HuskerBoard Consensus Top 25 - Post your ranking here

[knapplc]

Here are my rankings. Probably worth the paper their printed on:

1 - LSU

2 - Oregon

3 - USC

4 - Alabama

5 - Oklahoma

6 - Michigan

7 - South Carolina

8 - Georgia

9 - West Virginia

10 - Arkansas

11 - Ohio St

12 - Kansas St

13 - Florida St

14 - Michigan St

15 - Wisconsin

16 - Boise State

17 - TCU

18 - Virginia Tech

19 - Texas

20 - Nebraska

21 - Clemson

22 - Stanford

23 - Texas A&M

24 - Louisville

25 - Missouri

26 - Oklahoma St

27 - Washington

28 - Florida

29 - Notre Dame

30 - Penn State

Question for any statisticians - is there a threshold number of samples that I would need before I throw out high/low rankings here to remove anomalies? We have 11 so far. Is that enough, or would I want 15 before I start trying to do something like that?

 

[bleedinghuskerred]

What exactly are you trying to find - the average rankings of a given team based on the current ranking lists people have made?

 

[knapplc]

What exactly are you trying to find - the average rankings of a given team based on the current ranking lists people have made?

PM sent.

 

[corncraze]

1. LSU

2. U$C

3. Oklahoma

4. Alabama

5. Oregon

6. West Virginia

7. South Carolina

8. Michigan

9. Arkansas

10. Michigan State

11. Kansas State

12. Clemson

13. Georgia

14. Wisconsin

15. Florida State

16. Stanford

17. Nebraska

18. Virginia Tech

19. Boise St.

20. Ohio State

21. Texas

22. Auburn

23. Notre Dame

24. Oklahoma State

25. Georgia Tech

26. TCU

27. Florida

28. Miss. State

29. Washington

30. Penn State

 

[jsneb83]

If you are trying to find a consensus top 25, the best way is to assign points (ie 30 for 1st, 1 for 30th) and rank the teams by the number of points. As far as averages go, it depends on what confidence level you want. But I would say since most people have the same top 10-12 teams, 15 should be enough. But for the lower ranked teams, where there is more disparity, you will need more, roughly 20-30 to get a good approximation.

 

[knapplc]

Do I want to rank by total points or average of points? Or does that get me the same thing? I've got each ranking pointed in reverse order, like you said (30 for first, 29 for second, etc) and my thought was to divide each team's total by the number of entries I get. At the moment there are 12, so Nebraska's total would be 175 with an average of 14.58, while Missouri's total would be 59 (they're ranked eight times) but their average would be 4.92 (59/12).

I think that's a better way of doing it than using point totals, but it may get me the same thing when I'm done.

I have another suggestion of running the same numbers twice - once with all totals, once removing high/low numbers. I'm thinking now I may not be able to eliminate hi/lo because of teams like Washington, who are only ranked three times, or Pittsburgh who is only ranked once. So I think that idea's out the window.

 

[fro daddy]

you would have to do it by point rank. Thats the best way. I wouldnt eliminate the outliers. Its such a small sample size, that and its also not a true look at the board if you do. People are bound to not feel the same about all teams. Certain teams others always downgrade (i.e. Mizzou) and others are always upgraded (i.e. Texas). Buy dropping those highs and lows you really can change the board poll. You could do a column like whats on pollspeak. Have the top 30 poll. Then show the highest rank and lowest rank given.

 

[broganreynik]

1. Oklahoma

2. Alabama

3. USC

4. Oregon

5. Michigan

6. TCU

7. LSU

8. Georgia

9. Arkansas

10. Virginia Tech

11. South Carolina

12. West Virginia

13. Nebraska

14. Kansas State

15. Wisconsin

16. Washington

17. Mississippi State

18. Boise State

19. Ohio State

20. Southern Miss

21. Oklahoma State

22. Clemson

23. Texas A&M

24. SMU

25. Florida State

26. Iowa

27. Georgia Tech

28. Stanford

29. Arkansas State

30. Michigan State

 

[broganreynik]

Do I want to rank by total points or average of points? Or does that get me the same thing? I've got each ranking pointed in reverse order, like you said (30 for first, 29 for second, etc) and my thought was to divide each team's total by the number of entries I get. At the moment there are 12, so Nebraska's total would be 175 with an average of 14.58, while Missouri's total would be 59 (they're ranked eight times) but their average would be 4.92 (59/12).

I think that's a better way of doing it than using point totals, but it may get me the same thing when I'm done.

