THE POWER RANK

  • About
    • About The Power Rank
    • Start Here
    • Contact
  • Predictions
    • Games
    • March Madness
  • Content
    • Must Read
    • Blog
    • Podcast
    • The Craft of Sports Betting Professionals
    • March Madness Book
  • Rankings
    • World Soccer/Football
    • College Basketball
    • College Football
    • NFL
    • NFL passing success rate
    • MLB
    • Cluster Luck
  • Members
    • My Account
    • Login
    • Become a member
  • Log in

3 predictions from a new college football ranking system, week 6, 2013.

By Dr. Ed Feng 5 Comments

Rankings based on a regression model designed for early in the season.

Rankings based on a regression model designed for early in the season.

After 5 weeks of the college football season, we’re still in the dark about most college football teams. The only certainty is that Lane Kiffin no longer coaches USC.

I always try to improve the preseason and early season college football rankings at The Power Rank. The primary rankings on the site still use last season’s games, with this season’s games counted twice. I think they do a good job, but this method reacts slowly to teams that have struggled, such as Texas (31st).

So I developed new model this week. It’s based on the regression model that I used for my preseason predictions, which consider a team’s rating the last 4 years, turnovers and returning starters. Now, the model includes a rating calculated from only games this year.

The visuals shows the top 10 teams in this regression model. While Baylor is mostly likely overrated at 2nd since they have not played anyone, I do like that Alabama has dropped to 3rd and Washington has cracked the top 10.

Let’s look at the predictions this model makes.

How low should Texas be ranked?

Texas checks in at 51st in this regression model. Their moderate success over the past 4 seasons (moderate by Texas standards) and a host of returning starters keep the Longhorns above the average FBS team (125 teams total).

For last night’s game at Iowa State, the regression model predicted a 2.3 win for Iowa State. The rankings that use last year’s games had Texas by 2.8. The regression model has reacted faster to the Longhorn’s struggles, who have lost badly to Mississippi and BYU.

Texas squeaked out a win last night over Iowa State. They needed a hail mary touchdown at the end of the 1st half as well as a no call on a fumble that would have ended Texas’s game winning drive. Further more, Iowa State gained 6.0 yards per play compared to 4.9 for Texas.

Mack Brown is dating Lady Luck.

How good are the predictions of the new model?

I went back and tested how accurately each ranking system predicted game winners. This test considered all games after week 5 from the 2007 to 2012 seasons.

The regression model predicted 69.2% of game winners, while The Power Rank using last year’s games got 68.9% correct. With an error of about 0.8%, both rankings system have the same predictive power.

However, both methods perform better than The Power Rank with only this year’s games. Those rankings predicted 67.5% of game winners, quite a bit less.

Let’s look at the predictions these two models make.

Notre Dame and Arizona State

Notre Dame has disappointed this season. They have already lost twice, and that 7 point win over Purdue looks worse as the Boilermakers continue to lose badly each week.

The rankings with last year’s games predict a 1.3 point loss against Arizona State at a neutral site in Dallas. However, the regression model predicts a 5.5 point loss, the same as the line.

I still don’t know what to think about Notre Dame. Their defense doesn’t tackle well in the secondary. But Oklahoma scored 14 points off of 2 tipped passes against the Fighting Irish last week. Moreover, QB Tommy Rees had a terrible game.

I’d stay away from this game.

Illinois at Nebraska

Illinois has been a pleasant surprise, a rarity in the Big Ten this season. Behind the 9th best offense, the Fighting Illini are 53rd in the regression model, a miracle for a team that finished 115th last season.

They travel to Lincoln to face a Nebraska team that has struggled on defense. The regression model has reacted more quickly to the opposite fortunes of these two teams, picking a 6 point win for Nebraska (the line favors Nebraska by 9).

The rankings with last year’s games have Nebraska by 13.6 points. With the two teams that do not resemble their preseason expectations, it’s safe to ignore this prediction.

This is my upset special for the week. Nebraska’s offense has not lived up to expectations, and QB Taylor Martinez will not play again this week. Illinois gets the win in Lincoln. Next week’s headlines give Mack Brown a week of reprieve and focus on the job security of Bo Pellini.

Kansas State at Oklahoma State

Kansas State lost a host of starters from last season’s stellar team. In addition, the Wildcats had an unsustainable turnover margin in 2012. Hence, my preseason ranking had them at 37th.

The rankings with last season’s games predict a tight game (0.8 points) in favor of Oklahoma State. Again, it’s safe to ignore that given the changes to this Kansas State team.

The regression model predicts a 9 point win for Oklahoma State. This margin is probably to big. Kansas State fumbled the ball 3 times in gifting a win to Texas last week.

