Tuesday, January 12, 2016

Final College Football Rankings FBS 2015-2016 by SportPundit

Final College Football Rankings FBS 2015-2016 by SportPundit

Our system is based on net average yards per play stats, which we calibrate primarily by adjusting for schedule difficulty, i.e. the teams thus far played (this we take as the average rank of the opponents played). Other adjustments are also made (*=adjustment). We take the cumulative yards per play stat data from cfbstats.com and from the college and university football athletic pages online, as linked here for each team, if possible.

Caveat emptor (Buyer beware): We make this material available in good fun out of interest for the sport of college football. Please do not rely on our material to place bets or wagers of any kind.  No one knows the exact outcome of a game or a season before it is played and that is what makes it so interesting. We disclaim any and all liability for the consequences of anyone relying in any way upon our postings, analysis, links or reasoning - for which we make no warranty of accuracy. May the best team win.

Final College Football Rankings FBS 2015-2016 by SportPundit
Final
Team
RANK
2015
-2016
by 
Sport
Pundit



TEAM
Name
(2015
head
coaching
change
marked
by # link
2014 by
## link)



 2015-2016
NAYPPA
net
average
yards per play
advantage
offense
over
defense
stats from
cfbstats.com

(our
calculation)


2015
yards
per
play
offense via
cfbstats
.com

the links
below
are
to the
school
sites

2015
yards
per
play
defense via
cfbstats
.com



Schedule
difficulty 

based on
Massey
Ratings,
Sagarin,

and our
own
ratings 
(*=
adjusted)

