[BostonCard]

We have a bit of clarity now.

1) Stanford - not firing on all cylinders, but still winning.  Kings of the North.
2) Oregon - Oregon with Adams is a completely different team than without, and right now they are playing the best football in the conference.  But, too little, too late.
3) Washington State - Yup, that's three P12N teams on top.
4) UCLA - Least lousy of the three co-leaders of the P12S.
5) SC - We felt bad about losing to Oregon... how do you think Trojans feel.
6) Utah - Hard to believe they were the top dog a few weeks ago.  But they've had trouble, and losing Booker really hurts.

- Gap -

7) ASU - A couple weeks ago they looked to be in trouble at 4-5, but they won two games they needed, and have a chance to beat Cal next week.
8) Cal - Another team that started hot at 5-0, and is looking to end 1-6.  Yikes.  Important game against ASU next week.
9) Washington - Although they have a better record, tough to put Arizona here given it was a 49-3 head to head game.  They need one more win to become bowl eligible.
10) Arizona - Their Pac-12 wins are Oregon State, Colorado... and Utah?!?
11) Colorado - They keep giving teams scares and I think they actually have a chance to beat Utah, given how Utah's been playing.
12) OSU - The wheels have officially fallen off, losing 52-7 to Washington.  The game against Oregon is going to be... ugly.

BC

[BostonCard]

We have a bit of clarity now.

1) Stanford - not firing on all cylinders, but still winning.  Kings of the North.
2) Oregon - Oregon with Adams is a completely different team than without, and right now they are playing the best football in the conference.  But, too little, too late.
3) Washington State - Yup, that's three P12N teams on top.
4) UCLA - Least lousy of the three co-leaders of the P12S.
5) SC - We felt bad about losing to Oregon... how do you think Trojans feel.
6) Utah - Hard to believe they were the top dog a few weeks ago.  But they've had trouble, and losing Booker really hurts.

- Gap -

7) ASU - A couple weeks ago they looked to be in trouble at 4-5, but they won two games they needed, and have a chance to beat Cal next week.
8) Cal - Another team that started hot at 5-0, and is looking to end 1-6.  Yikes.  Important game against ASU next week.
9) Washington - Although they have a better record, tough to put Arizona here given it was a 49-3 head to head game.  They need one more win to become bowl eligible.
10) Arizona - Their Pac-12 wins are Oregon State, Colorado... and Utah?!?
11) Colorado - They keep giving teams scares and I think they actually have a chance to beat Utah, given how Utah's been playing.
12) OSU - The wheels have officially fallen off, losing 52-7 to Washington.  The game against Oregon is going to be... ugly.

BC

[OutsiderFan]

It's tough to put Stanford over Oregon, but those two fumbled snaps were difference in game.  North should continue its undefeated streak in Pac-12 Championship games...

1. Stanford
2. Oregon
3. Washington State
4. UCLA
5. USC
6. Utah
7. ASU
8. Ca.l
9. Washington
10. Arizona
11. Colorado
12. Oregon State

[OutsiderFan]

It's tough to put Stanford over Oregon, but those two fumbled snaps were difference in game.  North should continue its undefeated streak in Pac-12 Championship games...

1. Stanford
2. Oregon
3. Washington State
4. UCLA
5. USC
6. Utah
7. ASU
8. Ca.l
9. Washington
10. Arizona
11. Colorado
12. Oregon State

[yvonne]

I'd put Oregon over Stanford in power ratings. Yes, Stanford won the division, but Oregon is firing on all cylinders right now, and Stanford is not.

[yvonne]

I'd put Oregon over Stanford in power ratings. Yes, Stanford won the division, but Oregon is firing on all cylinders right now, and Stanford is not.

[CTcard]

We have a bit of clarity now.

1) Stanford ...
2) Oregon ...
3) Washington State ...
4) UCLA ...
5) SC ...
6) Utah ...

7) ASU ...
8) Low APR U ...
9) Washington ...
10) Arizona ...
11) Colorado ...
12) OSU ...

