You’re right – if Colorado runs the table they will undoubtedly be South champs – and rightfully so! Colorado’s two/three predicted losses, by system, are UW and Utah (Sagarin) or UW, Utah and USC (S&P+). If Colorado beats UW, Utah and USC they deserve to be South champs. Just like if Utah runs the table from here on out there will be quality wins (Stanford, USC and Colorado).
Thank you for the kind words about my posts! The reason I find these numbers interesting is because they are an attempt at removing bias from analysis. I especially like the S&P+ system because Connelly is so transparent in how he calculates it. He also has a fantastic SB Nation site, which really gets into the nitty gritty of statistical analysis.
The thing that has always bothered me is when people dismiss teams based on history or the ‘eye test.’ This is because I am a Utah fan and experienced one of the most epic upsets in college football history – which, btw, was predicted by an algorithm. Here’s an excerpt from an interesting read (find the rest of the article here)
The computers reclaimed center stage in 2008, when Massey’s ratings had undefeated Mountain West champ Utah ranked ahead of Alabama, which had been No. 1 in the human polls. At the time, it seemed ridiculous—even Massey agrees that it was borderline absurd. But, he says, once margin of victory went by the wayside, sometimes his poll results looked wonky. Alabama ended up facing Utah in the Sugar Bowl to end that season after losing to Florida in the SEC title game, and the Utes won handily, 31–17.
The problem with statistical analysis in football is sample size. This is why Utah’s predicted finish has been so volatile – there haven’t been enough events to really get a handle on this team’s capabilities. But that 7-2 record keeps coming up, that might be what we stabilize at. That would be enough to win the south, assuming Colorado loses to UW.
Iowa State @ 
Utah 
.