Won-loss
record (W-L)
for the
2015
-2016
season


2015
-2016

Team
Rating
by
Sport
Pundit









1
Alabama
1.6

5.89
4.30

20*
14-1
+0.8
2 Clemson 1.5

6.39
4.85

35*
14-1
+0.3
3Stanford  1.0

6.57
5.57

10*
12-2
+0.3
4 Ohio State 1.8

6.33
4.50

50*
12-1
+0.1
5 Notre Dame 1.5

7.02
5.57

30*
10-3
+0.0
6 Mississippi 2.2

7.07
4.87

55*
10-3
+0.0
7 LSU 1.5

6.70
5.17

30*
9-3
+0.0
8 Michigan # 1.2

5.68
4.46

20*
9-3
+0.0
9 Oklahoma2.0

6.80
4.79

55*
11-2
+0.0
10 TCU 1.6

6.79
5.16

40*
11-2
+0.0
11 Baylor
2.1


7.26
5.19


55*

10-3

-0.1

12
Florida State
1.9

6.53
4.68

50*
10-3
-0.2
13 North Carolina 1.8

7.28
5.50

50*
11-3
-0.3
14 Michigan State 0.0

5.44
5.47

25*
12-2
-0.4
15 Iowa
0.8


5.77
4.96

30*
12-2
-0.5
16Florida #0.5

5.11
4.65

10*
10-4
-0.6
17 Tennessee 0.4

5.56
5.21

10*
9-4
-0.7
18 Georgia 1.3

6.03
4.76

45*
10-3
-0.7
19 Oregon 1.0

7.05
6.03

35*
9-4
-0.8

20 Mississippi St.
1.1


6.46
5.32


35*

9-4

-0.8

21 Arkansas 0.7

6.83
6.07

15*
8-5
-0.8
22 Oklahoma State 0.7

6.39
5.69

30*
10-3
-0.8
23 Auburn 0.0

5.39
5.37

***
7-6
-0.8
24 Houston # 0.7

6.16
5.48

45*
13-1
-0.9
25 Northwestern -0.1

4.47
4.53

***
10-3
-1.0
26 Wisconsin #
0.9


5.29
4.41


45*

10-3

-1.0

27 USC ## 0.5

6.19
5.70

10*
8-6
-1.0
28 UCLA 1.3

6.25
5.00

45*
8-5
-1.0
29 Utah  -0.1

5.11
5.18

***
10-3
-1.0
30 Washington ## 1.1

6.00
4.90

***
7-6
-1.1
31 Washington St. 0.1

5.92
5.78

***
9-4
-1.2
32 West Virginia 0.6

5.93
5.32

30*
8-5
-1.3
33 BYU  1.1

6.02
4.90

55*
9-4
-1.4
34 California 0.9

6.96
6.10

45*
8-5
-1.5
35 Louisville ##  1.2

6.01
4.82

60*
8-5
-1.6
36 Texas A&M 0.2

5.59
5.42

30*

8-5

-1.7

37 Penn State ## 0.7

5.47
4.78

40*
7-6
-1.7
38 Texas Tech 0.0

6.95
6.91

20*
7-6
-1.8
39 W. Kentucky ## 1.5

7.23
5.69

95*
12-2
-1.8
40 Nebraska # 0.2

6.09
5.88

25*
6-7
-1.9
41 Toledo 1.1

6.13
5.07

85*
10-2
-1.9
42 Bowling Gr. ## 1.4

6.74
5.40

85*
10-4
-2.0
43 North. Illinois
0.2

5.33
5.18

35*
8-6
-2.0
44 West. Michigan 0.6

6.86
6.31

55*
8-5
-2.0
45 Temple 0.3

5.37
5.04

50*
10-4
-2.0

46 Miami (Florida) 0.1

5.91
5.78

40*
8-5
-2.1
47 Navy 0.7

6.35
5.65

80*
11-2
-2.1
48 Pittsburgh # 0.1

5.76
5.69

40*
8-5
-2.1
49 Memphis 0.6

6.15
5.51

65*
9-4
-2.1
50 South Florida 1.2

6.43
5.24

75*
8-5
-2.1
51 Texas ## 0.1

5.70
5.63

25*
5-7
-2.1
52 Arizona State
-0.4


5.80
6.24


10*
6-7
-2.1
53 Minnesota 0.4

5.34
4.90

35*
6-7
-2.1
54 Missouri 0.1

4.38
4.32

25*
5-7
-2.1
55 Virginia Tech -0.2

5.33
5.55

25*
7-6
-2.1
56 Louisiana Tech 1.6

6.90
5.29

95*
9-4
-2.1
57 Arizona  0.5

6.49
5.94

50*
7-6

-2.2
58 South Carolina
-0.4


5.61
6.03

***
3-9
-2.3
59 San Diego State 1.0

5.67
4.66

90*
11-3
-2.3
60 Boise State ##  1.2


6.05
4.86

90*
9-4
-2.3
61 Kentucky -0.1

5.47
5.55

30*
5-7
-2.4
62 Virginia -0.7

5.49
6.23

***
4-8
-2.4
63 Duke 0.2

5.53
5.37

55*
8-5
-2.5
64 Indiana -0.2

6.23
6.38

30*
6-7
-2.5
65 Vanderbilt -0.7

4.50
5.17

***
4-8
-2.5
66 N.C. State 0.1

5.63
5.51

50*
7-6
-2.6
67 Kansas State -1.3

4.95
6.24

***
6-7
-2.6
68 Georgia Tech 0.0

5.85
5.82

25*
3-9
-2.6
69 Air Force 0.7

6.40
5.71

75*
8-6
-2.7
70 Cincinnati 0.8

6.60
5.79

75*
7-6
-2.7
71  C. Michigan # 0.6

5.71
5.14

70*
7-6
-2.7
72 Mid. Tennessee 0.5

5.92
5.46

65*
7-6
-2.7
73 Marshall 0.7

5.38
4.69

95*
10-3
-2.7
74 Syracuse -1.1

5.11
6.21

***
4-8
-2.7
75 Boston College 0.3

