Week 4 Betting Results

                                                                                                                                             

The Aggregate's week four results are in. We were unfortunately not able to publish our predictions for week 4 of the college football season, but we did make them. We should be able to publish them for this coming week even if we aren't able to mass advertise them yet. Without further ado here are the results.

Amazon Prime Free Trial

Overall:

The Aggregate: 45-18 (71.4%)

The Aggregate's main predictor. If a team has a 50.1% chance to win according to the Aggregate then they fit into this category. The only game the Aggregate didn't predict this week was the Texas Tech vs. California game as they both had a 50.0% chance to win.

ESPN's FPI: 49-14 (77.8%)

Taken off of ESPN's website. It should be noted ESPN had the worst cumulative rate last year, but early this year is leading.

W-L: 37-27 (57.8%)

We track this because it's often suggested that the most important information when predicting games is a teams win loss ratio. This is often not actually the case, but it's good to have the data to back that up. When teams have an equal record than the second decider is home field advantage.

Jeff Sagarin: 42-22 (65.6%)

By far the best predictor last year as it was at an over 80% hit rate going into the college bowl season. It is definitely a surprise to see it as the low man after one week. It will be interesting to see if this changes throughout the season. 

Vegas's Betting Line: 39-14 (73.6%)

Vegas had the almost the worst percentage last year, but has a good start this season. It should be noted that there are less games here because when we pulled the numbers there were still certain games the Vegas sites we follow had not posted a line for. 

LSU T-Shirts on Amazon

Summary:

ESPN's FPI has been the best indicator through this week. It will be interesting to see if that continues as it finished both behind the Aggregate and Jeff Sagarin's ratings last year. It is at least possible to think that ESPN's metric is better with limited data than the Aggregate or Jeff Sagarin's as last years data was more from the back half of the season then the front. 

Also Vegas's betting line did very well. Better than the Aggregate which is exactly opposite of what our goal is here. The fact that the Aggregate out performed the Vegas betting line was one of the reasons we decided to actually invest in this betting scheme this college football season. However, because of the way we are betting we still made out more details on that below.

Prime Video Free Trial

Betting Results:

The Aggregate made 11 bets for the fourth week of college football. We put money on 10 games in which the Aggregate had predicted at least an 80% chance or better for a team to win. We then more then doubled the money in three games in which the Aggregate saw a 90% chance or better. We also made one parlay bet that included four money line bets on teams in which the Aggregate saw one team as a 90% chance or better. 

We won 8 out of the 10 single game bets and won the parlay bet. As a result we came out ahead and made about a 6.5% gain on our money for the week. Unfortunately because of a dismal week 0 we are still down about 10% on our total money. 

Hurricane T Shirts on Amazon

Single Game Bets:

LSU over UCLA

Chance to win: 96.7%

Money line: -2100

Gain %: 2.9%

Duke over MTSU

Chance to win: 91.7%

Money line: -600

Gain %: 15.2%

Miami (FL) over USF

Chance to win: 100%

Money line: -850

Gain %: 11.8%

Mizzou over Vandy

Chance to win: 88.9%

Money line: -1200

Gain %: 7.1%

Sam Houston over New Mexico

Chance to win: 88.9%

Money line: -850

% Change: 7.1%

Kansas State over Brigham Young

Chance to win: 88.9%

Money line: -225

% Change: 4.8% (total)

Clemson over NC State

Chance to win: 88%

Money line: -1200

% Change: 7.1%

Memphis over Navy

Chance to win: 88%

Money line: -355

% Change: 4.8% (total)

Kentucky over Ohio

Chance to win: 86.1% 

Money line: -1350

% Change: 7.1%

Fresno State over New Mexico

Chance to win: 86.1%

Money line: -600

% Change: 14.3%

Parlay

Miami over USF

Duke over MTSU

LSU over UCLA

Indiana over Charlotte (100%)

Money line: -263

Return on Investment: 38.3%

Total

90% Single game picks: 3/3 

ROI: 8.9%

Remaining Single game picks: 5/7

ROI: 10.2%

Parlay: 1/1

ROI: 38.3%

Total: 9/11

ROI: 6.6%

Top 25 Rankings Post Week 3

               

         

The Aggregate's second Top 25 and 1 rankings of the season are out. Texas claims the new top spot. Despite losing Quinn Ewers the Longhorns topped UTSA 56-7. The Roadrunners were the 103rd ranked team coming into the week, but the lopsided victory still helped Texas surpass Tennessee this week. 

