Rivalry week produces some big changes: The SEC East's 0-4 massacre at the hands of the ACC drops the SEC's win % from .78 to .60, putting the SEC out of first place for the first time this season. The PAC, which goes 1-1 thanks to a win by USC and loss by CAL, rises to #1 with a .625 win %. Meanwhile, the ACC leaps from .35% to .46%, and up to #3 in the rankings.

November 1st results

Conference...........Win credits ..........Losses..........Overall Season %

1)PAC ......................USC.......................CAL.....................10-6 (.625)

2)SEC ...............................................UF,KY,GA,SC...........10.5-7 (.60)

3)ACC ................GT*,FS,UL,CL.......................................12-14 (.46)

3)B1G ...........................................................................10-14 (.42)

5)B12............................................................................4-8 (.33)



*1.5 points for 'quality win'

Here's how it works:

1) A conference gets credit for a win (1.0) if a member beats an OOC opponent, so long as the OOC opponent is either (a) from another Power conference, or (b) is from a G5 conference but the G5 opponent is ranked in the AP or Coaches poll the week the game was played, including the "others receiving votes" category.

2) If the opponent beaten is ranked in the AP or Coaches Top 20 at the time the game was played, the winning team's conference gets one and a half (1.5) win credits, as this reflects a "quality" win.

3) Notre Dame always counts as a Power opponent, and Notre Dame also still counts as an OOC opponent for ACC teams. BYU and other FBS independents count as G5 opponents subject to 1(b) above.

4) A conference gets tagged with a loss (1.0) if a member loses against any OOC opponent. If the opponent is FCS, the conference gets tagged with two losses, indicating that this is an "awful" loss.

5) Conference rankings are based on overall win-credit %. If % is the same, tie is broken by team with more raw wins against other P5 conferences.

So as you see, the method is 'conservative': A loss always counts, but not all wins do. Only wins against other Power leagues and against ranked or almost-ranked G5 opponents count. Since lots of P5 OOC games are played against unranked G5 and even FCS opponents, lots of wins will not show up in my standings. The point is to weed out rent-a-wins and the like.

How do handle conference games?

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

(08-31-2014 08:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  For about five years I did a "BCS Conference Comparison" on the Big East/AAC Board, and so this is a continuation of that tradition. The goal is to provide a weekly ranking of the Power Five conferences. Here's how it works:

1) A conference gets credit for a win (1.0) if a member beats an OOC opponent, so long as the OOC opponent is either (a) from another Power conference, or (b) is from a G5 conference but the G5 opponent is ranked in the AP or Coaches poll the week the game was played, including the "others receiving votes" category.

2) If the opponent beaten is ranked in the AP or Coaches Top 20 at the time the game was played, the winning team's conference gets one and a half (1.5) win credits, as this reflects a "quality" win.

3) Notre Dame always counts as a Power opponent, BYU and other FBS independents do not.

4) A conference gets tagged with a loss if a member loses against any OOC opponent. If the opponent is FCS, the conference gets tagged with two losses, indicating that this is an "awful" loss.

5) Conference rankings are based on overall win-credit %. If % is the same, tie is broken by team with more raw wins against other P5 conferences. E.g., below, the PAC and B1G both have the same percentage, but the PAC won twice versus other P5 compared to once for the B1G.

So as you see, the method is 'conservative': A loss always counts, but not all wins do. Only wins against other Power leagues and against ranked or almost-ranked G5 opponents count. Since lots of Power games are played against unranked G5 and even FCS opponents, lots of wins will not show up in my standings. The point is to weed out rent-a-wins and the like.

Week 1 standings (August 31 - results will be modified pending result of Tennessee-Utah State)

Conference...........Win credits ............Losses..........Overall %

1)SEC ............AL,LSU*,GA*,OLE,.............VDY..................5-1 (.83)

2)PAC ...............USC,CAL,UCL................WST,CO ............3-2 (.60)

3)B1G ............... OSU,RTG,PST.............WSC,NW ............3-2 (.60)

4)ACC ................FSU..........................WF, CL, VA ....... .1-3 (.25)

5)B12 ................................................IAST,WV,OKST ....0-3 (.00)


* 1.5 wins for "quality win"

Could you post how we stack up as if we were a power 6 set up?

(08-31-2014 09:28 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  How do handle conference games?

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

Early OOC matchups help set up the power rankings. Conference games can maintain and strengthen them or weaken them but the early OOC games are essential when it comes to getting a leg up on the SoS mentality that is taking over.

That is why the Wisconsin and Northwestern losses hurt for the Big Ten. Had Wisconsin been able to hold on, the Big Ten would be sitting pretty going into Week 2.

A Northwestern win would have built up perceived Big Ten strength from the middle, making them a stronger opponent for everyone else in the Big Ten and improving the SoS even more. Now though, California does that for whomever they play in the PAC.

(08-31-2014 09:28 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  How do handle conference games?