4.40
4.07

40*
3-9
-2.7
76 Southern Miss 1.6

6.91
5.32

110*
9-5
-2.7
77 Maryland -0.2

5.43
5.58

25*
3-9
-2.7
78 Arkansas St. ## 0.1

5.86
5.76

70*
9-4
-2.8
79 East Carolina 0.3

5.67
5.38

55*
5-7
-2.8
80 Akron 0.3

5.13
4.85

70*
8-5
-2.8
81 Utah State
0.6


5.44
4.85


75*

6-7

-2.8

82 Iowa State -0.8

5.39
6.16

***
3-9
-2.8
83 Appalachian St. 2.1

6.74
4.69

***
11-2
-2.8
84 Ohio 0.1

5.76
5.70

65*

8-5

-2.8

85 Georgia State 0.9

6.23
5.30

75*
6-7
-2.8
86 Georgia South. 0.9

6.41
5.47

95*
9-4
-2.8
87 Illinois 0.0

4.93
4.90

50*
5-7
-2.9
88 UConn ## -0.3

4.93
5.20

45*
6-7
-3.0
89 Colorado St. #  0.2

5.98
5.79

75*
7-6
-3.2
90 Tulsa # -0.5

6.09
6.59

55*
6-7
-3.5
91 Purdue -1.3

4.80
6.13

***
2-10
-3.5
92 Colorado -0.6

5.12
5.72

35*
4-9
-3.6
93 San Jose St. 0.1

5.70
5.60

75*
6-7
-3.6

94 Wake Forest ## -0.8

4.80
5.57

35*
3-9
-3.6
95 New Mexico -0.3

5.83
6.11

75*
7-6
-3.7
96 South Alabama -0.8

5.19
6.01

50*
5-7
-3.7
97 Nevada -0.2

5.50
5.73

75*
7-6
-3.7
98 Oregon State # -1.3

5.12
6.44

15*
2-10
-3.7
99 Troy # 0.2

5.41
5.25

75*
4-8
-3.7
100  Fl. Atlantic ##  -0.5

5.09
5.54

***
3-9
-3.7
101 Fl. Int'l FIU  -0.7

5.06
5.71

***
5-7
-3.7
102 Old Dominion -0.3

5.34
5.68

65*
5-7
-3.7
103 UTEP -1.9

4.93
6.82

***
5-7
-3.7
104 North Texas -2.1

4.56
6.67

***
1-11
-3.7
105 Louis.-Lafayette -0.2

5.61
5.85

65*
4-8
-3.7
106 Buffalo # -0.4

5.27
5.66

65*
5-7
-3.7
107 Wyoming ## -0.9

5.51
6.40

***
2-10
-3.8
108 Rice -1.8

5.32
7.13

***
5-7
-3.8
109 Ball State -1.8

4.98
6.76

***
3-9
-3.8
110 UNLV # -0.6

5.62
6.23

50*
3-9
-3.9
111 Rutgers -1.2

5.61
6.85

40*
4-8
-4.0
112 New Mexico St. -1.0

5.80
6.79

45*

3-9

-4.1
113 UTSA -1.0

4.99
5.97

***
3-9
-4.1
114 Fresno State -1.4

4.58
5.99

***
3-9
-4.1
115 SMU # -1.8

5.29
7.06

***
2-10
-4.1
116 Kent State -0.8

4.11
4.86


***
3-9
-4.2
117 Miami (Oh.) ## -0.6

5.06
5.63

60*
3-9
-4.2
118 UMass ## -0.3

5.41
5.67

70*
3-9
-4.2
119 Hawaii -0.7

4.85
5.55

65*
3-10
-4.6
120 Tulane -1.1

4.76
5.81

55*
3-9
-4.6
121 Idaho -1.4

5.53
6.97

55*
4-8
-4.6
122 Army ## -0.5

5.61
6.07

75*
2-10
-4.7
123 Texas State -1.6

5.55
7.01

55*
3-9
-5.0
124
Charlotte 49ers -1.2

4.32
5.54

60*
2-10
-5.0
125 Louis.-Monroe 
-1.1


4.48
5.61


60*

2-11

-5.1
126  Kansas # -2.5

4.43
6.96

15*
0-12
-5.3
127 E. Michigan ##  -1.5

5.51
7.02

60*
1-11
-5.5
128 UCF (C. Florida) -2.4

4.12
6.54

***
0-12
-5.5
129 UAB - ##
(Blazers back 
in 2017)
!!!


--
--


--

--

--


2015-2016 College Football Bowl Game Prediction RESULTS by SportPundit

2015-2016 College Football Bowl Game Prediction RESULTS by SportPundit
Although we finished ahead for the season, the bowls were not in our favor at all this year as there were many bizarre blowout games and final scores that were much higher than expected, which affects the spread. For the bowl and playoff games 2015-2015 we were 
  • 24-17 in calling the winner
  • 12-28-1 against the spread,
  • 15-26 against the CFPT prediction average, and
  • 20-20-1 against the over-under.
For the entire 2015-2016 college football season
we thus finished a cumulative:
  • 662-210 in predicting the winner
  • 430-422-17 against the spread
  • 348-347 against the CFPT prediction average, and 
  • 405-369-39 against the over/under.
See our final college football rankings and ratings for 2015-2016.

