ESPN FPI Team Efficiencies Update, Wk. 13
Woohoo, the updated FPI team efficiency ratings have been posted! Yep - just testing myself - and it's definitely easier to just type that than it is to say it out loud, given the cloud of suspended disbelief in which I seem to be immersed. Despite the soul-crushing loss to OSU, Michigan manages to hold onto the #2 spot for the third consecutive week. Meanwhile in some bitterly ironic twist of fancystats, OSU drops to the #4 spot from #3. Once again though, the Buckeyes managed to score more points than their opponent, and that is - as Bob Ufer used to say - "the only statistic that matters."
The U-M splits are offense, #11 (down from #10); defense, #2 (up from #3); and special teams, #7 (up from #11).
Of U-M's 2016 opponents, Colorado slipped to #11 from #8, one behind #10 Wisconsin. UCF remains rated above 6 of Michigan's other opponents this season, including Sparty. Sparty slid to #70 from #68 after its pummeling at the hands of PSU, but still remain ahead of Eastern and Central Michigan to retain the title of Third Best Team in the State of Michigan. Meanwhile Western Michigan slips to #13 from #12, but WMU still looks like a lock for a New Year's Day bowl invitation.
Here's the selectively abbreviated synopsis of the ratings. Click the link above to see the whole list &/or sort by category:
| RK | TEAM | OFF | DEF | S/T | O'ALL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alabama, SEC | 69.7 | 98.2 | 53.0 | 93.7 |
| 2 | Michigan, Big Ten | 78.1 | 89.4 | 71.7 | 91.1 |
| 3 | Washington, Pac-12 | 86.3 | 83.3 | 53.9 | 90.2 |
| 4 | OSU, Big Ten | 75.4 | 89.3 | 50.1 | 87.8 |
| 5 | Clemson, ACC | 76.4 | 83.3 | 49.2 | 85.0 |
| 6 | USC, Pac-12 | 76.6 | 73.9 | 68.7 | 82.8 |
| 7 | Louisville, ACC | 83.9 | 75.5 | 30.9 | 82.4 |
| 8 | Oklahoma, Big 12 | 91.1 | 57.3 | 46.0 | 81.4 |
| 9 | LSU, SEC | 73.3 | 83.7 | 33.9 | 81.3 |
| 10 | Wisconsin, Big Ten | 60.9 | 89.2 | 45.5 | 80.7 |
| 11 | Colorado, Pac-12 | 68.0 | 85.9 | 33.9 | 79.8 |
| 13 | W Michigan, MAC | 83.7 | 58.8 | 50.2 | 78.5 |
| 21 | Penn State, Big Ten | 64.6 | 68.8 | 58.9 | 71.9 |
| 27 | Iowa, Big Ten | 55.4 | 68.4 | 72.0 | 69.6 |
| 65 | UCF, American | 23.9 | 72.1 | 65.6 | 50.9 |
| 69 | Maryland, Big Ten | 54.3 | 40.5 | 64.9 | 48.8 |
| 70 | Michigan State, Big Ten | 53.6 | 43.0 | 50.5 | 48.1 |
| 71 | Indiana, Big Ten | 39.6 | 61.6 | 38.0 | 47.8 |
| 90 | E Michigan, MAC | 39.8 | 36.7 | 60.4 | 37.6 |
| 94 | Cent Michigan, MAC | 36.8 | 44.9 | 39.0 | 36.4 |
| 100 | Illinois, Big Ten | 27.6 | 44.8 | 38.0 | 31.6 |
| 104 | Hawai'i, MW | 31.7 | 32.9 | 51.2 | 28.9 |
| 118 | Rutgers, Big Ten | 16.1 | 42.9 | 37.5 | 21.9 |
November 27th, 2016 at 9:02 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 9:15 PM ^
Coming to the end of the season being #2 in the overall rankings here is actually rather impressive - if only the Committee really understood or appreciated advanced stats and predictive analytics as much as MGoBlog.
Going down the list, I will add my voice to the chorus of people that think Rutgers might be better off if they were relegated.
November 27th, 2016 at 9:16 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 9:22 PM ^
Based on those numbers, we seem to be the most complete team in the country (offense, defense and special teams).
