This has been on my wantlist for a while and last week it turned up at one of my local spots. Not the UK version but it will do for now. Its psychadelica i guess, im no expert on this area - but the goove is solid, ranging from dreamy intrumental flutey tracks to break heavy progressive. Hold on to your mind is my choice here but if you enjoy that go look for the LP cause its packed with quality.

From the self-deprecation department

This year was the first year that I followed our web traffic at any level of detail. The normal pattern has been that traffic spikes on Sundays during the regular season. But that traffic has dropped off dramatically following the big spike on BCS Selection Sunday. Right now, maybe that looks like a positive development (smile) seeing how poorly we're doing so far in our now annual use of the RWFL rankings to try to pick the bowl games. This year's RWFL-based selections have correctly picked 1 of the 6 bowl games so far this season, putting us currently at the 9.9th percentile in ESPN's College Bowl Mania. That's right, more than 90% of entries are currently performing better than our picks. Impressive! But there are a lot of games left to play, so we'll see how it shakes out in the long run. After all, our entry can't drop much lower.

Last Minute Bowl Game Preparations

The first bowl games are only hours away, so it's time to get ready! No, I don't mean chili and guacamole (though that sounds good). I mean our third annual attempt to use the rankings to predict the bowl games. We'll once again be playing over at ESPN's College Bowl Mania (not endorsing it, it's just where I'm signed up), which requires predictions of outcomes and rank-ordering of confidence in those predictions. The 2007 random walker bowl predictions turned out pretty well, placing above the 75th percentile of all entries, which I believe is good for a fully automated system. The 2008 bowl predictions, however, really missed the mark. But that doesn't stop us from coming back to try again.

The big caveats up front are that we definitely do not recommend these rankings for anything beyond entertainment. The underlying rankings are not intended to be best in any sense, except that they are relatively simple to explain. And the methodology used to assign predictive probabilities here is fundamentally flawed. The general principle we use is that we assign a probability to a victory by the higher-ranked team such that the addition of a mythical fractional-outcome game split according to those probabilities does not change the existing rankings. However, this simple principle is fabulously erroneous for many reasons, not the least of which is that it can algebraically return a greater-than-100% chance of victory. You might think a mathematician would bother to fix such a problem, but there are so many other flaws in trying to use these rankings to predict upcoming games that it's unclear whether further detailed work would yield anything useful.

Like past years, we used the full-component RWFL predictions at p=0.75 (see other parts of this site for those details). Each game selection is specified by predicting the higher-ranked team will beat the lower-ranked team. The games are presented in order of confidence (highest to lowest), determined by the mean of the stated probability spread (obtained individually by the first-place votes and the last-place votes). I'm happy to discuss such details further, though I warn again that it is a relatively crude model. And since I'm assuming visitors just want the results, let's get to the predictions.

----
International
South Florida (7-5) over Northern Illinois (7-5)
70-82%
----
AdvoCare V100 Independence
Georgia (7-5) over Texas A&M (6-6)
67-79%
----
Chick-fil-A
Virginia Tech (9-3) over Tennessee (7-5)
69-76%
----
Emerald
Southern Cal (8-4) over Boston College (8-4)
65-70%
----
Rose Bowl Game presented by Citi
Oregon (10-2) over Ohio State (10-2)
61-71%
----
Brut Sun
Stanford (8-4) over Oklahoma (7-5)
63-69%
----
Insight
Minnesota (6-6) over Iowa St (6-6)
65-67%
----
Konica Minolta Gator
West Virginia (9-3) over Florida St (6-6)
65-67%
----
New Mexico
Fresno St (8-4) over Wyoming (6-6)
65-66%
----
Pacific Life Holiday
Arizona (8-4) over Nebraska (9-4)
65-66%
----
EagleBank
UCLA (6-6) over Temple (9-3)
56-70%
----
Outback
Auburn (7-5) over Northwestern (8-4)
61-62%
----
Papajohns.com
South Carolina (7-5) over Connecticut (7-5)
61-62%
----
Valero Alamo
Texas Tech (8-4) over Michigan St (6-6)
57-66%
----
Champs Sports
Miami FL (9-3) over Wisconsin (9-3)
56-67%
----
Sheraton Hawaii
Nevada (8-4) over SMU (7-5)
56-65%
----
Bell Helicopter Armed Forces
Houston (10-3) over Air Force (7-5)
47-75%
----
FedEx Orange
Georgia Tech (11-2) over Iowa (10-2)
56-61%
----
Citi BCS National Championship Game
Alabama (13-0) over Texas (13-0)
47-70%
----
Texas
Missouri (8-4) over Navy (8-4)
54-60%
----
Gaylord Hotels Music City
Clemson (8-5) over Kentucky (7-5)
57-58%
----
St. Petersburg
Central Florida (8-4) over Rutgers (8-4)
50-65%
----
R+L Carriers New Orleans
Middle Tennessee St (9-3) over Southern Miss (7-5)
56-57%
----
S.D. County Credit Union Poinsettia
California (8-4) over Utah (9-3)
53-59%
----
AT&T Cotton
Oklahoma St (9-3) over Mississippi (8-4)
52-59%
----
Allstate Sugar
Florida (12-1) over Cincinnati (12-0)
52-59%
----
Capital One
LSU (9-3) over Penn State (10-2)
50-60%
----
Tostitos Fiesta
TCU (12-0) over Boise St (13-0)
53-55%
----
Roady's Humanitarian
Idaho (7-5) over Bowling Green (7-5)
50-58%
----
GMAC
Central Michigan (11-2) over Troy (9-3)
54-54%
----
Little Caesars
Ohio U. (9-4) over Marshall (6-6)
52-53%
----
AutoZone Liberty
Arkansas (7-5) over East Carolina (9-4)
44-55%
----
MAACO Las Vegas
Oregon St (8-4) over Brigham Young (10-2)
49-50%
----
Meineke Car Care
North Carolina (8-4) over Pittsburgh (9-3)
39-51%
----

Note, in particular, the toss-up nature in the last picks above. Meanwhile, even some of the more confident calls include probability spreads that dip below 50%, including the call for the BCS National Championship Game.

By the way, we get a LOT more visitors than comments on this site. Feel free to express your opinion about the accuracy (or better yet, the stupidity) of these predictions!

A great year and a request

2009 has been a great year for digging, I have found more stuff over the last 12 months than the rest of the 21st century. It even makes up for the records I passed on in the late 90s to never see again. And 2009 keeps on giving, the pic above is from yesterdays haul. Nothing spectacular, apart from Chain Reaction maybee, but 10 or so great Lps for peanuts - some spares but still quality. 2010 has a lot to live up to. The one 12" to the left in the pile from yesterday was a stormer: "Reaction - In a moment" on Strawberry. Soulful disco or even straight modern soul, if you liked Henry Woods Troupe a few posts down this is for you.

And here's the other good track "Gospel Train" of the Better Late Than Ever LP that i posted a track from previously. By request from Damian.

Ex-Tras, King Sporty & Connie Case - Get On Down

A Proper LP from a proper recordstore - no bargain bins here. This is how I like my disco, gritty, funky, slamming bassline and great hook. This french LP from 83 contains 2 amazing tunes - "Get On Down" and "Haven't Been Funked Enough", both avaliable on separate 12" from the Konduku label but here you get them both on one LP. A real money saver. Or just download Get On Down here by clicking the divshare logo and use your money on candy instead.

Rankings through December 5th

Every time you changed the channel yesterday, there was another wild game on. Alabama rolled Florida. Texas survived last-second confusion and won on a last-second FG. Cincy came back from 21 down and won by the difference of Pitt's botched extra point attempt following a perhaps too-early TD. GT won a back-and-forth match with Clemson. And Fresno State beat Illinois on a stretch into the endzone in the last seconds, followed by a fluke tip drill two-point conversion. Okay, so that last one has zero implication for the BCS bowls, and most of us probably only saw it on SportsCenter; but it was crazy.

Cincy and TCU fans are probably steaming this morning that Texas got that second back. And Texas will probably lose a few votes in the BCS Standings, but the conventional wisdom seems to be that their lead over TCU last week was so large that it won't matter: Texas will play Alabama for the championship.

TCU will get the non-AQ group automatic qualification. The three remaining BCS at-large bids are up to the bowls themselves, but it seems certain that Florida will get one, and it seems likely that Boise State and either Iowa or Penn State will get the other. That is, unless a bowl game chooses to go to a three-loss team, it's just a matter of which team goes where; Brad Edwards at ESPN concisely breaks the process down and makes predictions.

Finally, on to our own rankings. Note the figure below the rank ordering of the 120 teams, because it says something interesting this week. Specifically, it plots the order of the top teams under varying the single "p value" bias parameter in our ranking system, which is a highly imperfect proxy for exploring other ranking systems that work under the same limiting assumptions (notably no margin of victory and no information about dates of games). While Alabama remains the undisputed #1 as the bias varies between its allowed values, Cincy, Florida, and Texas each make appearances at #2.

