Congrove Rankins

[donovan]

I have always been supportive of Mr. Congrove and his site. He eshcewed the establishment to be true to his systems, for that alone he has my respect. But I do not get these current rankings.

1 Louisiana StateSEC-W
2 Ohio StateBig 10-E
3 ClemsonACC-A
4 GeorgiaSEC-E
5 MichiganBig 10-E
6 AlabamaSEC-W
7 Notre DameInd.
8 AuburnSEC-W
9 Michigan StateBig 10-E
10 OklahomaBig 12
11 Washington StatePAC 12-N
12 WisconsinBig 10-W
13 OregonPAC 12-N How can this be...they have a loss!!!
14 Penn StateBig 10-E
15 FloridaSEC-E
16 UtahPAC 12-S
17 IowaBig 10-W
18 Mississippi StateSEC-W
19 Iowa StateBig 12
20 NorthwesternBig 10-W
21 MinnesotaBig 10-W
22 VirginiaACC-C
23 BaylorBig 12
24 Texas A & MSEC-W
25 KentuckySEC-E
26 South CarolinaSEC-E
27 MissouriSEC-E
28 Southern CaliforniaPAC 12-S
29 Arizona StatePAC 12-S
30 TexasBig 12
31 North Carolina StateACC-A
32 StanfordPAC 12-N
33 Oklahoma StateBig 12
34 SyracuseACC-A
35 Wake ForestACC-A
36 MarylandBig 10-E
37 Texas ChristianBig 12
38 Kansas StateBig 12
39 WashingtonPAC 12-N
40 IndianaBig 10-E
41 IllinoisBig 10-W
42 CaliforniaPAC 12-N
43 DukeACC-C
44 Virginia TechACC-C
45 Boston CollegeACC-A
46 Central FloridaAmer-E
47 Texas TechBig 12
48 PittsburghACC-C
49 Florida StateACC-AThey are ahead of Boise State. A loss and a skin of your teeth win.
50 PurdueBig 10-W
51 ColoradoPAC 12-S
52 Boise StateMWC-M A good win and a not so good squeaker...52nd in the nation....not sure.
53 Appalachian StateSun-E
54 CincinnatiAmer-E
55 MississippiSEC-W

[Cane from the Bend]

---

There are certainly a few head scratchers on that list.

I also would have Maryland somewhere above 20 right now. I think they, along with Virginia are definitely better than Minnesota, Northwestern & Iowa State.

.
.
.

[Spence]

Computer rankings make lots more sense at the end of the year than they do at the beginning.

[Derek]

Michigan should not be that high IMO. And I don't see why LSU is #1 and OSU #2 ahead of Clemson....

[Cane from the Bend]

---

These are based on Computer algorithms, and are formulated on what has happened in Weeks 1 & 2.

I get the LSU ranking. They have lots of yards and points --- though their defensive numbers should be low. Texas had over 400 passing yards on so called DBU.

Ohio State is playing lights out. I don't have a problem with their being ranked as high as they are.

However, Maryland has played just as well as either of those teams. Their stats are very comprable. I believe, also, that Virginia has the same quarter by quarter play efficiency, consistent to Maryland; Though not quite a frequency of scoring percentage.

These models are not drawn up by the eye test, which is where most of us pull back from. Still, this computer model has Notre Dame listed as #7, even though they have only one game to factor in, which was a 2 score win over a team not on this list of 55 teams. Where as several teams with better statistics, and two wins behind them, are listed beneath ND.

Minnesota & Northwestern are listed above both Maryland & Virginia. Yet, Maryland & Virginia have both recorded better offensive and defensive statistics.

As much as I respect the teams that Minnesota played; Fresno State has opened with two losses. So, statistically, the competition in the algorithm should reflect that.

I don't know what the design of Congrove's Computer Poll uses as data entry, other than statistical analysis --- Spence is right, that computer's tend to adjust to shape a more logical conclusion the further into a season we get. However; basing the information, solely by what has already happened on the field; several of these positions look tremendously out of order.

.
.
.