The aggregate had four teams who moved eight spots this week. Notre Dame, Texas A&M, Louisiana State, and Missouri all notched big victories. Notre Dame crushed 78th ranked Purdue 66-7. Texas A&M won at the swamp beating 43rd ranked Florida 33-20. LSU won a hotly contested contest at 22nd ranked South Carolina vaulting them back into the top 25. Missouri came back and beat 13th ranked Boston College propelling them back into the top 25.  All of these are interesting although for the eye test we think the Aggregate might have been rating Florida and Boston College too high. 

Young Adult Free 6 Month Amazon Prime Trial

The biggest drops this week went to Georgia, Utah and Central Florida. All of whom dropped four spots. All three teams won, but their games were much closer than the Aggregate expected. Georgia beat 63rd ranked Kentucky by one point. The Aggregate expected them to win by 18. Utah beat 113th ranked Utah State 38-21 in what was a one possession game until the 4th quarter. UCF beat 58th ranked TCU 35-34. 

Both Michigan and South Carolina dropped out of the power ranking. Carolina is referenced above, but Michigan had a lackluster performance at home against 119th ranked Arkansas State, winning 28-18.

The Aggregate included two teams in the top 25 that did not receive any votes in the AP list Baylor (2-1) and Georgia Tech (3-1). Baylor has a 2-1 record and a +19.7 average point differential against the 26th hardest schedule so far this year and Tech is 3-1 with a +18.8 point differential against the 21st hardest schedule. The Tech schedule is assuming that Florida State was actually a good team which has yet to be shown, but it also points out that Tech's loss was really not that bad. The Aggregate has Syracuse as it's 29th best team in the FBS. 

UT T-Shirts on Amazon

	Top 25 and 1 Aggregate Power Ranking
Rank	Team	Record	Change	Rating	AP Ranking
1	Texas	3-0	+1	57.2	1
2	Tennessee	3-0	-1	56.7	6
3	Alabama	3-0	+1	53.3	4
4	Ohio State	2-0	-1	52.7	3
5	Miami (FL)	3-0	+1	52.2	8
6	Mississippi	3-0	-1	51.5	5
7	Notre Dame	2-1	+8	48.3	17
8	Southern California	2-0	0	45.2	11
9	Penn State	2-0	0	44.9	10
10	Oregon	3-0	+7	43.5	9
11	Georgia	3-0	-4	42.9	2
12	Clemson	1-1	0	40.9	21
13	Louisville	2-0	+1	40.4	19
14	Utah	3-0	-4	39.6	12
15	Central Florida	3-0	-4	38.8	38
16	Boston College	2-1	-3	38.7	30
17	Texas A&M	2-1	+8	37.7	25
18	Oklahoma	3-0	0	37.4	15
19	Kansas State	3-0	+1	37.3	13
20	Louisiana State	2-1	+8	36.7	16
21	Baylor	2-1	+3	36.5	#N/A
22	Georgia Tech	3-1	-3	35.9	#N/A
23	Oklahoma State	3-0	-2	35.5	14
24	Missouri	3-0	+8	35.3	7
25	Iowa	2-1	-2	35.2	33
133	Kent State	0-3	0	-12.5	#N/A

First Top 25 Rankings of the Year

                                     

Not totally done working out all the automation kinks in the predictive part of the metric, but we were able to get the record keeping and ranking evaluation tool totally automated and up to date. Here are the first top 25 Aggregate power rankings of the year. Hopefully predictions are coming soon. One note, Change in the table below is tracking the teams ranking change since the start of the year. 

Amazon Young Adult 6 Months Free Prime

	Top 25 and 1 Aggregate Power Ranking
Rank	Team	Record	Change	Rating	AP Ranking
1	Tennessee	2-0	+18	57.0	7
2	Texas	2-0	+3	56.7	2
3	Ohio State	2-0	+1	52.7	3
4	Alabama	2-0	+12	50.8	4
5	Mississippi	2-0	+1	50.7	5
6	Miami (FL)	2-0	+7	47.6	10
7	Georgia	2-0	-5	46.2	1
8	Southern California	2-0	+19	45.2	11
9	Penn State	2-0	-2	44.9	8
10	Utah	2-0	+7	42.5	12
11	Central Florida	2-0	+25	41.1	T42
12	Clemson	1-1	-1	40.9	22
13	Boston College	2-0	+32	40.8	24
14	Louisville	2-0	+12	40.4	19
15	Notre Dame	1-1	-12	40.0	18
16	Michigan	1-1	-4	39.8	17
17	Oregon	2-0	-16	38.0	9
18	Oklahoma	2-0	-9	37.6	15
19	Georgia Tech	2-1	+23	37.2	#N/A
20	Kansas State	2-0	+5	36.9	14
21	Oklahoma State	2-0	+10	36.4	13
22	South Carolina	2-0	+16	36.2	#N/A
23	Iowa	1-1	0	36.1	32
24	Baylor	1-1	+37	35.8	#N/A
25	Texas A&M	1-1	-15	35.7	28
133	Kent State	0-2	0	-12.6	#N/A