2009 Random Walker Rankings (RWFL, p=0.75)
Games through Saturday December 5th:
1. Alabama (13-0) [1.6882]
2. Florida (12-1) [1.2422]
3. Cincinnati (12-0) [1.2000]
4. Texas (13-0) [1.1248]
5. TCU (12-0) [1.0198]
6. Oregon (10-2) [1.0023]
7. Georgia Tech (11-2) [0.9651]
8. Boise St (13-0) [0.9495]
9. Virginia Tech (9-3) [0.8073]
10. Ohio State (10-2) [0.7910]
11. LSU (9-3) [0.7865]
12. Iowa (10-2) [0.7746]
13. Miami FL (9-3) [0.7666]
14. West Virginia (9-3) [0.6841]
15. Arizona (8-4) [0.6710]
16. Southern Cal (8-4) [0.6678]
17. Stanford (8-4) [0.6546]
18. North Carolina (8-4) [0.6454]
19. Penn State (10-2) [0.6447]
20. Pittsburgh (9-3) [0.6344]
21. Oregon St (8-4) [0.6244]
22. Brigham Young (10-2) [0.6235]
23. Georgia (7-5) [0.6216]
24. Oklahoma St (9-3) [0.6175]
25. California (8-4) [0.6021]
26. Mississippi (8-4) [0.5896]
27. South Carolina (7-5) [0.5764]
28. Clemson (8-5) [0.5750]
29. Arkansas (7-5) [0.5734]
30. Auburn (7-5) [0.5696]
31. Tennessee (7-5) [0.5425]
32. Wisconsin (9-3) [0.5406]
33. Houston (10-3) [0.5280]
34. East Carolina (9-4) [0.5162]
35. Kentucky (7-5) [0.4978]
36. Utah (9-3) [0.4977]
37. Nebraska (9-4) [0.4903]
38. Boston College (8-4) [0.4878]
39. Florida St (6-6) [0.4825]
40. Texas Tech (8-4) [0.4599]
41. Missouri (8-4) [0.4591]
42. Central Michigan (11-2) [0.4558]
43. Northwestern (8-4) [0.4454]
44. Connecticut (7-5) [0.4429]
45. Oklahoma (7-5) [0.4380]
46. Washington (5-7) [0.4369]
47. South Florida (7-5) [0.4368]
48. Mississippi St (5-7) [0.4327]
49. Troy (9-3) [0.4211]
50. Central Florida (8-4) [0.4205]
51. Fresno St (8-4) [0.4197]
52. UCLA (6-6) [0.4193]
53. Rutgers (8-4) [0.4184]
54. Navy (8-4) [0.4175]
55. Nevada (8-4) [0.4011]
56. Notre Dame (6-6) [0.3973]
57. Minnesota (6-6) [0.3862]
58. Temple (9-3) [0.3607]
59. SMU (7-5) [0.3477]
60. Middle Tennessee St (9-3) [0.3437]
61. Wake Forest (5-7) [0.3422]
62. Michigan St (6-6) [0.3296]
63. Texas A&M (6-6) [0.3279]
64. Ohio U. (9-4) [0.3254]
65. Air Force (7-5) [0.3141]
66. North Carolina St (5-7) [0.3131]
67. Purdue (5-7) [0.3102]
68. Marshall (6-6) [0.3034]
69. Wyoming (6-6) [0.3017]
70. Idaho (7-5) [0.3011]
71. Southern Miss (7-5) [0.2985]
72. Bowling Green (7-5) [0.2968]
73. Arizona St (4-8) [0.2795]
74. Iowa St (6-6) [0.2771]
75. Virginia (3-9) [0.2765]
76. Syracuse (4-8) [0.2763]
77. Kansas St (6-6) [0.2736]
78. Duke (5-7) [0.2680]
79. Kansas (5-7) [0.2590]
80. UNLV (5-7) [0.2453]
81. Hawai`i (6-7) [0.2430]
82. Baylor (4-8) [0.2417]
83. Louisville (4-8) [0.2379]
84. Michigan (5-7) [0.2319]
85. Alabama-Birmingham (5-7) [0.2182]
86. Illinois (3-9) [0.2168]
87. Louisiana-Monroe (6-6) [0.2137]
88. Colorado (3-9) [0.2120]
89. Northern Illinois (7-5) [0.2065]
90. Louisiana-Lafayette (6-6) [0.2039]
91. Utah St (4-8) [0.1998]
92. Louisiana Tech (4-8) [0.1984]
93. UTEP (4-8) [0.1947]
94. Indiana (4-8) [0.1935]
95. Vanderbilt (2-10) [0.1921]
96. Tulsa (5-7) [0.1912]
97. San Diego St (4-8) [0.1860]
98. Washington St (1-11) [0.1816]
99. Colorado St (3-9) [0.1813]
100. Maryland (2-10) [0.1808]
101. Buffalo (5-7) [0.1735]
102. Florida Atlantic (5-7) [0.1715]
103. Toledo (5-7) [0.1697]
104. Florida Int'l (3-9) [0.1677]
105. Tulane (3-9) [0.1555]
106. Kent St (5-7) [0.1471]
107. San Jose St (2-10) [0.1420]
108. New Mexico St (3-10) [0.1388]
109. Army (5-6) [0.1341]
110. Rice (2-10) [0.1262]
111. Western Michigan (5-7) [0.1256]
112. Memphis (2-10) [0.1172]
113. Arkansas St (4-8) [0.1162]
114. Miami OH (1-11) [0.1088]
115. New Mexico (1-11) [0.1048]
116. Akron (3-9) [0.1004]
117. North Texas (2-10) [0.0838]
118. Ball St (2-10) [0.0634]
119. Eastern Michigan (0-12) [-0.0003]
120. Western Kentucky (0-12) [-0.0032]
Conference Rankings (Average Per Team):
SEC 0.6927
Pac10 0.5540
BigEast 0.5414
ACC 0.5092
Big10 0.4422
Big12 0.4317
MWC 0.3860
WAC 0.3326
FBSInd 0.3163
CUSA 0.2848
MAC 0.1949
SunBelt 0.1909
Non-FBS -0.0829

Choralerna - Gud gav mig en sång

A christian band mixing some pop and gospel into their regular repertoire of mind numbing hyms. These types of bands seems to have been widely popular in sweden during the 70s. In this live recording however, the band steps outside the box and gets some straight B-boy breaks going. The crowd is chanting in swedish and if you don't speak it just imagine that they are cheering at someone doing a backspin instead.

Rankings through November 28th

With only one week left before the bowl bids, the teams at the very top just keep on winning. Meanwhile, losses among BCS bid hopefuls Oklahoma State and Pitt have helped to slightly clarify the at-large possibilities.

First, the obvious: the winner of the SEC Championship game next weekend between Florida and Alabama will appear in the National Championship game. The loser will get one of the three BCS at-large bids. Texas will be the other half of the National Championship game if they beat Nebraska for the Big 12 Championship. TCU will get a non-AQ-group automatic bid to a BCS bowl, leaving only two at-large bids left up for grabs.

If Texas loses next weekend, they will certainly get an at-large bid, and we're going to hear lots of controversy about who should play in the National Championship game: Texas, TCU, Cincinnati (if they beat Pitt in the de facto Big East title game), or Boise State (if they win their final regular season game).

Will Boise State get an at-large bid? Let's break it down very quickly by assuming for the present argument that no three-loss team is going to get a BCS bowl bid this year (though that assumption might not be safe). This way, we take Oregon, GT, and Pitt out of at-large contention: if they win, they win the automatic bids from their respective conferences. The remaining variables then are Texas, Cincinnati, the Big Ten at-large hopefuls, and of course, Boise State has to win their regular season finale (otherwise this discussion is moot).

Assuming Boise State wins next weekend and no three-loss team gets an at-large bid, the remaining scenarios are:

If Texas and Cincy both lose next weekend, they very likely take the two remaining at-large bids, though Boise State, Iowa & Penn State fans might not be too pleased with the Cincinnati selection. More importantly, the bowl games (who ultimately make the selections) might decide a different selection is more lucrative. In any case, this scenario is bad for Boise State.

If Cincy wins and Texas loses, Texas certainly takes an at-large bid, leaving one left to go to either Boise State, Iowa, or Penn State. If the split goes the other way (Texas wins and Cincy loses), then perhaps the Cincy selection isn't quite so certain, leaving two at-large bids to split among these teams. Does Boise State get one under this scenario? I have no idea. Note this might also end up depending on the other conference championship games, in that it might be hard to rationalize an Iowa/PennSt selection over a Boise State squad ranked, say, five spots higher in the BCS Standings; but if other teams fall, the rank-order gap might narrow significantly.

Finally, the good news for Boise State: if Texas and Cincy both win next weekend, they take their respective conferences' automatic bids, leaving two at-large bids remaining. In this scenario, an undefeated Boise State is all but certain to grab a BCS bid, since the Big Ten can only take one at-large bid (to either Iowa or Penn State). The only way to deny Boise State in this scenario is to give an at-large bid to a three-loss team. So the Broncos will be cheering for the Longhorns and Bearcats, and if all three win, it looks like we'll see two non-AQ group schools in the BCS games for the first time.

