After two weeks of the 2018 season, we need to make adjustments based on this season’s data.
We want adjustments that considers strength of schedule. However, there is not yet enough data from this season to apply my algorithm to game results. The algorithm requires that all teams get connected in a network, which happens after week 3 or 4.
Instead, let’s take the margin of victory for a team and compare it against the median closing point spread on Don Best. This considers strength of schedule in that the markets account for the strength of both teams.
Here are the average points by which FBS teams have covered the spread. Positive numbers imply that a team did better than expected by the closing spread. (The record in parentheses is in games straight up, not against the spread.)
These numbers inform my early season adjustments in my member predictions. To learn more about becoming a member, click here.
1. Boise State, (2-0), 24.25
2. Vanderbilt, (2-0), 23.00
3. Cincinnati, (2-0), 22.50
4. Ball State, (1-1), 21.50
5. Utah State, (1-1), 21.00
6. Kent State, (1-1), 20.75
7. Appalachian State, (1-1), 19.25
8. Louisiana, (1-0), 18.50
9. Hawaii, (3-0), 18.00
10. Maryland, (2-0), 17.50
11. Fresno State, (1-1), 16.75
12. Colorado, (2-0), 16.50
13. Arizona State, (2-0), 16.00
14. Virginia Tech, (2-0), 15.75
15. Liberty, (1-1), 15.25
16. Toledo, (1-0), 14.50
17. Coastal Carolina, (1-1), 14.25
18. Oklahoma, (2-0), 13.75
19. Eastern Michigan, (2-0), 13.50
20. Alabama, (2-0), 13.50
21. Air Force, (1-1), 12.50
22. Mississippi, (2-0), 12.25
23. Mississippi State, (2-0), 11.75
24. Minnesota, (2-0), 11.50
25. Kentucky, (2-0), 11.25
26. Duke, (2-0), 11.25
27. Georgia Southern, (2-0), 11.25
28. Iowa, (2-0), 11.25
29. Ohio State, (2-0), 10.25
30. Penn State, (2-0), 10.25
31. East Carolina, (1-1), 9.75
32. Washington State, (2-0), 9.75
33. North Texas, (2-0), 9.00
34. West Virginia, (2-0), 9.00
35. Stanford, (2-0), 8.25
36. Boston College, (2-0), 8.25
37. Houston, (2-0), 8.00
38. Virginia, (1-1), 7.75
39. Syracuse, (2-0), 7.75
40. Texas A&M, (1-1), 7.50
41. Kansas, (1-1), 7.25
42. Tulsa, (1-1), 6.62
43. Memphis, (1-1), 6.50
44. Georgia, (2-0), 6.00
45. Brigham Young, (1-1), 5.75
46. Army, (1-1), 5.25
47. Texas Tech, (1-1), 5.25
48. UNLV, (1-1), 4.75
49. Tulane, (1-1), 4.62
50. Missouri, (2-0), 4.50
51. LSU, (2-0), 4.25
52. Michigan, (1-1), 4.00
53. Southern Miss, (1-1), 4.00
54. Florida International, (1-1), 4.00
55. Oklahoma State, (2-0), 3.25
56. South Florida, (2-0), 3.00
57. California, (2-0), 2.50
58. TCU, (2-0), 2.50
59. Buffalo, (2-0), 2.25
60. North Carolina State, (2-0), 2.25
61. Nevada, (1-1), 2.00
62. Oregon State, (1-1), 1.50
63. Tennessee, (1-1), 1.25
64. Illinois, (2-0), 0.50
65. New Mexico, (1-1), 0.50
66. UCF, (2-0), 0.50
67. Utah, (2-0), -0.75
68. Oregon, (2-0), -1.00
69. Rutgers, (1-1), -1.25
70. Miami (FL), (1-1), -1.50
71. Louisiana Tech, (2-0), -2.00
72. Auburn, (2-0), -2.00
73. Indiana, (2-0), -2.00
74. Massachusetts, (1-2), -2.08
75. Wake Forest, (2-0), -2.25
76. South Alabama, (0-2), -2.50
77. Rice, (1-2), -3.00
78. Wyoming, (1-2), -3.33
79. Georgia State, (1-1), -3.50
80. Washington, (1-1), -3.50
81. Marshall, (2-0), -4.00
82. Western Kentucky, (0-2), -4.00
83. San Jose State, (0-2), -4.50
84. Troy, (1-1), -4.75
85. Wisconsin, (2-0), -5.00
86. Louisiana Monroe, (2-0), -5.50
87. Northwestern, (1-1), -5.75
88. South Carolina, (1-1), -6.25
89. Baylor, (2-0), -6.25
90. Iowa State, (0-1), -6.50
91. Charlotte, (1-1), -6.75
92. USC, (1-1), -6.75
93. Northern Illinois, (0-2), -7.00
94. Georgia Tech, (1-1), -8.00
95. Nebraska, (0-1), -8.00
96. Notre Dame, (2-0), -8.00
97. Akron, (1-0), -8.50
98. UAB, (1-1), -9.00
99. San Diego State, (1-1), -9.00
100. Bowling Green, (0-2), -9.00
101. UTEP, (0-2), -9.25
102. Arkansas State, (1-1), -9.25
103. Clemson, (2-0), -9.88
104. Middle Tennessee, (1-1), -10.00
105. UCLA, (0-2), -10.00
106. Colorado State, (1-2), -10.00
107. Florida, (1-1), -10.25
108. Purdue, (0-2), -10.50
109. Arkansas, (1-1), -10.50
110. Navy, (1-1), -11.75
111. Michigan State, (1-1), -12.00
112. UTSA, (0-2), -12.50
113. Central Michigan, (0-2), -12.50
114. Western Michigan, (0-2), -13.25
115. SMU, (0-2), -13.25
116. Temple, (0-2), -13.75
117. Texas State, (1-1), -14.25
118. Miami (OH), (0-2), -15.00
119. Texas, (1-1), -15.75
120. Louisville, (1-1), -15.75
121. Florida Atlantic, (1-1), -16.25
122. Kansas State, (1-1), -17.50
123. Connecticut, (0-2), -18.00
124. North Carolina, (0-2), -18.75
125. New Mexico State, (0-3), -19.33
126. Pittsburgh, (1-1), -19.50
127. Arizona, (0-2), -20.00
128. Florida State, (1-1), -24.75
129. Ohio, (1-0), -25.50
130. Old Dominion, (0-2), -26.00
Thanks for the update. One blowout with your advice about very limited samples(2 games) may not give an accurate comparable,(your good advice) but is very interesting. It seems that if you could take those preseason predictions that were spot on with the point spread in one group and then those in blowouts seperatly. Correct me if I’m wrong but I would think that the teams or games that covered closest to the average ending point spread early on would lead to better predictability versus continual blowouts. Thanks for what you do.
Expanding on my previous comment:
It it likely that the Markets will adjust and maybe over adjust. Expecting for example Vanderbilt or Boise state to do better then they are capable of ? Causing them to not get enough points versus power teams? So many thoughts. If was easy it wouldn’t be any fun. Thanks again.
I believe in small adjustments these first few weeks of the season. Boise, Vandy are probably better than we expected preseason, but hard to make big claims after two games.