#35 South Carolina (9-2)

avg: 1424.74  •  sd: 75.71  •  top 16/20: 0.8%

Click on a column to sort  • 
# Opponent Result Game Rating Status Date Event
126 Appalachian State Win 13-10 977.95 Feb 1st Carolina Kickoff mens 2025
63 North Carolina-Wilmington Win 13-10 1487.87 Feb 1st Carolina Kickoff mens 2025
101 Ohio State Win 13-10 1194.03 Feb 1st Carolina Kickoff mens 2025
20 Georgia Tech Loss 11-15 1221.32 Feb 2nd Carolina Kickoff mens 2025
87 North Carolina-Charlotte Win 15-12 1274.88 Feb 2nd Carolina Kickoff mens 2025
39 Maryland Win 14-11 1719.9 Feb 2nd Carolina Kickoff mens 2025
91 Alabama Win 13-9 1366.45 Feb 15th Queen City Tune Up 2025
82 Carnegie Mellon Win 13-6 1628.28 Feb 15th Queen City Tune Up 2025
63 North Carolina-Wilmington Win 13-7 1717.26 Feb 15th Queen City Tune Up 2025
8 North Carolina Loss 2-11 1228.15 Feb 16th Queen City Tune Up 2025
19 Washington University Win 11-10 1766.47 Feb 16th Queen City Tune Up 2025
**Blowout Eligible

FAQ

What is the uncertainty of the mean?
The uncertainty of the mean is equal to the standard deviation of the set of game ratings, divided by the square root of the number of games. We treated a team’s ranking as a normally distributed random variable, with the USAU ranking as the mean and the uncertainty of the ranking as the standard deviation
What's the algorithm again?
  1. Calculate uncertainy for USAU ranking averge
  2. Model ranking as a normal distribution around USAU averge with standard deviation equal to uncertainty
  3. Simulate seasons by drawing a rank for each team from their distribution. Note the teams in the top 16 (club) or top 20 (college)
  4. Sum the fractions for each region for how often each of it's teams appeared in the top 16 (club) or top 20 (college)
  5. Subtract one from each fraction for "autobids"
  6. Award remainings bids to the regions with the highest remaining fraction, subtracting one from the fraction each time a bid is awarded
Is there a longer explanation of all this?
There is an article on Ulitworld written by Scott Dunham and I that gives a little more context (though it probably was the thing that linked you here)