2009 Random Walker Rankings (RWFL, p=0.75)
Games through Saturday November 28th:
1. Alabama (12-0) [1.4900]
2. Florida (12-0) [1.4155]
3. Cincinnati (11-0) [1.1452]
4. Texas (12-0) [1.0918]
5. TCU (12-0) [1.0246]
6. Boise St (12-0) [0.9648]
7. Oregon (9-2) [0.9501]
8. Georgia Tech (10-2) [0.9121]
9. Ohio State (10-2) [0.7874]
10. Virginia Tech (9-3) [0.7827]
11. LSU (9-3) [0.7669]
12. Miami FL (9-3) [0.7656]
13. Southern Cal (8-3) [0.7645]
14. Iowa (10-2) [0.7552]
15. Pittsburgh (9-2) [0.6931]
16. Oregon St (8-3) [0.6788]
17. California (8-3) [0.6785]
18. Stanford (8-4) [0.6565]
19. Penn State (10-2) [0.6446]
20. West Virginia (8-3) [0.6358]
21. Brigham Young (10-2) [0.6218]
22. North Carolina (8-4) [0.6187]
23. Oklahoma St (9-3) [0.6181]
24. Georgia (7-5) [0.6170]
25. Clemson (8-4) [0.6148]
26. Houston (10-2) [0.5983]
27. Arizona (7-4) [0.5967]
28. South Carolina (7-5) [0.5749]
29. Mississippi (8-4) [0.5728]
30. Arkansas (7-5) [0.5678]
31. Auburn (7-5) [0.5456]
32. Tennessee (7-5) [0.5430]
33. Wisconsin (8-3) [0.5170]
34. Nebraska (9-3) [0.5057]
35. Utah (9-3) [0.4952]
36. Kentucky (7-5) [0.4924]
37. Florida St (6-6) [0.4890]
38. South Florida (7-4) [0.4845]
39. Boston College (8-4) [0.4844]
40. Texas Tech (8-4) [0.4635]
41. Rutgers (8-3) [0.4605]
42. Missouri (8-4) [0.4569]
43. East Carolina (8-4) [0.4418]
44. Northwestern (8-4) [0.4401]
45. Oklahoma (7-5) [0.4367]
46. Troy (9-3) [0.4295]
47. Mississippi St (5-7) [0.4284]
48. Central Florida (8-4) [0.4237]
49. Navy (8-4) [0.4199]
50. UCLA (6-6) [0.4165]
51. Central Michigan (10-2) [0.4135]
52. Connecticut (6-5) [0.4011]
53. Fresno St (7-4) [0.3965]
54. Nevada (8-4) [0.3957]
55. Notre Dame (6-6) [0.3933]
56. Minnesota (6-6) [0.3872]
57. Washington (4-7) [0.3808]
58. Temple (9-3) [0.3637]
59. Ohio U. (9-3) [0.3557]
60. Middle Tennessee St (9-3) [0.3467]
61. SMU (7-5) [0.3434]
62. Wake Forest (5-7) [0.3420]
63. Texas A&M (6-6) [0.3256]
64. Michigan St (6-6) [0.3248]
65. North Carolina St (5-7) [0.3189]
66. Air Force (7-5) [0.3135]
67. Purdue (5-7) [0.3067]
68. Marshall (6-6) [0.3017]
69. Bowling Green (7-5) [0.2987]
70. Southern Miss (7-5) [0.2975]
71. Wyoming (6-6) [0.2968]
72. Idaho (7-5) [0.2954]
73. Syracuse (4-8) [0.2801]
74. Iowa St (6-6) [0.2788]
75. Arizona St (4-8) [0.2766]
76. Kansas St (6-6) [0.2754]
77. Virginia (3-9) [0.2729]
78. Duke (5-7) [0.2676]
79. Kansas (5-7) [0.2584]
80. Hawai`i (6-6) [0.2518]
81. UNLV (5-7) [0.2469]
82. Baylor (4-8) [0.2397]
83. Louisville (4-8) [0.2378]
84. Michigan (5-7) [0.2292]
85. Illinois (3-8) [0.2262]
86. Alabama-Birmingham (5-7) [0.2129]
87. Louisiana-Monroe (6-6) [0.2109]
88. Colorado (3-9) [0.2088]
89. Louisiana-Lafayette (6-6) [0.2051]
90. Northern Illinois (7-5) [0.2041]
91. UTEP (4-8) [0.1987]
92. Utah St (4-8) [0.1975]
93. Vanderbilt (2-10) [0.1936]
94. Indiana (4-8) [0.1921]
95. Tulsa (5-7) [0.1916]
96. Maryland (2-10) [0.1891]
97. Florida Int'l (3-8) [0.1875]
98. San Diego St (4-8) [0.1832]
99. Washington St (1-11) [0.1824]
100. Louisiana Tech (3-8) [0.1811]
101. Colorado St (3-9) [0.1793]
102. Buffalo (5-7) [0.1768]
103. Toledo (5-7) [0.1691]
104. San Jose St (2-9) [0.1567]
105. Tulane (3-9) [0.1565]
106. Florida Atlantic (4-7) [0.1515]
107. Kent St (5-7) [0.1509]
108. Army (5-6) [0.1361]
109. Rice (2-10) [0.1264]
110. Western Michigan (5-7) [0.1248]
111. New Mexico St (3-9) [0.1220]
112. Memphis (2-10) [0.1167]
113. Arkansas St (3-8) [0.1092]
114. Miami OH (1-11) [0.1084]
115. New Mexico (1-11) [0.1035]
116. Akron (3-9) [0.1004]
117. North Texas (2-10) [0.0790]
118. Ball St (2-10) [0.0631]
119. Western Kentucky (0-11) [0.0062]
120. Eastern Michigan (0-12) [-0.0022]
Conference Rankings (Average Per Team):
SEC 0.6840
Pac10 0.5581
BigEast 0.5423
ACC 0.5048
Big10 0.4373
Big12 0.4300
MWC 0.3850
WAC 0.3290
FBSInd 0.3164
CUSA 0.2841
MAC 0.1944
SunBelt 0.1917
Non-FBS -0.0825

Fia Nyström - Natt Katt & Glittrande Ljus

Det är för sent

Kärlekens hav

Typical 80s pop from Fia Nyström, both records have one standout track. This goes down real well in france for some reason and I guess this could be labeled as boogie in the most generous definition of the term.

Rankings through November 21st

Another week of wins at the top of last week's BCS Standings. The most prominent loss near the top of the Standings was LSU's confused clock management thriller at Ole Miss. Of course, other losses by Notre Dame, Kansas and Michigan make big news because coaching jobs might be on the line, but we're now most interested in the BCS Bowl bids here.

All signs continue to point to a probable Alabama/Florida v. Texas National Championship Game, though of course that might depend on teams continuing to win. That said, it's becoming conceivable that Texas could lose a game down the stretch and still appear in the National Championship (the earliest compelling argument I heard for this was on Slate's Hang Up and Listen podcast). So I continue to be most interested right now in whether Boise State will get a BCS at-large bid this year.

Without repeating yesterday's post, the LSU loss possibly hurts Boise State a little, simply because LSU wasn't going to get a BCS Bowl bid anyway (assuming Florida and Alabama get them, with only two allowed per conference). So LSU will fall from their current BCS#8 spot, and someone else who might be in the running for an at-large bid will be able to make a stronger case. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here worrying on Boise State's behalf about one loss by LSU. But there could be a lot of teams making a respectable case for an at-large bid if they don't win their conference championships: Texas plays Nebraska, GT faces Clemson, Cincy gets Pitt, and Oregon hosts Oregon State in the now de facto Pac-10 championship game. Again, we take it as a given that the loser of Florida/Alabama will get an at-large bid, and we assume that TCU will get the non-AQ-group automatic berth if they beat New Mexico next week. That leaves two at-large bids remaining, some of which could disappear to losers of the conference championship games, or even to the Big Ten.

2009 Random Walker Rankings (RWFL, p=0.75)
Games through Saturday November 21st:
1. Alabama (11-0) [1.3873]
2. Florida (11-0) [1.2604]
3. Cincinnati (10-0) [1.2062]
4. Georgia Tech (10-1) [1.1521]
5. TCU (11-0) [1.1169]
6. Texas (11-0) [1.0729]
7. Oregon (9-2) [0.9538]
8. Boise St (11-0) [0.9062]
9. Pittsburgh (9-1) [0.8839]
10. Ohio State (10-2) [0.8350]
11. Virginia Tech (8-3) [0.7996]
12. Miami FL (8-3) [0.7874]
13. Iowa (10-2) [0.7809]
14. North Carolina (8-3) [0.7454]
15. Southern Cal (7-3) [0.7449]
16. Clemson (8-3) [0.7240]
17. Penn State (10-2) [0.6923]
18. California (8-3) [0.6850]
19. Oklahoma St (9-2) [0.6742]
20. Oregon St (8-3) [0.6731]
21. LSU (8-3) [0.6490]
22. Stanford (7-4) [0.6206]
23. Mississippi (8-3) [0.6025]
24. Houston (9-2) [0.5948]
25. Arizona (6-4) [0.5763]
26. Arkansas (7-4) [0.5670]
27. West Virginia (7-3) [0.5627]
28. Utah (9-2) [0.5575]
29. South Florida (7-3) [0.5547]
30. Brigham Young (9-2) [0.5481]
31. Wisconsin (8-3) [0.5401]
32. Florida St (6-5) [0.5242]
33. Auburn (7-4) [0.5063]
34. Navy (8-3) [0.5059]
35. Kentucky (7-4) [0.5029]
36. Boston College (7-4) [0.4981]
37. South Carolina (6-5) [0.4919]
38. Georgia (6-5) [0.4811]
39. Nebraska (8-3) [0.4753]
40. Rutgers (7-3) [0.4727]
41. Northwestern (8-4) [0.4598]
42. Temple (9-2) [0.4448]
43. Tennessee (6-5) [0.4446]
44. Notre Dame (6-5) [0.4387]
45. Missouri (7-4) [0.4333]
46. UCLA (6-5) [0.4262]
47. Texas Tech (7-4) [0.4256]
48. East Carolina (7-4) [0.4150]
49. Central Florida (7-4) [0.4123]
50. Minnesota (6-6) [0.4084]
51. Central Michigan (9-2) [0.4007]
52. Troy (8-3) [0.3985]
53. Connecticut (5-5) [0.3958]
54. Nevada (8-3) [0.3955]
55. Fresno St (7-4) [0.3857]
56. Washington (3-7) [0.3645]
57. Mississippi St (4-7) [0.3637]
58. Oklahoma (6-5) [0.3586]
59. Michigan St (6-6) [0.3419]
60. Wake Forest (4-7) [0.3372]
61. Southern Miss (7-4) [0.3362]
62. Marshall (6-5) [0.3341]
63. Idaho (7-4) [0.3291]
64. SMU (6-5) [0.3276]
65. Middle Tennessee St (8-3) [0.3266]
66. Purdue (5-7) [0.3241]
67. Air Force (7-5) [0.3215]
68. Syracuse (4-7) [0.3196]
69. Virginia (3-8) [0.3158]
70. Duke (5-6) [0.3154]
71. Texas A&M (6-5) [0.3116]
72. Ohio U. (8-3) [0.3014]
73. North Carolina St (4-7) [0.2844]
74. Wyoming (5-6) [0.2841]
75. Iowa St (6-6) [0.2825]
76. Arizona St (4-7) [0.2815]
77. Kansas (5-6) [0.2761]
78. Bowling Green (6-5) [0.2736]
79. Louisville (4-7) [0.2728]
80. Kansas St (6-6) [0.2699]
81. Baylor (4-7) [0.2485]
82. Michigan (5-7) [0.2481]
83. Northern Illinois (7-4) [0.2280]
84. UNLV (4-7) [0.2276]
85. Alabama-Birmingham (5-6) [0.2244]
86. Louisiana-Monroe (6-5) [0.2230]
87. Illinois (3-7) [0.2219]
88. Colorado (3-8) [0.2155]
89. Louisiana-Lafayette (6-5) [0.2121]
90. Maryland (2-9) [0.2100]
91. San Diego St (4-7) [0.2051]
92. Indiana (4-8) [0.2047]
93. Colorado St (3-8) [0.1993]
94. Hawai`i (5-6) [0.1967]
95. Toledo (5-6) [0.1940]
96. Washington St (1-10) [0.1870]
97. Vanderbilt (2-10) [0.1809]
98. Florida Int'l (3-8) [0.1781]
99. Kent St (5-6) [0.1717]
100. Louisiana Tech (3-8) [0.1702]
101. Tulsa (4-7) [0.1675]
102. Buffalo (4-7) [0.1650]
103. UTEP (3-8) [0.1637]
104. Tulane (3-8) [0.1588]
105. Utah St (3-8) [0.1586]
106. Western Michigan (5-6) [0.1557]
107. Army (5-6) [0.1415]
108. Florida Atlantic (3-7) [0.1384]
109. San Jose St (1-9) [0.1352]
110. New Mexico St (3-8) [0.1303]
111. Memphis (2-9) [0.1249]
112. Rice (2-9) [0.1204]
113. Miami OH (1-11) [0.1152]
114. Akron (2-9) [0.0997]
115. Arkansas St (2-8) [0.0908]
116. North Texas (2-9) [0.0851]
117. New Mexico (1-10) [0.0814]
118. Ball St (1-10) [0.0415]
119. Western Kentucky (0-10) [0.0134]
120. Eastern Michigan (0-11) [0.0131]
Conference Rankings (Average Per Team):
SEC 0.6198
BigEast 0.5836
ACC 0.5578
Pac10 0.5513
Big10 0.4597
Big12 0.4203
MWC 0.3935
FBSInd 0.3620
WAC 0.3119
CUSA 0.2816
MAC 0.2003
SunBelt 0.1851
Non-FBS -0.0831

