Nebraska Cornhuskers

College football predictions for week 10, 2016

When I post my public predictions, my computer ranks the games by quality of teams and predicted closeness of outcome. It’s a viewer’s guide that highlights good teams in close games.

This week, Nebraska at Ohio State filtered up to the top, with a prediction of an Ohio State win by 8.4 points. That spread is too low.

The predictions comes from team rankings based on margin of victory adjusted for strength of schedule. Each week, you can find the latest rankings here.

Nebraska has played well this season, as they lost their first game to Wisconsin this past week. The Cornhuskers rank a solid 14th.

Ohio State started the season strong but has stumbled the past two weeks with a loss at Penn State and an unexpectedly close win over Northwestern. This stumble has dropped the Buckeyes from 2nd to 7th in the public team rankings.

Still, a 8.4 point spread isn’t enough. Margin of victory is a noisy indicator of team strength when looking at small sample size of 8 or so games. Let’s look at other methods for rankings teams to reveal more insight into Nebraska at Ohio State.

At The Power Rank, I also rank teams based on yards per play, a powerful efficiency metric that measures how well an offense can move the ball or a defense can prevent this movement. After adjustments for schedule, Ohio State and Nebraska rank 7th and 40th respectively.

This season, I also started using data from the markets to rank football teams. This uses the closing spread in games and adjusts for strength of schedule. Here, Ohio State and Nebraska rank 2nd and 29th respectively.

My prediction for members is much closer to the 17 points set by the markets as of Tuesday morning. There might be some value in taking Nebraska at that number, but it feels wrong to go against the talent of Ohio State.

You can see all my public college football predictions for week 10 here.

If you need my most accurate predictions, consider becoming a member of The Power Rank.

Is Iowa safe from an upset against Nebraska?

By Dr. Ed Feng 1 Comment

It seems like undefeated Iowa should cruise to an easy win over 5-6 Nebraska.

Nebraska has had a nightmare season, causing some fans to call for the firing of first year coach Mike Riley. In contrast, Iowa has already clinched the Big Ten West and has cracked the top four of the college football playoff committee rankings.

However, my number favor Nebraska against Iowa on Friday. Let me explain.

Nebraska’s poor record in close games

Nebraska has lost 5 games by a total of 13 points. Randomness plays a huge role in a team’s record in close games, and this year’s Cornhuskers are a perfect example.

In their first game, BYU beat Nebraska on a hail mary pass in the final seconds. They had a 0-5 record in games decided by a touchdown or less heading into the Michigan State game.

Then Nebraska’s luck turned against Michigan State. The refs ruled that a receiver had been pushed out of bounds, which allowed him to legally catch the game winning touchdown. Nebraska scored a big upset over the Spartans.

Nebraska is a much better team than their 5-6 record suggests.

Iowa isn’t as good as 11-0 suggests

On the other hand, Iowa came into this season with low expectations. They received no votes in either the preseason AP or Coaches poll. This might seem irrelevant this late in the season, but the higher ranked team in the preseason Coaches poll has won 59.9% of bowl games since 2005. They are remarkable predictors of team strength.

In addition, Iowa has had 11 more take aways than give aways this season. Randomness plays a large role in turnovers, and the Hawkeyes are unlikely to continue to average +1 in turnover margin per game. QB C.J. Beathard has throw interceptions on 1% on his pass attempts, a number that will regress to the college football average of 3%.

Nebraska has a 53% win probability over Iowa

Nebraska will test Iowa this Saturday. Iowa is the better team, but my numbers favor Nebraska by a point due to home field advantage. The markets favor Iowa by a point, down from two points earlier this week. Both metrics imply a close game that Iowa must win to preserve its playoff hopes.

The odds for the 2014 Big Ten Tourney

By Dr. Ed Feng 1 Comment

My buddy Mark Elsesser tweeted me yesterday about whether Nebraska at 16 to 1 odds to win the Big Tourney had value.

Nebraska has been hot lately, with wins over Michigan State and Wisconsin towards the end of the conference schedule. However, my rankings, which consider all games from the season, only rank them as the 8th best Big Ten team.

I calculated the win probability for the Big Ten tourney, which starts in a few hours.

