What the hell is up with the BPI?

What the hell is up with the BPI?

Submitted by DCAlum on November 30th, 2018 at 9:28 AM

Michigan basketball is currently ranked 4th in Bart Torvik's rankings, and 6th in kenpom. So what the hell is up with BPI?




We're ranked 15th, one spot behind (wait for it...) Villanova. (To be fair, we're second in ESPN's "resume" computer ranking. But I think maybe they're overvaluing preseason expectations if they've got us ranked behind a team we beat by 20+ on the road who also lost to Furman). 

Final 2018 Basketball COMPOSITE Rankings

Final 2018 Basketball COMPOSITE Rankings

Submitted by SailingNomad on April 19th, 2018 at 10:46 PM

As noted by a couple of users in the 247 rankings thread, the composite was updated this afternoon now that Rivals, ESPN, and 247 have all released their final 2018 rankings.  There are a couple of small changes from earlier today (and one large drop for Nunez):

Ignas Brazdeikis: 36th / 4-star

Brandon Johns: 65th / 4-star

David DeJulius: 98th / 4-star

Colin Castleton: 117th / 4-star

Adrien Nunez: 291st(!) / 3-star

Not sure what happened with the Nunez composite ranking - earlier today he was at 216.  Regarless, we end up with 1 Top 50 recruit and 3 total in the Top 100.  Four 4-star recruits and one 3-star recruit.

For those interested, Taylor Currie ended up at as a 3-star at 191. Also, Indiana still has a chance to bring the Big 10 it's lone Top 10 recruit if they can sign Romeo Langford (6th in the composite).  He would join Jalen Smith (14th in the composite / signed with Maryland) as the lone 5-star recruits in the B1G for 2018.

Final AP Poll (5 B1G teams in the top-17)

Final AP Poll (5 B1G teams in the top-17)

Submitted by BoFlex on January 9th, 2018 at 11:36 AM

AP just released its final poll of the season.

Of note...

  • Top 4:
    • #1 Alabama
    • #2 Georgia
    • #3 Oklahoma
    • #4 Clemson
  • Five total B1G teams represented
    • #5 Ohio State
    • #7 Wisconsin
    • #8 Penn State
    • #15 Michigan State
    • #17 Northwestern
  • Others
    • #6 UCF recieves four 1st place votes
    • #11 Notre Dame

Michigan #1 in Colley Rankings (W/L-based mathematical rankings)

Michigan #1 in Colley Rankings (W/L-based mathematical rankings)

Submitted by atticusb on October 11th, 2016 at 12:01 AM

Not sure how we feel about computer rankings, but the Colley Matrix (here) has Michigan at #1.  This ranking method only consider wins and losses and the win/loss records of opponents (and their opponents, etc., etc.).  See here for Wesley Colley's (the rankings creator) comments on his methodology and it's benefits.  Colley states:

[The rankings are] absolutely free from human influence or opinion, [account] for schedule strength, [ignore] runaway scores, and yet [produce] common sense results, which at the end of the season compare very favorably with human rankings (and other computer rankings). What else do you want? 

Well, for one thing, Michigan to be at #1 at the end of the season...

As a final aside, kudos to all our opponents to date... apparently they aren't as weak (ok, except for Rutgers, Colley agrees they suck) as might have been thought before the season started... Colley has our SOS as 10th overall.

Michigan's first AP Top 10 matchup since...

Michigan's first AP Top 10 matchup since...

Submitted by 1464 on September 30th, 2016 at 2:01 PM

Tomorrow will be the first time Michigan has been in a top 10 matchup since...

...any guesses?

The answer is - 9/1/12.  Coming off a BCS bowl win, Michigan (8) got blown out by Nick Saban and Alabama (2).  Not exactly a fun memory for me.  Granted, we were a fake top 10 team that year.  We have to go back almost a decade TO THE LLOYD CARR ERA to see legit top 10 games.  And even then they were rare.