Breaking Down the BCS Bowl Bids

Last year in this space, we watched anxiously throughout November as Boise State tried to make its case for a BCS Bowl bid on the field, and in the Standings, only to have the last at-large bowl bid go to a lesser-ranked Ohio State team. Anyone else getting a sense of deja vu here?

Wait, you say, Boise State is currently #6 in the BCS Standings, and there are 10 BCS Bowl bids (Fiesta, Orange, Rose, Sugar, and the National Championship Game). Ah, but how do teams qualify for BCS games? In the rules, Boise State is what the latest politically correct college football language deems a "non-AQ group" school (that is, they are not from a conference with an Automatic Qualifier). A non-AQ group school can earn an automatic BCS berth if they do well enough in the Standings; but the rules are also very explicit that "No more than one such team from the non-AQ group shall earn an automatic berth in any year." Last year, that berth went to Utah. This year, if both TCU and Boise State win out, it will almost certainly go to TCU.

So does Boise State have any shot at getting an at-large selection this year? First, it obviously depends on their winning out; if they lose, their BCS bid is finished. Second, it depends on who wins the AQ conferences, because those winners take 6 of the 10 spots. If TCU wins out, they'll almost certainly take a 7th automatic qualification (and if they don't, then the discussion simplifies because an undefeated Boise State would get it instead). So who will get the other three at-large spots? The SEC runner-up, definitely a given. If Texas doesn't win the Big 12, they would almost certainly still be in the running for a bid. So there may be either one or two more slots for Boise State to try to take.

Remembering that BCS at-large bids do not need to follow the BCS Standings beyond a top-14 requirement (as when Ohio State was selected over Boise State last year), it's perhaps still reasonable to look at the top teams in the Standings to see who else might legitimately get selected over a non-automatic Boise State. In the Big East, Cincinnati is currently #5 and Pitt is #9, and obviously only one of them will win that conference. At #7, Georgia Tech might be a candidate for an at-large bid if they fail to win the ACC. Luckily for Boise State, #8 LSU is not a worry right now because each conference can only get two bids, and we already counted two to the SEC. Meanwhile, #10 Ohio State has already wrapped up the Big Ten, which is also good for Boise State. In contrast, #11 Oregon is still fighting in the Pac-10, and #12 Oklahoma State won last night to increase their chances. And the financial incentives for the bowl games built into the at-large selections might cause one to look at a second Big Ten school, with Iowa at #13 and Penn State at #14.

That's a lot of teams fighting for at most two spots. While some of the confusion might clarify this weekend or next, much might remain unresolved until the conference championships.

----

Unsurprisingly, we aren't the only ones who have been talking about Boise State's BCS at-large chances. See also:

PR firm hired to make push for Boise St.

Boise State still in line for at-large

Boise State fans need to pull for Texas, root against Oklahoma State

A backlog of Trent McCotter's columns

Apparently Trent McCotter's brief stint writing thought-provoking articles about stats and sports for the News & Observer has come to an end. I'm disappointed by this, because I enjoyed each of his columns (not just the two we previously linked to from here). Indeed, I've been asking him every week for the past month whether a new one was coming or not. His columns were concise, and I know Trent well enough to know that he could have found a lot more to write about each topic. I'm certain it can't be an easy task to condense such thoughts into the strictly allotted newspaper space.

Trent's stories that appeared are still online:

How to fix the 'perfect game'

Zimmerman best in state at hitting streaks

'Tiger-proofing' golf courses yields surprises

Time to monkey around with BCS?

Ichiro a version of Wee Willie Keeler

The 'hot hand' in basketball: Does it exist?

Statistics gaffes highlight sports history

When is a conversion worth the risk?

Epsilon - Ayayaya

Now here's a record that sells itself - 4 german guys in fantastic outfits and cool haircuts on the picture cover and a track named Elephant Funk. Snapped that right out the 1€-bin. The Elephant funk was a letdown but the flip, "Ayayaya" sounds like a good Jimmy Castor tune fused with some quality kraut. Bitte!

Rankings through November 14th

No big changes at the top of the RWFL rankings this week.

TCU solidified their position across various p bias values---if you look at the plot below the list of ranks, their win against Utah definitely helps in general, but still leaves them in fourth-place at the selected p=0.75 value posted here. This might help solidify TCU's narrowly-held #4 position in the BCS Standings, since they were already ahead of Cincinnati in both polls and should now do better than before in the computer component. But of course TCU will still be behind Texas in the BCS Standings, since they were already ahead of Texas in the composite of the computers and were still well behind Texas in the Standings.

That is, unless someone loses, we seem to be on course for a championship game between Texas and the winner of the Florida-Alabama "semifinal" SEC Championship game. TCU is on course for an automatic BCS bowl game berth; in contrast, Boise State's relatively weaker strength of schedule continues to leave them later in the discussion. Because of the wrinkles in the rules that only give one automatic BCS bid to the "non-AQ group", Boise State will possibly be hoping for one of the at-large bids, and those at-large bids do not have to follow the BCS Standings, as Boise State learned all too well last year when they watched a lower-rated Ohio State team take the last BCS bid.

