Post by LSUfan on Nov 5, 2004 11:05:40 GMT -6
DETERMINING THE RELATIVE STRENGTH OF TEAMS THAT DO NOT PLAY EACH OTHER
IF TWO TEAMS DONT PLAY EACH OTHER, HOW DO YOU DETERMINE WHICH TEAM IS BETTER? WE HAVE TO DO THIS ALL THE TIME. FOR INSTANCE, HOW DO WE KNOW THAT LSU WAS BETTER THAN BOISE STATE LAST YEAR IF THEY HAD THE SAME RECORD? OR GEORGIA BETTER THAN TCU?
OF COURSE, WE CAN'T KNOW WITH ANY EMPIRICAL CERTAINTITY BECAUSE TO GET THAT CERTAINTITY WE WOULD NEED THE TWO TEAMS TO PLAY.
HOWEVER, WE MAKE SUCH SUBJECTIVE JUDGMENTS ALL THE TIME. A TEAM THAT FINISHES 10-1 IN THE SEC IS ALMOST ALWAYS THOUGHT OF AS A MUCH, MUCH, MUCH STRONGER TEAM THAN A CUSA TEAM THAT FINISHES 10-1.
FOR INSTANCE, WHY IN 1998 WHEN TENNESSEE WAS 12-0 THOUGHT OF AS A MUCH BETTER TEAM THAN TULANE, A TEAM THAT ALSO FINISHED 12-0?
WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF JUDGMENT SYSTEM TO ON WHICH TO BASE THESE DETERMINATIONS OR ELSE WE HAVE NO NEED TO DIVIDE TEAMS INTO CONFERENCES OR EVEN DIVISIONS (DIV IAA, ETC.).
THIS IS HOW I COMPARE/RANK TEAMS IF THEY DON'T PLAY EACH OTHER. NUMBERED IN ORDER OF IMPORTANCE.
1. W/L RECORD
2. STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE
3. MARGIN OF VICTORY
4. NUMBER OF RANKED TEAMS PLAYED (SIMILAR, BUT EXACTLY THE SAME AS SOS BECAUSE TO BE THE BEST YOU HAVE TO BEAT THE BEST).
5. RESULTS AGAINST COMMON OPPONENTS IF ANY
6. HOW TEAMS DID ON THE ROAD.
7. STRENGTH OF DEFENSE.
8. TALENT AND COACHING
IT'S INTERESTING THAT WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO 2003, LSU WAS AHEAD OF USC IN EACH OF THE ABOVE CATEGORIES. #8 IS DISPUTABLE BECAUSE IT'S SO SUBJECTIVE, BUT LSU HAS A MORE SOUGHT AFTER COACH AND ITS RECRUITING CLASSES THE FIVE YEARS THAT MADE UP LAST YEAR'S TEAM WERE RATED ON AVERAGE HIGHER THAN USC'S. THIS WAS PROVED WHEN 7 LSU PLAYERS WERE DRAFTED LAST YEAR COMPARED TO USC'S 4.
HOW WOULD YOU RANK THESE CRITERIA? ARE THERE OTHER CRITERIA YOU USE?
------------------------------------------------
FACT, FICTION, AND OPINION:
FACT: LSU HAD A TOUGHER STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE THAN USC
FACT: LSU HAD A LARGER MARGIN OF VICTORY THAN USC
FACT: LSU PLAYED FIVE TIMES THE NUMBER OF RANKED TEAMS DURING THE REGULAR SEASON THAN USC.
FACT: LSU'S ONLY LOSS WAS TO A RANKED TEAM. USC'S ONLY LOSS WAS TO UNRANKED, SIX LOSS CAL.
FACT: LSU HAD BETTER RESULTS AGAINST COMMON OPPONENTS, ARIZONA AND AUBURN, THAN USC.
FACT: COMMON OPPONENTS COACHES AND PLAYERS (ARIZONA AND AUBURN AGAIN) SAID AFTER PLAYING BOTH TEAMS THAT LSU WAS BETTER. SOURCE: msnbc.msn.com/id/3475396/
FACT: LSU HAD THE #1 DEFENSE IN THE NATION. USC HAD THE 30TH, INCLUDING THE 110TH RATED PASS DEFENSE.
FACT: LSU HAD MORE WINS THAN USC.
FACT: LSU WON TWO CHAMPIONSHIP GAMES, INCLUDING THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP GAME. USC WON ZERO. ITS BOWL WIN WAS OVER #6.