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

FINAL College Football Rankings FBS 2014-2015


Final College Football Rankings FBS 2014-2015 After the Bowls and After the CFB National Championship Game in the 1st Ever Playoffs
(adjusments 14 Jan. 2015 due to final SoS at Massey Ratings)

Our 2014-2015 preseason rankings at this link had as the first five teams: Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Oregon and Ohio State,
four of which were in the National Championship College Football Playoffs.

Accordingly, we beat all the major rating services known to us, except for Paul Myerberg at USA Today, who had Florida State, Oregon, Alabama and Ohio State as the top 4 with Auburn 5th, so that we agreed on the top 5. Almost all other prognosticators included Oklahoma in the top 4, but the Sooners fizzled.

A team's rating below is its net average yards per play advantage, minus a schedule difficulty calculation, minus a calculation for losses.
This system is a very simple, and yet amazingly effective tool for judging relative team strengths.

Our rankings are based on the NAYPPA of each team (net average yards per play advantage) minus our own special calculation based on the schedule difficulty as calculated at Massey Ratings. From the NAYPPA we subtract 3 x the schedule difficulty divided by 100, e.g. schedule difficulty 30 x 3 = 90 divided by 100 = .9, which is subtracted). We subtract also .2 for each loss.

We take the cumulative yards per play stat data from cfbstats.com and from the college and university football athletic pages online, as linked here for each team, if possible. Many schools have cumulative season statistics, but some have none, or are difficult to access.

Caveat emptor (Buyer beware): We make this material available in good fun out of interest for the sport of college football. Please do not rely on our material to place bets or wagers of any kind.  No one knows the exact outcome of a game or a season before it is played and that is what makes it so interesting. We disclaim any and all liability for the consequences of anyone relying in any way upon our postings, analysis, links or reasoning - for which we make no warranty of accuracy. May the best team win.

Final College Football Rankings and Ratings by SportPundit After the Bowls and Champ Game

Post-
Bowl

Final
Team
Rank
2014
-2015
by 
Sport
Pundit


TEAM
Name
(head
coaching
changes
marked
for

2014-2015
by
## link
and already
for
2015-2016
by
# link)


2014-2015
NAYPPA
net
average
yards per play
advantage
offense
over
defense
stats from
cfbstats.com

(our
calculation) 


yards
per
play
offense
cfbstats
.com

yards
per
play
defense
cfbstats
.com



Schedule
difficulty
rank


based
on
Massey
Ratings,
up to
10th
treated
as 10

*=

adjusted)