2009 Random Walker Rankings (RWFL, p=0.75)
Games through Saturday November 14th:
1. Alabama (10-0) [1.4580]
2. Florida (10-0) [1.3715]
3. Cincinnati (10-0) [1.1665]
4. TCU (10-0) [1.1513]
5. Georgia Tech (10-1) [1.1157]
6. Texas (10-0) [1.0832]
7. Boise St (10-0) [0.9626]
8. Oregon (8-2) [0.9185]
9. Pittsburgh (9-1) [0.8749]
10. Ohio State (9-2) [0.8747]
11. Iowa (9-2) [0.8048]
12. LSU (8-2) [0.7904]
13. Southern Cal (7-3) [0.7818]
14. Virginia Tech (7-3) [0.7656]
15. Miami FL (7-3) [0.7521]
16. Stanford (7-3) [0.7219]
17. Clemson (7-3) [0.7040]
18. Oregon St (7-3) [0.6998]
19. Oklahoma St (8-2) [0.6666]
20. Penn State (9-2) [0.6635]
21. Arizona (6-3) [0.6618]
22. Wisconsin (8-2) [0.6567]
23. North Carolina (7-3) [0.6480]
24. California (7-3) [0.6326]
25. Houston (8-2) [0.6094]
26. Utah (8-2) [0.5507]
27. Boston College (7-3) [0.5498]
28. Georgia (6-4) [0.5491]
29. Arkansas (6-4) [0.5351]
30. Navy (8-3) [0.5326]
31. Rutgers (7-2) [0.5299]
32. Brigham Young (8-2) [0.5200]
33. Mississippi (7-3) [0.5192]
34. Notre Dame (6-4) [0.5182]
35. West Virginia (7-3) [0.5174]
36. South Florida (6-3) [0.5016]
37. Auburn (7-4) [0.4948]
38. Florida St (5-5) [0.4892]
39. South Carolina (6-5) [0.4885]
40. Kentucky (6-4) [0.4662]
41. Nebraska (7-3) [0.4464]
42. Tennessee (5-5) [0.4407]
43. Temple (8-2) [0.4321]
44. Minnesota (6-5) [0.4253]
45. UCLA (5-5) [0.4175]
46. Central Michigan (8-2) [0.4161]
47. Northwestern (7-4) [0.4023]
48. Nevada (7-3) [0.4020]
49. Missouri (6-4) [0.4008]
50. Mississippi St (4-6) [0.4004]
51. Troy (7-3) [0.3978]
52. Washington (3-7) [0.3974]
53. Oklahoma (6-4) [0.3954]
54. Fresno St (6-4) [0.3905]
55. Central Florida (6-4) [0.3814]
56. Texas Tech (6-4) [0.3731]
57. SMU (6-4) [0.3699]
58. Michigan St (6-5) [0.3674]
59. Idaho (7-4) [0.3505]
60. East Carolina (5-4) [0.3505]
61. Air Force (7-4) [0.3443]
62. Wake Forest (4-7) [0.3439]
63. Connecticut (4-5) [0.3345]
64. Purdue (4-7) [0.3231]
65. Virginia (3-7) [0.3212]
66. Arizona St (4-6) [0.3201]
67. Middle Tennessee St (7-3) [0.3143]
68. Duke (5-5) [0.3137]
69. Southern Miss (6-4) [0.3070]
70. Iowa St (6-5) [0.3040]
71. North Carolina St (4-6) [0.2888]
72. Marshall (5-5) [0.2861]
73. Kansas St (6-5) [0.2809]
74. Texas A&M (5-5) [0.2760]
75. Baylor (4-6) [0.2692]
76. Ohio U. (7-3) [0.2686]
77. Northern Illinois (7-3) [0.2680]
78. Louisville (4-6) [0.2678]
79. Kansas (5-5) [0.2672]
80. Wyoming (5-5) [0.2672]
81. Michigan (5-6) [0.2657]
82. Bowling Green (5-5) [0.2629]
83. Syracuse (3-7) [0.2547]
84. Louisiana-Monroe (6-4) [0.2545]
85. Alabama-Birmingham (5-5) [0.2298]
86. Colorado St (3-7) [0.2291]
87. Indiana (4-7) [0.2266]
88. UNLV (4-7) [0.2246]
89. Illinois (3-7) [0.2220]
90. Maryland (2-8) [0.2139]
91. San Diego St (4-6) [0.2120]
92. Colorado (3-7) [0.2109]
93. Washington St (1-9) [0.1993]
94. Tulsa (4-5) [0.1976]
95. UTEP (3-7) [0.1941]
96. Toledo (4-6) [0.1931]
97. Vanderbilt (2-9) [0.1914]
98. Louisiana-Lafayette (5-5) [0.1894]
99. Hawai`i (4-6) [0.1863]
100. Louisiana Tech (3-7) [0.1856]
101. Kent St (5-5) [0.1831]
102. Tulane (3-7) [0.1678]
103. San Jose St (1-8) [0.1599]
104. Western Michigan (5-6) [0.1574]
105. Florida Int'l (3-7) [0.1571]
106. Buffalo (3-7) [0.1481]
107. Utah St (3-7) [0.1453]
108. Florida Atlantic (3-6) [0.1425]
109. New Mexico St (3-7) [0.1328]
110. Army (4-6) [0.1321]
111. Miami OH (1-10) [0.1248]
112. Memphis (2-8) [0.1102]
113. Akron (2-8) [0.1020]
114. North Texas (2-8) [0.0981]
115. Rice (1-9) [0.0951]
116. Arkansas St (2-7) [0.0923]
117. New Mexico (0-10) [0.0460]
118. Ball St (1-9) [0.0344]
119. Eastern Michigan (0-10) [0.0140]
120. Western Kentucky (0-10) [0.0125]
Conference Rankings (Average Per Team):
SEC 0.6421
Pac10 0.5751
BigEast 0.5559
ACC 0.5422
Big10 0.4756
Big12 0.4145
FBSInd 0.3943
MWC 0.3939
WAC 0.3239
CUSA 0.2749
MAC 0.2004
SunBelt 0.1843
Non-FBS -0.0836

Betina - The Hunters

Here is some more good stuff from the Sir Lancelot label, check my previous post if you like this. Betina sings about the dangers that lurks it the dark end of the street - a typical 80s theme with "street crime" being a common topic in movies and music. Its not very convincing coming from Betina in stockholm, and the cover doesnt send any chills down my spine but its a great track none the less. Produced by Tomas Blank whos behind alot of releases from this era. The style is not easy to define but I would say it floats along somewhere in between balearic and italo. This is the superior 12" version with break and all.

Rankings through November 7th

Two key losses this week effectively eliminate the title hopes of both Iowa and Oregon. Whatever our own rankings say below, it seems clear that the BCS is on a likely trajectory to a championship game between Texas and the winner of the Florida-Alabama "national semi-final" SEC Championship Game. Of course, if someone stumbles, Cincinnati, TCU & Boise State are all there waiting and hoping...

2009 Random Walker Rankings (RWFL, p=0.75)
Games through Saturday November 7th:
1. Alabama (9-0) [1.4886]
2. Florida (9-0) [1.3796]
3. Cincinnati (9-0) [1.1104]
4. TCU (9-0) [1.0754]
5. Georgia Tech (9-1) [1.0749]
6. Texas (9-0) [1.0623]
7. Iowa (9-1) [0.9969]
8. Boise St (9-0) [0.9968]
9. Oregon (7-2) [0.9503]
10. Southern Cal (7-2) [0.8936]
11. Miami FL (7-2) [0.8435]
12. LSU (7-2) [0.8376]
13. Ohio State (8-2) [0.7920]
14. Pittsburgh (8-1) [0.7876]
15. Arizona (6-2) [0.7793]
16. Virginia Tech (6-3) [0.7577]
17. Houston (8-1) [0.7383]
18. Penn State (8-2) [0.6932]
19. Wisconsin (7-2) [0.6782]
20. Clemson (6-3) [0.6766]
21. Stanford (6-3) [0.6530]
22. Oregon St (6-3) [0.6506]
23. Oklahoma St (7-2) [0.5992]
24. South Florida (6-2) [0.5860]
25. Utah (8-1) [0.5841]
26. Notre Dame (6-3) [0.5727]
27. West Virginia (7-2) [0.5629]
28. Auburn (7-3) [0.5611]
29. California (6-3) [0.5426]
30. Brigham Young (7-2) [0.5242]
31. North Carolina (6-3) [0.5139]
32. Arkansas (5-4) [0.5073]
33. Navy (7-3) [0.5064]
34. Boston College (6-3) [0.5047]
35. Georgia (5-4) [0.4917]
36. Tennessee (5-4) [0.4911]
37. South Carolina (6-4) [0.4844]
38. Kentucky (5-4) [0.4713]
39. Mississippi (6-3) [0.4702]
40. Washington (3-6) [0.4643]
41. Troy (7-2) [0.4590]
42. Fresno St (6-3) [0.4577]
43. Temple (7-2) [0.4420]
44. Florida St (4-5) [0.4358]
45. UCLA (4-5) [0.4302]
46. Northwestern (6-4) [0.4300]
47. Texas Tech (6-3) [0.4225]
48. Rutgers (6-2) [0.4216]
49. Minnesota (5-5) [0.4131]
50. Nebraska (6-3) [0.4129]
51. Central Michigan (7-2) [0.4061]
52. Mississippi St (4-5) [0.4012]
53. Oklahoma (5-4) [0.3762]
54. Idaho (7-3) [0.3761]
55. Purdue (4-6) [0.3604]
56. Wake Forest (4-6) [0.3598]
57. Michigan St (5-5) [0.3564]
58. Missouri (5-4) [0.3527]
59. SMU (5-4) [0.3354]
60. Kansas St (6-4) [0.3331]
61. Nevada (5-3) [0.3309]
62. Arizona St (4-5) [0.3285]
63. Marshall (5-4) [0.3240]
64. Virginia (3-6) [0.3201]
65. East Carolina (5-4) [0.3191]
66. Air Force (6-4) [0.3105]
67. Connecticut (4-5) [0.3095]
68. Michigan (5-5) [0.3061]
69. Texas A&M (5-4) [0.3045]
70. Duke (5-4) [0.2961]
71. Middle Tennessee St (6-3) [0.2948]
72. Kansas (5-4) [0.2913]
73. Syracuse (3-6) [0.2911]
74. Central Florida (5-4) [0.2905]
75. Iowa St (5-5) [0.2848]
76. North Carolina St (4-5) [0.2840]
77. Northern Illinois (6-3) [0.2838]
78. Ohio U. (6-3) [0.2678]
79. Southern Miss (5-4) [0.2672]
80. Louisiana-Monroe (5-4) [0.2636]
81. Bowling Green (4-5) [0.2630]
82. Indiana (4-6) [0.2499]
83. Baylor (4-5) [0.2470]
84. Illinois (3-6) [0.2449]
85. Wyoming (4-5) [0.2381]
86. Colorado (3-6) [0.2381]
87. UTEP (3-6) [0.2364]
88. San Diego St (4-5) [0.2363]
89. Louisville (3-6) [0.2342]
90. UNLV (4-6) [0.2334]
91. Louisiana-Lafayette (5-4) [0.2290]
92. Colorado St (3-7) [0.2200]
93. San Jose St (1-6) [0.2162]
94. Toledo (4-5) [0.2149]
95. Alabama-Birmingham (4-5) [0.2137]
96. Washington St (1-8) [0.2132]
97. Tulane (3-6) [0.2061]
98. Tulsa (4-5) [0.2033]
99. Maryland (2-7) [0.1981]
100. Vanderbilt (2-8) [0.1888]
101. Kent St (5-5) [0.1836]
102. Louisiana Tech (3-6) [0.1767]
103. Hawai`i (3-6) [0.1746]
104. Western Michigan (4-6) [0.1652]
105. Buffalo (3-6) [0.1614]
106. New Mexico St (3-6) [0.1511]
107. Florida Int'l (2-7) [0.1494]
108. Miami OH (1-9) [0.1402]
109. Florida Atlantic (2-6) [0.1293]
110. Utah St (2-7) [0.1288]
111. Army (3-6) [0.1255]
112. North Texas (2-7) [0.1241]
113. Arkansas St (2-6) [0.1226]
114. Memphis (2-7) [0.1217]
115. Akron (2-7) [0.1106]
116. Rice (0-9) [0.0540]
117. Ball St (1-8) [0.0483]
118. New Mexico (0-9) [0.0421]
119. Western Kentucky (0-9) [0.0270]
120. Eastern Michigan (0-9) [0.0251]
Conference Rankings (Average Per Team):
SEC 0.6477
Pac10 0.5906
BigEast 0.5379
ACC 0.5221
Big10 0.5019
Big12 0.4104
FBSInd 0.4016
MWC 0.3849
WAC 0.3343
CUSA 0.2758
MAC 0.2086
SunBelt 0.1999
Non-FBS -0.0842

Jerry Knight - Nothing Can Hold Us Back

This tune embodies everything I like about 80s soul. It also reminds me of why I got into crate digging way back in the day - you pick up a record that looks promising, good label, funky outfit, dope producers etc and when you drop the needle back at your house pure class flows from the speakers. Uncovering a gem like this makes it all worthwhile. This sounds a little like R Kelly when he's in his best mood. Enjoy!