FACT: LSU PLAYED A PLAYOFF. LSU'S LAST FOUR GAMES WERE AGAINST #13, #27, #5, AND #3. LSU WON BY AN AVERAGE OF OVER 15 AGAINST EACH.
FACT: USC PLAYED NOTHING RESEMBLING A PLAYOFF. IT FINISHED THE SEASON BY PLAYING 3 UNRANKED TEAMS, AND THEN AN OVERRATED MICHIGAN TEAM THAT LOST 3 GAMES, INCLUDING ONE TO AN UNRANKED TEAM.
FACT: LSU PLAYED RANKED TEAMS ON THE ROAD.
FACT: USC PLAYED ZERO RANKED TEAMS ON THE ROAD. CONSIDERING HOW IT DID AGAINST UNRANKED CAL ON THE ROAD, A LOSS, WE MIGHT HAVE SEEN SOME DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS ABOUT WHO DESERVED TO BE IN THE SUGAR IN OU'S STEAD.
OPINION: LSU HAD MORE TALENT THAN USC. VALID OPINION BASED ON THE FACT THAT LSU HAD HIGHER RATED RECRUITING CLASSES IN 4/5 YEARS THAT COMPRISED OF LAST YEAR'S TEAMS. THE ONLY YEAR USC WAS AHEAD, 2002, LSU WAS 15TH WHILE USC WAS 13TH. LSU HAD 11 PLAYERS FROM LAST YEAR'S TEAM WHO ARE STILL ON AN NFL ROSTER NOW. USC ONLY 4.
OPINION: 2003 USC IS THE MOST OVERRATED TEAM SINCE 1984 BYU, MAYBE EVEN MORE THAN 84 BYU. BYU PLAYED THE SAME NUMBER OF RANKED TEAMS AS DID 03 USC, BUT AT LEAST BYU WENT UNDEFEATED.
FICTION: USC WAS BETTER THAN LSU LAST YEAR.
------------------------------
THE STRANGE ABSENCE OF USC'S FAN'S ARGUMENTS FOR USC'S WORTHINESS:
WHERE IS USC'S ARGUMENT?
WITH ALL THE FACTS I THROW OUT HERE, ISN'T IT ODD THAT USC FANS NEVER REBUTE THEM? YOU WOULD THINK SOME GENIUS USC FANS (ISN'T USC SUPPOSED TO BE A GOOD SCHOOL? OR IS IT ONE OF THOSE PAY 30 GRAND A YEAR AND GET B'S TYPE SCHOOL?) WOULD MAKE SOMETHING OF AN ARGUMENT.
BUT THERE IS NONE.
SURE, SOME OF YOU WILL SAY THAT THE USC FANS JUST AREN'T OBSESSIVE LIKE I AM. OTHERS WILL SAY USC FANS SIMPLY DON'T CARE BECAUSE THEY'VE WON MANY NATIONAL TITLES WHILE LSU HAS ONLY WON 2 IN THE PAST FIFTY YEARS.
REMEMBER, THOUGH, USC HASN'T WON A NATIONAL TITLE SINCE 78.
REMEMBER, USC FANS HAVE TRIED TO ARGUE WITH ME IN THE PAST.
REMEMBER, THE INTERNET BRINGS OUT PRIDE IN PEOPLE. PEOPLE WANT TO ARGUE THEIR CASE UNTIL THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY AND TOTALLY EMBARRASSED AND HUMILIATED. USC FANS IN THE PAST HAVE BEEN DRIVEN INTO THE GROUND BY ME, AND THESE SAME USC FANS THAT CONTINUE TO POST NOW, SUCH AS NYCUSC, PACTENFAN, STR8TEASTCOAST, AENEASTROJAN, ETC., CURRENTLY ABSTAIN FROM THE ARGUMENT ALTOGETHER, NOT BECAUSE THEY NO LONGER CARE BUT BECAUSE I HAVE DESTROYED EACH OF THE ARGUMENTS AND COUNTER-ARGUMENTS.
IF USC HAD A CASE, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MADE. SIMPLY PUT, USC IS THE MOST OVERRATED TEAM IN THE HISTORY OF COLLEGE FOOTBALL. USC FANS REALIZE THIS, AND HOPE THAT THIS OFF SEASON MOVES ALONG QUICKLY BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE IT WILL SHUT ME UP.
------------------------------------------------
SCHEDULES COMPARED AND ANALYZED:
LSU proved it is #1 by beating top teams. USC went through the season playing almost exclusively #50-#60 teams. In fact, USC was voted #1 by the AP after playing just one top 25 team! And zero ranked teams on the road!!