Another name for that list is The Standings.

1) Stanford 8-1
2) Oregon 6-2
3) Washington State 6-2
4) UCLA 5-3
5) SC 5-3
6) Utah 5-3
7) ASU 4-4
8) Low APR U 3-5
9) Washington 3-5
10) Arizona 3-6
11) Colorado 1-7
12) OSU 0-8

[CTcard]

We have a bit of clarity now.

1) Stanford ...
2) Oregon ...
3) Washington State ...
4) UCLA ...
5) SC ...
6) Utah ...

7) ASU ...
8) Low APR U ...
9) Washington ...
10) Arizona ...
11) Colorado ...
12) OSU ...

Another name for that list is The Standings.

1) Stanford 8-1
2) Oregon 6-2
3) Washington State 6-2
4) UCLA 5-3
5) SC 5-3
6) Utah 5-3
7) ASU 4-4
8) Low APR U 3-5
9) Washington 3-5
10) Arizona 3-6
11) Colorado 1-7
12) OSU 0-8

[OutsiderFan]

After thinking about it, Yvonne is right.

Oregon is #1. But if Stanford beats UDFG, Stanford will be back on top for sure.

The power rankings aren't standings.  They are a reflection of who is playing the best right now, i.e., they take injuries and improvement into account more than standings, per se.

[OutsiderFan]

After thinking about it, Yvonne is right.

Oregon is #1. But if Stanford beats UDFG, Stanford will be back on top for sure.

The power rankings aren't standings.  They are a reflection of who is playing the best right now, i.e., they take injuries and improvement into account more than standings, per se.

[stupac2]

ESPN gives basically the same rankings:

1) Stanford
2) Oregon
3) WSU
4) UCLA
5) USC
6) Utah
7) ASU
8) Cal
9) Washington
10) Arizona
11) Colorado
12) ORST

And, as always, if you want to have "8)" show up instead of a smiley face with sunglasses, hit "Attachments and other options" and check "Don't use smileys."

[stupac2]

ESPN gives basically the same rankings:

1) Stanford
2) Oregon
3) WSU
4) UCLA
5) USC
6) Utah
7) ASU
8) Cal
9) Washington
10) Arizona
11) Colorado
12) ORST

And, as always, if you want to have "8)" show up instead of a smiley face with sunglasses, hit "Attachments and other options" and check "Don't use smileys."

[FarmBoy]

Did Stanford peak too soon? Did we show too much of our playbook too early?

I agree that Oregon is the better team right now, especially with the defensive breakdowns.

Any word on Aziz? I recall he went out on a later drive after sacking Goff. If he's dinged, ND will be a significantly tougher challenge.

[FarmBoy]

Did Stanford peak too soon? Did we show too much of our playbook too early?

I agree that Oregon is the better team right now, especially with the defensive breakdowns.

Any word on Aziz? I recall he went out on a later drive after sacking Goff. If he's dinged, ND will be a significantly tougher challenge.

[stupac2]

Did Stanford peak too soon? Did we show too much of our playbook too early?

I agree that Oregon is the better team right now, especially with the defensive breakdowns.

Any word on Aziz? I recall he went out on a later drive after sacking Goff. If he's dinged, ND will be a significantly tougher challenge.

He came back in after he limped off the field.

Also, I think people are reading a bit much into some things here. This game we punted three times in non-garbage time, the rest were TDs. Is that really a bad showing? Against Oregon we win if we don't have a bunch of screwups on offense. WSU was our only game that was actually bad. If we're going to worry about something, it seems to me it should be that Hogan hasn't been playing super well, but even that might be too much as he was actually pretty good against Oregon... when he could receive a snap.

[stupac2]

Did Stanford peak too soon? Did we show too much of our playbook too early?

I agree that Oregon is the better team right now, especially with the defensive breakdowns.

Any word on Aziz? I recall he went out on a later drive after sacking Goff. If he's dinged, ND will be a significantly tougher challenge.

He came back in after he limped off the field.

