The following are the pre-season ARGH power ratings for the 112 Division 1-A teams for 1998. Middle Tennessee State is also included in the ratings, as they play two games against current Division 1-A teams and will be joining Division 1-A in 1999. Buffalo, who also joins Division 1-A in 1999, will not be rated until next year, since they play no games against Division 1-A teams in 1998. These are final, although I reserve the right to revise them should there be a coaching change between now and the beginning of the season. These power ratings are computed using the following factors: Previous year's power rating; second previous year's power rating; previous year's strength of schedule; number of returning starters; whether the coach is returning; and whether the starting quarterback is returning. The strength of each factor varies each year based on what has happened in the three previous years. This year, the factor for returning coach is way up, the factors for previous year's power rating and returning starters are also up, the factors for second previous year's power rating and returning quarterback are practically unchanged, and the factor for strength of schedule is way down. The estimated home field advantage for 1998 is .584. I've included projected "paper" records for all teams. These records are based strictly on which team projects to win a particular matchup, and do not include bowl games or conference championship games. Records are calculated after power ratings are known. I've also included rankings for strength of schedule and strength of non-conference schedule. Feedback encouraged at SWHuck@compuserve.com. Best viewed in a fixed-width font. 1997 Power Paper Schedule NC Sched '98 '97 Team Record Rating Record Rank Rank 1 1 Michigan 12-0 .879 11-1 32 63 2 7 Kansas St. 11-1 .870 11-0 78 112 3 3 Florida St. 11-1 .846 12-0 11 2 4 10 Ohio St. 10-3 .841 11-0 44 48 5 4 Florida 10-2 .834 9-2 10 49 6 2 Nebraska 13-0 .807 11-1 33 28 7 5 Tennessee 11-2 .800 10-1 25 71 8 13 Louisiana St. 9-3 .796 9-2 18 83 9 11 Auburn 10-3 .745 10-1 2 39 10 8 UCLA 10-2 .743 10-1 28 64 11 14 Washington 8-4 .738 8-3 4 16 12 6 N. Carolina 11-1 .718 10-1 41 54 13 15 Colorado St. 11-2 .716 11-1 77 47 14 16 Arizona St. 9-3 .709 9-2 15 46 15 44 Wisconsin 8-5 .705 9-2 50 55 16 19 S. Mississippi 9-3 .704 10-1 79 38 17 25 Oregon 7-5 .680 9-2 16 72 18 22 Texas A&M 9-4 .679 8-4 39 13 19 17 Penn State 9-3 .674 8-3 24 59 20 33 Notre Dame 7-6 .673 6-5 27 7 21 9 Georgia 10-2 .656 6-5 6 69 22 29 Georgia Tech 7-5 .656 7-4 47 77 23 21 Syracuse 9-4 .654 8-3 55 1 24 24 Michigan St. 7-5 .653 8-4 22 10 25 26 Southern Cal 6-5 .652 8-4 3 4 26 28 Marshall 10-3 .649 9-2 111 107 27 41 Ohio 8-3 .647 10-1 92 15 28 32 Virginia 7-4 .642 5-6 20 12 29 23 Iowa 7-5 .641 7-4 45 79 30 36 Oklahoma St. 8-4 .638 9-2 52 93 31 20 Purdue 9-3 .627 7-5 34 6 32 59 Arkansas 4-7 .622 6-5 21 96 33 40 Tulane 7-4 .620 10-1 108 105 34 35 S. Carolina 5-6 .612 6-5 8 35 35 18 Mississippi 8-4 .611 7-4 31 86 36 31 Arizona 7-5 .608 7-5 26 73 37 27 Mississippi St. 7-4 .606 5-6 30 67 38 64 California 3-8 .605 5-6 9 44 39 52 West Virginia 7-5 .602 9-2 89 61 40 49 Virginia Tech 7-5 .586 8-3 80 41 41 42 Missouri 7-5 .580 6-5 38 68 42 30 Clemson 7-5 .578 8-3 43 76 43 65 Brigham Young 6-5 .572 8-4 86 23 44 37 Colorado 5-6 .568 7-4 49 53 45 60 Wake Forest 5-6 .567 5-6 51 102 46 43 Toledo 9-3 .567 9-2 104 34 47 51 Kentucky 5-6 .566 6-5 35 111 48 56 Rice 7-4 .551 7-4 61 24 49 34 Miami, OH 8-3 .550 7-4 76 20 50 12 Washington St. 10-2 .550 3-8 29 108 51 46 Texas Tech 6-5 .549 8-3 75 99 52 54 Wyoming 7-6 .548 8-3 70 66 53 38 Air Force 10-3 .543 8-3 87 87 54 45 Stanford 5-6 .539 4-7 5 14 55 62 Utah 6-5 .537 10-1 107 104 56 48 Alabama 4-7 .528 3-8 1 25 57 47 Louisiana Tech 9-2 .524 6-6 58 9 58 76 Oregon St. 3-8 .523 4-7 14 92 59 57 Northwestern 5-7 .519 4-8 13 78 60 66 Miami, FL 5-6 .510 6-5 60 18 61 53 Cincinnati 8-4 .507 8-3 94 62 62 55 C. Florida 5-6 .499 7-4 105 85 63 39 N. Carolina St. 6-5 .496 4-7 17 22 64 61 W. Michigan 8-3 .493 9-2 110 75 65 83 NE Louisiana 5-7 .492 7-4 96 51 66 67 Fresno St. 6-6 .486 6-5 100 33 67 74 Kansas 5-6 .476 5-6 53 110 68 72 E. Carolina 5-6 .474 5-6 83 58 69 89 Nevada-Las Vegas 3-8 .474 5-6 54 17 70 78 Minnesota 3-9 .473 4-7 12 100 71 63 S. Methodist 6-5 .470 5-7 59 21 72 79 Memphis 4-7 .450 5-6 57 37 73 73 Texas 4-7 .448 4-7 36 45 74 70 Nevada 5-6 .433 5-6 95 36 75 99 Boise St. 4-7 .409 7-4 112 98 76 50 New Mexico 9-4 .405 7-5 106 106 77 84 Duke 2-9 .405 2-9 37 89 78 101 Akron 2-9 .403 5-6 101 90 79 68 Pittsburgh 6-6 .403 5-6 74 56 80 75 Vanderbilt 3-8 .400 2-9 23 97 81 81 Boston College 4-7 .392 4-7 72 52 82 80 Ball St. 5-6 .386 2-9 81 31 83 92 Maryland 2-9 .385 2-9 42 101 84 77 Oklahoma 4-8 .380 3-8 63 95 85 69 Utah St. 6-6 .377 5-6 103 50 86 87 Baylor 2-9 .376 1-10 19 11 87 71 San Diego St. 5-7 .367 2-9 66 3 88 95 Indiana 2-9 .366 1-10 7 29 89 102 Iowa St. 1-10 .365 2-9 48 82 90 96 Tulsa 2-9 .360 3-8 62 60 91 88 San Jose St. 4-7 .360 4-8 65 19 92 90 Houston 3-8 .357 1-10 40 8 93 85 AL-Birmingham 5-6 .356 4-7 93 70 94 58 Navy 7-4 .349 4-7 98 84 95 97 Texas-El Paso 4-7 .344 3-8 67 43 96 86 Bowling Green 3-8 .339 3-8 56 5 97 105 C. Michigan 2-9 .321 4-7 97 40 98 94 Army 4-7 .312 1-10 71 65 99 108 Arkansas St. 2-9 .303 4-8 102 74 100 93 Temple 3-8 .292 2-9 88 88 101 91 Idaho 5-6 .291 3-8 109 81 102 98 N. Texas 4-7 .290 3-8 85 27 103 104 Louisville 1-10 .284 2-9 84 91 104 110 New Mexico St. 2-9 .267 0-11 99 57 105 103 Hawaii 3-9 .266 1-11 69 26 106 82 E. Michigan 4-7 .264 3-8 82 82 107 107 Illinois 0-11 .258 2-9 46 109 108 106 Texas Christian 1-10 .248 0-11 68 94 109 100 Kent 3-8 .239 2-9 90 80 110 113 N. Illinois 0-11 .208 1-10 73 30 111 111 SW Louisiana 1-10 .207 2-9 64 42 112 109 Wild Card U. 6-32 .195 8-45 113 112 Rutgers 0-11 .187 1-10 91 103 114 NA M. Tennessee St. 4-6 .069 0-10 The following are the preseason power ratings, non-conference projected "paper" records, and strength of schedule ratings for the various conferences: Power Record Schedule SEC .648 31-5 .431 Pac-10 .635 27-5 .477 Big Ten .603 28-9 .465 ACC .588 19-9 .468 Big Twelve .561 27-11 .433 Conference USA .463 18-22 .466 Big East .453 15-17 .491 WAC .453 24-30 .491 Independents .425 28-38 .484 MAC .422 15-19 .493 Big West .345 8-28 .468 ---------- A few comments about the ARGH Preseason Power Ratings: Factors that are used to calculate the pre-season ratings are: * Previous Year's Power Rating. This is the single most powerful predictor of the current year's power rating, both because much of the team responsible for the previous year's results will be back and because the previous year's results are an indication in and of themselves of the talent level of the team. * Second Previous Year's Power Rating. This is used because much of the team will still be around after two years, and because it helps to create a historical context with which to judge a team. In other words, if a good team has an off year, this factor will tend to predict that team to bounce back. * Previous Year's Strength of Schedule. This works under the theory that teams tend to play up or down to the level of their competition. This is currently a very weak factor. * Number of Returning Starters. This is an indication of the experience level of a team, and has a fairly strong correlation with a team's improvement. * Returning Coach. A team changing