Lupus - Mama Funk

Incorporating the word funk in a song title is rarely a mark of quality. In sweden however I dont think that to many people was down with the funk in the 70s. So a private pressed 7" with this title sure gets my attention. Its a solid funky rock-groove with silly lyrics about being a cry-baby. With some creative editing this could be a rock-disco tune XL.

Rankings through October 31st

The undefeated teams all won again, with Iowa adding to their catalog of close calls. That said, you have to give the Hawkeyes credit: wins are wins. We have a lot of football left to play this season, so virtually anything can happen. Certainly Iowa has some big games left on their schedule. However, if Iowa continues to win and there's any BCS controversy down the stretch, I'd expect the off-season BCS discussions to include reconsideration of the rules which prevent computer rankings from including margin of victory.

In the meantime, I'd be surprised if Iowa falls much in this week's official BCS Standings, if at all, since they were already only #8 in both polls last week. Oregon, after their impressive victory over USC, is the obvious candidate to potentially pass Iowa. TCU, Boise State, and Cincinnati were each already ahead of Iowa in the polls, but behind Iowa in the total standings because of the computer ranking component, and it's hard for me to see how that will change.

Speaking of the remaining BCS busters, we have double intrigue waiting for the official BCS Standings this week. First, I'm interested to see whether BCS#6 TCU stays ahead of BCS#7 Boise State in this week's Standings. Boise State, already ahead of TCU in both polls last week, is likely to get a small boost in the computer rankings from the follow-on effect of Oregon's victory over USC, given Boise State's season-opening win over Oregon. Will it be enough to pass TCU in the official Standings? Second, we eagerly wait to see the relative rankings between Oregon and Boise State. The Ducks will undoubtedly get a big boost across all the BCS components this week, but will it be enough to pass the Broncos, the only team to beat them on the field this season?

Using the random walker rankings across various p values as an imperfect proxy for other rankings, the closeness of these questions regarding Boise State are evident in the figure presented here below the p=0.75 rankings. Boise State is ranked higher than TCU for p > 0.7 (approximately) and higher than Oregon for p > 0.8. In other words, very slight changes in the methodology (e.g., changing the p value) can reasonably have big effects in the rank ordering in this situation.

2009 Random Walker Rankings (RWFL, p=0.75)
Games through Saturday October 31st:
1. Florida (8-0) [1.5226]
2. Iowa (9-0) [1.3781]
3. Alabama (8-0) [1.3288]
4. Oregon (7-1) [1.2656]
5. Boise St (8-0) [1.1549]
6. Texas (8-0) [1.1480]
7. TCU (8-0) [1.0819]
8. Cincinnati (8-0) [1.0588]
9. Georgia Tech (8-1) [1.0200]
10. LSU (7-1) [0.9699]
11. Southern Cal (6-2) [0.9276]
12. Penn State (8-1) [0.8159]
13. Miami FL (6-2) [0.7950]
14. Arizona (5-2) [0.7487]
15. Houston (7-1) [0.7412]
16. Pittsburgh (7-1) [0.7346]
17. Virginia Tech (5-3) [0.7173]
18. Notre Dame (6-2) [0.7120]
19. Wisconsin (6-2) [0.6726]
20. Utah (7-1) [0.6687]
21. California (6-2) [0.6666]
22. Ohio State (7-2) [0.6604]
23. Oklahoma St (6-2) [0.6069]
24. Clemson (5-3) [0.5981]
25. South Florida (6-2) [0.5667]
26. Auburn (6-3) [0.5600]
27. Washington (3-5) [0.5577]
28. West Virginia (6-2) [0.5328]
29. Oregon St (5-3) [0.5319]
30. South Carolina (6-3) [0.5292]
31. Brigham Young (6-2) [0.5189]
32. Georgia (4-4) [0.5091]
33. Boston College (6-3) [0.5045]
34. Stanford (5-3) [0.5002]
35. Tennessee (4-4) [0.4980]
36. Troy (6-2) [0.4887]
37. Kentucky (4-4) [0.4732]
38. North Carolina (5-3) [0.4711]
39. Florida St (4-4) [0.4556]
40. Arkansas (4-4) [0.4500]
41. Minnesota (5-4) [0.4463]
42. Idaho (7-2) [0.4406]
43. Oklahoma (5-3) [0.4341]
44. Texas Tech (6-3) [0.4313]
45. Mississippi (5-3) [0.4245]
46. Fresno St (5-3) [0.4179]
47. Central Michigan (7-2) [0.4109]
48. Missouri (5-3) [0.4108]
49. Rutgers (6-2) [0.4092]
50. Temple (6-2) [0.4047]
51. Mississippi St (4-5) [0.4026]
52. Michigan (5-4) [0.4012]
53. Navy (6-3) [0.3883]
54. UCLA (3-5) [0.3765]
55. Nebraska (5-3) [0.3680]
56. Kansas (5-3) [0.3633]
57. Texas A&M (5-3) [0.3633]
58. Michigan St (4-5) [0.3583]
59. Marshall (5-3) [0.3572]
60. Nevada (5-3) [0.3554]
61. Arizona St (4-4) [0.3493]
62. Duke (5-3) [0.3388]
63. SMU (4-4) [0.3271]
64. Virginia (3-5) [0.3258]
65. Iowa St (5-4) [0.3229]
66. Wake Forest (4-5) [0.3193]
67. Purdue (3-6) [0.3192]
68. East Carolina (5-3) [0.3141]
69. Kansas St (5-4) [0.3081]
70. Air Force (5-4) [0.3060]
71. Connecticut (4-4) [0.2868]
72. UTEP (3-5) [0.2821]
73. Northern Illinois (5-3) [0.2799]
74. Syracuse (3-5) [0.2797]
75. Northwestern (5-4) [0.2788]
76. Ohio U. (6-3) [0.2776]
77. Middle Tennessee St (5-3) [0.2723]
78. Bowling Green (3-5) [0.2686]
79. Louisiana-Monroe (4-4) [0.2655]
80. Indiana (4-5) [0.2628]
81. Wyoming (4-4) [0.2608]
82. Colorado St (3-6) [0.2544]
83. North Carolina St (3-5) [0.2542]
84. Southern Miss (5-4) [0.2541]
85. Louisville (3-5) [0.2489]
86. San Jose St (1-6) [0.2317]
87. Washington St (1-7) [0.2299]
88. San Diego St (4-4) [0.2258]
89. Kent St (5-4) [0.2189]
90. Colorado (2-6) [0.2176]
91. Maryland (2-6) [0.2113]
92. Central Florida (4-3) [0.2107]
93. Tulsa (4-4) [0.2093]
94. Louisiana-Lafayette (4-4) [0.2077]
95. UNLV (3-6) [0.2069]
96. Illinois (2-6) [0.2042]
97. Alabama-Birmingham (3-5) [0.2037]
98. Toledo (4-5) [0.2018]
99. Baylor (3-5) [0.1968]
100. Western Michigan (4-5) [0.1901]
101. Buffalo (3-5) [0.1798]
102. Tulane (2-6) [0.1780]
103. Hawai`i (2-6) [0.1666]
104. Arkansas St (2-5) [0.1647]
105. Vanderbilt (2-7) [0.1580]
106. Utah St (2-6) [0.1555]
107. Louisiana Tech (3-5) [0.1539]
108. Florida Int'l (2-6) [0.1537]
109. New Mexico St (3-6) [0.1476]
110. Miami OH (1-8) [0.1444]
111. Florida Atlantic (2-5) [0.1443]
112. Army (3-5) [0.1292]
113. North Texas (2-6) [0.1264]
114. Memphis (2-6) [0.1161]
115. Akron (1-7) [0.0875]
116. Ball St (1-8) [0.0440]
117. Rice (0-8) [0.0391]
118. New Mexico (0-8) [0.0277]
119. Eastern Michigan (0-8) [0.0183]
120. Western Kentucky (0-8) [0.0063]
Conference Rankings (Average Per Team):
SEC 0.6522
Pac10 0.6154
Big10 0.5271
BigEast 0.5147
ACC 0.5009
Big12 0.4309
FBSInd 0.4098
MWC 0.3946
WAC 0.3582
CUSA 0.2694
MAC 0.2097
SunBelt 0.2033
Non-FBS -0.0854

Concise Definition of RWFL Rankings

The general mathematical description of the random walker (RW) ranking methodology is presented as a sidebar on p.889 of ''The Bowl Championship Series: A Mathematical Review,'' T. Callaghan, P. J. Mucha and M. A. Porter, Notices of the American Mathematical Society 51, 887-893 (2004). These RW rankings, which amount to an amalgamation of first-place votes, depend on a bias value p setting the extent to which random walkers respect each individual game outcome.

