Rice #59, SMU #85

[PerunaPunch]

Stallion's right on the money on this one. Until the Stangs play consistently, it's going to hurt us in the rankings. We may be the better team, but Tulsa is the more consistently better team, which plays to the rankings.

But in all fairness to these systems, the math doesn't lie too much. You never know when the Mustangs are going to come out and kick butt (first half against Houston and last half against Tulsa) or come out and lay an egg – thus the lower ranking.

Hopefully we'll play well on Saturday and jump up into the Top 60-ish.

[SMU Football Blog]

Regarding those computers, I like the Colley Rankings I linked to above. Not that I think they are more accurate, but because it allows hypotheticals. You can see what would change had SMU beaten NTSU, for example (from 71 to 60).

[perunapower]

Regarding those computers, I like the Colley Rankings I linked to above. Not that I think they are more accurate, but because it allows hypotheticals. You can see what would change had SMU beaten NTSU, for example (from 71 to 60).

I like that site. Thanks for that post.

[Stallion]

Could someone like Big 10 calculate our Woulda Coulda Shoulda Rating?

[MustangIcon]

Sagarin Ratings:
54. UH
58. Tulsa
59. Southern Miss
60. ECU
61. Rice
88. SMU
92. Marshall
93. UTEP
110. Tulane
112. UAB
116. Central Florida
149. Memphis

I feel like these are a little low really. I don't think there is any way that UH should be that low. They should be top 35, even if you feel CUSA is a weak conference. And by this ranking, if Tulsa were 1 spot lower, UH would be the only CUSA team ranked in the top half of D1a programs.

[Stallion]

if they hadn't lost to La-La they probably would be rated that high. Losing that game can not be totally discounted. And I don't think any CUSA team is a Top 50 team-they sure haven't prove it. I'd bet victories over Top 50 teams by CUSA teams are few and far between.