W-L
(won
-loss)
record
2014
-2015
season

Final
YPPSYS

2014
-2015

Team
Rating
by
Sport

Pundit

1 Ohio State 2.0

6.98
4.98

9
14-1
+1.5
2
Alabama
1.8

6.66
4.87

2
12-2
+1.1
3 Oregon 1.8

7.34
5.52

6
13-2
+1.1

4 TCU 2.0

6.68
4.66

28*
12-1
+1.1
5 Georgia 2.0

6.81
4.84

8
10-3
+1.1
6 Mississippi 1.4

6.03
4.67

3
9-4
+0.3
7 Michigan State 1.5

6.55
5.09

27
11-2
+0.3
Florida State
0.9

6.39
5.51

19
13-1
+0.1
9 UCLA 1.0

6.13
5.17

4
10-3
+0.1
10 Baylor
1.4


6.64
5.28


35

11-2

+0.0

11Stanford 1.7

5.89
4.21

22
8-5
+0.0
12 Wisconsin #
1.9


6.77
4.91


45

11-3

+0.0

13 Georgia Tech 0.4

6.72
6.32

26***
11-3
+0.0
14 Mississippi St.
1.0


6.67
5.65


13

10-3

+0.0

15 Clemson 1.3

5.36
4.03

33
10-3
-0.3
16 Auburn 1.0

6.71
5.67

1
8-5
-0.3
17 Missouri 0.6

5.39
4.82

10**
11-3
-0.3
18 USC ## 0.7

6.04
5.30

20*
9-4
-0.5
19 Kansas State 0.7

6.15
5.46

16*
9-4
-0.5
20 Oklahoma1.3

6.41
5.14

15*
8-5
-0.5
21 LSU 0.8

5.62
4.87

7*
8-5
-0.5
22 Marshall 2.9

7.59
4.73

109
13-1
-0.6
23Florida #0.7

5.24
4.55

18*
7-5
-0.8
24 Miami (Florida) 1.9

6.68
4.79

44
6-7
-0.8
25 Texas A&M 0.4

6.33
5.91

12*

8-5

-0.9

26 Arkansas 0.6

5.76
5.12

5
7-6
-0.9
27 Boise State ## 1.3


6.53
5.24

66
12-2
-1.1
28 West Virginia 0.5

5.92
5.43

17
7-6
-1.2
29 Notre Dame 0.5

6.11
5.60

30
8-5
-1.4
30 Arizona 0.0

5.70
5.66

23*
10-4

-1.5
31 Arizona State
0.3


5.90
5.62


36*
10-3
-1.5
32 Utah 0.0

5.35
5.34

24
9-4
-1.5
33 Louisville ## 0.7

5.46
4.77

46
9-4
-1.5
34 Nebraska # 0.9

6.22
5.37

52
9-4
-1.5
35 Colorado State # 1.4

7.09
5.74

77
10-3
-1.5
36 Texas ## 0.2

4.92
4.68

14
6-7
-1.6
37 Tennessee -0.4

4.93
5.31

11*
7-6
-1.7
38 South Carolina
0.1


6.09
6.22

21*
7-6
-1.7
39 East Carolina 1.4

6.48
5.10

81
8-5
-2.0
40 Utah State
1.1


5.89
4.76


80

10-4

-2.1

41 Oklahoma St. -0.3

5.43
5.79

29*
7-6
-2.1
42 Washington ## 0.0

5.40
5.38

50*
8-6
-2.1
43 Louisiana Tech 0.9

5.86
4.94

67
9-5
-2.1
44 Minnesota 0.0

5.45
5.43

42*
8-5
-2.1
45 Michigan # 0.6

5.32
4.77

43
5-7
-2.1
46 N.C. State 0.7

5.97
5.24

62
8-5
-2.2
47 Texas Tech 0.4

6.62
6.24

34
4-8
-2.2
48 Boston College 0.6

5.69
5.13

57
7-6
-2.3
49 Memphis 0.8

5.49
4.74

84
10-3
-2.3
50 BYU 0.8

5.70
4.93

72
8-5
-2.4
51 Georgia Southern 1.9

7.34
5.49

123
9-3
-2.4
52 Maryland -0.2

5.26
5.45

40
7-6
-2.6
53 Kentucky -0.1

5.43
5.50

37
5-7
-2.6
54 California -0.2

6.09
6.27

32
5-7
-2.6
55 Virginia Tech -0.2

4.93
5.15

47*
7-6
-2.7
56 Navy 0.5

6.36
5.83

76*
8-5
-2.7
57 Duke 0.1

5.38
5.28

65
9-4
-2.7
58 Iowa
0.2


5.47
5.28

61*
7-6
-2.7
59 Virginia -0.1

5.08
5.14

41
5-7
-2.7
60 Washington St. -0.1

6.12
6.18

31
3-9
-2.7
61 Oregon State # 0.2

5.57
5.76

51
5-7
-2.7
62 Cincinnati 0.3

6.33
5.98

69*
9-4
-2.7
63 Houston # 0.8

5.70
4.88

103*
8-5
-2.7
64 Pittsburgh # 0.6

6.17
5.59

63
6-7
-2.7
65 Penn State ## 0.3

4.60
4.27

60
7-6
-2.7
66 Toledo 0.9

6.54
5.69

96
9-4
-2.8
67 UCF 0.6

5.01
4.47

89
9-4
