Earl Nall's Prep Performance Ratings Tennessee High School Football
Tennessee High School Football Ratings with and without the Margin of Victory Monday, June 24, 2002
The collegiate Bowl Championship Series (BCS) formula is being modified to eliminate the margin of victory (MOV) component in the computer ratings. I modified my Tennessee high school football computer ratings to see what affect eliminating the MOV would have on them. From a statisticians view this was a good experiment as my ratings terminate at the end of the regular season. Since Tennessee has a playoff system I can always determine how good the ratings were by looking at the results of the play-offs and compare them to my final ratings. This is something the NCAA cannot do since they do not have a play-off system and can’t really determine how good the BCS is at picking the top teams.
I have been doing ratings for ten years and they consistently hit on 80-84% of the games during the last weeks of the season. Also, never has a team won the state championship that was not ranked in the top 10 at the end of the season.
Like a lot of computer rating systems I use a cap on the MOV. I cannot imagine not using the MOV. The margin of victory is the single most important statistic in determining a team’s strength. If a team wins a game 45-0, they are almost always going to win the statistical game too. In all my studies in determining what are the important factors in a team’s strength, MOV comes out on top. If in the final score one could eliminate points off turnovers, substitutes, and trick plays - computer ratings could be unbelievably accurate.
To see how not using MOV could cause problems – look at this scenario. Suppose you have a ten-team conference and all the teams play each other. Going into the last week of the season Team A has defeated all its opponents handily by a score of 55-0 – inserting second and third teams to finish each game. For the last game of the season they are going to play Team B who is also undefeated, but has won each of its games 7-6. The rest of the schools in the conference have beaten up on each other. So for the common opponents Team A has won by a margin of 54 points more than Team B has.
Going into the final game, common sense would tell you that Team A is going to defeat Team B. In fact, all the voting polls would have Team A solidly ranked No. 1 and Team B a distant No. 2. But the computer systems would have to have these teams’ dead even since you can’t count MOV and since all the teams in the conference have beaten up of each other so there is no clear team to put into 3rd place.
So, how did the Tennessee high school ratings do using MOV and without MOV?
In Tennessee there are eight state championships, so 16 teams
make it to the final game. Brackets
are pre-set before the season starts.
Using my current system which uses the MOV, 13 of the 16 teams that
were in the championship game were “picked to be there” by the ratings. This is a darn good number I think. You can say you don’t like computer
ratings, but historically good computer ratings program will have that kind of
accuracy. When the MOV was not
used, the ratings picked 9 of the 16 teams to make the finals. While not bad, it is still just a little
over 50% while using the MOV was over 80%.
Here is the breakdown by class:
|
Final
Regular Season Ratings |
| ||||
|
Class
1A |
| ||||
|
Using
Margin of Victory |
|
Eliminating
Margin of Victory |
| ||
|
Rank |
Team |
|
Rank |
Team |
|
|
1 |
Ezell-Harding
(Champions) |
1 |
Ezell-Harding
(Champions) | ||
|
2 |
Univ.
School Jackson |
|
2 |
Collinwood |
|
|
3 |
Christ
Pres. Academy |
|
3 |
Bruceton
Central |
|
|
4 |
Collinwood |
|
4 |
Gordonsville |
|
|
5 |
Bruceton
Central |
|
5 |
Univ.
