Final Sagarin Rankings

[RV]

UK is 18

We were 2-3 against the top 25 teams.

Link (http://www.kiva.net/~jsagarin/sports/cfsend.htm)

[jpay]

UK is 18

We were 2-3 against the top 25 teams.

Link (http://www.kiva.net/~jsagarin/sports/cfsend.htm)

Go Cats!!!!!!

[The Old School JPS]

1 LSU 93.39
7 Georgia 89.83
10 Florida 87.59
13 Auburn 84.42
15 Tennessee 84.31
18 Kentucky 83.02
25 Arkansas 81.39
31 Alabama 79.26
32 South Carolina 79.23
37 Mississippi State 77.69
40 Florida State 77.01
45 Louisville 75.58
54 Vanderbilt 74.19
78 Florida Atlantic 67.78
80 Ole Miss 67.64
90 Notre Dame 64.55 ha ha ha
136 Eastern Kentucky 54.07
139 Kent 53.41

Q. What do Michigan, Clemson, Boston College, Arkansas, Penn State, Alabama, South Carolina, UCLA, Wisconsin, Florida State, Texas A&M, Louisville, Michigan State, Washington, Colorado, Georgia Tech, Nebraska, Pitt, Miami (Florida) and Notre Dame all have in common?

A. All are ranked behind Kentucky.

[poodoo]

THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

This news has MADE MY DAY, RV! I had been posting that the Sagarin ratings would be the ones that would better reveal how we had actually performed this season. I had just known that we would finish in the top 25 and had even suspected a top 20 finish, which we did indeed get! :)

I just hope the state media outlets will mention this ranking in some of their pieces. Our players deserve just that.

In fact, maybe some of you with any connections can contact local writers and request just that. :icon_biggrin: Hearing last night that Ohio State had not beaten a top 20 team all year and was soundily beaten in the national championship game by a team WE HAD BEATEN got my attention. Seeing how Hawaii performed against Georgia, in comparison to our Cats, also got my attention. Again, listening yesterday to some of the embarrassing defeats many highly ranked teams had suffered during the season reminded me that the Cats had NOT, contrastingly, suffered a SINGLE bad loss, none to a non-eligible bowl team and the largest, a loss of seventeen points to a winner of a bowl. That all sounds like a positive UK football story to me! :icon_biggrin:

Too, in contrast, I just read in another thread that one of the ESPN guys mistakingly said that UK had lost its bowl game. :mad: At least locally, I would love to see some still more positive, accurate coverage about these Cats who BEAT THE NATIONAL CHAMPS and won back-to-back bowl games for the first time in over half a century. I HOPE it happens this week.

Obviously, even though the football season is over, I am NOT finished heaping praise on our Cats and recognizing their accomplishments. :) Yes, my Cats finished #18 in the nation. Yes, I am PROUD (although disappointed a few plays did not go differently and change our record and put the Cats into the AP poll).

KUDOS to the players and the coaches for how this team played football this season!!! :)

[poodoo]

1 LSU 93.39
7 Georgia 89.83
10 Florida 87.59
13 Auburn 84.42
15 Tennessee 84.31
18 Kentucky 83.02
25 Arkansas 81.39
31 Alabama 79.26
32 South Carolina 79.23
37 Mississippi State 77.69
40 Florida State 77.01
45 Louisville 75.58
54 Vanderbilt 74.19
78 Florida Atlantic 67.78
80 Ole Miss 67.64
90 Notre Dame 64.55 ha ha ha
136 Eastern Kentucky 54.07
139 Kent 53.41

Q. What do Michigan, Clemson, Boston College, Arkansas, Penn State, Alabama, South Carolina, UCLA, Wisconsin, Florida State, Texas A&M, Louisville, Michigan State, Washington, Colorado, Georgia Tech, Nebraska, Pitt, Miami (Florida) and Notre Dame all have in common?

A. All are ranked behind Kentucky.

YES, they are. Too, JPS, thanks for pointing that out to folks. :) GO CATS! GO COACH BROOKS!

[Blue4ever]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt07.htm?loc=interstitialskip

More like it. :thumbup: I know I'm biased but I couldn't believe we were left out of the Top 25. Some of the teams (Hawaii? Might've won one game in the SEC) that made the top 25 were a joke. I'd compare UK's strength of schedule against any of the top 10 team's.

[bluescat]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt07.htm?loc=interstitialskip

More like it. :thumbup: I know I'm biased but I couldn't believe we were left out of the Top 25. Some of the teams (Hawaii? Might've won one game in the SEC) that made the top 25 were a joke. I'd compare UK's strength of schedule against any of the top 10 team's.

Amen to that! This bunch deseves to be in the top twenty-five and in my mind the Sagarin ratings are more accurate then either the coaches' poll or the AP (sports writers') poll.

[poodoo]

bttt.

Yes, this ranking is SO MUCH more indicative of the fine football our Cats played. I wish someone in the local media would write a piece praising this UK football team, which has just finished its season, and include mention of the #18 ranking. In my opinion, this team deserves such recognition. :)

[The Old School JPS]

Poll voters do a pathetic job of actually analyzing how teams compare to one another. If the #1 team in the country beats the #18 team in the country by 2 points, the #18 team drops in the polls . . . despite the fact that anyone would expect that #18 team to have lost that game, probably by more than 2 points.

Poll voters instead use win-loss records as shorthand. That's why teams from good conferences get short shrift in the polls, and wimps like Hawaii get overrated despite playing nobody respectable.

Because of that, UK losing 5 games kept them out of the top 25, although no one could make much of an argument that higher-ranked teams like Hawaii or Cincinnati are actually better teams.

The computers, on the other hand, do in fact match teams up against one another, based on how they've fared against various opponents all season. Done that way, teams are not penalized for playing tough opponents, playing well against a better team, etc. And the computers don't do foolish things that sportswriters and poll voters do, like automatically overrate Notre Dame and Big Ten teams all season long. In many ways the computer rankings are much more fair.

[gerntz]

Taking the human element out of the ranking eliminates bias. Doesn't say Sagrin's computer model is better or worse for ranking, just unbaised. I'll take it.

[CatFanInTheBathtub]

Taking the human element out of the ranking eliminates bias. Doesn't say Sagrin's computer model is better or worse for ranking, just unbaised. I'll take it.

I like our sagarin ranking because it's the highest of the rankings, of course.
at the same time though, you cannot take the human element out of any ranking system......it was a human who programmed the thing and it was a human who set up the criteria/formulas. In this case, it is biased towards what mr. sagarin himself thinks is important (such as strength of sched.)

another thing to think about regarding rankings is that they are ALWAYS wrong ! how do I know that ??? because they change EVERY week. ranking are simply reflective of what has already happened. hypothetically, if there was another week of football coming up, we could all expect the rankings to change at least a little bit following that week....right ?? so basically that would mean that as of right now, they are "wrong" !
strange world we live in, huh ?