Schedules compared side by side (LSU on left/ USC on right).
Oklahoma (12-2) vs Michigan (10-3): OU favored.
UGA (11-3) vs. Washington State (10-3): UGA favored.
UGA (11-3) vs. Auburn (8-5): UGA beat Auburn.
Ole Miss (10-3) vs. Cal (8-6): Ole Miss favored.
Florida (8-5) vs. Oregon State (8-5): UF favored.
Arkansas (9-4) vs. Notre (5-7) Dame: Arkansas favored.
Auburn (8-5) vs. UCLA (6-7): Auburn favored.
------------------------------------------------
Bottom 7:
#62 South Carolina vs. #54 Washington : Washington favored.
#68 Alabama vs. #56 Hawaii: Hawaii won.
#77 LA Tech vs #67 Stanford: Stanford favored.
#89 Arizona vs #72 Arizona State: Arizona State won.
#95 Mississippi State vs #74 BYU: BYU favored.
#117 ULM vs. #89 Arizona: Arizona favored.
Western Illinois: No USC opponent to compare with.
So despite LSU playing three of the worst teams, LSU's strength of
schedule is better than USC's in every computer except one. A top 5
team should be able to #60 as easily as #117. Should the strength of
schedule consider beating #117 and #1 as indicative as beating #60
and#61? Would you be more impressed if LSU had beaten #1 Oklahoma and #117 Louisiana Monroe or if LSU beat #60 North Texas and #61 Tulsa? LSU's SOS was hurt greatly because of its bottom half schedule (even so, LSU's SOS was tougher than USC's!). But a great team is defined by its ability to win the tough games, which LSU has done. Beating abunch of 45-75 teams is nice for your strength of schedule, but it does nothing to prove that your team deserves a shot at the national title.
Looking at USC's schedule, it's no wonder they looked impressive on
paper. They simply played inferior opponents.
One ranked team during the regular season.
Zero ranked teams on the road.
As many losses to unranked teams as wins over ranked teams.
Embarrassing.
------------------------------------------------
THE FINAL BCS STANDINGS AFTER THE BOWLS:
The computer polls actually post new rankings after the bowl games. And since SOS changes can still be determined, Rich Tellshow has come up with the final tally.
..........................W-L...Comp..CoachAP....Ave....QW....SOS.....Total
1 LSU.................13-1....1.00......1......2.....1.5.....1.2.....0.52.....2.82
2 USC.................12-1....1.83......2......1.....1.5.....0.4....0.80......4.73
3 Ohio State.......11-2....4.33......4......4.....4.0.....0.2....0.56.....10.29
4 Oklahoma.......12-2....5.00......3......3.....3.0......0......0.56.....10.56
------------------------------------------------
FINAL COMPUTER RANKINGS:
LSU wins 6 of 7 computer polls, most by SIGNIFICANT margins over USC. Only the NYTimes poll gave USC the #1 spot, by a VERY SLIGHT margin.
LSU finishes 13th in the nation in SOS, ahead of OU who finishes 14th
and USC finished 20th. LSU was mere fractions away from actually
finishing 10th. Remove the Western Illinois game, which should have
never been scheduled, and LSU finishes 8th.
Computer poll results:
Kevin Massey
1 LSU..........5.060
2 USC..........4.756
3 Ohio St.....4.604
4 Georgia.....4.572
5 Miami OH...4.550
Jeff Sagarin
1 LSU..........98.21
2 USC..........95.56
3 Georgia.....92.01
4 Miami OH...91.89
5 Miami FL....91.21
NY Times
1 USC...........1.000
2 LSU............0.996
3 Maryland.....0.934
4 Ohio St.......0.927
5 Miami..........0.909
(Note: Maryland #3......hmmmmmm....makes you wonder about this poll)
Billingsley
1 LSU.............309.977
2 USC.............308.769
3 Oklahoma......295.654
4 Miami FL.......291.686
5 Ohio St.........290.926
(Note: LSU started the season 30 points behind USC in the first polling
for Billingsley)
Anderson-Hester
1 LSU...........0.792
2 USC...........0.774
3 Miami OH....0.758
4 Oklahoma....0.746
5 Ohio St.......0.744
Peter Wolfe
1 LSU............7.634
2 USC............7.252
3 Miami OH......6.910
4 Georgia........6.904
5 Oklahoma.....6.766
Colley Matrix
1 LSU...........0.93172
2 USC...........0.91873
3 Ohio St......0.87783
4 Oklahoma...0.87058
5 Miami FL.....0.84364
IF TWO TEAMS DONT PLAY EACH OTHER, HOW DO YOU DETERMINE WHICH TEAM IS BETTER? WE HAVE TO DO THIS ALL THE TIME. FOR INSTANCE, HOW DO WE KNOW THAT LSU WAS BETTER THAN BOISE STATE LAST YEAR IF THEY HAD THE SAME RECORD? OR GEORGIA BETTER THAN TCU?
