2011 Gridiron Power Index (GPI) Debuts, Georgia Southern is No. 1

[CSN-info]

http://www.collegesportingnews.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=689&cid=18
College Sporting News

2011 Gridiron Power Index (GPI) Debuts, Georgia Southern is No. 1

The Gridiron Power Index (GPI), the index ranking for the NCAA Division I FCS and a top indicator of at-large playoff selection debuts for the 2011-12 season with unbeaten Georgia Southern in the top spot.

The Southern Conference and Colonial Athletic Association have six teams each in the top 25; the Missouri Valley Football Conference has five; the Big Sky, Great West and Southland Conferences have two each; and the Big South and Ohio Valley Conferences plus the Patriot League have one each. (Games through 10/2/11)

As conference average rankings the Southern Conference has a sizable lead at #1 while the Great West and Missouri Valley Football Conferences plus the Colonial Athletic Association are bunched at #2-3-4 respectively. ...

10/3/2011 GPI Top 25
1. Ga Southern (1.29)
2. Northern Iowa (2.57)
3. Wofford (3.00)
4. N Dakota St (5.00)
5. Montana St (5.43)
6. James Madison (9.00)
7. New Hampshire (10.00)
8. Sam Houston St (10.71)
9. Maine (11.57)
10T. Furman (12.00)
10T. Appalachian St (12.00)
12. Indiana St (15.14)
13. Lehigh (15.86)
14. South Dakota (16.14)
15. McNeese St (18.14)
16. Southern Utah (20.71)
17. Delaware (21.29)
18. Chattanooga (21.43)
19. Montana (21.57)
20. Coastal Carolina (26.43)
21. Samford (27.29)
22. Youngstown St (27.43)
23. Towson (28.00)
24. Tennessee Tech (28.43)
25T. Richmond (28.57)
25T. S Illinois (28.57)

Read More... (http://www.collegesportingnews.com/content.php?624-2011-Gridiron-Power-Index-%28GPI%29-Debuts-With-Georgia-Southern-as-No.-1)

[danefan]

DISCLAIMER:

This is not the GPI officially used by the Playoff Selection Committee. The Selection Committee has in years past used a modified GPI formula as one-third of the Bridge AQ qualification for conferences that qualify for and request an AQ but are denied. This year, as was the case in 2010, only the PFL has applied for and been denied an AQ.

The Bridge AQ is determined as follows:

1. 8 DI wins
2. 2 wins over teams from AQ leagues
3. Average ranking of 20 or higher in (a) the TSN poll, (b) the Coaches Poll and (c) a modified GPI using only Massey, Ashburn, Self, Laz and Wolfe.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/champ_handbooks/football/2010/10_1_football.pdf (emphasis added)

With that being said, it is widely thought that the Committee may unofficially refer to polls and rankings, including the GPI. That has never been confirmed and the below statement from the Chair of the 2010 NCAA Playoff Committee indicates otherwise. Specifically, he had this to say about external polls and rankings:




John McCutcheon: That is a great question. The criteria we use to evaluate which teams get the top seeds are the same as those used to determine which teams get an at-large bid. Those are overall won-loss record, strength of schedule and quality of wins. External polls and computer rankings are not factored into our decisions. We also consider the input received by the regional advisory committees.

http://www.ncaa.com/news/football/2009-11-18/ncca6


With all of that out of the way, I encourage you to enjoy the GPI for what it is - another ranking prime for discussion board fodder. xthumbsupx







And yes Ralph, I do plan to post this exact message each week until CSN can show me that I am wrong in anything I've said above. xsalutex

[Dane96]

DF..........................for President!

[Dane96]

Now, let's get back to the crock of **** that it is:

10. Furman
12. Indiana State
14. South Dakota
15. McNeese
21. Samford
23. Towson
44. Holy Cross

Who has Indiana State Played-- granted, they are a solid team, and a feel good story...but #12?

Who has S. Dakota BEAT-- E. Washington. That's it. I don't count non D-I wins. So, S. Dakota is now 1-0 in FCS, 1-2 overall D-I.