November 27th, 2016 at 9:27 PM ^
that Michigan may make it in if Washington loses, it's highly unlikely any 2 loss team would be allowed into the playoff. Get pissed at me if you like but I would be saying the same about the Buckeyes had they lost by 3.
November 27th, 2016 at 9:30 PM ^
Welcome, glad to hear reasonable analysis even from the other side.
One question: who are your four one-loss teams if Washington and/or Alabama lose? I got:
Alabama (even if they lose the SEC Championship)
OSU of course,
Clemson, and...?
November 27th, 2016 at 9:37 PM ^
lol, just kidding. You kind of got me as I wasnt paying as close attention as I should have I guess. I think the playoff would take an 11-2 B1G chmp over 10-2 Michigan even if Michigan beat both. It's unfortunate for you guys but they will be rewarding recent success (B1G championship vs early season loss). Just my opinion...
November 27th, 2016 at 9:48 PM ^
November 27th, 2016 at 9:49 PM ^
Sadly, but if that happens, maybe we get the Rose Bowl? (Pretty please...)
November 27th, 2016 at 9:37 PM ^
Unlikely but possible. Especially since they could take into account the screw job officiating and the fact that Michigan is in most peoples eyes a top 4 team that on a neutral field would most likely obliterate your team.
November 27th, 2016 at 9:56 PM ^
Highly unlikely? If Clemson or Washington loses, the playoff will feature a 2-loss team. If both lose, the playoff will feature 2 2-loss teams.
November 27th, 2016 at 11:58 PM ^
I don't think anyone legitimately expects UM to make it. But the committee has made it clear numerous times they want the regular season and conference titles to matter, and OSU not even winning their division may matter. And if PSU wins, they'll have the head-to-head win over OSU. I mean, the playoffs are, what, 3 years old now? We don't really have a track record for how this stuff shakes out.
November 27th, 2016 at 9:24 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 27th, 2016 at 9:36 PM ^
I think Michigan should absolutely be #4 this week in the CFP rankings. I mean, they stayed at #3 after losing on a walk off field goal at then unranked Iowa. This week, they lost on a walk off TD at #2 OSU. It's unrealistic to expect Michigan to remain at #3 this week but does Clemson beating a bad South Carolina team and/or Washington beating a now unranked Washington State team warrant them both jumping Michigan? This week, I say no.
November 27th, 2016 at 9:56 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 28th, 2016 at 12:46 AM ^
This weeks rankings are HUGE, becuase the committee will be setting up for what they plan to do. If Michigan is #4 that is a great sign, if they are #6 or worse that is bad.
November 27th, 2016 at 9:47 PM ^
However, I still think a 2-loss Conference Champion has a stronger argument that a 2-loss fancy stats/eye-ball test team. It seems to me that Michigan needs:
- A loss by Clemson in the ACC
- A loss by Washington in the Pac 12
- An underwhelming B1G Championship performance by both teams
- Ditto the Oklahoma-OSU "bedlam" match-up for the Big 12
Then the playoffs would be
- Alabama
- Ohio State
- And two slots for
-- Colorado (2-loss Pac 12 Champ)
-- Wisc/PSU (2-loss B1G Champ)
-- OU/OSU (2-loss Big 12 Champ)
-- Michigan (and we have the bad taste in the mouth from losing our last game with everything on the line)
It seems to me the most important game is for Clemson to lose and take the ACC out of the picture, but even with that, it's still an incredible long shot.
The sad part is that even the Rose Bowl is out of the picture as a consolation prize. Ohio State may get the playoffs, but short of the B1G sending two playoff teams, the B1G Champion, regardless of how ugly the B1G Championship is, gets the auto-bid to the Rose Bowl.
[sigh], 3-0 against teams that qualified for their Conference Championship Game, but no love for us. I'm still in disbelief about Penn State finagling their way to winning the B1G East, and Ohio State still being in the cat bird's seat.
November 28th, 2016 at 12:24 AM ^
Forget about Oklahoma and OSU. Whoever wins Bedlam still loses a beauty pageant against any other 2 loss team amongst Michigan, Colorado and PSU/WI.
November 28th, 2016 at 12:29 AM ^
Off-topic, just went and checked the offensive FPI ranking for San Jose State. #108th. Ouch. Which I mention because the San Jose State staff, including our old friend Al Borges, just got fired.