I have another suggestion of running the same numbers twice - once with all totals, once removing high/low numbers. I'm thinking now I may not be able to eliminate hi/lo because of teams like Washington, who are only ranked three times, or Pittsburgh who is only ranked once. So I think that idea's out the window.

I think total points is better. If you go by average, then teams near the bottom get a break because the times they aren't ranked don't go against them, inflating their average ranking. Unless you just average it out with all of the lists, but then that just gets you the same as total points, so it'd be fruitless.

 

[knapplc]

Do I want to rank by total points or average of points? Or does that get me the same thing? I've got each ranking pointed in reverse order, like you said (30 for first, 29 for second, etc) and my thought was to divide each team's total by the number of entries I get. At the moment there are 12, so Nebraska's total would be 175 with an average of 14.58, while Missouri's total would be 59 (they're ranked eight times) but their average would be 4.92 (59/12).

I think that's a better way of doing it than using point totals, but it may get me the same thing when I'm done.

I have another suggestion of running the same numbers twice - once with all totals, once removing high/low numbers. I'm thinking now I may not be able to eliminate hi/lo because of teams like Washington, who are only ranked three times, or Pittsburgh who is only ranked once. So I think that idea's out the window.

I think total points is better. If you go by average, then teams near the bottom get a break because the times they aren't ranked don't go against them, inflating their average ranking. Unless you just average it out with all of the lists, but then that just gets you the same as total points, so it'd be fruitless.

If I divide by the total ballots submitted rather than by the times they're ranked it would. But I think everyone is right - total points is better (and lots easier).

 

[jsneb83]

Do I want to rank by total points or average of points? Or does that get me the same thing? I've got each ranking pointed in reverse order, like you said (30 for first, 29 for second, etc) and my thought was to divide each team's total by the number of entries I get. At the moment there are 12, so Nebraska's total would be 175 with an average of 14.58, while Missouri's total would be 59 (they're ranked eight times) but their average would be 4.92 (59/12).

I think that's a better way of doing it than using point totals, but it may get me the same thing when I'm done.

I have another suggestion of running the same numbers twice - once with all totals, once removing high/low numbers. I'm thinking now I may not be able to eliminate hi/lo because of teams like Washington, who are only ranked three times, or Pittsburgh who is only ranked once. So I think that idea's out the window.

I think total points is better. If you go by average, then teams near the bottom get a break because the times they aren't ranked don't go against them, inflating their average ranking. Unless you just average it out with all of the lists, but then that just gets you the same as total points, so it'd be fruitless.

If I divide by the total ballots submitted rather than by the times they're ranked it would. But I think everyone is right - total points is better (and lots easier).

Yeah if you divide every team by the same number of ballots, they would be in the same order. So you are skipping a step by using total points.

 

[NUance]

1 - USC

2 - Oklahoma

3 - Alabama

4 - Ohio St

5 - Florida St

6 - Georgia

7 – Oregon

8 - LSU

8 - West Virginia

10 - Boise State

11 - Kansas St

12 – Clemson

13 - Oklahoma St

14 - Nebraska

15 – Texas

16 - Michigan St

17 - South Carolina

18 - TCU

19 - Virginia Tech

20 - Michigan

21 - Notre Dame

22 - Auburn

23 - Wisconsin

24 - Iowa

25 - Missouri

26 - Florida

27 - Penn State

28 - Stanford

29 - Texas A&M

30 – Nevada

 

[Excel]

There are much easier ways to determine an aggregate top 25 than assigning points and going through all that pain...excel, copy paste to columns, sort, take averages and you're done. If you're handy with excel it should only take a few minutes...I won't ruin it for everyone but ya'll's current Big Ten rankings are;

8. Michigan

13. Ohio State

15. Michigan State

16. Wisconsin

17. Nebraska

The only tricky or tiresome parts are copying and pasting all the lists, replacing all the commas, periods dashes and parentheses with blanks, sorting through the fact that you guys used multiple names for the same team and then removing the few outliers you all threw out there.

It's important to keep in mind that they're not straight averages of what you all ranked them, there's more in play than just what that single team was ranked, its all the other teams as well.

 

[knapplc]

I have them in a spreadsheet. I have a macro to remove all the rank numbers, commas & periods. The multiple names thing is kind of a bear, but expected. The problem with just sorting them by name is, as you mentioned, the outlier teams.

I've tossed everything into one column, sorted by name, fixed the different names, and I should have a product by the end of the day (pending any last-minute submissions).