College football power ratings

College football power ratings [B]I posted this a couple of years ago at another site and got a lot of response, so thought I would post it here FWIW.[/B] I was just curious to learn what processes other college football handicappers use to assign power ratings to the 120 teams and also to make lines during the early season (first three games or so). I have been doing power ratings for about a dozen years and feel it's one of the strongest aspects of my handicapping arsenal. Personally, this is where I have historically been most effective in my handicapping and feel like the astute, well-informed player has the advantage over the house in CFB during the month of September. I am primarily a fundamental handicapper and use a lot of subjectivity in arriving at my preseason power ratings and early season lines. This is an open-ended discussion with no restrictions, so please contribute any worthwhile points whether totally on topic or only slightly. First of all, I make power ratings for all 120 teams, with the top team typically having a PR of 100 and the worst having a PR of around 45 or perhaps slightly lower. A high concentration of teams fall in the "average" category and are assigned a PR in the neighborhood of 67-to-75. This season, I anticipate Florida will start the season at around 105 based on their offensive prowess. They are going to be able to pile up the points on most opponents and this has to be strongly factored into its PR. Anyway, I make three or four sets of PRs and try to compile those "independent" of one another. I am currently doing my first set of power ratings which is essentially based on my own personal knowledge of the teams; their historical performance; returning talent; and the such. I do these without the benefit of any notes/resources/etc and it's just kind of a "what number comes to mind" sort of thing (Not that this part of the process is done in haste. I do think about it extensively). Then I compile a second set of PRs (without referring to the first set) when Phil Steele's pub comes out. Whether you believe he is an above average or below average handicapper, he puts out a magazine that is the CFB bible for any serious capper IMO. The information and detail is incredible. I usually buy four or five more preseason mags and will make one or two more sets of PRs from those publications. The reason I do this is I believe it is important to not rely on a single source when formulating PRs from outside entities. Although I believe strongly in Steele's magazine, his is only one and certainly subject to human biases and preferences, so I want to ensure there is a strong element of balance in my process. From there, I look at each of the different PRs for each team (typically there is not a great deal of variance) and make sure I don't have any wide ranges of opinion. If so, I go back and fine tune those schools' numbers and then come up with the teams' final preseason PR for 2009. Although the same teams typically fall in the A, B, C, D and F categories in college football from one season to the next, I do not refer to last year's final power ratings. I have a deep enough knowledge of the teams and my process to pretty much know where they finished without referring to it. Returning starters is something I look at closely in those teams historically doing business in the C through F categories, but not so much a factor among the top programs. The USCs and Ohio States of the world cannot always be judged in negative terms during years when they have 10 or fewer returning starters. Obviously, these programs recruit at a level that the "next in line" blue chipper might actually be better than the more experienced senior who exhausted his eligibility. On offense, I obviously start at the quarterback position. This is not the NFL and some teams do throw some "stinkers" out there in the early going (Oftentimes, a junior or senior who has "waited his turn" and earned the right to start for State U. Then after game one or two, the more talented underclassman is handed the keys). If a QB has not played (or only played sparingly), he will likely struggle in his first game; get a little better in game two; and settle into "who he is" by the fourth or fifth game (not that he won't continue to show improvement, he's just no longer having to think through every aspect of the game mentally with his head while simultaneously having to respond to fluid circumstances physically with the rest of his body). After the QB, I look at the center and left tackle positions. If a team has new faces at QB and C, they are a better possibility to struggle early as the whole timing of a play starts with the underrated exchange between those two positions. If a team also lacks experience at the critical LT position (and they are a balanced team throwing the ball), this is an offense that is probably going to have some growing pains. Then I look at the "playmaking" positions of RB and WR/TE. Does a team have potential playmakers in the running and passing game? One but not the other? No playmakers anywhere? Then I move to defense. I first look at the front seven whether a team plays a 5-2 defense; the old traditional 4/3; or some other twist derived out of these two standards. If a team does not have experience or talent in the front four, they can probably be run on during the early portion of the season. Although defensive end is the sexier position since most sacks come from the edge, I place equal stock (if not more) in the defensive tackle positions. A defense needs to be able to plug and control the middle of the field to be successful. If your "two techniques" get pushed all over the field, a team does not have to be all that creative to move the ball up and down the field on you. As in "run the ball down your throat." In the secondary, I look for a team to have one "shutdown" or at least a capable CB with some experience. Most college teams only have one "big play" type receiver, so that's why I approach it that way. Obviously, the Floridas and USCs of the world can trot out two and, in some cases, even three receivers who have the size, route-running ability and hands to merit top-notch coverage. Once I get my final PRs, I then make lines on all games scheduled for the month of September. I don't go any further because teams' PRs are quite fluid early in the year and _ as much as I hate to admit it _ we do even miss on a team now and then. Please give any feedback on what you feel is most important during the early season; your preseason preparation process; and anything else you feel is a worthwhile addition to the discussion. Good luck, Paul
looking forward to your september college plays. good luck.