School Jackson |
|
|
6 |
Jo
Byrns |
|
6 |
Christ
Pres. Academy |
|
|
7 |
Cloudland
(Runnerup) |
|
7 |
Cloudland
(Runnerup) |
|
|
8 |
DCA |
|
8 |
Midway |
|
|
9 |
Gordonsville |
|
9 |
Greenback |
|
|
10 |
Boyd-Buchanan |
|
10 |
Cascade |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teams in
bold are the highest rated teams that could reach the finals based on the
brackets |
| ||||
|
Example: Teams 1-6 were in the west bracket
this year, while Cloudland was the highest ranked team from the
east | |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes: Ezell-Harding actually finished
second in the final ratings using MOV, but just by a
point. | |||||
|
Since they
played University School of Jackson at home in the play-offs they
were |
| ||||
|
actually
favored since they got the 2.5 point home field
advantage. |
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Final
Regular Season Ratings |
| ||||
|
Class
2A |
| ||||
|
Using
Margin of Victory |
|
Eliminating
Margin of Victory |
| ||
|
Rank |
Team |
|
Rank |
Team |
|
|
1 |
Westview
(Runnerup) |
|
1 |
McKenzie |
|
|
2 |
David
Lipscomb |
|
2 |
Westview
(Runnerup) |
|
|
3 |
Goodpasture
(Champions) |
|
3 |
Alcoa |
|
|
4 |
Tyner |
|
4 |
Lewis
County |
|
|
5 |
Lewis
County |
|
5 |
Tyner |
|
|
6 |
McKenzie |
|
6 |
David
Lipscomb |
|
|
7 |
Union
City |
|
7 |
South
Greene |
|
|
8 |
Huntingdon |
|
8 |
Goodpasture
(Champions) |
|
|
9 |
Humboldt |
|
9 |
Sweetwater |
|
|
10 |
Milan |
|
10 |
Booker T.
Washington |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teams in
bold are the highest rated teams that could reach the finals based on the
brackets |
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Final
Regular Season Ratings |
| ||||
|
Class
3A |
| ||||
|
Using
Margin of Victory |
|
Eliminating
Margin of Victory |
| ||
|
Rank |
Team |
|
Rank |
Team |
|
|
1 |
Portland |
|
1 |
Portland |
|
|
2 |
Covington |
|
2 |
Anderson
County |
|
|
3 |
McNairy
Central |
|
3 |
McNairy
Central |
|
|
4 |
Trousdale
County |
|
4 |
Covington |
|
|
5 |
Anderson
County |
|
5 |
Trousdale
County |
|
|
6 |
Crockett
County (Runnerup) |
6 |
Sycamore |
| |
|
7 |
Austin-East
(Champions) |
|
7 |
Austin-East
(Champions) |
|
|
8 |
Marshall
County |
|
8 |
Knoxville
Fulton |
|
|
9 |
Knoxville
Fulton |
|
9 |
Kingsbury |
|
|
10 |
Smith
County |
|
10 |
Smith
County |
|
|
11 |
|
|
11 |
Crockett
County (Runnerup) | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teams in
bold are the highest rated teams that could reach the finals based on the
brackets |
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Final
Regular Season Ratings |
| ||||
|
Class
4A |
| ||||
|
Using
Margin of Victory |
|
Eliminating
Margin of Victory |
| ||
|
Rank |
Team |
|
Rank |
Team |
|
|
1 |
Maryville
(Champions) |
|
1 |
Tennessee
High |
|
|
2 |
Hillsboro
(Runnerup) |
|
2 |
Dyersburg |
|
|
3 |
Cleveland |
|
3 |
Hillsboro
(Runnerup) |
|
|
4 |
Red
Bank |
|
4 |
Morristown
West |
|
|
5 |
Memphis
East |
|
5 |
Columbia |
|
|
6 |
Morristown
West |
|
6 |
Maryville
(Champions) |
|
|
7 |
East
Ridge |
|
7 |
East
Ridge |
|
|
8 |
White
House |
|
8 |
White
House |
|
|
9 |
Columbia |
|
9 |
Memphis
East |
|
|
10 |
Tennessee
High |
|
10 |
Pearl-Cohn |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teams in
bold are the highest rated teams that could reach the finals based on the
brackets |
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Final