Who has McNeese BEAT- Yes, they are 2-0 in FCS...but they beat two bad football teams...one by 2 points and one in a gamee they gave up nearly 30. I like McNeese...but not at 15. Put it this way: McNeese vs. SELA and Lamar vs. SELA were similar games; anyone ranking Lamar in their Top 15?

Samford- NEED I SAY MORE?!?!?!? They are 0 and ****ing 2 in their conference, losing to the top-2 teams by an average of 14.5 points. Oh...and they beat G-W...who seem to be pretty bad this year. Yes, they played two FBS's...but they were not impressive beating Brevard.

Towson- I don't know what this team needs to do to get ranked higher...

Holy Cross- Not in the Top 25, ok...I could maybe buy that...but in the 40's...get real. They would be in the game to beat most teams this year except for maybe the Top 4 - 5 teams.

[FurmanWins!!]

Furman is solid son, just be patient and let things work themselves out, its to early for you to get worked up about polls and rankings ;)

[OL FU]

Now, let's get back to the crock of **** that it is:

10. Furman
12. Indiana State
14. South Dakota
15. McNeese
21. Samford
23. Towson
44. Holy Cross

Who has Indiana State Played-- granted, they are a solid team, and a feel good story...but #12?

Who has S. Dakota BEAT-- E. Washington. That's it. I don't count non D-I wins. So, S. Dakota is now 1-0 in FCS, 1-2 overall D-I.

Who has McNeese BEAT- Yes, they are 2-0 in FCS...but they beat two bad football teams...one by 2 points and one in a gamee they gave up nearly 30. I like McNeese...but not at 15. Put it this way: McNeese vs. SELA and Lamar vs. SELA were similar games; anyone ranking Lamar in their Top 15?

Samford- NEED I SAY MORE?!?!?!? They are 0 and ****ing 2 in their conference, losing to the top-2 teams by an average of 14.5 points. Oh...and they beat G-W...who seem to be pretty bad this year. Yes, they played two FBS's...but they were not impressive beating Brevard.

Towson- I don't know what this team needs to do to get ranked higher...

Holy Cross- Not in the Top 25, ok...I could maybe buy that...but in the 40's...get real. They would be in the game to beat most teams this year except for maybe the Top 4 - 5 teams.

Always been the problem with Power polls if you play in a highly rated conference, then you are rated more highly. Now to some extent that is fair, on the other hand, you can still lose everygame and be rated high.

[youwouldno]

Computer rankings eliminate human bias but they are never more than the product of a formula. The GPI is problematic because it combines multiple formulas, which is more likely to throw things out of balance than reach a better result.

Samford does really stick out in that GPI ranking. Sagarin has them 7th in the SoCon. It almost looks like it has to be some kind of error.

[Professor Chaos]

Who has Indiana State Played-- granted, they are a solid team, and a feel good story...but #12?
They dominated FBS Western Kentucky... and I don't care if WKU is a bad FBS team. They're still 85 scholarship and it was still on the road and it was still a $h!tkicking.

They also beat a pretty good YSU team at home and beat SDSU on the road which is no easy task no matter how down SDSU is (ask Southern Utah).

Their only loss is to Penn State. I'd say ISU Blue has one of the better resumes in the country at this point in the season.

[bluehenbillk]

Awesome!!! Again, the bastard wanna be little brother of the BCS has saved me a trip to the supermarket to buy toilet paper!!

[Dane96]

Furman is solid son, just be patient and let things work themselves out, its to early for you to get worked up about polls and rankings ;)

I have Furman in my polls...and I have them in a nice slot...just not that high. Based on what they have done, that is a bit of a stretch TODAY.

I like Furman alot though.

[FurmanWins!!]

I have Furman in my polls...and I have them in a nice slot...just not that high. Based on what they have done, that is a bit of a stretch TODAY.

I like Furman alot though.

Cool, I don't know about you guys but I am extremely ready for another Saturday of football!!! ;)

[Dane96]

They dominated FBS Western Kentucky... and I don't care if WKU is a bad FBS team. They're still 85 scholarship and it was still on the road and it was still a $h!tkicking.