1. Wisconsin, 22.6%
2. Michigan, 20.1%
3. Michigan State, 17.7%
4. Ohio State, 13.7%
5. Iowa, 10.6%
6. Nebraska, 5.5%
7. Minnesota, 3.1%
8. Indiana, 2.9%
9. Illinois, 1.9%
10. Penn State, 0.9%
11. Purdue, 0.8%
12. Northwestern, 0.2%

Nebraska has the benefit of a first round bye, making the 8th best team have the 6th highest win probability.

The Vegas odds of 16 to 1 equates to a 5.8% win probability, which is consistent with my calculation of 5.5%.

Overall, the tourney looks wide open. Five teams have a greater than 10% chance to win.

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.

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

The Top 25 College Football Teams of 2013 by Recruiting Rankings

By Dr. Ed Feng Leave a Comment

Recruiting rankings do matter.

Each year, Rivals assigns a rating or points value to each school that describes the talent of the players who signed a letter of intent. For Sports Illustrated, we developed a model that takes the Rivals ratings and predicts future team performance. To compare the rankings from this model with the preseason AP poll, we looked at which rankings better predicted the final AP poll.

The Rivals model did as good or better than the preseason AP poll on 46 out of 100 teams over the last 4 years. This is remarkable given the limited information the recruiting model has compared with the writers that vote in the AP poll.

To get the full story on SI.com, click here.

Before we count down the top 25 teams for 2013, we note the following about this regression model.

The regression model has learned from the past by relating recruiting ratings to the team ratings from The Power Rank algorithm. For example, recruiting data from 2009 to 2012 were fit to The Power Rank’s results for the 2012 season. Our team ratings from the regular season have picked the winner in 62.8% of bowl games over the last 11 years, a better percentage than the Vegas line (62.2%). Part of the accuracy of the recruiting model depends on our team ratings.
We used the final AP poll as the measuring stick for the accuracy of the Rivals model and the preseason AP poll. This poll has problems, as it strongly considers wins but almost ignores margin of victory. However, it was the most relevant measurement of team strength for a general college football audience.
The 100 teams we looked at were the top 25 teams in the preseason AP poll over the last 4 years. This puts the recruiting model in a better light, since this set of teams didn’t include teams highly ranked by the recruiting model but outside the AP top 25. For example, the recruiting model had Auburn 7th heading into the 2012 season. The preseason AP poll had Auburn 28th, which more accurately predicted their disasterous season.

With the passing of National Signing Day 2013, we now have the Rivals ratings to predict the 2013 college football season. The predictions are based the past 8 years of team performance.

25. Stanford. The Cardinal only had 12 scholarships to offer incoming freshmen. Since the number of recruits directly affects the Rivals team rating, Stanford only had the 61st ranked class this year, a far cry from their 5th ranked class a season ago.

24. Miami (FL). Miami coach Al Golden can’t walk off campus without tripping over a highly touted high school player. However, impending NCAA sanctions made recruiting difficult this year, as they had the 44th best class, much worse than their 9th ranking a year ago.

23. Virginia Tech. Despite two down years, coach Frank Beamer still recruited the 22nd ranked class. The Hokies need QB Logan Thomas’s passing to improve or groom a better passer.

22. California. The Bears continue to recruit well despite the coaching change from Jeff Tedford to Sonny Dykes. However, this ranking is probably too high. The Cal offense will be learning a new spread system under Dykes, while the defense lost coordinator Clancy Pendergast to USC.

21. Washington. The Huskies have continually improved their recruiting rank over the last 4 year, rising from 28th in 2010 to 18th in 2013. Hopefully, some of the linemen recruiting during this time will give QB Keith Price better protection next season.

20. Nebraska. The Cornhuskers pulled in the 17th best class, by far the 3rd best class in the Big Ten. Unfortunately, Michigan and Ohio State were way ahead, and Nebraska has to travel to Ann Arbor this season.

19. South Carolina. With all the media chatter about the talent in Columbus and the draw dropping hits from Jadeveon Clowney, you might think South Carolina is a top 10 recruiting team. In reality, their 16th ranking in 2013 was their best over the last 4 seasons.

18. Tennessee. The Rivals model had the Vols 13th in the nation last season, which was way too high. With new coach Butch Jones taking over, this year’s 18th ranking is also probably too high.

17. Oregon. Over the last 4 years, the Rivals model has consistently underrated the Ducks. The preseason AP poll was more accurate each year. Will this continue after head coach Chip Kelly handed the program over to Mark Helfrich?