Also, I think people are reading a bit much into some things here. This game we punted three times in non-garbage time, the rest were TDs. Is that really a bad showing? Against Oregon we win if we don't have a bunch of screwups on offense. WSU was our only game that was actually bad. If we're going to worry about something, it seems to me it should be that Hogan hasn't been playing super well, but even that might be too much as he was actually pretty good against Oregon... when he could receive a snap.

[washingtonismoney]

Subjectively -- on the eye test -- it does seem like Stanford has slowed down a bit since the Washington game. Why is that? Part of it may be facing more experienced/quality QBs -- Falk/Liufau/Adams/Goff is a hell of a lot better than Collins/Randall/Rosen/Carta-Samuels.

Put another way, teams look worse against better opponents. One of the various doo-dads added onto the statistical rating systems out there these days is "game score" -- the algorithmic equivalent of day-after grades from pundits. I don't believe Connelly's updated his S&P+ system's game score functions, but ESPN's FPI has the same feature. It gives Stanford a 91 rating for the Big Game win, about the same as the UW win. Here's the average game score by "third" of the system (i.e. NW-UCF-SC is first third; OSU-UW is second; WSU-59ers is third):

1st: 60.67
2nd: 84.25
3rd: 75.25

So there's definitely been a drop-off, though not an extreme one. (The "48" against Oregon is weighing down the score. But the ratings systems are underrating Oregon because of the Adams injury issues, I think we can agree, meaning that that grade should probably be bumped up.)

I believe the mark for the third third of the season would put us in the top fifteen nationwide if extended over the full season, though ESPN's formula is opaque.

[washingtonismoney]

Subjectively -- on the eye test -- it does seem like Stanford has slowed down a bit since the Washington game. Why is that? Part of it may be facing more experienced/quality QBs -- Falk/Liufau/Adams/Goff is a hell of a lot better than Collins/Randall/Rosen/Carta-Samuels.

Put another way, teams look worse against better opponents. One of the various doo-dads added onto the statistical rating systems out there these days is "game score" -- the algorithmic equivalent of day-after grades from pundits. I don't believe Connelly's updated his S&P+ system's game score functions, but ESPN's FPI has the same feature. It gives Stanford a 91 rating for the Big Game win, about the same as the UW win. Here's the average game score by "third" of the system (i.e. NW-UCF-SC is first third; OSU-UW is second; WSU-59ers is third):

1st: 60.67
2nd: 84.25
3rd: 75.25

So there's definitely been a drop-off, though not an extreme one. (The "48" against Oregon is weighing down the score. But the ratings systems are underrating Oregon because of the Adams injury issues, I think we can agree, meaning that that grade should probably be bumped up.)

I believe the mark for the third third of the season would put us in the top fifteen nationwide if extended over the full season, though ESPN's formula is opaque.

[BostonCard]

I'd put Oregon over Stanford in power ratings. Yes, Stanford won the division, but Oregon is firing on all cylinders right now, and Stanford is not.

It ultimately depends on how much you want to emphasize recency.  You don't want an extreme version where Utah and USC are in the bottom half of the rankings just because they lost yesterday.  On the flip side, Oregon has been playing well recently, and we seem to have played our best games in October.  Still, it is hard to ignore the fact that Oregon lost 62-20 to Utah, and (in overtime) to Washington State), not to mention tight wins against Washington and ASU (in overtime) not long ago.  Over the last three weeks, no team in the Pac-12 has played better, so if you want to emphasize that recency in power rankings, they can rightfully take their place at the top.

On the other hand, it is remarkable that we are talking about Stanford not playing as well, and yet over the last four weeks of "not great" play, we are 3-1 with our only loss by two points in a game that featured 2 fumbled snaps.  Oregon won that game, but it was close, and could easily have turned out differently.

BC

[BostonCard]

I'd put Oregon over Stanford in power ratings. Yes, Stanford won the division, but Oregon is firing on all cylinders right now, and Stanford is not.