Regular Season Ratings |
| ||||
|
Class
5A |
| ||||
|
Using
Margin of Victory |
|
Eliminating
Margin of Victory |
| ||
|
Rank |
Team |
|
Rank |
Team |
|
|
1 |
Riverdale
(Champions) |
|
1 |
Riverdale
(Champions) |
|
|
2 |
Kingsport
Dobyns Bennett |
|
2 |
Kingsport
Dobyns Bennett |
|
|
3 |
Hendersonville
(Runnerup) |
3 |
Hendersonville
(Runnerup) | ||
|
4 |
Brentwood |
|
4 |
Brentwood |
|
|
5 |
Germantown |
|
5 |
Whitehaven |
|
|
6 |
Collierville |
|
6 |
Germantown |
|
|
7 |
Ooltewah |
|
7 |
Houston |
|
|
8 |
Gallatin |
|
8 |
Collierville |
|
|
9 |
Whitehaven |
|
9 |
Hunters
Lane |
|
|
10 |
Hunters
Lane |
|
10 |
Central-Merry |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teams in
bold are the highest rated teams that could reach the finals based on the
brackets |
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Final
Regular Season Ratings |
| ||||
|
Division
II AAA |
| ||||
|
Using
Margin of Victory |
|
Eliminating
Margin of Victory |
| ||
|
Rank |
Team |
|
Rank |
Team |
|
|
1 |
Bishop
Byrne (Champions) |
1 |
Bishop
Byrne (Champions) | ||
|
2 |
SBEC
(Runnerup) |
|
2 |
SBEC
(Runnerup) |
|
|
3 |
Rosemark |
|
3 |
St.
Andrews |
|
|
4 |
FACS |
|
4 |
FACS |
|
|
5 |
St.
Andrews |
|
5 |
Rosemark |
|
|
6 |
Memphis
Catholic |
|
6 |
Elliston |
|
|
7 |
Elliston |
|
7 |
Memphis
Catholic |
|
|
8 |
Kings
Academy |
|
8 |
Kings
Academy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teams in
bold are the highest rated teams that could reach the finals based on the
brackets |
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Final
Regular Season Ratings |
| ||||
|
Division
II AA |
| ||||
|
Using
Margin of Victory |
|
Eliminating
Margin of Victory |
| ||
|
Rank |
Team |
|
Rank |
Team |
|
|
1 |
Briarcrest
(Runnerup) |
|
1 |
Harding
Academy |
|
|
2 |
BGA
(Champions) |
|
2 |
Briarcrest
(Runnerup) |
|
|
3 |
Knoxville
Webb |
|
3 |
BGA
(Champions) |
|
|
4 |
Harding
Academy |
|
4 |
Knoxville
Webb |
|
|
5 |
ECS |
|
5 |
ECS |
|
|
6 |
Notre
Dame |
|
6 |
Notre
Dame |
|
|
7 |
Knoxville
Catholic |
|
7 |
Knoxville
Catholic |
|
|
8 |
St.
Benedict |
|
8 |
St.
Benedict |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teams in
bold are the highest rated teams that could reach the finals based on the
brackets |
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Final
Regular Season Ratings |
| ||||
|
Division
II A |
| ||||
|
Using
Margin of Victory |
|
Eliminating
Margin of Victory |
| ||
|
Rank |
Team |
|
Rank |
Team |
|
|
1 |
McCallie
(Champions) |
|
1 |
McCallie
(Champions) |
|
|
2 |
Brentwood
Academy (Runnerup) |
2 |
Brentwood
Academy (Runnerup) | ||
|
3 |
MUS |
|
3 |
MUS |
|
|
4 |
MBA |
|
4 |
CBHS |
|
|
5 |
Baylor |
|
5 |
MBA |
|
|
6 |
CBHS |
|
6 |
Baylor |
|
|
7 |
Father
Ryan |
|
7 |
Father
Ryan |
|
Earl Nall has been doing computer ratings for Tennessee high school football for ten years. He majored in mathematics and physics in college and his mathematics professor was Herman Matthews whose ratings for Scripps-Howard are part of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS). Mr. Nall worked for years as a statistician and computer programmer in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. He is now the technology coordinator for the Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association (TSSAA), which oversees high school sports in the state. He lives in Kingston, Tennessee with his wife and daughter who is a college sophomore.