-2.9
68 San Diego St. 1.0

5.92
4.93

100
7-5
-3.0
69  Rutgers -0.4

5.99
6.39

55
8-5
-3.0
70 W. Kentucky ## 0.4

7.05
6.66

87
8-5
-3.2
71 North. Illinois 0.3

5.76
5.50

99
11-3
-3.3
72 Syracuse -0.1

4.90
5.00

49
3-9
-3.4
73 Rice -0.1

5.62
5.74

79
8-5
-3.5
74 North Carolina -1.0

5.56
6.53

39
6-7
-3.6
75 Illinois -0.6

5.41
6.01

53*
6-7
-3.6
76   West. Michigan 1.0

6.51
5.47

119
8-5
-3.6
77 Indiana -0.2

5.70
5.85

58
4-8
-3.7
78 Northwestern -0.8

4.50
5.25

56
5-7
-3.7
79 Appalachian St. 1.0

6.31
5.31

126
7-5
-3.8
80 Louis.-Lafayette 0.0

5.91
5.88

104
9-4
-3.9
81 Arkansas St. ## 0.5

5.96
5.51

110
7-6
-4.0
82 Nevada -0.5

5.35
5.86

78
7-6
-4.0
83 Air Force -0.3

5.43
5.73

108
10-3
-4.0
84 Temple 0.0

4.79
4.75

93
6-6
-4.0

85 Mid. Tennessee 0.1

5.93
5.85

97
6-6
-4.0
86 UAB - ##
-0.1


5.51
5.68


85*

6-6

-4.0

87 Old Dominion 0.3

6.44
6.15

98*
6-6
-4.0
88  Cent. Michigan 0.4

5.84
5.44

106
7-6
-4.0
89 Purdue -0.6

4.95
5.58

59
3-9
-4.2
90 Iowa State -1.6

4.90
6.53

25
2-10
-4.3
91 Vanderbilt -1.0

4.68
5.72

54
3-9
-4.4
92 Colorado -1.3

5.29
6.55

38
2-10
-4.4
93 New Mexico -0.3

6.52
6.82

86
4-8
-4.5
94 Texas State 0.3

6.06
5.71

127
7-5
-4.5
95 San Jose St. -0.3

5.25
5.52

90*
3-9
-4.7

96 Wyoming ## -1.0

5.55
6.54

70
4-8
-4.7
97 Tulane -0.8

4.83
5.65

68
3-9
-4.7
98  Kansas # -1.7

4.62
6.29

48
3-9
-4.7
99 South Alabama -0.5

5.12
5.60

105
6-6
-4.7
100 Hawaii -0.9

4.77
5.67

75
4-9
-4.9
101 UTEP -1.0

5.30
6.30

91
7-6
-4.9
102 Fresno State -1.1

5.19
6.27

73
6-8
-4.9
103 UTSA -0.7

4.48
5.23

82*
4-8
-4.9
104 Buffalo # 0.1

5.95
5.86

128
5-6
-4.9
105 South Florida -0.8

4.94
5.69

88
4-8
-5.0
106 Ohio -0.3

5.26
5.58

118

6-6

-5.0

107 UMass ## 0.2

5.75
5.75

116
3-9
-5.0
108 Louis.-Monroe 
-0.6


4.70
5.31


94

4-8

-5.0
109 Bowling Gr. ## -0.5

5.50
5.98

114
8-6
-5.1
110  Florida Atl. ##  -0.8

5.39
6.23

83
3-9
-5.1
111 Southern Miss -1.3

5.10
6.41

74
3-9
-5.3
112 Akron -0.2

5.03
5.18

125
5-7
-5.4
113 Wake Forest ## -1.8

3.38
5.22

64
3-9
-5.5
114 Ball State -0.7

5.17
5.87

120
5-7
-5.6
115 UConn ## -0.7

4.50
5.22

101
2-10
-5.7
116 Fl. Int'l FIU  -1.0

4.33
5.38

102
4-8
-5.7
117 Army ## -1.0

5.67
6.65

112
4-7
-5.8
118 Kent State -0.9

4.83
5.75


107
2-9
-5.9
119 Miami (Ohio) ## -0.6

5.45
6.03

111
2-10
-5.9
120 North Texas -0.6

4.87
5.48

121
4-8
-5.9
121 Troy # -1.0

5.34
6.38

117
3-9
-6.3
122 UNLV # -1.4

5.22
6.58

95
2-11
-6.4
123 Tulsa # -1.8

5.17
6.95

92
2-10
-6.6
124 New Mexico St. -1.0

5.48
6.50

124

2-10

-6.7
125 Georgia State -1.2

5.39
6.57

115
1-11
-6.8
126 SMU # -2.5

4.08
6.62

71
1-11
-6.8
127 Idaho -1.7

5.21
6.93

122
1-10
-7.2
128 E. Michigan ##  -2.3

4.46
6.75

113
2-10
-7.7





Sky Earth Native America


Sky Earth Native America 1 :
American Indian Rock Art Petroglyphs Pictographs
Cave Paintings Earthworks & Mounds as Land Survey & Astronomy
,
Volume 1, Edition 2, 266 pages, by Andis Kaulins.