It ultimately depends on how much you want to emphasize recency.  You don't want an extreme version where Utah and USC are in the bottom half of the rankings just because they lost yesterday.  On the flip side, Oregon has been playing well recently, and we seem to have played our best games in October.  Still, it is hard to ignore the fact that Oregon lost 62-20 to Utah, and (in overtime) to Washington State), not to mention tight wins against Washington and ASU (in overtime) not long ago.  Over the last three weeks, no team in the Pac-12 has played better, so if you want to emphasize that recency in power rankings, they can rightfully take their place at the top.

On the other hand, it is remarkable that we are talking about Stanford not playing as well, and yet over the last four weeks of "not great" play, we are 3-1 with our only loss by two points in a game that featured 2 fumbled snaps.  Oregon won that game, but it was close, and could easily have turned out differently.

BC

[stupac2]

On the other hand, it is remarkable that we are talking about Stanford not playing as well, and yet over the last four weeks of "not great" play, we are 3-1 with our only loss by two points in a game that featured 2 fumbled snaps.  Oregon won that game, but it was close, and could easily have turned out differently.

Two fumbled snaps, an INT on a deflected ball, a missed FG, and a couple drives killed by penalties. I think we made about five unforced errors, any of which goes the other way and we win.

[stupac2]

On the other hand, it is remarkable that we are talking about Stanford not playing as well, and yet over the last four weeks of "not great" play, we are 3-1 with our only loss by two points in a game that featured 2 fumbled snaps.  Oregon won that game, but it was close, and could easily have turned out differently.

Two fumbled snaps, an INT on a deflected ball, a missed FG, and a couple drives killed by penalties. I think we made about five unforced errors, any of which goes the other way and we win.

[washingtonismoney]

Let's update with S&P+'s view.

First third: 64th percentile
Second third: 84.25th percentile
Third third: 72.5th percentile.

So pretty similar.

[washingtonismoney]

Let's update with S&P+'s view.

First third: 64th percentile
Second third: 84.25th percentile
Third third: 72.5th percentile.

So pretty similar.

[BostonCard]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=13707.msg142929#msg142929 date=1448184093]
We have a bit of clarity now.

1) Stanford ...
2) Oregon ...
3) Washington State ...
4) UCLA ...
5) SC ...
6) Utah ...

7) ASU ...
8) Low APR U ...
9) Washington ...
10) Arizona ...
11) Colorado ...
12) OSU ...

Another name for that list is The Standings.

1) Stanford 8-1
2) Oregon 6-2
3) Washington State 6-2
4) UCLA 5-3
5) SC 5-3
6) Utah 5-3
7) ASU 4-4
8) Low APR U 3-5
9) Washington 3-5
10) Arizona 3-6
11) Colorado 1-7
12) OSU 0-8
[/quote]

Was that an objection?  The only twist in the standings that I considered was placing Oregon over Stanford, but ultimately I dismissed it for reasons already stated.  Had Utah not completely humiliated them, they'd probably deserve to be up there.  Stanford has one conference loss by two points, Oregon has two, by 49 total points.

Standings aside, how would you have rated them?

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=13707.msg142929#msg142929 date=1448184093]
We have a bit of clarity now.

1) Stanford ...
2) Oregon ...
3) Washington State ...
4) UCLA ...
5) SC ...
6) Utah ...

7) ASU ...
8) Low APR U ...
9) Washington ...
10) Arizona ...
11) Colorado ...
12) OSU ...

Another name for that list is The Standings.

1) Stanford 8-1
2) Oregon 6-2
3) Washington State 6-2
4) UCLA 5-3
5) SC 5-3
6) Utah 5-3
7) ASU 4-4
8) Low APR U 3-5
9) Washington 3-5
10) Arizona 3-6
11) Colorado 1-7
12) OSU 0-8
[/quote]

Was that an objection?  The only twist in the standings that I considered was placing Oregon over Stanford, but ultimately I dismissed it for reasons already stated.  Had Utah not completely humiliated them, they'd probably deserve to be up there.  Stanford has one conference loss by two points, Oregon has two, by 49 total points.