The line favors Oklahoma State by 14. This is too much for a team whose offense hasn’t performed at the elite level it did last season.

What do you think?

I’ve copied the rankings from the regression model below. Would you like to see them as the primary rankings?

Let me know in the comments. Thanks for reading.

1. Oregon (4-0), 28.80
2. Baylor (3-0), 26.81
3. Alabama (4-0), 23.22
4. Stanford (4-0), 17.67
5. Georgia (3-1), 15.98
6. Texas A&M (4-1), 15.55
7. LSU (4-1), 15.49
8. Washington (4-0), 14.31
9. Florida State (4-0), 14.14
10. Florida (3-1), 14.07
11. Ohio State (5-0), 13.87
12. Clemson (4-0), 13.46
13. Louisville (4-0), 12.92
14. UCLA (4-0), 12.58
15. Wisconsin (3-2), 11.93
16. South Carolina (3-1), 11.47
17. Miami (FL) (4-0), 10.73
18. TCU (2-2), 10.14
19. Oklahoma (4-0), 10.14
20. Arizona State (3-1), 9.84
21. Texas Tech (4-0), 9.74
22. Arizona (3-1), 9.59
23. Missouri (4-0), 9.01
24. Utah State (3-2), 8.32
25. Mississippi (3-1), 8.17
26. USC (3-2), 7.75
27. Northwestern (4-0), 7.42
28. Oklahoma State (3-1), 7.41
29. Oregon State (4-1), 7.23
30. Northern Illinois (4-0), 5.76
31. Virginia Tech (4-1), 5.24
32. Tennessee (3-2), 4.79
33. Maryland (4-0), 4.72
34. Auburn (3-1), 4.67
35. UCF (3-1), 4.53
36. Penn State (3-1), 4.43
37. Notre Dame (3-2), 4.37
38. Boise State (3-2), 4.28
39. Nebraska (3-1), 4.11
40. Iowa (4-1), 3.92
41. Michigan State (3-1), 3.67
42. Utah (3-2), 3.45
43. Brigham Young (2-2), 3.41
44. Vanderbilt (3-2), 3.05
45. Georgia Tech (3-1), 3.01
46. Michigan (4-0), 2.60
47. Fresno State (4-0), 2.24
48. West Virginia (3-2), 1.88
49. Arkansas (3-2), 1.76
50. Syracuse (2-2), 1.50
51. Texas (3-2), 1.40
52. Kansas State (2-2), 1.21
53. Illinois (3-1), 1.02
54. East Carolina (3-1), 0.94
55. Mississippi State (2-2), 0.80
56. North Carolina State (3-1), 0.73
57. Iowa State (1-3), 0.72
58. Washington State (3-2), 0.50
59. Rutgers (3-1), -0.15
60. Toledo (2-3), -0.17
61. Ball State (4-1), -0.23
62. Cincinnati (3-1), -0.33
63. San Jose State (1-3), -0.38
64. Pittsburgh (3-1), -0.44
65. Houston (4-0), -0.58
66. California (1-3), -0.62
67. North Carolina (1-3), -0.66
68. Kentucky (1-3), -0.75
69. Minnesota (4-1), -1.11
70. Bowling Green (4-1), -1.49
71. Marshall (2-2), -1.65
72. North Texas (2-2), -1.87
73. Indiana (2-2), -1.90
74. Boston College (2-2), -1.92
75. Western Kentucky (4-2), -2.02
76. Buffalo (2-2), -2.33
77. Ohio (3-1), -2.50
78. Rice (2-2), -2.77
79. Navy (2-1), -3.03
80. San Diego State (1-3), -3.31
81. Connecticut (0-4), -3.37
82. Colorado State (2-3), -4.02
83. Virginia (2-2), -4.74
84. Wyoming (3-2), -5.16
85. SMU (1-3), -5.28
86. Arkansas State (2-3), -5.78
87. Louisiana Lafayette (2-2), -6.11
88. Tulsa (1-3), -6.14
89. Nevada (3-2), -6.31
90. Duke (3-2), -6.34
91. Louisiana Monroe (2-4), -6.46
92. Colorado (2-1), -6.49
93. Army (2-3), -7.09
94. Wake Forest (2-3), -8.01
95. Temple (0-4), -8.05
96. Kent State (2-3), -8.11
97. Louisiana Tech (1-4), -8.17
98. Florida Atlantic (1-4), -8.54
99. Middle Tennessee State (3-2), -8.61
100. Purdue (1-4), -9.07
101. Kansas (2-1), -9.54
102. South Florida (0-4), -9.68
103. Tulane (3-2), -10.27
104. Western Michigan (0-5), -10.40
105. Troy (2-3), -11.14
106. UAB (1-3), -11.34
107. Hawaii (0-4), -11.75
108. Air Force (1-4), -11.80
109. UNLV (3-2), -12.39
110. Southern Miss (0-4), -13.19
111. Memphis (1-2), -13.20
112. Akron (1-4), -13.27
113. UTEP (1-3), -14.38
114. Idaho (1-4), -14.94
115. Miami (OH) (0-4), -15.71
116. Florida International (0-4), -15.86
117. Central Michigan (1-4), -16.30
118. Eastern Michigan (1-3), -17.36
119. New Mexico (1-3), -18.10
120. New Mexico State (0-5), -19.98