16. UCLA. In talent rich Southern California, the Bruins always recruit well. They finally lived up to that talent last season under first year head coach Jim Mora. Their 11th ranked class this year should continue this trajectory.

15. Texas A&M. New coach Kevin Sumlin is getting tons of credit for recruiting the 10th best class this year. Of course, it helps that Johnny Manziel (a 3 star recruit) led the Aggies to their best season in more than a decade.

14. Mississippi. The Rebels and coach Hugh Freeze had a magical signing day, landing two top 10 recruits on the offensive and defensive line. Their 7th ranking is by far their best since 2002. However, three of their rivals in the SEC west are ranked higher in these rankings.

13. Clemson. With their dramatic, come from behind win against LSU in the Chick-fil-A Bowl, the Tigers will surely be an overrated top 10 team in the preseason AP poll. This ranking in the teens seems more appropriate.

12. Oklahoma. In the past 12 years, the Sooners have recruited a top 10 class 7 times. However, none of these top 10 classes have occurred during the last 3 seasons. Coach Bob Stoops needs more talent on the defensive line to start contending for national titles again.

11. Texas. Even Mack Brown can’t recruit after 3 subpar seasons. The Longhorns had the 23rd ranked class, their worst since 2002. Their usually excellent defense really needs help after last season.

10. Georgia. How would the Bulldogs recruiting class would have fared if the coaches had told QB Aaron Murray to spike the ball during the waning moments of the SEC championship game? A win over Alabama would have landed Georgia in the national title game against Notre Dame. Instead, they had the 12th best class, a fine rank but the second worst for coach Mark Richt over the last 12 years.

9. Michigan. After a disasterous 3 seasons under Rich Rodriguez, Brady Hoke has turned around this program both on the field and recruiting trail. The Wolverines notched the 5th ranked class after finishing 7th last year. These are their two best ranked classes over the last 8 years.

8. USC. While we kept hearing about the defections from the Trojan’s class, no one mentioned that coach Lane Kiffin still had five 5 star recruits coming to campus, more than any other school (yes, even Alabama). Lack of talent will not be a problem for USC.

7. Auburn. Yes, feel free to call BS on this one. The Tigers continue to recruit well. But unless the next Cam Newton and Nick Fairley show up on campus this fall, Auburn will not return to elite status this season under new coach Gus Malzahn.

6. Florida State. Call BS on this one at your own risk. Despite disappointing loses to NC State and Florida this year, expect the talent rich Seminoles to exceed expectations next season.

5. LSU. It’s a bit shocking that top recruit Robert Nkemdiche picked Ole Miss over LSU. There’s more certainly in winning games in Baton Rouge. Still, coach Les Miles landed the 6th best class in the nation.

4. Notre Dame. The Fighting Irish took full advantage of their undefeated regular season and landed the 3rd best class in the nation. While we should expect Notre Dame to be good next year, 4th is probably too high.

3. Ohio State. The Buckeyes will not surprise anyone this year. In coach Urban Meyer’s first season, Ohio State started the year 18th in the preseason AP poll. Now, with an undefeated season and a 2nd ranked recruiting class, anything but a national title will be a disappointment.

2. Florida. Last year, first year coach Will Muschamp landed the 3rd ranked class despite finishing 7-6. Somehow, a 11-2 season this year got the Gators the 4th ranked class (although they did top the rankings before National Signing Day). Talent is never a problem at Florida.

1. Alabama. Duh. What did you expect? After going 7-6 in his first year at Alabama, coach Nick Saban still recruited the top ranked class in 2008. This started a streak of top ranked classes for Alabama in 5 of the last 6 years. The rest of the SEC should resort to a voodoo consultant to bring bad turnover luck to Alabama next season.

Outlook

No one should take these rankings too seriously. With the short season and the youth of the players involved, college football is incredibly difficult to predict during the preseason. And these rankings have their problems. There’s an incredibly high likelihood that Boise State will be better than the 60th best team in the nation next year.

However, these rankings are still useful, and not only because they are six months ahead of the preseason AP poll. As with all predictive analytics, use these rankings has a guide to help navigate expectations for next season.

Moreover, this is only the beginning of our preseason college football predictions. To keep up to date, sign up for our free email newsletter below.

Thanks for reading.