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

Since conference games all even out, they are ignored.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(08-31-2014 08:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  5)B12 ................................................IAST,WV,OKST ....0-3 (.00)

Shouldn't that be 4 losses for the B12 as ISU lost to an FCS team? Or am I misunderstanding your system?

(08-31-2014 05:46 PM)prp Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 08:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  5)B12 ................................................IAST,WV,OKST ....0-3 (.00)

Shouldn't that be 4 losses for the B12 as ISU lost to an FCS team? Or am I misunderstanding your system?

You are correct! An oversight on my part and i have corrected the OP. Thanks!

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(08-31-2014 10:39 AM)pablowow Wrote:  Could you post how we stack up as if we were a power 6 set up?

Yes, here is how the AAC would stack up:

Wins: Temple

Losses: UCF, SMU, Houston, UConn

Record: 1-4 (.20)

Which would have placed the AAC in 5th, ahead of the Big 12.

(08-31-2014 11:27 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 09:28 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  How do handle conference games?

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

Early OOC matchups help set up the power rankings. Conference games can maintain and strengthen them or weaken them but the early OOC games are essential when it comes to getting a leg up on the SoS mentality that is taking over.

That is why the Wisconsin and Northwestern losses hurt for the Big Ten. Had Wisconsin been able to hold on, the Big Ten would be sitting pretty going into Week 2.

Yes. Conference games, like Ohio State vs Michigan, don't tell us anything about the strength of a conference because it is an in-house competition. We can see that mathematically, because conference games are like a ledger that must balance: Every time two conference teams play, one wins and the other loses, making it a wash for the conference.The only way to assess the strength of a conference is by its team's results versus teams from other conferences.

Also as you note, these early-season OOC games are important as they establish perceptions for the media and they establish baseline strength in computer formulas. Because after the first couple weeks, just about all teams settle in to conference schedules that don't allow us to assess between-conference strength.

Had Wisconsin beaten LSU, the B1G would have lots of dividends: The immediate benefit of a high-profile win over a top SEC team that would have received lots of attention on Sportscenter and other influential media - it would have undermined the "SEC is better than the B1G" media meme. But also as you note it would have resonated throughout the season in various computer formulas as well.

Instead, assuming Wisconsin goes on to have a good year, LSU will be strengthened by that win, meaning any SEC teams that beat them will benefit in the formulas from that too, and it reinforces the commonly held media theme of SEC dominance.

IIRC, in 2007, the cluster-frack year when there were about 5 teams with two losses vying to play Ohio State in the BCS title game, LSU got the bid largely because they had played and beaten highly-ranked Virginia Tech in the second week of the season. None of the other contenders had that kind of high-profile OOC win, and it tipped the polls in LSU's direction. That type of impact is likely to be in play with the CFP committee as well.

(09-01-2014 09:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 11:27 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 09:28 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  How do handle conference games?

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

Early OOC matchups help set up the power rankings. Conference games can maintain and strengthen them or weaken them but the early OOC games are essential when it comes to getting a leg up on the SoS mentality that is taking over.

That is why the Wisconsin and Northwestern losses hurt for the Big Ten. Had Wisconsin been able to hold on, the Big Ten would be sitting pretty going into Week 2.

Yes. Conference games, like Ohio State vs Michigan, don't tell us anything about the strength of a conference because it is an in-house competition. We can see that mathematically, because conference games are like a ledger that must balance: Every time two conference teams play, one wins and the other loses, making it a wash for the conference.The only way to assess the strength of a conference is by its team's results versus teams from other conferences.

Also as you note, these early-season OOC games are important as they establish perceptions for the media and they establish baseline strength in computer formulas. Because after the first couple weeks, just about all teams settle in to conference schedules that don't allow us to assess between-conference strength.

Had Wisconsin beaten LSU, the B1G would have lots of dividends: The immediate benefit of a high-profile win over a top SEC team that would have received lots of attention on Sportscenter and other influential media - it would have undermined the "SEC is better than the B1G" media meme. But also as you note it would have resonated throughout the season in various computer formulas as well.

Instead, assuming Wisconsin goes on to have a good year, LSU will be strengthened by that win, meaning any SEC teams that beat them will benefit in the formulas from that too, and it reinforces the commonly held media theme of SEC dominance.

IIRC, in 2007, the cluster-frack year when there were about 5 teams with two losses vying to play Ohio State in the BCS title game, LSU got the bid largely because they had played and beaten highly-ranked Virginia Tech in the second week of the season. None of the other contenders had that kind of high-profile OOC win, and it tipped the polls in LSU's direction. That type of impact is likely to be in play with the CFP committee as well.

Good explanation and after this year's playoff plays out I do think we will see signings for future early ooc matchups increasing between notable programs.

Updated for Week 2 results.

(09-08-2014 02:38 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Updated for Week 2 results.

Quo,

You still show the ACC at #4 and the BIG at #3 in your chart.

(09-08-2014 03:10 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(09-08-2014 02:38 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Updated for Week 2 results.