test test test
This is a great post. College football is not anything I do any handicapping for. I try to follow sharp bettors and pick up good numbers. Got a tweet today from Fez saying he's got his programmers working on things to set power ratings, etc. It sounds like a good amount of work. It sounds like pstone is doing alot of work. Hypothesis: Doing extra work, reading magazines, setting power ratings will give the bettor an advantage especially early in the year and perhaps later in the year. Rebuke for discussion purposes: I paid for the Phil Steele magazine. He has done all this work obviously. I'll assume he'll do more than either of you. (This isn't meant to be insulting. If you're doing as much as he is obviously your college football knowledge is beyond through the roof if you believe half of what Phil Steele tells you he does.) You're going to use his work within your work anyway. In 10 minutes I can flip to a few key pages especially one of his pages I'm sure has power ratings already and I'm done. Phil reminds me every page that his accuracy is better than any other magazine and somebody would have called him on this already if that weren't true so I'll skip the other 40 hours reviewing Street and Smith's, SI, Yahoo, whoever else regurgitates this. My Hypothesis: Can just reading a few key pages of Phil Steele give me 75% of the advantage that you can get using publications to assist yourself in forecasting? Is the market that potentially inefficient that all I need to do is read a bunch of magazines and I can gain an advantage? Look, it might be true so it may very well be a worthwhile process but this a tedious process that I would like to cut down. If it is an advantage, well the market just isn't efficient. And I'm sure it isn't to some extent. . I guess I'm saying that without Fez (who I have no idea what he does) and pstone (who is clearer in what he's doing) sounds to me like it your power ratings, etc. are somewhat derived and influenced by general publications. And obviously knowledge can be gained that way. But I'm going to say that it somewhat defaults to Phil Steele, Yahoo, etc. is sharp money--even at least a little bit. And maybe Phil or Yahoo is. I don't know for sure. But I have a feeling that real sharp money is more than this. In other words, when Phil says the Alabama D Line is #2 in the country or whatever, I don't know if it is true or how you know otherwise. Now if someone else tells you it is #20 and you weight them a bit and it turns out they aren't as good, well that is good. If you weight them and they really were #2, well that is bad. And when Phil needs to release an errors page and tell you that I said Central Michigan had the #1 secondary in the conference that was a printing error, I meant #11. And if you had no idea that was a typo or sounded funny when reading it, well I think it can lead to problems. In other words, I'm going to after these approaches as good ideas, probably give you a little advantage but I'm not sure that this is the real source of sharp money out there at this. To the extent that either Fez or pstone do their work and win (and I assume they will. They both are good at this. We know Fez has had success and we know pstone is a gentleman and he says he wins.) But when either of you do your work, is it your own massaging of the data that is the difference? When you're finished doing your work, are your power ratings very similar to Phil Steele anyway? A weighted average of publications? Unless YOU have original research and data on players, coaching, etc. from either closer following of the teams and their local coverage I have to infer that you're just taking publicly available information and massaging it. I think it will put you ahead of many bettors but I don't necessarily think it will move you ahead of truly sharp bettors at this. Just my thoughts.