Here are the top ten matchups that Michigan has been in since 2000, as well as the result.  None of this has any bearing on tomorrow's game, but still nice to look back at our history with important games.  I'm shocked at home infrequent our top 10 games have been.  This will be our first home top 10 matchup in 13 years.  It's also our last win in a top 10 matchup, so let's hope we break the trend.

9/1/12   (8)  ns  (2) Alabama  L, 14-41
1/1/07  (3)  ns  (8) USC  L, 18-32
11/18/06  (2)  at  (1) OSU  L, 39-42
1/1/04  (4)  ns (1) USC  L, 14-28
11/22/03  (5)  vs (4) OSU  W, 35-21


Michigan #17 In 1st CFP Rankings

Michigan #17 In 1st CFP Rankings

Submitted by smwilliams on November 3rd, 2015 at 7:13 PM

From ESPN:





College Football Playoff Rankings 16-20 » #CFP25 pic.twitter.com/klU1TNCxJH


Sandwiched in between #16 Florida State and #18 Ole Miss.

EDIT: Can mod delete this? Meant to post to the board.

EDIT 2: Since this is being left up for some bizarre reason, let's get to some actual analysis and compare some resumes.

Humans love to argue. We pay lawyers obscene amounts of money to argue for us because we're not good at arguing. Click bait sites generate "discussion" by posting "controversial" articles or arbitrary rankings of things that are entirely subjective. Last night, the College Football Playoff Committee transformed into Bleacher Report's wet dream. They ranked 25 college football teams in order of, I dunno, bestness or something. Aside from the obvious elephant in the room (pun absolutely intended because nobody from Alabama gets puns and so it doesn't matter), Michigan was ranked for the first time ever (except in Brady Hoke's fever dreams), coming in at #17. But, what does that #17 really mean?

What criteria did the Committee use to rank the teams? Strength of schedule is a factor, apparently. Top 30 wins might be too. Why the Top 30 and not the Top 25? The Committee wants to create controversy, man. Shake up the establishment. Why can't we have a Top 27?

Look at the programs on either side of Michigan. Florida State at #16. Ole Miss at #18. Is there an argument to be made for Michigan to be higher than the 'Noles or lower than the school with a horrible, racist mascot that's a remnant of one of the darkest period in American history.

I think this calls for a chart.

VS. TOP 25 0-0 1-2 2-2
SOS #64 #39 #41






Florida State has one loss to a 3-6 Georgia Tech team. Michigan and Ole Miss have two losses a piece. Michigan lost to the committee's #7 team and its #12 team. Ole Miss lost to the committee's #10 team and it's #13 team. Clearly, the committee values losing less games even if your 2 losses are better than the other team's 1 loss.

But, wait, if that's the case then why is 1-loss Alabama and 1-loss ND ranked ahead of undefeated Michigan State? Is it quality of wins? Alabama's best win is #19 Texas A&M. State's best win is, sigh, us. Alabama's 2nd best win is Wisconsin. Their 3rd best win is Georgia or Tennessee. Is that difference between Wisconsin and Georgia vs. Oregon and nobody so great that it warrants Alabama at #4? Or maybe it's SOS. Alabama has the 9th ranked schedule and State is in the low 50s (all SOS #s from Sagarin).

Then, wait, if SOS and quality wins trump the # of losses, then why is Florida State ranked ahead of Michigan and Ole Miss? Michigan and Ole Miss have a better SOS, better top 3 wins, and their 2 losses are way better than Florida State's one loss.

Michigan is ranked #17 and that's nice, but at this point, it's no different than the ranking in the AP or Coaches Poll. The Committee is another arbitrary body that uses a vague methodology or no methodology at all to rank the 25 "best" teams in the country. The only difference is that their poll actually matters.


SB Nation composite CFB rankings - Week 10

SB Nation composite CFB rankings - Week 10

Submitted by The Mad Hatter on November 3rd, 2015 at 12:00 PM

SB Nation has a top 25 composite ranking that uses the AP Poll, Coaches Poll, S&P+, Massey, and witchcraft.

OSU, Clemson, Baylor, and LSU are the top 4 (same as last week).  MSU is at 8 (+3) and we've fallen one spot to #13.