They also beat a pretty good YSU team at home and beat SDSU on the road which is no easy task no matter how down SDSU is (ask Southern Utah).

Their only loss is to Penn State. I'd say ISU Blue has one of the better resumes in the country at this point in the season.

Come now.

They beat a bad Butler team. They beat a very very bad WKU team...I mean, last place potentially in FBS and probably wouldn't even be in the top 40 of FCS WKU team.

They Beat Youngstown, which owns wins over Valpo (maybe the worst FCS team) and a meh Illinois State team. Youngstown is my biggest poll question mark; I have them in but barely.

South Dakota State- they own a 1 point win over Southern Utah, which is another enigma team. I dont put stock in a win vs. SDSU.

Again, ISU is a good team...but based on that resume (stated above) they don't deserve to be that high.

[Dane96]

Cool, I don't know about you guys but I am extremely ready for another Saturday of football!!! ;)

All you need to know is we are in the East Coast Purple family ;)

Good to see Furman turning it around again.

[Sycamore51]

Come now.

They beat a bad Butler team. They beat a very very bad WKU team...I mean, last place potentially in FBS and probably wouldn't even be in the top 40 of FCS WKU team.

They Beat Youngstown, which owns wins over Valpo (maybe the worst FCS team) and a meh Illinois State team. Youngstown is my biggest poll question mark; I have them in but barely.

South Dakota State- they own a 1 point win over Southern Utah, which is another enigma team. I dont put stock in a win vs. SDSU.

Again, ISU is a good team...but based on that resume (stated above) they don't deserve to be that high.
If we don't then who does? Any win on the road in the MVFC is a good win. YSU was in the top 25 when we beat them. WKU is an FBS school and we killed them. I'll give you that Butler isn't very strong, but they were sandwiched between 2 FBS schools, so a little pad isn't bad there. 2-1 in our OOC, with 2 FBS schools and an instate rival. 2-0 in the MVFC with a win against a top 25 school at the time and a road win. I think that's pretty solid.

[Dane96]

Just because a team was in the Top 25 when you beat them doesn't mean much today. As for WKU, it was a great win...but there is a difference between humiliating Minnesota (NDSU) and humiliating WKU, a team that would probably be .500 in the FCS and is probably the worst team in FBS. Please understand that there is a difference both objectively and subjectively between certain FBS squads.

And since when is Butler an, "In-State" football rival. Really? "In a series that dates back to 1904, Butler holds a 25-7-2 lead all-time. In Terre Haute, the Bulldogs owns a 9-4-1 advantage. The two teams have not met since 1974, when ISU won 56-27 at Memorial Stadium. Indiana State has won seven of the last eight meetings between the two schools."

Like I said, ISU is a great story, and definitely a Top 20 team. They, however are not a Top 12 team.

[Professor Chaos]

Come now.

They beat a bad Butler team. They beat a very very bad WKU team...I mean, last place potentially in FBS and probably wouldn't even be in the top 40 of FCS WKU team.

They Beat Youngstown, which owns wins over Valpo (maybe the worst FCS team) and a meh Illinois State team. Youngstown is my biggest poll question mark; I have them in but barely.

South Dakota State- they own a 1 point win over Southern Utah, which is another enigma team. I dont put stock in a win vs. SDSU.

Again, ISU is a good team...but based on that resume (stated above) they don't deserve to be that high.
And that perenially last place FBS WKU was 7-1 against FCS competition since they went FBS going into this year. To say they wouldn't be top 40 in the FCS with 85 scholarships is ludicrous. I realize this is an FCS board and we all root for the little guys but there's a reason why the all-time win percentage FBS against FCS is 80%+. The WKU win was impressive by itself but the convincing nature of the win was even more impressive.

[TwoFeathers]

Wow, W&M #43...

[Dane96]

And that perenially last place FBS WKU was 7-1 against FCS competition since they went FBS going into this year. To say they wouldn't be top 40 in the FCS with 85 scholarships is ludicrous. I realize this is an FCS board and we all root for the little guys but there's a reason why the all-time win percentage FBS against FCS is 80%+. The WKU win was impressive by itself but the convincing nature of the win was even more impressive.