OF COURSE, WE CAN'T KNOW WITH ANY EMPIRICAL CERTAINTITY BECAUSE TO GET THAT CERTAINTITY WE WOULD NEED THE TWO TEAMS TO PLAY.
HOWEVER, WE MAKE SUCH SUBJECTIVE JUDGMENTS ALL THE TIME. A TEAM THAT FINISHES 10-1 IN THE SEC IS ALMOST ALWAYS THOUGHT OF AS A MUCH, MUCH, MUCH STRONGER TEAM THAN A CUSA TEAM THAT FINISHES 10-1.
FOR INSTANCE, WHY IN 1998 WHEN TENNESSEE WAS 12-0 THOUGHT OF AS A MUCH BETTER TEAM THAN TULANE, A TEAM THAT ALSO FINISHED 12-0?
WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF JUDGMENT SYSTEM TO ON WHICH TO BASE THESE DETERMINATIONS OR ELSE WE HAVE NO NEED TO DIVIDE TEAMS INTO CONFERENCES OR EVEN DIVISIONS (DIV IAA, ETC.).
THIS IS HOW I COMPARE/RANK TEAMS IF THEY DON'T PLAY EACH OTHER. NUMBERED IN ORDER OF IMPORTANCE.
1. W/L RECORD
2. STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE
3. MARGIN OF VICTORY
4. NUMBER OF RANKED TEAMS PLAYED (SIMILAR, BUT EXACTLY THE SAME AS SOS BECAUSE TO BE THE BEST YOU HAVE TO BEAT THE BEST).
5. RESULTS AGAINST COMMON OPPONENTS IF ANY
6. HOW TEAMS DID ON THE ROAD.
7. STRENGTH OF DEFENSE.
8. TALENT AND COACHING
IT'S INTERESTING THAT WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO 2003, LSU WAS AHEAD OF USC IN EACH OF THE ABOVE CATEGORIES. #8 IS DISPUTABLE BECAUSE IT'S SO SUBJECTIVE, BUT LSU HAS A MORE SOUGHT AFTER COACH AND ITS RECRUITING CLASSES THE FIVE YEARS THAT MADE UP LAST YEAR'S TEAM WERE RATED ON AVERAGE HIGHER THAN USC'S. THIS WAS PROVED WHEN 7 LSU PLAYERS WERE DRAFTED LAST YEAR COMPARED TO USC'S 4.
HOW WOULD YOU RANK THESE CRITERIA? ARE THERE OTHER CRITERIA YOU USE?
------------------------------------------------
FACT, FICTION, AND OPINION:
FACT: LSU HAD A TOUGHER STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE THAN USC
FACT: LSU HAD A LARGER MARGIN OF VICTORY THAN USC
FACT: LSU PLAYED FIVE TIMES THE NUMBER OF RANKED TEAMS DURING THE REGULAR SEASON THAN USC.
FACT: LSU'S ONLY LOSS WAS TO A RANKED TEAM. USC'S ONLY LOSS WAS TO UNRANKED, SIX LOSS CAL.
FACT: LSU HAD BETTER RESULTS AGAINST COMMON OPPONENTS, ARIZONA AND AUBURN, THAN USC.
FACT: COMMON OPPONENTS COACHES AND PLAYERS (ARIZONA AND AUBURN AGAIN) SAID AFTER PLAYING BOTH TEAMS THAT LSU WAS BETTER. SOURCE: msnbc.msn.com/id/3475396/
FACT: LSU HAD THE #1 DEFENSE IN THE NATION. USC HAD THE 30TH, INCLUDING THE 110TH RATED PASS DEFENSE.
FACT: LSU HAD MORE WINS THAN USC.
FACT: LSU WON TWO CHAMPIONSHIP GAMES, INCLUDING THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP GAME. USC WON ZERO. ITS BOWL WIN WAS OVER #6.
FACT: LSU PLAYED A PLAYOFF. LSU'S LAST FOUR GAMES WERE AGAINST #13, #27, #5, AND #3. LSU WON BY AN AVERAGE OF OVER 15 AGAINST EACH.
