big deal on its own, but the computer rankings were prohibited from using margin of victory because it was decided that the pollsters normally overweight that element.

In Wilner's world of polls, the computers really should get to use their original formulas.  The formulas with margin of victory.

Stanford is #15 in Sagarin's BCS margin of victory-free poll.  Ouch!  But when the local guy excludes margin of victory too it really hurts the national perception of the team.  Sagarin's predictor ranking, which includes margin of victory, has Stanford at #5.  Sounds a lot better.  Thankfully, the coaches know that never trailing in the entire season is rather impressive, and seem to be factoring that margin of victory and complete game dominance into their rankings.

Hopefully, Stanford will keep winning big.  I think Clemson, Boise State & Wisconsin can all be taken if Stanford wins impressively.  Still, it looks like all in the 5-8 group would need losses from 3 out of the Big 4 (OK, OKst, Bama, LSU) to get an invite to the game.

In some ways, the #8 BCS ranking and the lack of Wilner love is a blessing because it will help keep the team focused on the upcoming opponent rather than BCS formulas and all of that hype.