The RWFL rankings at bias value p are calculated by the difference between first-place votes (following game winners) and last-place votes (following game losers). This is equivalent to subtracting RW at bias value (1-p) from RW at bias value p.

Starting in November 2009, all of our rankings are calculated on the full connected network of teams connected by games played, of which the FBS teams are a relatively small subset (even when we only report the FBS results). Prior to November 2009, our weekly rankings treated all non-FBS teams as a single catch-all "team" (who played a lot of games). However, our bowl predictions have used the full connected network in previous seasons. See this post for more discussion about this switch and its consequences.

Got Math? Part Two: The Consequences

In an earlier post, we explored the remarkable similarities between our RWFL rankings posted on Kenneth Massey's comparisons page, using our selected p=0.75 bias value, and Eugene Potemkin's E-Ratings. Through completely independent rationalizations, we ended up at equivalent linear algebra problems that we each solved to reach our rankings.

Well, this didn't seem to be adding much value to the comparisons, so Kenneth nicely asked me if we would do something to make sure ours were unique. So we're going to tweak our algorithm used to bring you weekly rankings, though we're going to do so in a logically consistent way. From now on, we're going to bring you the RWFL rankings as obtained by running the algorithm on the full set of 716 connected college football teams that include the FBS (that is, including all the FCS and DivII schools that play against the FBS, and all the schools who play them, etc.), and we'll report the ordered results from the FBS. This isn't actually "new" per se for us, as these are the rankings we've been using for our bowl predictions the past two years, because we think in principle they should be better. We just didn't want to spring a change without a compelling reason; needing to do something distinct from the E-Ratings is certainly a good enough reason.

If you decide you liked the old RWFL run on the FBS plus a single made-up catch-all non-FBS team, don't worry: you can still see those as the E-Ratings in Massey's comparisons. Indeed, comparing and contrasting the two should be interesting, in that the difference is all because of the treatment of the non-FBS teams, emphasizing the follow-on indirect effects present in the rankings.

An interesting part about this switch has to do with the only other change we've ever made in our rankings. Back in the original days of the Random Walker rankings, when all of us involved were all still at Georgia Tech, our "RW" rankings were just the linear algebra problem described in our manuscripts (which you can reach quickly from the sidebar), describing walkers with first-place votes. As noted at the end of our American Mathematical Monthly paper, there were a lot of reasons to expect improvement using this along with a second set of walkers, with last-place votes. For years, we've simply subtracted these second vote counts from the first to give the RWFL rankings ("Random Walkers First-Last").

But on the whole connected network of 716 teams, very little total weight of those last-place votes ends up in the FBS at all, so the rankings of the FBS teams are only very slightly modified by the last-place piece. One might argue that it would be more interesting to look at ratios instead of differences between the first-place and last-place votes, but that's not something we're going to do without some mathematical and computational investigation first.

Without further ado, as a means of comparison, let's back up to the beginning of the week (not just so we can relive the Carolina victory over Virginia Tech). The rankings listed below with the full connected set of teams definitely differs in some places from the old, simpler setting.

2009 Random Walker Rankings (RWFL, p=0.75)
Games through Saturday October 24th:
1. Iowa (8-0) [1.5817]
2. Florida (7-0) [1.5259]
3. Alabama (8-0) [1.5150]
4. Boise St (7-0) [1.1477]
5. TCU (7-0) [1.1042]
6. Southern Cal (6-1) [1.0839]
7. Oregon (6-1) [1.0780]
8. Texas (7-0) [1.0615]
9. LSU (6-1) [1.0351]
10. Georgia Tech (7-1) [1.0196]
11. Cincinnati (7-0) [0.9606]
12. Virginia Tech (5-2) [0.8658]
13. Arizona (5-2) [0.8354]
14. Penn State (7-1) [0.7979]
15. Miami FL (5-2) [0.7636]
16. Notre Dame (5-2) [0.7396]
17. South Carolina (6-2) [0.7216]
18. Pittsburgh (7-1) [0.7082]
19. Houston (6-1) [0.7080]
20. Oklahoma St (6-1) [0.6849]
21. Ohio State (6-2) [0.6686]
22. West Virginia (6-1) [0.6671]
23. Wisconsin (5-2) [0.6599]
24. California (5-2) [0.6102]
25. Utah (6-1) [0.5987]
26. Clemson (4-3) [0.5983]
27. Washington (3-5) [0.5971]
28. Georgia (4-3) [0.5816]
29. Kentucky (4-3) [0.5785]
30. Central Michigan (7-1) [0.5483]
31. Stanford (5-3) [0.5317]
32. Auburn (5-3) [0.5246]
33. Mississippi (5-2) [0.5227]
34. Michigan (5-3) [0.5090]
35. Oregon St (4-3) [0.5085]
36. Brigham Young (6-2) [0.4973]
37. Arkansas (3-4) [0.4728]
38. Kansas (5-2) [0.4617]
39. Navy (6-2) [0.4476]
40. Tennessee (3-4) [0.4473]
41. Boston College (5-3) [0.4472]
42. Troy (5-2) [0.4423]
43. Idaho (6-2) [0.4359]
44. Michigan St (4-4) [0.4309]
45. South Florida (5-2) [0.4255]
46. Oklahoma (4-3) [0.4157]
47. UCLA (3-4) [0.4119]
48. Arizona St (4-3) [0.4097]
49. Fresno St (4-3) [0.4068]
50. Iowa St (5-3) [0.3971]
51. Minnesota (4-4) [0.3863]
52. Nebraska (4-3) [0.3834]
53. Florida St (3-4) [0.3770]
54. Texas Tech (5-3) [0.3711]
55. Kansas St (5-3) [0.3708]
56. Marshall (5-3) [0.3688]
57. Missouri (4-3) [0.3631]
58. Virginia (3-4) [0.3422]
59. Wake Forest (4-4) [0.3391]
60. Rutgers (5-2) [0.3358]
61. Temple (5-2) [0.3357]
62. Mississippi St (3-5) [0.3356]
63. UTEP (3-4) [0.3356]
64. Nevada (4-3) [0.3286]
65. North Carolina (4-3) [0.3278]
66. Connecticut (4-3) [0.3232]
67. Purdue (3-5) [0.3231]
68. Louisiana-Monroe (4-3) [0.3146]
69. Duke (4-3) [0.3062]
70. SMU (3-4) [0.2991]
71. Texas A&M (4-3) [0.2976]
72. East Carolina (4-3) [0.2973]
73. North Carolina St (3-4) [0.2907]
74. Louisiana-Lafayette (4-3) [0.2842]
75. Colorado St (3-5) [0.2837]
76. Northern Illinois (4-3) [0.2814]
77. Southern Miss (5-3) [0.2748]
78. Wyoming (4-3) [0.2716]
79. Ohio U. (5-3) [0.2709]
80. Colorado (2-5) [0.2703]
81. Northwestern (5-3) [0.2684]
82. Air Force (4-4) [0.2677]
83. Bowling Green (3-5) [0.2592]
84. Syracuse (3-4) [0.2571]
85. Middle Tennessee St (4-3) [0.2457]
86. Toledo (4-4) [0.2452]
87. Western Michigan (4-4) [0.2379]
88. Indiana (4-4) [0.2353]
89. Tulsa (4-3) [0.2344]
90. Washington St (1-6) [0.2296]
91. Baylor (3-4) [0.2288]
92. Louisville (2-5) [0.2238]
93. Central Florida (4-3) [0.2203]
94. San Jose St (1-5) [0.2175]
95. San Diego St (3-4) [0.2165]
96. Arkansas St (2-4) [0.2080]
97. Buffalo (3-5) [0.2024]
98. Florida Atlantic (2-4) [0.2010]
99. Maryland (2-6) [0.1958]
100. Hawai`i (2-5) [0.1819]
101. Kent St (4-4) [0.1814]
102. UNLV (3-5) [0.1725]
103. Louisiana Tech (3-4) [0.1615]
104. Alabama-Birmingham (2-5) [0.1571]
105. Tulane (2-5) [0.1545]
106. Vanderbilt (2-6) [0.1516]
107. Utah St (2-5) [0.1453]
108. New Mexico St (3-5) [0.1423]
109. Memphis (2-5) [0.1413]
110. Illinois (1-6) [0.1366]
111. North Texas (1-6) [0.1264]
112. Florida Int'l (1-6) [0.1256]
113. Army (3-5) [0.1185]
114. Miami OH (0-8) [0.1078]
115. Akron (1-6) [0.1038]
116. Ball St (1-7) [0.0379]
117. Rice (0-8) [0.0368]
118. New Mexico (0-7) [0.0185]
119. Western Kentucky (0-7) [0.0139]
120. Eastern Michigan (0-7) [0.0083]
Conference Rankings (Average Per Team):
SEC 0.7010
Pac10 0.6296
Big10 0.5452
ACC 0.4894
BigEast 0.4877
Big12 0.4422
FBSInd 0.4353
MWC 0.3812
WAC 0.3519
CUSA 0.2690
SunBelt 0.2180
MAC 0.2169
Non-FBS -0.0867

Rankings through October 24th

Many of the top teams won easily yesterday, while both Iowa and Alabama maintained their undefeated records through end-of-game heroics. But to these rankings, a win is a win, period.

Comparing with last week's RWFL ranking, there has been significant shakeup in the ordering of the teams immediately following the top 4. GT and VT both fall a few spots because of Miami's loss to Clemson (the intertwined nature of these three teams was discussed last week). In contrast, USC jumped a number of spots, presumably due to similar secondary effects from victories obtained by teams they previously beat (e.g., Ohio State and Notre Dame). We note the very close net vote percentages in square brackets, from #5 USC [1.6882] down to #9 Boise State [1.6228], with the difference between #5 and #7 in the fourth digit after the decimal point (under rounding). That's really close, so future secondary effects could continue to shake up these rankings, while we await more losses among the top 10 to hopefully decide things.