FACT: USC PLAYED NOTHING RESEMBLING A PLAYOFF. IT FINISHED THE SEASON BY PLAYING 3 UNRANKED TEAMS, AND THEN AN OVERRATED MICHIGAN TEAM THAT LOST 3 GAMES, INCLUDING ONE TO AN UNRANKED TEAM.
FACT: LSU PLAYED RANKED TEAMS ON THE ROAD.
FACT: USC PLAYED ZERO RANKED TEAMS ON THE ROAD. CONSIDERING HOW IT DID AGAINST UNRANKED CAL ON THE ROAD, A LOSS, WE MIGHT HAVE SEEN SOME DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS ABOUT WHO DESERVED TO BE IN THE SUGAR IN OU'S STEAD.
OPINION: LSU HAD MORE TALENT THAN USC. VALID OPINION BASED ON THE FACT THAT LSU HAD HIGHER RATED RECRUITING CLASSES IN 4/5 YEARS THAT COMPRISED OF LAST YEAR'S TEAMS. THE ONLY YEAR USC WAS AHEAD, 2002, LSU WAS 15TH WHILE USC WAS 13TH. LSU HAD 11 PLAYERS FROM LAST YEAR'S TEAM WHO ARE STILL ON AN NFL ROSTER NOW. USC ONLY 4.
OPINION: 2003 USC IS THE MOST OVERRATED TEAM SINCE 1984 BYU, MAYBE EVEN MORE THAN 84 BYU. BYU PLAYED THE SAME NUMBER OF RANKED TEAMS AS DID 03 USC, BUT AT LEAST BYU WENT UNDEFEATED.
FICTION: USC WAS BETTER THAN LSU LAST YEAR.
------------------------------
THE STRANGE ABSENCE OF USC'S FAN'S ARGUMENTS FOR USC'S WORTHINESS:
WHERE IS USC'S ARGUMENT?
WITH ALL THE FACTS I THROW OUT HERE, ISN'T IT ODD THAT USC FANS NEVER REBUTE THEM? YOU WOULD THINK SOME GENIUS USC FANS (ISN'T USC SUPPOSED TO BE A GOOD SCHOOL? OR IS IT ONE OF THOSE PAY 30 GRAND A YEAR AND GET B'S TYPE SCHOOL?) WOULD MAKE SOMETHING OF AN ARGUMENT.
BUT THERE IS NONE.
SURE, SOME OF YOU WILL SAY THAT THE USC FANS JUST AREN'T OBSESSIVE LIKE I AM. OTHERS WILL SAY USC FANS SIMPLY DON'T CARE BECAUSE THEY'VE WON MANY NATIONAL TITLES WHILE LSU HAS ONLY WON 2 IN THE PAST FIFTY YEARS.
REMEMBER, THOUGH, USC HASN'T WON A NATIONAL TITLE SINCE 78.
REMEMBER, USC FANS HAVE TRIED TO ARGUE WITH ME IN THE PAST.
REMEMBER, THE INTERNET BRINGS OUT PRIDE IN PEOPLE. PEOPLE WANT TO ARGUE THEIR CASE UNTIL THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY AND TOTALLY EMBARRASSED AND HUMILIATED. USC FANS IN THE PAST HAVE BEEN DRIVEN INTO THE GROUND BY ME, AND THESE SAME USC FANS THAT CONTINUE TO POST NOW, SUCH AS NYCUSC, PACTENFAN, STR8TEASTCOAST, AENEASTROJAN, ETC., CURRENTLY ABSTAIN FROM THE ARGUMENT ALTOGETHER, NOT BECAUSE THEY NO LONGER CARE BUT BECAUSE I HAVE DESTROYED EACH OF THE ARGUMENTS AND COUNTER-ARGUMENTS.
IF USC HAD A CASE, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MADE. SIMPLY PUT, USC IS THE MOST OVERRATED TEAM IN THE HISTORY OF COLLEGE FOOTBALL. USC FANS REALIZE THIS, AND HOPE THAT THIS OFF SEASON MOVES ALONG QUICKLY BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE IT WILL SHUT ME UP.
------------------------------------------------
SCHEDULES COMPARED AND ANALYZED:
LSU proved it is #1 by beating top teams. USC went through the season playing almost exclusively #50-#60 teams. In fact, USC was voted #1 by the AP after playing just one top 25 team! And zero ranked teams on the road!!