Adjusted Winning Percentage for Big 12 Coaches

I've often felt that winning percentage is not a great look at how good coaches actually perform as it does not factor in a multitude of items including environment, player talent and competition. As a result I devised a formula to try and tackle some of that problem and give a more accurate portrayal of what part of the wins and losses the head coach was responsible for. 

This metric, the adjusted win percentage for FBS coaches, tries to take into account at least the players that each coach is responsible for. For example when a new head coach wins in their very first year the credit only lies somewhat with them. Many of the players they are winning with were recruited by the previous staff. Often these coaches go on to not be successful in the long term. The best examples I can think of are Ed Orgeron at LSU or Gene Chizik at Auburn. Both should be noted actually had their best year a few years in, but neither lasted after a prolonged time. On the flip side new coaches often lose heavily in their first year because it takes time to recruit and install new systems and to get a full buy-in from players. Think Sabin's first year at Alabama or Bobby Petrino's first at Arkansas.

The basic thrust of the formula is this, the longer a coach has coached a team the more accountable he is for their wins and losses. The transfer portal has changed some of this in that the formula now holds coaches more accountable sooner. Gone are the days when you had four years to show some results.

Special notes, these statistics are based on fbs wins and losses only. The time period for the coaches is endless so all the coaches years are included, but it is only an evaluation of current coaches not coaches from the past.

You've got two veteran coaches in the Big 12 at the top of the Adjusted winning percentage, but it's Mike Gundy from Oklahoma State who has a slightly better percentage than Kyle Whittingham from Utah. Gundy came out with a 69.5% rate, about two points higher than Whittingham who sits in second. 

The most interesting coaches on the list are likely Lance Leipold at Kansas and Gus Malzahn at UCF. Leipold has a much better Adjusted rate, 63.2%, than has traditional rate. The metric suggests that Leipold is much better than a .500 coach. Malzahn on the other hand has a lower adjusted winning percentage than his traditional suggesting that he's come into some favorable situations and isn't as good as his 65.2% mark. It should be noted though he's not far from it, still ranking 4th in the Big 12. 

Check where your coach ranks below.

Big 12 Coaches	Team	W	L	Adjusted W Pct	Traditional W Pct	Difference
Mike Gundy	Ok St	157.8	69.3	69.5%	67.8%	1.7%
Kyle Whittingham	Utah	149.6	71.8	67.6%	67.2%	0.4%
Lance Leipold	KU	46.8	27.3	63.2%	50.0%	13.2%
Gus Malzahn	UCF	75.0	44.3	62.9%	65.2%	-2.3%
Chris Klieman	Kansas State	35.0	21.5	61.9%	61.9%	0.0%
Kalani Sitake	BYU	50.5	32	61.2%	59.8%	1.4%
Neal Brown	WVU	52.8	33.5	61.2%	59.5%	1.7%
Scott Satterfield	Cincinnati	56.3	36.5	60.6%	60.5%	0.1%
Matt Campbell	Iowa St	66.4	46.0	59.1%	58.3%	0.8%
Sonny Dykes	TCU	61.5	42.6	59.1%	55.3%	3.8%
Joey McGuire	Texas Tech	11.0	8.5	56.4%	57.7%	-1.3%
Willie Fritz	Houston	48.3	38.8	55.5%	57.1%	-1.6%
Dave Aranda	Baylor	22.0	21.5	50.6%	47.9%	2.7%
Brent Brennan	Arizona	32.0	32.5	49.6%	41.5%	8.1%
Deion Sanders	Colorado	2.0	4.0	33.3%	33.3%	0.0%
Kenny Dillingham	AZ St	1.5	4.5	25.0%	25.0%	0.0%

Big 12 Kids Shirts

Amazon Prime Deal