Regarding Wooster, I think this is a place where the numbers lie a lot. I really think the Committee is going to try to look at the OWP of the teams YOU BEAT as much as your overall OWP. If that's the case, RPI's numbers fall, but Wooster's numbers freefall. Then you need to look at Win % -- Wooster lost twice, RPI once. I think a partially subjective analysis gives you a better comparison when it comes to those two teams since you really need some good reasons to place a two-loss team ahead of a one-loss team. In this situation, those conditions do not really exist.

Very true, but the committee MIGHT decide to flip the logic - Wooster is surely the only two-loss team in the country where BOTH losses came to teams who are still undefeated!

That ought to be reflected in the OWP.

Ultimately, I think that the combination of winning percentage and OWP/OOWP can be a fairly comprehensive system of comparison. As Frank asked, do we reward winning or losing? The winning percentage comparison rewards winning, the OWP/OOWP stats minimize the damage inflicted by losses to good teams.

True, but I'm a retired stats prof, and a 10 (or less) game schedule (which rarely crosses regional lines) is just too small a sample to rely on. In the football picks, I think the criteria MUST be augmented with 'common sense'. *Of course*, 'common sense' is a very loaded 'criterion'.

Personally, I'm hoping for a whole bunch of 'upsets' Saturday to render most of this moot - then we can (for a few hours ) have this to do all over again!

I'm with you, Prof--but why didn't your academic brethren listen to me when I was a mere undergrad, and they were dishing out grades of C to all of us within one standard deviation of the mean, in a class of 18? I mean, I know the guys who took this class last year, Doc--they were a bunch of morons, we're

*all* smarter than them!

Do you have a favorite upset possibility? I'm pulling for Alfred over St. John Fisher (to cap the 2008 E8 Clusterfu. . . nny story), and for some odd reason, I feel compelled to root for John Carroll v. Otterbein.

Note also that I said I think that the combination of winning percentage and OWP/OOWP

**can** be a fairly comprehensive system of comparison. There would have to be some weighting of those criteria, but I haven't come up with a clear idea of what the weighting scheme would be, other than winning percentage is somewhat more valuable than OWP/OOWP--but how much more valuable, I can't yet say.