coaches tends to get a little worse during the year immediately after the change, presumably due to a period of adjustment to the new coach's system. * Returning Starting Quarterback. The quarterback is far and away the most important position in terms of experience, and a returning starting quarterback is worth far more than a returning starter at any other position. It's been a couple of years since I looked at the other positions, but last time I looked there was little difference between them. Factors that are NOT used to calculate the ratings are: * Previous years' power ratings beyond two years. There's no evidence that these are statistically significant to the current year's power rankings. * Current year's strength of schedule. Every year some team is touted for the national championship because their schedule is so weak. Every year that team loses, usually more than one game, and usually early. Having a weak schedule does not make a team strong, and having a tough schedule does not make a team weak, and these power ratings are meant to measure how good a team is, not to measure a team's ability to beat patsies. West Virginia, beware. Preseason #2 Kansas State has a schedule this year that about 50 teams should be able to win ten games against. They are not ranked #2 because of that schedule; they are ranked #2 because they were a top ten team last year who returns nearly everybody. * Recruiting. I used to believe that recruiting rankings were complete garbage, based more on a team's previous year than anything else. I now believe that recruiting rankings do mean something despite the inherent biases involved, and that they should probably be used as a weak factor for predicting a coming season. It is, however, difficult to get decent rankings beyond the top 25, even more difficult to get historical recruiting rankings beyond the top 25, and at this point I haven't decided exactly how to apply this factor. It will happen in the future, but not yet. * Individual player talent. I don't pretend to know how to judge anything like this, and even the people who do have their own biases or a lack of context. Talent usually manifests itself in a team's record for the previous year. * Because I like them. You don't see Cal at #1, do you? They actually have a decent preseason ranking this year, but that's because of 18 returning starters. * Because I dislike them. Notre Dame has been in the top 25 every year I've done these preseason rankings, even after some years where they do not finish that high. * Because *you* like them. These ratings are mathematical, and an e-mail that says "I'm a 1977 alumni of Wild Card U., and in my unbiased opinion, my Jokers are going to go all the way!! Go Jokers!!!!!!" won't change the formulas or the ratings. ---------- The Projected "Paper" Record is the record a team would end up with should every team win all games they would be favored in. This method tends to predict more teams to have extreme records (11-0; 0-11, etc.) than actually happens. The most accurate means I know of to predict records tends to not give anyone more than nine or less than three wins (OK, except for Kansas State who projects to win 10 games even by that method), and is accordingly rather boring. The 'paper' record is more illustrative from the standpoint that it might identify which teams might have schedules that will produce more wins than the team might deserve on the basis of its talent level. Power ratings are calculated before the 'paper' records, so if a team is in the top 25 with a 5-6 record, that's more an indication of some possible bad matchups in their schedule than any real weakness in the team.