2009 Random Walker Rankings (RWFL, p=0.75)
Games through Saturday October 24th:
1. Florida (7-0) [2.5831]
2. Iowa (8-0) [2.5206]
3. Alabama (8-0) [2.4836]
4. Texas (7-0) [1.8001]
5. Southern Cal (6-1) [1.6882]
6. TCU (7-0) [1.6881]
7. Oregon (6-1) [1.6879]
8. LSU (6-1) [1.6597]
9. Boise St (7-0) [1.6228]
10. Cincinnati (7-0) [1.5428]
11. Georgia Tech (7-1) [1.5167]
12. Virginia Tech (5-2) [1.2926]
13. Arizona (5-2) [1.0958]
14. Notre Dame (5-2) [1.0319]
15. Miami FL (5-2) [0.9884]
16. Penn State (7-1) [0.9727]
17. Pittsburgh (7-1) [0.9532]
18. Houston (6-1) [0.9350]
19. South Carolina (6-2) [0.8567]
20. Oklahoma St (6-1) [0.8559]
21. Wisconsin (5-2) [0.8480]
22. Ohio State (6-2) [0.8447]
23. Utah (6-1) [0.8052]
24. West Virginia (6-1) [0.7966]
25. California (5-2) [0.6695]
26. Kentucky (4-3) [0.6415]
27. Washington (3-5) [0.6179]
28. Georgia (4-3) [0.6150]
29. Clemson (4-3) [0.5506]
30. Brigham Young (6-2) [0.5400]
31. Oregon St (4-3) [0.5221]
32. Stanford (5-3) [0.5134]
33. Mississippi (5-2) [0.4995]
34. Central Michigan (7-1) [0.4918]
35. Auburn (5-3) [0.4483]
36. Kansas (5-2) [0.3811]
37. Idaho (6-2) [0.3730]
38. Boston College (5-3) [0.3716]
39. Oklahoma (4-3) [0.3697]
40. Michigan (5-3) [0.3167]
41. Arkansas (3-4) [0.2987]
42. Navy (6-2) [0.2916]
43. Troy (5-2) [0.2619]
44. Arizona St (4-3) [0.2591]
45. UCLA (3-4) [0.2513]
46. Minnesota (4-4) [0.2418]
47. Iowa St (5-3) [0.2333]
48. Nebraska (4-3) [0.2251]
49. Michigan St (4-4) [0.2172]
50. South Florida (5-2) [0.2126]
51. Missouri (4-3) [0.1572]
52. Tennessee (3-4) [0.1469]
53. Fresno St (4-3) [0.1418]
54. Rutgers (5-2) [0.1200]
55. Nevada (4-3) [0.0854]
56. Connecticut (4-3) [0.0675]
57. Texas Tech (5-3) [0.0539]
58. Florida St (3-4) [0.0486]
59. Louisiana-Monroe (4-3) [0.0448]
60. Marshall (5-3) [0.0350]
61. Mississippi St (3-5) [0.0117]
62. Kansas St (5-3) [0.0113]
63. North Carolina (4-3) [-0.0818]
64. Wake Forest (4-4) [-0.0973]
65. Texas A&M (4-3) [-0.1199]
66. Air Force (4-4) [-0.1264]
67. Purdue (3-5) [-0.1306]
68. Northern Illinois (4-3) [-0.1443]
69. Colorado St (3-5) [-0.1773]
70. Southern Miss (5-3) [-0.1884]
71. East Carolina (4-3) [-0.2288]
72. UTEP (3-4) [-0.2325]
73. Baylor (3-4) [-0.2581]
74. Wyoming (4-3) [-0.2635]
75. Louisiana-Lafayette (4-3) [-0.2675]
76. Northwestern (5-3) [-0.2768]
77. Syracuse (3-4) [-0.2855]
78. North Carolina St (3-4) [-0.3074]
79. Louisville (2-5) [-0.3100]
80. SMU (3-4) [-0.3102]
81. San Diego St (3-4) [-0.3315]
82. Duke (4-3) [-0.3404]
83. Central Florida (4-3) [-0.3514]
84. Middle Tennessee St (4-3) [-0.3598]
85. Ohio U. (5-3) [-0.3613]
86. Virginia (3-4) [-0.3724]
87. Colorado (2-5) [-0.3881]
88. Tulsa (4-3) [-0.3909]
89. Temple (5-2) [-0.4241]
90. Western Michigan (4-4) [-0.4333]
91. Indiana (4-4) [-0.4431]
92. Bowling Green (3-5) [-0.4488]
93. Arkansas St (2-4) [-0.4608]
94. Toledo (4-4) [-0.4756]
95. Florida Atlantic (2-4) [-0.5493]
96. UNLV (3-5) [-0.5680]
97. Louisiana Tech (3-4) [-0.5888]
98. San Jose St (1-5) [-0.6078]
99. Kent St (4-4) [-0.6440]
100. Washington St (1-6) [-0.6731]
101. Buffalo (3-5) [-0.6979]
102. Hawai`i (2-5) [-0.7916]
103. Utah St (2-5) [-0.7968]
104. Tulane (2-5) [-0.8196]
105. Alabama-Birmingham (2-5) [-0.8352]
106. Memphis (2-5) [-0.8717]
107. New Mexico St (3-5) [-0.8827]
108. Maryland (2-6) [-0.9288]
109. Vanderbilt (2-6) [-0.9366]
110. Illinois (1-6) [-1.0920]
111. Army (3-5) [-1.1913]
112. Florida Int'l (1-6) [-1.3427]
113. North Texas (1-6) [-1.4819]
114. Akron (1-6) [-1.4836]
115. FCS teams (XXX-XXX) [-1.6343]
116. Miami OH (0-8) [-1.7733]
117. Rice (0-8) [-2.3124]
118. New Mexico (0-7) [-2.3608]
119. Ball St (1-7) [-2.7930]
120. Western Kentucky (0-7) [-2.8963]
121. Eastern Michigan (0-7) [-3.4677]
Conference Rankings (Average Per Team):
SEC 0.7757
Pac10 0.6632
BigEast 0.3871
Big10 0.3654
Big12 0.2768
ACC 0.2200
FBSInd 0.0441
MWC -0.0882
WAC -0.1605
CUSA -0.4643
SunBelt -0.7835
MAC -0.9735
Non-FBS -1.6343

Got Math?

On a day full of exciting action, including a last-second blocked FG attempt that may turn out to have serious BCS implications, it may seem rather pedestrian to ask a math question. Then again, that's essentially what we do here. So while we're watching the rest of the games, I have a question, brought to my attention by another football ranking fan, Martien Maas.

Martien Maas' Rating System also appears on Kenneth Massey's College Football Ranking Comparison page. Perhaps in part because we ended up very close to each other in the comparisons this week, Martien noted that the RWFL rank order this week is precisely the same as that from Eugene Potemkin's E-Rating System (see also his more detailed discussion). Indeed, the two are nearly the same every week (except for some examples from last year, including here, here, and here). And there are clearly some philosophical similarities between the two rankings. But I haven't sat down to try to work out whether we're mathematically equivalent, so I'd be happy if someone could tell me if they have an expert opinion here. My gut instinct is that our p=0.75 bias value choice happens to set our rankings to the same linear algebra problem, with perhaps the small differences in the past due to details about how non-FBS teams are handled. But, like I said, I haven't looked at it sufficiently yet. Nevertheless, I thought it was worth mentioning...

----

Addition (October 25): Of course, while I tried to leave this puzzle for others, I couldn't let it go myself. I can never resist a good puzzle. It's probably a good thing that I get to solve puzzles for a living. Plus I received an email from Eugene Potemkin responding to a query I sent him directly.

Eugene and I had a wonderfully pleasant exchange of emails back and forth today, wherein he shared some of the details of his E-Rating implementation for college football, adding further mathematical details, including: (1) Where he uses ratios of "ratings" and "anti-ratings" to obtain scores in other sports, he uses a difference for American college football (this is the same as the "First-minus-Last" part in RWFL). (2) Like us, he usually treats the collection of all non-FBS teams as effectively one team. (3) To get around the singular nature of random walks on the fully directed graph---sorry for the lingo here but be thankful I'm not using it to launch into an entire discussion of how this relates to the original PageRank algorithm!---he doesn't treat a win as a full win; rather he equates a win as effectively 3 wins and 1 loss. This is perfectly identical to the "bias value" p=0.75 choice that we've espoused here, which is nice for a variety of reasons. So it appears that the minor differences must be small round-off or tie-breaking differences, and the RWFL(p=0.75) and E-Ratings are completely identical.

Again, a huge thanks to both Martien and Eugene. It's been nice emailing with both of them.

Going forward, we still have value to add, don't worry. For instance, we should spend a lot more time in future posts looking at the plots I post every week that show the top rankings across different choices of this infamous "bias value" p, because those plots hold a lot of utility in being a proxy for various kinds of ranking choices.

Henry Woods Troupe - The Stranger

Ace organic, airy disco with lots of soul. This is the "disco" mix but i can't tell the difference from the flip. This deserves to be on a loud 12" but I think the OG is only availible on this 7"?

Immortals - House is not a home

The beauty of crate digging is that you never know what records will cross your path. This roots 12" arranged by Agustus Pablo crossed mine yesterday and hadn't it I would most likely never have heard it. Im not realy into Reggae but the more dub/roots souding stuff like this one can be a rather enjoyable listen. Popsike suggest this is a decent record token though.

Stardust International & Tayfun

This is one of a handfull swedish Lps that realy qualify as a true rarity. Acording to legend 500 copys were pressed but only 200 sold and when one of the band members passed the remaining 300 were incinerated. This is unconfirmed but this story was told by the guy who discovered this LP in the 90s. I was lucky to find a copy this summer and Im yet to decide whether to keep it or let it go in exchange for something more close to home. Meanwhile I will share the best track with you - in my opinion its the only good cut on this LP, "Asi Es La Vida".