Schedules compared side by side (LSU on left/ USC on right).
Oklahoma (12-2) vs Michigan (10-3): OU favored.
UGA (11-3) vs. Washington State (10-3): UGA favored.
UGA (11-3) vs. Auburn (8-5): UGA beat Auburn.
Ole Miss (10-3) vs. Cal (8-6): Ole Miss favored.
Florida (8-5) vs. Oregon State (8-5): UF favored.
Arkansas (9-4) vs. Notre (5-7) Dame: Arkansas favored.
Auburn (8-5) vs. UCLA (6-7): Auburn favored.
------------------------------------------------
Bottom 7:
#62 South Carolina vs. #54 Washington : Washington favored.
#68 Alabama vs. #56 Hawaii: Hawaii won.
#77 LA Tech vs #67 Stanford: Stanford favored.
#89 Arizona vs #72 Arizona State: Arizona State won.
#95 Mississippi State vs #74 BYU: BYU favored.
#117 ULM vs. #89 Arizona: Arizona favored.
Western Illinois: No USC opponent to compare with.
So despite LSU playing three of the worst teams, LSU's strength of
schedule is better than USC's in every computer except one. A top 5
team should be able to #60 as easily as #117. Should the strength of
schedule consider beating #117 and #1 as indicative as beating #60
and#61? Would you be more impressed if LSU had beaten #1 Oklahoma and #117 Louisiana Monroe or if LSU beat #60 North Texas and #61 Tulsa? LSU's SOS was hurt greatly because of its bottom half schedule (even so, LSU's SOS was tougher than USC's!). But a great team is defined by its ability to win the tough games, which LSU has done. Beating abunch of 45-75 teams is nice for your strength of schedule, but it does nothing to prove that your team deserves a shot at the national title.
Looking at USC's schedule, it's no wonder they looked impressive on
paper. They simply played inferior opponents.
One ranked team during the regular season.
Zero ranked teams on the road.
As many losses to unranked teams as wins over ranked teams.
Embarrassing.
------------------------------------------------
THE FINAL BCS STANDINGS AFTER THE BOWLS:
The computer polls actually post new rankings after the bowl games. And since SOS changes can still be determined, Rich Tellshow has come up with the final tally.
..........................W-L...Comp..CoachAP....Ave....QW....SOS.....Total
1 LSU.................13-1....1.00......1......2.....1.5.....1.2.....0.52.....2.82
2 USC.................12-1....1.83......2......1.....1.5.....0.4....0.80......4.73
3 Ohio State.......11-2....4.33......4......4.....4.0.....0.2....0.56.....10.29
4 Oklahoma.......12-2....5.00......3......3.....3.0......0......0.56.....10.56
------------------------------------------------
FINAL COMPUTER RANKINGS:
LSU wins 6 of 7 computer polls, most by SIGNIFICANT margins over USC. Only the NYTimes poll gave USC the #1 spot, by a VERY SLIGHT margin.
LSU finishes 13th in the nation in SOS, ahead of OU who finishes 14th
and USC finished 20th. LSU was mere fractions away from actually
finishing 10th. Remove the Western Illinois game, which should have
never been scheduled, and LSU finishes 8th.
Computer poll results:
Kevin Massey
1 LSU..........5.060
2 USC..........4.756
3 Ohio St.....4.604
4 Georgia.....4.572
5 Miami OH...4.550
Jeff Sagarin
1 LSU..........98.21
2 USC..........95.56
3 Georgia.....92.01
4 Miami OH...91.89
5 Miami FL....91.21
NY Times
1 USC...........1.000
2 LSU............0.996
3 Maryland.....0.934
4 Ohio St.......0.927
5 Miami..........0.909
(Note: Maryland #3......hmmmmmm....makes you wonder about this poll)
Billingsley
1 LSU.............309.977
2 USC.............308.769
3 Oklahoma......295.654
4 Miami FL.......291.686
5 Ohio St.........290.926
(Note: LSU started the season 30 points behind USC in the first polling
for Billingsley)
Anderson-Hester
1 LSU...........0.792
2 USC...........0.774
3 Miami OH....0.758
4 Oklahoma....0.746
5 Ohio St.......0.744
Peter Wolfe
1 LSU............7.634
2 USC............7.252
3 Miami OH......6.910
4 Georgia........6.904
5 Oklahoma.....6.766
Colley Matrix
1 LSU...........0.93172
2 USC...........0.91873
3 Ohio St......0.87783
4 Oklahoma...0.87058
5 Miami FL.....0.84364