Quo,

You still show the ACC at #4 and the BIG at #3 in your chart.

Thanks for noticing, I have now corrected that. Sloppy of me.

Just seen on College Football live that the Big Ten is ranked 5th in the FPI.

(09-08-2014 04:14 PM)cardshouse Wrote:  Just seen on College Football live that the Big Ten is ranked 5th in the FPI.

And for week 2, that is most deserved. That is only a week 2 rating though as was also stated on the show.

(09-08-2014 04:24 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-08-2014 04:14 PM)cardshouse Wrote:  Just seen on College Football live that the Big Ten is ranked 5th in the FPI.

And for week 2, that is most deserved. That is only a week 2 rating though as was also stated on the show.

Yes, I agree. Heck by my system the B1G went 0-5 during week 2, an abject disaster. That has happened only twice before in the 6 seasons I have been doing this rating.

But overall, the Big 12 has been worse. The B1G actually had a pretty good week 1.

Updated for week 3.

(09-09-2014 07:06 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-08-2014 04:24 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-08-2014 04:14 PM)cardshouse Wrote:  Just seen on College Football live that the Big Ten is ranked 5th in the FPI.

And for week 2, that is most deserved. That is only a week 2 rating though as was also stated on the show.

Yes, I agree. Heck by my system the B1G went 0-5 during week 2, an abject disaster. That has happened only twice before in the 6 seasons I have been doing this rating.

But overall, the Big 12 has been worse. The B1G actually had a pretty good week 1.

You are the only person who thinks so. The B12 is still ranked as the #3 conference in the power rankings by all the experts, and the Pac is falling back to meet us.

BTW, the B1G lost every game they played against the B12 this week. That includes Iowa State's win over Iowa, and Iowa State lost to an FCS team in week 1. I realize it was to the FCS national champion. But FCS is FCS.

(09-14-2014 01:28 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-09-2014 07:06 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-08-2014 04:24 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-08-2014 04:14 PM)cardshouse Wrote:  Just seen on College Football live that the Big Ten is ranked 5th in the FPI.

And for week 2, that is most deserved. That is only a week 2 rating though as was also stated on the show.

Yes, I agree. Heck by my system the B1G went 0-5 during week 2, an abject disaster. That has happened only twice before in the 6 seasons I have been doing this rating.

But overall, the Big 12 has been worse. The B1G actually had a pretty good week 1.

You are the only person who thinks so. The B12 is still ranked as the #3 conference in the power rankings by all the experts, and the Pac is falling back to meet us.

BTW, the B1G lost every game they played against the B12 this week. That includes Iowa State's win over Iowa, and Iowa State lost to an FCS team in week 1. I realize it was to the FCS national champion. But FCS is FCS.

My comment that the Big 12 is worse than the B1G was made last week. With yesterday's results added in, the B1G is now the worst.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(09-14-2014 02:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-14-2014 01:28 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-09-2014 07:06 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-08-2014 04:24 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-08-2014 04:14 PM)cardshouse Wrote:  Just seen on College Football live that the Big Ten is ranked 5th in the FPI.

And for week 2, that is most deserved. That is only a week 2 rating though as was also stated on the show.

Yes, I agree. Heck by my system the B1G went 0-5 during week 2, an abject disaster. That has happened only twice before in the 6 seasons I have been doing this rating.

But overall, the Big 12 has been worse. The B1G actually had a pretty good week 1.

You are the only person who thinks so. The B12 is still ranked as the #3 conference in the power rankings by all the experts, and the Pac is falling back to meet us.

BTW, the B1G lost every game they played against the B12 this week. That includes Iowa State's win over Iowa, and Iowa State lost to an FCS team in week 1. I realize it was to the FCS national champion. But FCS is FCS.

My comment that the Big 12 is worse than the B1G was made last week. With yesterday's results added in, the B1G is now the worst.

The B1G was the worst to start with. Ohio State, their supposed leader, fell in week 1. Another supposed leader, Michigan State, got stomped in week 2. Nothing that has happened since has improved on that. Not even Ohio State's stomping of a bottom feeding MAC team. The B1G sucks this season.

The B12 on the other hand, had 2 teams predicted to finish in the bottom half of the conference give the 2 top ranked teams in the nation all they could handle in week 1. I discount the North Dakota State game, since they're the reigning FCS Champion and have won 5 straight games against FBS schools. I will admit that Texas got stomped by BYU. But they weren't going to challenge for the B12 title. Nobody expected them to - except for Texas fans, who have such expectations every year. Texas Tech was overrated, simply because the media likes their coach.

The top B12 teams are taking care of business, unlike the top teams in the B1G. The top teams in the Pac12, except for Oregon, looked pretty weak too. UCLA almost lost to Texas one week after the Longhorns got embarrassed by BYU, and USC had no run defense against Boston College.

IMO you need to examine what's actually happening, since you're clearly not looking at things properly.