The eXcellent Football Bowl Subdivision
An online NCAA-style football league using FBPRO'98.

2011 Computer Ranking - Weighted Margin of Victory Ranking (WMoV)

 

After week 12

RK Prv TEAM Opp1 Opp2 Opp3 Opp4 Opp5 Opp6 Opp7 Opp8 Opp9 Opp10 Opp11 Opp12 MoV
SCORE
1 1 UO 33.3 25.1 7.5 41.3 -3.9 5.4 26.2 18.9 13.4 10.1 19.1 -2.4 16.1703
2 2 BSU 37.0 13.1 5.9 2.1 24.4 6.3 12.4 17.9 8.7 3.1 45.9 3.5 15.0298
3 3 IOWA -6.7 21.1 37.1 28.2 9.6 27.0 21.9 3.1 -3.7 -7.4 16.6 18.5 13.7706
4 5 MICH 14.3 5.9 18.1 -13.5 10.4 8.7 30.4 -2.6 -1.9 -3.8 9.3 10.8 7.1758
5 4 NCST 24.6 9.4 8.7 9.3 3.0 3.4 9.3 -2.9 31.6 3.0 2.8 -17.9 7.0224
6 6 ARK 4.6 21.1 -5.8 26.8 -3.6 -10.7 14.8 21.0 4.5 7.0 -7.0 7.2 6.6715
7 10 MSU 19.7 23.1 30.3 -1.6 -9.6 -3.7 -18.4 -5.5 0.9 -0.9 6.2 27.8 5.6901
8 7 FLA 19.1 -9.6 -7.9 25.1 4.3 12.8 5.0 -2.9 4.1 2.7 7.6 3.7 5.3354
9 8 TEX -3.7 18.9 3.7 -3.7 -19.1 44.7 5.4 -6.6 4.0 -2.8 7.5 6.0 4.5285
10 11 MIZZ -9.7 -19.3 9.9 10.5 -7.0 8.4 21.9 7.0 2.1 1.0 10.9 9.0 3.7346
11 13 UofA 10.6 27.8 -19.6 -8.4 4.7 30.7 -9.6 -12.4 9.7 0.8 -5.8 16.1 3.7304
12 9 LSU 23.8 12.5 2.0 14.6 9.9 -4.6 -4.3 3.3 -10.7 -14.7 17.7 -6.5 3.5750
13 15 VT -22.2 21.1 -9.5 23.5 11.3 6.5 -9.9 3.2 -3.6 -2.4 -8.6 32.7 3.5015
14 16 USC 7.9 -21.1 10.3 -9.4 8.1 -4.8 -20.6 13.4 24.4 4.2 -3.4 21.3 2.5159
15 18 OKLA 19.3 -9.4 8.1 -11.0 18.1 -8.5 -3.0 9.0 3.6 -22.5 -13.7 33.7 1.9726
16 12 OSU 4.0 6.9 -7.0 11.3 6.5 -21.9 23.5 6.3 -8.7 16.5 -6.4 -9.6 1.7915
17 17 TENN -2.7 8.1 -4.0 -9.9 16.8 10.7 4.1 -24.3 14.6 -9.9 -2.8 -3.6 -0.2577
18 14 NEB 2.8 22.8 -7.5 4.0 -5.5 4.2 -26.8 3.5 -6.4 5.6 14.1 -14.9 -0.3474
19 19 MIA -17.3 -19.6 7.6 -24.5 -2.8 16.1 10.3 22.4 -6.0 20.5 -15.7 3.7 -0.4323
20 20 AUB -19.2 9.0 -4.8 9.5 -9.7 -11.8 -14.0 22.2 -29.9 20.9 1.8 4.2 -1.8152
21 21 TAMU 15.0 -18.4 -1.9 -33.8 7.4 9.9 2.8 -44.6 6.0 -6.5 8.4 -6.0 -5.1470
22 22 FSU -4.7 -22.3 -35.0 -24.6 8.6 -6.8 -9.4 15.3 4.7 19.7 -8.9 -4.0 -5.5968
23 23 TCU -30.5 -10.1 30.0 8.3 2.7 -10.9 -6.0 -10.6 -12.4 18.1 -40.9 -9.4 -5.9858
24 27 UNC -2.3 -10.7 -10.6 12.5 -13.5 -19.9 -2.3 -20.4 -5.0 -6.4 -21.2 16.0 -6.9786
25 24 ASU -15.3 -13.5 -10.4 -16.7 -8.6 -4.9 6.3 -16.0 -4.3 8.3 5.2 -17.4 -7.2720
26 25 OKST -25.3 -22.8 18.6 5.2 -3.3 -48.8 -22.7 41.3 -17.2 -2.7 -2.0 -39.3 -9.9148
27 26 WISC 1.6 -30.9 7.6 -6.5 -9.6 -9.6 -24.9 -3.7 9.9 -24.3 -6.6 -30.7 -10.6364
28 28 ND -34.5 -7.4 -20.1 -11.2 -10.7 -3.7 1.6 -25.8 -1.0 -23.1 3.1 -36.7 -14.1151
29 29 BAMA -24.4 -6.7 -34.5 -27.0 -21.5 4.1 -5.5 -23.3 -27.6 -1.0 -12.3 -5.1 -15.3888
30 30 UCLA -18.9 -23.9 -41.8 -31.7 -24.9 -37.7 -8.8 -19.8 -6.4 -25.8 -18.4 -25.7 -23.6463

 

Weighted Margin of Victory/Loss Ranking (WMoV): Most people think a ranking focused on margin of victory is a bad idea, but that's simply because no one has found a way to make sure strong teams don't get rewarded for running up the score on weaker teams . . . until now.

The solution? The Margin of Victory/Loss value is computed on a game by game basis and each game's value is further adjusted by the strength of the opponent (based on their W/L% and their opponent's strength of schedules). Each game's score is then added together and divided by games played. This formula ensures each game is counted the same and lessens the effect of blowouts of weaker opponents. Personally, I think Margin of Victory speaks volumes about how good a team really is because a good team should soundly and consistently beat the teams they are supposed to beat. My formula exposes which teams inconsistently get a high margin of victory.