LOL.

WKU wins over FCS since going FBS (and let me give you the fact that they were a transition team in 2007 and 2008, and I will include those wins):

Central Arkansas- twice, but a transistion team to FCS.
Morehead- Non-scholarship
Chattanooga- weren't so hot back then.
North Carolina Central- bad team that was transitioning up to FBS
Indiana State- really bad team then
Murry State- sub .500

Best Win-
EKU...was a really good win both years...EKU was a playoff team in both

Let's not pretend WKU was dominating good teams at the FCS level during their transition. They are a bad football team, period.

[Sycamore51]

LOL.

WKU wins over FCS since going FBS (and let me give you the fact that they were a transition team in 2007 and 2008, and I will include those wins):

Central Arkansas- twice, but a transistion team to FCS.
Morehead- Non-scholarship
Chattanooga- weren't so hot back then.
North Carolina Central- bad team that was transitioning up to FBS
Indiana State- really bad team then
Murry State- sub .500

Best Win-
EKU...was a really good win both years...EKU was a playoff team in both

Let's not pretend WKU was dominating good teams at the FCS level during their transition. They are a bad football team, period.

And we beat them like a red headed stepchild. I could understand if it were a close game or something of that nature, but to go on the road, and kill them is impressive. We're not #1 on this list, we're all the way down at #12. I think it's about right.

[Dane96]

"Western Kentucky (22) decided a few years back that despite being a basketball school located in a small state which lacks a surplus of local football talent, it would upgrade from FCS to FBS. The result has been a harsh reality check.

The Hilltoppers have lost 34 of their last 36 games and are winless in 2011, including a 28-point loss to FCS member Indiana State. That's despite not yet playing a true road game, and despite having one of the best players in school history in running back Bobby Rainey. Even playing in the Sun Belt Conference, Western Kentucky may go winless for the second time in the last three seasons."

Guess I am not the only one who cautions against anything positive regarding WKU.

[GaSouthern]

Sadly I think furman is on the rise :)

[MplsBison]

Now, let's get back to the crock of **** that it is:

10. Furman
12. Indiana State
14. South Dakota
15. McNeese
21. Samford
23. Towson
44. Holy Cross

Who has Indiana State Played-- granted, they are a solid team, and a feel good story...but #12?

Who has S. Dakota BEAT-- E. Washington. That's it. I don't count non D-I wins. So, S. Dakota is now 1-0 in FCS, 1-2 overall D-I.

Who has McNeese BEAT- Yes, they are 2-0 in FCS...but they beat two bad football teams...one by 2 points and one in a gamee they gave up nearly 30. I like McNeese...but not at 15. Put it this way: McNeese vs. SELA and Lamar vs. SELA were similar games; anyone ranking Lamar in their Top 15?

Samford- NEED I SAY MORE?!?!?!? They are 0 and ****ing 2 in their conference, losing to the top-2 teams by an average of 14.5 points. Oh...and they beat G-W...who seem to be pretty bad this year. Yes, they played two FBS's...but they were not impressive beating Brevard.

Towson- I don't know what this team needs to do to get ranked higher...

Holy Cross- Not in the Top 25, ok...I could maybe buy that...but in the 40's...get real. They would be in the game to beat most teams this year except for maybe the Top 4 - 5 teams.

It's must be weighted more heavily toward human polls - especially the kinds where voting decisions are made using emotions and losses of any kind can be rationalized. Oh wait, that's every human poll.

[PaladinFan]

Sadly I think furman is on the rise :)

All is right with the world.

[URMite]

It's must be weighted more heavily toward human polls - especially the kinds where voting decisions are made using emotions and losses of any kind can be rationalized. Oh wait, that's every human poll.

I was going to say no that the version Danefan cares about is more human weighted but...

It looks like besides dropping AGS, they also changed the weighting this year.

