By the end of 2009, my rankings were within +/- 2 places of the AP rankings for the top 16. The first exception was that my #17 team was Oklahoma, who did not appear in the final AP rankings.
Anyway, here are my computer's preseason rankings, based largely on last year's results, recruiting rankings, and some subjective adjustments for offseason activities and major personnel changes.
Rank | Team | Points | AP rank | AP-end 2009 |
1 | Alabama | 111.02 | 1 | 1 |
2 | Florida | 102.52 | 4 | 3 |
3 | Texas | 99.79 | 5 | 2 |
4 | Oregon | 96.30 | 11 | 11 |
5 | Cincinnati | 87.64 | 26 | 8 |
6 | Virginia Tech | 80.66 | 10 | 10 |
7 | OhioState | 77.53 | 2 | 5 |
8 | Oklahoma | 73.34 | 7 | n/a |
9 | BYU | 73.21 | 34 | 12 |
10 | Wyoming | 71.24 | n/a | n/a |
11 | Houston | 70.51 | 30 | n/a |
12 | LSU | 70.42 | 21 | 17 |
13 | Georgia Tech | 69.63 | 16 | 13 |
14 | Boise State | 69.37 | 3 | 4 |
15 | Utah | 69.04 | 28 | 18 |
16 | Penn State | 68.17 | 19 | 9 |
17 | Miami | 67.67 | 13 | 19 |
18 | Stanford | 67.17 | 27 | n/a |
19 | Nebraska | 65.30 | 8 | 14 |
20 | Southern Cal | 65.29 | 14 | 22 |
21 | Iowa | 64.99 | 9 | 7 |
22 | Clemson | 64.90 | 36 | 24 |
23 | Central Michigan | 64.86 | 44 | 23 |
24 | Missouri | 63.41 | 33 | n/a |
25 | Auburn | 63.34 | 22 | n/a |
Well, for the most part, I have the same teams in the rankings as the voters do, except Wyoming. How did they get in there? Apparently they have the 27th best 2010 recruiting class while the 2006 freshman class which is not basically gone ranked 99th. At this point that is weighted rather heavily. A few games into the seaon and that won't be part of teh equation any more.
You left them out just to irritate me, right?
ReplyDeleteleft who out?
ReplyDeleteoh, you mean them dogs? eh.
Interesting. Them dogs have a red shirt freshman qb but surely they will be in the top 25.
ReplyDelete