Standings aside, how would you have rated them?

BC

[CTcard]

[quote author=CTcard link=topic=13707.msg142945#msg142945 date=1448207049]
Another name for that list is The Standings.

Was that an objection? 
...
Standings aside, how would you have rated them?

[/quote]

Hmmm. I'm not sure.
At least originally it was just an observation.

However, it might be an objection to the idea of power ratings at this point in the season - at least within a conference.

Nobody seems to really agree what the point of power ratings is over any other ratings. I had always thought the usual main point was a personal view of which teams are really better regardless of record. This is a significant issue early in the season, but obviously less so within a conference once all (or most) of the games have been played.

Of course that isn't the only possible meaning of power rankings. Outsider wants them to reflect the most current situation. Others want them to be something like ... which team is best when playing its best.

So, to the extent that power rankings are a sum evaluation of the season, I don't think I can do better than the standings. In breaking ties, I think I agree with you. "Right now" is a harder deal, and I am not exactly sure that status of some key players (Falk?) - but I think that mainly changes the relative gaps.

If you want something different and perhaps controversial/discussion inducing, I guess I am left with the "which team in its current configuration is best when playing it's best" version. It's not all that meaningful, except maybe for thinking about which team poses the greatest threat in the CCG. Maybe I would go with something like:

1. Stanford
2. Oregon
3. U$C
4. UCLA
5. WSU
6. UW
7. c.a.l.
8. ASU
9. Utah
10. Arizona
11. Colorado
12. OSU

Notes:
- UW at their best has looked pretty decent. Their defense is good and their offense seems like they might be on the verge of figuring thing out. I haven't checked the ages on their depth chart, but think they might pose a challenge next year.
- Utah has probably played closer to their capabilities than any other Pac team - which brings them my respect but also may mean that their top-level capability isn't as high, particularly without Booker.
- If Falk is really out, WSU might drop.

[CTcard]

[quote author=CTcard link=topic=13707.msg142945#msg142945 date=1448207049]
Another name for that list is The Standings.

Was that an objection? 
...
Standings aside, how would you have rated them?

[/quote]

Hmmm. I'm not sure.
At least originally it was just an observation.

However, it might be an objection to the idea of power ratings at this point in the season - at least within a conference.

Nobody seems to really agree what the point of power ratings is over any other ratings. I had always thought the usual main point was a personal view of which teams are really better regardless of record. This is a significant issue early in the season, but obviously less so within a conference once all (or most) of the games have been played.

Of course that isn't the only possible meaning of power rankings. Outsider wants them to reflect the most current situation. Others want them to be something like ... which team is best when playing its best.

So, to the extent that power rankings are a sum evaluation of the season, I don't think I can do better than the standings. In breaking ties, I think I agree with you. "Right now" is a harder deal, and I am not exactly sure that status of some key players (Falk?) - but I think that mainly changes the relative gaps.

If you want something different and perhaps controversial/discussion inducing, I guess I am left with the "which team in its current configuration is best when playing it's best" version. It's not all that meaningful, except maybe for thinking about which team poses the greatest threat in the CCG. Maybe I would go with something like:

1. Stanford
2. Oregon
3. U$C
4. UCLA
5. WSU
6. UW
7. c.a.l.
8. ASU
9. Utah
10. Arizona
11. Colorado
12. OSU

Notes:
- UW at their best has looked pretty decent. Their defense is good and their offense seems like they might be on the verge of figuring thing out. I haven't checked the ages on their depth chart, but think they might pose a challenge next year.
- Utah has probably played closer to their capabilities than any other Pac team - which brings them my respect but also may mean that their top-level capability isn't as high, particularly without Booker.
- If Falk is really out, WSU might drop.

[French Rage]

If my count is right, the North leads the South 13-10 on head-to-head matchups.  Only Cal/ASU is left, so the North will win no matter what.

[French Rage]

If my count is right, the North leads the South 13-10 on head-to-head matchups.  Only Cal/ASU is left, so the North will win no matter what.