Last year - each of 5 (out of 7) computer systems and the 3 human systems (including AGS) were given equal weight - 1/8th

This year - average of 5 (out of 7) computer systems and the 2 human systems (not including AGS) were given equal weight - 1/3rd

Is that right? Let multiply the weight of the coach's poll by 2 2/3 and drop AGS, that should fix it! xoopsx

[URMite]

So Danefan, is the only difference between this version and the NCAA modified one now which computer systems are used?

[URMite]

I liked the old one better. :(

That one did seem to be a good system for finding teams to examine more closely or give a second look. Now...xconfusedx

[danefan]

So Danefan, is the only difference between this version and the NCAA modified one now which computer systems are used?

The NCAA GPI has historically included only Massey, Ashburn, Self, Laz and Wolfe. It then took that ranking and found an average between it and the Sportsnetwork and Coaches poll. That resulted in a ranking which consisted of 1/3 Coaches Poll, 1/3 TSN Poll and 1/3 Computer Average of Massey, Ashburn, Self, Laz and Wolfe.

In this new formula it appears that each each human poll only accounts for 1/7th of the rating, while 5 of the 7 computer ratings (dropping the highest and lowest) count for the remaining 5/7th. The computer ratings used here are MAS = Massey, ASH = Ashburn, SAG = Sagarin, LAZ = Laz Index, KEE = Keeper, SEL = Self, BRN = Born.

So all-in-all, (and please someone correct me if I'm wrong), the NCAA GPI would be more heavily weighted towards human polls by far.

[URMite]

Last one,

It seems that Furman benefited from the human cap of 26 (the lowest ranking), while the computers can rank you all the way down to 126 (see William & Mary).

This was true before but rarely seemed to affect the top 25.

[URMite]

The NCAA GPI has historically included only Massey, Ashburn, Self, Laz and Wolfe. It then took that ranking and found an average between it and the Sportsnetwork and Coaches poll. That resulted in a ranking which consisted of 1/3 Coaches Poll, 1/3 TSN Poll and 1/3 Computer Average of Massey, Ashburn, Self, Laz and Wolfe.

In this new formula it appears that each each human poll only accounts for 1/7th of the rating, while 5 of the 7 computer ratings (dropping the highest and lowest) count for the remaining 5/7th. The computer ratings used here are MAS = Massey, ASH = Ashburn, SAG = Sagarin, LAZ = Laz Index, KEE = Keeper, SEL = Self, BRN = Born.

So all-in-all, (and please someone correct me if I'm wrong), the NCAA GPI would be more heavily weighted towards human polls by far.

No, you are right. For some reason, when I first looked at it, I thought they were now using 5 of 7 computer ratings as 1/3rd instead of 5/7ths...not sure why.

[GaSouthern]

All is right with the world.

Honestly I love when App and Furman are "up" each year, I just wish GSU was a little higher up each year than the other two :D

[MplsBison]

I was going to say no that the version Danefan cares about is more human weighted but...

It looks like besides dropping AGS, they also changed the weighting this year.

Last year - each of 5 (out of 7) computer systems and the 3 human systems (including AGS) were given equal weight - 1/8th

This year - average of 5 (out of 7) computer systems and the 2 human systems (not including AGS) were given equal weight - 1/3rd

Is that right? Let multiply the weight of the coach's poll by 2 2/3 and drop AGS, that should fix it! xoopsx

So what you're saying is that last year there were 8 numbers being averaged for each school that determined the respective GPI. Of those 8, there were 5 numbers from computers and 3 numbers from humans.

This year, there are 3 numbers being average to determine GPI, 1 number from computers and 2 numbers from humans.


Yeah I'd say the humans are ruining it.

[danefan]

So what you're saying is that last year there were 8 numbers being averaged for each school that determined the respective GPI. Of those 8, there were 5 numbers from computers and 3 numbers from humans.

This year, there are 3 numbers being average to determine GPI, 1 number from computers and 2 numbers from humans.


Yeah I'd say the humans are ruining it.

The way you described is th way the NCAA AQ bridge works.

This GPI averages 2 human polls and 5 computer polls.

Computers are more of a factor this year than last.