Skeeter: You bring up some valid points regarding the use of Phil Steele and other similar preseason publications as a resource for developing power ratings. First of all IMO, Phil Steele does an exceptional job of compiling information _ much of which I find applicable and valuable in my process of establishing power ratings/early season lines/etc. (starts returning in the offensive line; number of plays by offensive linemen; experience level of new starters). Most importantly, I have found the information to have integrity and accuracy (Some magazines, for instance, publish ATS data which is inaccurate). Compiling the data and information is one thing, however, knowing how to apply that same information in a manner than translates into winners at the window is an entirely different matter. So I take the facts presented by Steele; ignore his overall preseason rankings and conference predicted order of finish; and make my own assumptions based on my individual belief systems about what is important, unimportant and somewhere in between (Some of my basic focus areas in CFB are at QB, the offensive line (most specificially the C and LT positions) and the front seven on defense, with a greater emphasis placed on the front four). I certainly agree it can be difficult to not be influenced by the presenter's perspective/etc, but I truly believe Steele does an excellent job of providing a lot of "objective" data. Good luck, Paul
Interesting discussion as I've often wondered the same thing as Skeeter. Thanks.
I think specialization is the key. Focus in on a few conferences and really learn about them. Also, there are certain things that are just obvious that it has become clear to me that you must know, if you don't you don't know what you are doing. If I asked what 4 teams run the ball 80% plus of the time, you simply have to be able to guess the right answer (Armed forces, and Gt). Who is 5th/6th is a much better question! While I expect many might guess correctly Whisky, AMAZINGLY it's AUBURN. YUp. AUBURN. I can tell you the Jurassic Park Vegas Handicapper's that have done this (and won) for 25 years, simply aren't winning anymore........the reason IMO is that they aren't sophisticated enough with power ratings/trends/situational spots/etc. To WIN, IMO you 1. Have to set the power rating line 2. Make necessary adjustments based on the specific matchups (some teams have high Pratings, but don't blow out teams....others LOVE to blow out teams) 3. Adjust for the key trend(s) 4. Adjust for the situational spot 5. Know the key injuries 6. Better check the weather (Bams -18 vs. Ten no good in the slop).
Thanks for the insight. Could one imagine a pre season magazine in baseball not giving the Phillies rotation an A+ at the beginning of the year? I have no chance at modifying power ratings for teams as I simply don't know the details of the sport. So I guess my question is: Are Phil Steele's power ratings (and related predictions for games and RSW) reflected in the betting market, RSW totals that will be listed soon, or are already out there? With the GN games of the year for instance and Phil Steele's facebook predictions for his games of the year, can I walk into the GN right now and am I going to be looking at lines which reflect Phil's predictions for the games that overlap? Or is the betting market reflected around TOP 25, AP polls etc? It would seem that Phil has so much information and obviously some of it will end up correct and some of it not but if there could be some acceptance that what he has are solid forecasts and the opening lines, RSW totals don't reflect his initial thoughts that the SIMPLEST way to profit his just read the magazine, take notes, accept what he says as fact and concentrate on betting. If you can be like pstone or Fezz and improve upon this or stratify things, it would seem safer to bet the things that you agree with and where you're competent enough to question him, just not bet on that. OR, is Phil's stuff baked in the lines and just market information and if one expects to win at this one will need to know where he's wrong more than where he's right which of course is a huge problem for someone like me?
[QUOTE=Skeeter;44504] OR, is Phil's stuff baked in the lines and just market information and if one expects to win at this one will need to know where he's wrong more than where he's right which of course is a huge problem for someone like me?[/QUOTE] This one. You'll have a much easier time of it by looking at his opinions and betting against when you react "huh?" Otherwise, bet his way when his opinions hit and then bet the other way after the lines stop moving. My guess is a lot of people bet his steam.