  • Sky Earth Native America 2 :
    American Indian Rock Art Petroglyphs Pictographs
    Cave Paintings Earthworks & Mounds as Land Survey & Astronomy
    ,
    Volume 2, Edition 2, 262 pages, by Andis Kaulins.

  • Both volumes have the same cover except for the labels "Volume 1" viz. "Volume 2".
    The image on the cover was created using public domain space photos of Earth from NASA.

    -----

    Both book volumes contain the following basic book description:
    "Alice Cunningham Fletcher observed in her 1902 publication in the American Anthropologist
    that there is ample evidence that some ancient cultures in Native America, e.g. the Pawnee in Nebraska,
    geographically located their villages according to patterns seen in stars of the heavens.
    See Alice C. Fletcher, Star Cult Among the Pawnee--A Preliminary Report,
    American Anthropologist, 4, 730-736, 1902.
    Ralph N. Buckstaff wrote:
    "These Indians recognized the constellations as we do, also the important stars,
    drawing them according to their magnitude.
    The groups were placed with a great deal of thought and care and show long study.
    ... They were keen observers....
    The Pawnee Indians must have had a knowledge of astronomy comparable to that of the early white men."
    See Ralph N. Buckstaff, Stars and Constellations of a Pawnee Sky Map,
    American Anthropologist, Vol. 29, Nr. 2, April-June 1927, pp. 279-285, 1927.
    In our book, we take these observations one level further
    and show that megalithic sites and petroglyphic rock carving and pictographic rock art in Native America,
    together with mounds and earthworks, were made to represent territorial geographic landmarks
    placed according to the stars of the sky using the ready map of the starry sky
    in the hermetic tradition, "as above, so below".
    That mirror image of the heavens on terrestrial land is the "Sky Earth" of Native America,
    whose "rock stars" are the real stars of the heavens, "immortalized" by rock art petroglyphs, pictographs,
    cave paintings, earthworks and mounds of various kinds (stone, earth, shells) on our Earth.
    These landmarks were placed systematically
    in North America, Central America (Meso-America) and South America
    and can to a large degree be reconstructed as the Sky Earth of Native America."

    Most Popular Posts of All Time

    Our Websites and Blogs

    Our Websites and Blogs: 3D Printing and More 99 is not 100 Aabecis AK Photo Blog Ancient Egypt Weblog Ancient Signs (the book) Ancient World Blog AndisKaulins.com Anthropomorphic Design Archaeology Travel Photos (blog) Archaeology Travel Photos (Flickr) Archaeo Pundit Arts Pundit Astrology and Birth Baltic Coachman Bible Pundit Biotechnology Pundit Book Pundit Chronology of the Ancient World Computer Pundit DVD Pundit Easter Island Script Echolat edu.edu Einstein’s Voice Energy Environment and Climate Blog Etruscan Bronze Liver of Piacenza EU Laws EU Legal EU Pundit FaceBook Pundit Gadget Pundit Garden Pundit Golf Pundit Google Pundit Gourmet Pundit Hand Proof HousePundit Human Migrations Idea Pundit Illyrian Language Indus Valley Script Infinity One : The Secret of the First Disk (the game) Jostandis Journal Pundit Kaulins Genealogy Blog Kaulinsium Kiel & Kieler Latvian Blog LawPundit.com Law Pundit Blog LexiLine.com LexiLine Group Lexiline Journal Library Pundit Lingwhizt LinkedIn Literary Pundit Magnifichess Make it Music Maps and Cartography Megalithic World Megaliths Blog) Megaliths.net Minoan Culture Mutatis Mutandis Nanotech Pundit Nostratic Languages Official Pundit Phaistos Disc Pharaonic Hieroglyphs Photo Blog of the World Pinterest Prehistoric Art Pundit Private Wealth Blog PunditMania Quanticalian Quick to Travel Quill Pundit Road Pundit Shelfari SlideShare (akaulins) Sport Pundit Star Pundit Stars Stones and Scholars (blog) Stars Stones and Scholars (book) Stonehenge Pundit The Enchanted Glass Twitter Pundit UbiquitousPundit Vision of Change VoicePundit WatchPundit Wine Pundit Word Pundit xistmz YahooPundit zistmz