
Started By
Message
Week 9 Power Ratings and SEC slate
Posted on 10/25/26 at 10:14 am
Posted on 10/25/26 at 10:14 am
UPDATE to the model:
Added turnover rate at the suggestion of Quicksilver. PFF found that 50% of turnover-worthy throws by QBs are intercepted. And 1/3 of all interceptions come from passes that are not classified as turnover-worthy. This is basically saying that more than half of interceptions are caused by bad throws by the QB and from the perspective of the defense are considered "luck".
Football Outsiders has determined that forcing a fumble is skill-based, but actually recovering the fumble is around 50%.
Because of all this, Bill Connelly also uses 50% in SP+ ratings.
So what this means is teams that have a high net turnover margin will be docked - because they are considered to score points off lucky turnovers. But it's not a blanket increase or decrease, it's still by game. In football, turnovers correlate to 5.7 points per turnover. A turnover points value of 2 per team (because 50/50) ended up being the most accurate for predictions. So, here's an example of how it's actually applied in my model now.
Kentucky - 0 turnovers - 15 offensive points, 6 defensive points
Oklahoma - 4 turnovers - 13 offensive points, 0 defensive points
the model says Kentucky earned two of those turnovers and the other two it got lucky, so it reduces Kentucky's offensive score by 4 (2 x 2), and increases Oklahoma's offensive score by 4 (2 x 2). So the model basically sees the game this way:
Kentucky - 17 points
Oklahoma - 17 points
And that's how credit for the game is then dispersed. So it hurt Kentucky and helped Oklahoma.
Teams that have a high negative turnover margin, it will help (Oklahoma, Oregon). Teams that have a turnover margin around zero, it will be insignificant (LSU, Ole Miss, BYU). Teams that have a high positive turnover margin, it will hurt (Kentucky, ND, Miami, Missouri, Nebraska, UCLA).
If you see a team that is rated higher than expected (Oregon) and they turn the ball over a lot - this means they are keeping games close even though they give the ball away a lot. That's why it helps their power rating.
If you see a team that is rated lower than expected (Kentucky) and they have a lot of takeaways - this means they are letting other teams keep the game close even though they have a lot of takeways. That's why it hurts their power rating.
Adding this IMPROVED backtesting MAE by 0.1 points - which is a considerable gain.
LSU jumped to the top because of yet another dominant performance over Auburn and because ND and Miami both fell due to the turnover luck.
If you want to cry about LSU, they have high expectations right now. They are currently favored over Bama by 8(h), Texas by 9.5(h), and Tenn by 7(a). If LSU doesn't live up to that, they will quickly fall. This will all work itself out in the end.
Submit your ignorant tears below.
Posted on 10/25/26 at 10:29 am to MilkJug
Stats are fine when they align with wins and losses. When they don't they are meaningless
Posted on 10/25/26 at 10:35 am to MilkJug
Is Ohio State's rating adjusted to having an injured Sayin?
Posted on 10/25/26 at 10:36 am to kywildcatfanone
quote:
Stats are fine when they align with wins and losses. When they don't they are meaningless
Fair, which is why my model isn't based on "stats". It's based on the score of the games and anything that directly effects the score of games.
This is what happens when your team is even in the turnover margin:

Posted on 10/25/26 at 10:36 am to trussthetruzz
quote:
Is Ohio State's rating adjusted to having an injured Sayin?
No, it's not. See last week's discussion about Kamario Taylor.
Posted on 10/25/26 at 10:37 am to MilkJug
quote:
Fair, which is why my model isn't based on "stats"
So it’s based on feelings. Because that seems rational.
Posted on 10/25/26 at 10:39 am to MilkJug
The way you derive these numbers is very intriguing.
Posted on 10/25/26 at 10:47 am to MilkJug
Come back to Earth. It was Auburn. Also 2 loss teams aren't the best team in the nation. No matter what stats you pick and choose matters or not. It's why we got rid of the BCS.
This post was edited on 10/25/26 at 10:49 am
Posted on 10/25/26 at 11:01 am to Rabern57
quote:
Come back to Earth. It was Auburn. Also 2 loss teams aren't the best team in the nation. No matter what stats you pick and choose matters or not. It's why we got rid of the BCS.
Another person who doesn't understand the difference between ratings and rankings. Shocker.
My model is a prediction model, not a ranking system. It tries to predict outcomes of games, that's all. If Kentucky played the following teams on a neutral field tomorrow, who do you think would be favored? by how much? why?
LSU
Ole Miss
Texas
Tennessee
Posted on 10/25/26 at 11:03 am to kywildcatfanone
quote:
Stats are fine when they align with wins and losses. When they don't they are meaningless
This is why power rankings are retarded. They're not really better than pre-season rankings. The only difference is beating the crap out of over-matched opponents.
Posted on 10/25/26 at 11:10 am to hoojy
quote:
This is why power rankings are retarded. They're not really better than pre-season rankings. The only difference is beating the crap out of over-matched opponents.
You could've just ignored the thread, but you clicked on it just to see where your team was on the list.. didn't you?
Your team is having a great season, they are finding ways to get the "W". I'm really curious to see what Stein can do there. But they are nowhere near as good as you and your friends think they are. Sorry, but that's not the model's fault.
Posted on 10/25/26 at 11:13 am to kywildcatfanone
quote:
Stats are fine when they align with wins and losses. When they don't they are meaningless
Stats and efficiency aren’t perfect.
There is the fact that these are human players dealing with human emotions prone to mistakes at critical times in high pressure environments.
With that said they are indicative of “process”
*most* times W-Ls follow those markers when over the course of the season.
It’s why baseball has farms of computer geeks now.
Notably though 12 game season is clearly prone to much more variance than a 162 game season.
This post was edited on 10/25/26 at 11:15 am
Posted on 10/25/26 at 11:13 am to MilkJug
Yes, I did click and comment. This is where you get your engagement on your fricking retarded, and plagiarized content from Vegas, which you just simply change a few algorithms.
Posted on 10/25/26 at 11:15 am to hoojy
quote:
your fricking retarded, and plagiarized content from Vegas, which you just simply change a few algorithms.
The fact that you think this is how it works means I'm doing something right. Thanks.
The intelligent amongst us should realize that I release my power ratings and predictions before Vegas odds are released.. but that's a side note.
This post was edited on 10/25/26 at 11:18 am
Posted on 10/25/26 at 11:46 am to MilkJug
Your model is consistently absolute trash every week, and yet you post it anyway. It's not even about Kentucky not being on there, which is in and of itself and absolute farce at this juncture in the season. It's the teams you have way up there that we all know have zero business being ranked that high
Your methodology is shite. Period. You can spin it however you want to justify it, but when week in and week out the overwhelming majority of folks are telling you it's a horseshite model, you're the problem, not us.
Your methodology is shite. Period. You can spin it however you want to justify it, but when week in and week out the overwhelming majority of folks are telling you it's a horseshite model, you're the problem, not us.
Posted on 10/25/26 at 12:11 pm to MilkJug
quote:LSU wouldn't be a clear favorite over many teams ahead of them if you look at all the upsets and let downs this year.
My model is a prediction model, not a ranking system. It tries to predict outcomes of games, that's all. If Kentucky played the following teams on a neutral field tomorrow, who do you think would be favored? by how much? why?
As for Kentucky, they had all they could handle from Vandy. No one is as set or untouchable as yall are putting LSU off as. Bama beat UK. Tennessee destroyed Bama. It's a giant loop and all about match up on the field. The simple fact Auburn best UGA shows that. LSU hasn't beat a good team they've played.
There is nothing about the Auburn win to change that or suddenly have them better than Ole Miss or Kentucky now. They can beat some teams but are just as likely to not beat others.
This post was edited on 10/25/26 at 12:15 pm
Posted on 10/25/26 at 12:51 pm to kywildcatfanone
quote:
Stats are fine when they align with wins and losses. When they don't they are meaningless
This is stupid and is in the same realm of logical fantasies as the transitive property.
Tennessee beat Alabama, Alabama beat South Carolina, South Carolina beat Tennessee.
So how is that supposed to work out in the stats?
The fact is, the stats measure team strength. Some teams can under achieve an some teams can over achieve.
LSU this year has under achieved with it's 2 losses. Kentucky has over-achieved.
And that's what the stats say if you actually learn to understand them rather than making idiotic statements that the stats don't mean anything because you don't like what they say.
Also, every spread has +/- 11 to 13 margin of error, even Vegas.
Posted on 10/25/26 at 12:55 pm to hoojy
quote:
This is why power rankings are retarded. They're not really better than pre-season rankings. The only difference is beating the crap out of over-matched opponents.
No, this is why YOU are retarded.
You don't understand anything about the stats and you ignorantly blame them because they don't match your narrative.
Posted on 10/25/26 at 12:55 pm to 3down10
You need to reread my post. You overlooked the part that matters

Popular
Back to top

6