Filed Under: Arizona State Sun Devils, College Football, College Football 2013, College Football Analytics, Illinois Fighting Illini, Kansas State Wildcats, Nebraska Cornhuskers, Notre Dame Fighting Irish, Oklahoma State Cowboys

3 predictions for week 1 of college football, 2013

By Dr. Ed Feng Leave a Comment

Are you sick of seeing another Johnny Manziel story this summer? The long off season in college football provides ample time to post videos of Texas frat parties and discuss allegations over autograph sessions.

Do you think new uniforms are news? I don’t. Just last week, SI.com filed a story on Wisconsin’s new red helmets.

It’s time for football. Finally.

Let’s look at some interesting games this weekend.

Georgia at Clemson

The Power Rank: Georgia by 1.1.

Clemson ended last season with a monumental bowl win over LSU. QB Tajh Boyd converted a 4th and 16 to DeAndre Hopkins on the final drive that set up a game winning field goal. For those of you who read my newsletter before this game, it was a big fail for The Power Rank.

A huge bowl win sets high expectations for Clemson this season. Both the Coaches and AP preseason poll have the Tigers 8th in the nation. Conversely, The Power Rank has Clemson 19th.

The odds makers opened the line at Clemson by 2 at home against Georgia, which reflects the opinion of the pollsters. The line has since shifted to a 1.5 win for Georgia, much in line with The Power Rank’s prediction.

The game will be a shoot out.

Georgia brings back 9 starters on offense, including senior QB Aaron Murray. Their top ranked passing attack (yards per attempt adjusted for strength of schedule) last season should only improve. This spells trouble for Clemson secondary that lost 3 starters from a year ago.

However, the Tigers should score points as well. QB Tajh Boyd led the 16th ranked offense last season (yards per play adjusted for strength of schedule). They face a Georgia defense that needs to replace 9 starters, which suggest regression to average from their 20th ranking from last season.

Syracuse and Penn State

The Power Rank: Penn State by 0.9 at a neutral site.

I find this game intriguing since I feel like my preseason rankings overrates both teams. They both lost a productive senior quarterback and have yet to settle on who will start the game at MetLife Stadium in the Meadowlands (New Jersey). Both teams also lost key pieces to the defense, returning 6 starters apiece.

With both teams overrated, one might think the prediction of Penn State by a point should still be valid. However, Penn State is almost a 9 point favorite in Vegas. The markets are also projecting only 4.5 wins for Syracuse this season, predicting the Orange will really fall off after coach Doug Marrone left for The Buffalo Bills.

Southern Illinois at Illinois

The Power Rank: Southern Illinois by 1.2.

Illinois coach Tim Beckman got up to the podium at Big Ten Media Day and fumbled around for a word to describe his emotions for his 2013 team. He finally came up with one: anxious.

That should not instill much confidence in the Fighting Illini fan base. Southern Illinois finished 13th in my FCS rankings last season. They might not pull off the upset, but expect them to give Tim Beckman’s team a fight into the 4th quarter.

Thanks for reading.

Filed Under: Clemson Tigers, College Football, College Football 2013, Georgia Bulldogs, Illinois Fighting Illini, Penn State Nittany Lions, Syracuse Orangemen

3 types of college football coaches that got fired

By Dr. Ed Feng Leave a Comment

College football is a big business. The University of Texas made over $93 million in revenue in 2010, a season in which they went 5-7 and failed to make a bowl game. This excellent visualization from Bloomberg shows the revenue and profit of other major programs. With so much money on the line, athletic directors are desperate to find the superstar coach. So when a coach doesn’t work out, he gets fired. Here, we look at programs headed in a new direction with our offense and defense rankings. The visual shows the offensive and defensive ratings, which corresponds to the expected number of points scored or allowed respectively against average opposition. See the offense and defense rankings for numerical values of these ratings. Note we did not include teams like Southern Miss who had coaches leave for other schools or Ohio State who kept interim coach Luke Fickell within the program.

Data visualization of college football teams that fired coaches at the end of the 2011 season.

The visual shows three regions that stand out.

