At some point instead of ranting about the poor scheduling practices in Division 1A we just threw up our hands and started trying to figure out how to take into account all the games those play against D 1AA now that there's no penalty for playing them. Different ratings systems handled that various ways, but I've spent a bit of time analyzing the consequences and I'm not sure there's a good way.
Originally we just ignored games against non-1A opponents. When the penalties for playing 1-AA teams were relaxed and a majority of teams did so every year, it was thought that those games ought to count somehow (especially when 1AA teams won.) Some systems just rank all Division 1 teams and include all the 1AA vs 1AA games as well as 1A vs 1A and 1A vs 1AA.
|
That field for 2015 is indicated by the D1* column in the table to the left. I have always been a bit uneasy about that definition (and when I came up with it Boyd opined that it "didn't seem right") but didn't really analyze that field until I re-wrote my presentation for this year. When I did, i noticed what should have been an obvious flaw. There are some teams who's rating (and contribution to opponent ratings) depends entirely on one or two games.
So for 2015 I have modified the field definition: D1** consists of all the teams who play at least half their games against 1A teams or 1AA teams with at least one 1A opponent. This eliminates six of the teams that would have been included as a part of D1*.
The table below shows the effect of the change and gives a good indication of why including all of D1 is not a good idea.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The new format is:
| Rank | ISR | Norm | Team | Conf | SOS | Rank | W | SOS(W) | L | SOS(L) | ||||
| 1 | 1 | 133.25 | 2.256 | Ohio State | B10 | 112.08 | 13 | 13 | 14 | 112.36 | 1 | 108.18 | ||
| 2 | 2 | 131.30 | 2.130 | Oregon | P12 | 113.47 | 4 | 4 | 13 | 111.23 | 2 | 128.01 | ||
| 3 | 3 | 130.70 | 2.091 | Florida State | ACC | 109.81 | 31 | 31 | 13 | 108.15 | 1 | 131.30 | ||
| 4 | 4 | 130.15 | 2.055 | Alabama | SEC | 112.82 | 6 | 6 | 12 | 110.20 | 2 | 128.59 | ||
| 5 | 5 | 128.10 | 1.923 | UCLA | P12 | 114.83 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 112.37 | 3 | 123.04 | ||
| 6 | 6 | 127.97 | 1.914 | TCU | B12 | 107.20 | 56 | 56 | 12 | 105.94 | 1 | 122.32 | ||
| ... | ||||||||||||||
| 21 | 21 | 120.20 | 1.411 | Auburn | SEC | 114.82 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 109.81 | 5 | 122.84 | ||
| 22 | 119.01 | 1.333 | North Dakota State | MVC | 98.04 | 103 | 12 | 97.52 | 1 | 104.34 | ||||
| 23 | 22 | 118.98 | 1.332 | Kansas State | B12 | 109.75 | 32 | 32 | 9 | 103.12 | 4 | 124.65 | ||
| ... | ||||||||||||||
| 196 | 67.83 | -1.982 | Elon | SoCon | 92.55 | 145 | 0 | 0.00 | 9 | 92.55 | ||||
| 197 | 64.26 | -2.213 | Delaware State | MEAC | 78.76 | 197 | 2 | 67.66 | 8 | 81.53 | ||||
| 198 | 61.51 | -2.391 | Savannah State | MEAC | 85.51 | 187 | 0 | 0.00 | 10 | 85.51 | ||||
| Rank | Two ranks are listed, the overall relative position in the field and for 1A teams the relative position if 1AA teams are not considered. |
| rating | The rating name - ISR or ISOV. |
| Norm | The rating expressed as number of standard deviations above or below the mean rating value. |
| Team | Team name (1AA team names are italicized) |
| Conf | Conference affiliation |
| SOS | Average of opponents' rating values. |
| Rank | Relative position in the overall and 1A lists sorted by descending SOS values. |
| W | Number of wins against teams in the field. |
| SOS(W) | Average opponents' values in team's wins. |
| L | Number of losses to teams in the field. |
| SOS(L) | Average opponents' values in team's losses. |
Links are provided to switch between the ratings-order and SOS-order.
© Copyright 2015, Paul Kislanko