1. Teams terrible on offense and defense. These teams appear in the lower left corner. Not surprisingly, Akron, Memphis and New Mexico all decided to head in new directions with their program. New Mexico fired Mike Locksley in September, a long overdue move after two 1-11 seasons and one fist to the head of his receivers coach. The fourth team in the corner is Florida Atlantic, whose coach Howard Schnellenberger announced his retirement at the beginning of the season.

2. Teams with a strong defense. Illinois and Penn State stand out in this visual because of their strong defenses. Joe Paterno lost his job over the child sex abuse scandal at Penn State, a shocking and sad state of affairs. The Nittany Lion defense ended the regular season ranked 4th. Illinois let Ron Zook loose after dropping 6 games to end the season, including a 27-7 loss to 69th ranked Minnesota. They finished the season with the 5th best defense after our adjustments for strength of schedule, but an anemic 97th ranked offense sunk the Illini this season.

3. Teams not so terrible on offense and defense. The two strangest firings according to TPR are Mike Sherman at Texas A&M and Dennis Erickson at Arizona State. Earlier, we devoted an entire post and visual to the folly of Sherman’s firing. Not only had his program improved from last year but the Aggies have severely struggled the year after replacing a head coach this decade. However, expectation were high in College Station, and Sherman posted a 6-6 record and lost to rival Texas. Arizona State controlled the Pac-12 South as late as November before 4 straight losses got Erickson fired. TPR has ranked the Sun Devils in the top 20 both of the past two season despite only 9 wins over bowl subdivision teams. So Erickson’s teams were a bit unlucky. However, his team also led the nation in penalty yards this season, and silly penalties prevented his teams from winning. Last night in the MAACO Bowl, an Arizona State defender picked up a personal foul after hitting a Boise State player after he had crossed the goal line. The touchdown made the score 42-10 Boise State. It was a fitting end to Erickson’s tenure.

For more content, find The Power Rank on Twitter.

Related Posts:

—About The Power Rank.
—Ranking college football bowl games: a viewer’s guide.
—College football’s incredibly slow progress towards a playoff.
—Texas A&M should not have fired Mike Sherman
—The Power Rank featured on KALX Spectrum, the science and technology show on UC Berkeley student radio.

Filed Under: Arizona State Sun Devils, College Football, College Football 2011, College Football Analytics, Football Analytics, Illinois Fighting Illini, Mike Sherman, Penn State Nittany Lions, Texas A&M Aggies

Data driven betting information

Valuable. Concise. Entertaining.

To sign up for The Power Rank's email newsletter, enter your best email and click on "Sign up now!"

Popular Articles

  • How to predict interceptions in the NFL
  • 5 insights from academic research on predicting world soccer/football matches
  • How to win your NCAA tournament pool
  • The ultimate guide to predictive college basketball analytics
  • Accurate football predictions with linear regression
  • The surprising truth about passing and rushing in the NFL
  • Football analytics resource guide
  • The Reason You Can’t Avoid The Curse of Small Sample Size
  • The essential guide to predictive CFB rankings
  • How computer rankings make you smarter about sports
  • How to win your college football bowl pool
  • Do you make these 3 mistakes with college football statistics?
  • The Top 10 Things to Know About The Power Rank’s Methods

Recent Articles

  • Members: Super Bowl game and prop analysis
  • 7-Nugget Saturday, January 28, 2023
  • Cincinnati at Kansas City, AFC Conference Championship Game
  • Podcast: Dr. Eric Eager on the NFL Conference Championships
  • Members: Football analysis for NFL Conference Championships

© 2023 The Power Rank Inc., All rights reserved.

About, Terms of Use, Privacy Policy

Smarter sports betting in less than 5 minutes

Valuable. Concise. Entertaining.


These are the goals with every correspondence, which cover bets on the NFL and college football.


To sign up for The Power Rank's free email newsletter, enter your best email and click on "Sign up now!"


No thanks, I'll make my predictions without data and analytics.

{"cookieName":"wBounce","isAggressive":false,"isSitewide":true,"hesitation":"","openAnimation":false,"exitAnimation":false,"timer":"","sensitivity":"","cookieExpire":"","cookieDomain":"","autoFire":"","isAnalyticsEnabled":true}
  • About
    • About The Power Rank
    • Start Here
    • Contact
  • Predictions
    • Games
    • March Madness
  • Content
    • Must Read
    • Blog
    • Podcast
    • The Craft of Sports Betting Professionals
    • March Madness Book
  • Rankings
    • World Soccer/Football
    • College Basketball
    • College Football
    • NFL
    • NFL passing success rate
    • MLB
    • Cluster Luck
  • Members
    • My Account
    • Login
    • Become a member