boxedlunch
Water Engineer
Posts: 46
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 3
I Root For: College Footbal
Location:
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
(04-09-2015 03:11 PM)ecumbh1999 Wrote: ECU joined the NCAA in1961, not 1966.
I didn't say they joined the NCAA in 1966, I said the were not in the top division of the NCAA until 1966.
|
|
04-09-2015 03:32 PM |
|
boxedlunch
Water Engineer
Posts: 46
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 3
I Root For: College Footbal
Location:
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
(04-09-2015 03:28 PM)JHG722 Wrote: (04-09-2015 02:32 PM)boxedlunch Wrote: (04-09-2015 02:21 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: (04-09-2015 02:19 PM)boxedlunch Wrote: (04-09-2015 02:08 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: These records should not include any seasons a team like USF was in a lower division.
That's fine. Why don't you remove seasons where the other teams were in a lower division? Do it for all, not just a few.
I selected that option when I ran these records. Which teams on these records include seasons in a lower division? If that happened, it was not my intention. The script should have removed any seasons in which any of these teams played in a lower division.
Houston entered the upper division in 1949, you've got all-time numbers.
East Carolina entered in 1966, you've got, what I guess is supposed to be all-time numbers (they are 424-387-12).
Cincinnati's first year in the upper division was 1946. You have what I guess is all-time numbers (They are 589-564-51).
Memphis' first year in FBS was 1960, you have what I suppose are all-time numbers (they are 454-500-33).
Temple spent several years in the lower division, but again you have what are close to all-time numbers.
We've been D-I since the designation existed in 1973. Who cares about the 50s and 60s?
I'm commenting on what's on the table. Why respond to me, respond to the person who put the 50s and the 60s on the table.
|
|
04-09-2015 03:33 PM |
|
robertfoshizzle
Heisman
Posts: 6,981
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation: 273
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location: Columbus
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
Once again, I just put the criteria in the script and that's what it spit out. The script gave the option to only include seasons in which a team was a "major" program, which I assumed to mean playing at the highest level. I don't know anything about divisions of college football prior to the 70s or so when the NCAA started splitting schools up.
|
|
04-09-2015 06:06 PM |
|
robertfoshizzle
Heisman
Posts: 6,981
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation: 273
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location: Columbus
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
Feel free to disregard the all-time records if you wish. The 5-, 10-, and 25-year intervals are solid information either way.
|
|
04-09-2015 06:07 PM |
|
oldtiger
Forgiven Through Jesus' Grace
Posts: 23,014
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 1181
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Germantown
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
(04-09-2015 06:07 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: Feel free to disregard the all-time records if you wish. The 5-, 10-, and 25-year intervals are solid information either way.
Here's my comment for folks that complain about the way stats are presented, especially when they were compiled by another source and you're only reporting the results........
"You don't like the stats?......recalculate them yourself or go find more stats. I went to the trouble of putting the available stats on the board for folks to see/comment on."
Hand folks info on a silver platter (that may or may not need tweaking) and they complain about it.
edit.....and thanks for providing the stats!!
(This post was last modified: 04-09-2015 09:22 PM by oldtiger.)
|
|
04-09-2015 09:21 PM |
|
shere khan
Southerner
Posts: 60,504
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 7458
I Root For: Tulane
Location: Teh transfer portal
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
(04-06-2015 02:56 AM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: All rankings are among current FBS programs. No agenda -- just some stats I compiled out of my own curiosity, shared with you because why not?
PAST 5 YEARS (minimum 50 games, 122 qualifying programs)
17. UCF - .71212 / 47-19-0
28. Cincinnati - .65625 / 42-22-0
37-T. Houston - .60938 / 39-25-0
37-T. Navy - .60938 / 39-25-0
48. East Carolina - .57812 / 37-27-0
61. Tulsa - .53125 / 34-30-0
74. Temple - .48333 / 29-31-0
84. SMU - .43750 / 28-36-0
94. Connecticut - .37705 / 23-38-0
101. USF - .36066 / 22-39-0
106. Memphis - .32787 / 20-41-0
113. Tulane - .29032 / 18-44-0
PAST 10 YEARS (minimum 100 games, 119 qualifying programs)
19. Cincinnati - .67969 / 87-41-0
29. Navy - .63566 / 82-47-0
31-T. Houston - .62308 / 81-49-0
31-T. UCF - .62308 / 81-49-0
37. Tulsa - .59231 / 77-53-0
41. East Carolina - .58140 / 75-54-0
70. USF - .49600 / 62-63-0
79. Connecticut - .46341 / 57-66-0
95. Temple - .40000 / 48-72-0
96. SMU - .39516 / 49-75-0
102. Memphis - .35772 / 44-79-0
115. Tulane - .27273 / 33-88-0
PAST 20 YEARS (minimum 150 games, 117 qualifying programs)
34. Cincinnati - .58943 / 145-101-0
46. UCF - .54978 / 127-104-0
49. East Carolina - .54286 / 133-112-0
50. Navy - .54098 / 132-112-0
52. USF - .53254 / 90-79-0
66. Houston - .49590 / 121-123-0
76. Connecticut - .46961 / 85-96-0
81. Tulsa - .45714 / 112-133-0
97. Memphis - .38397 / 91-146-0
102. Tulane - .36441 / 86-150-0
106. SMU - .35021 / 83-154-0
110. Temple - .31034 / 72-160-0
ALL-TIME (minimum 500 games, 108 qualifying programs)
47. Tulsa - .55901 / 588-461-27
50. Navy - .55339 / 681-544-58
58. Houston - .53442 / 404-351-15
63. East Carolina - .52381 / 423-384-12
71. Cincinnati - .50835 / 584-564-50
90. SMU - .47992 / 475-517-54
92. Memphis - .47454 / 450-500-32
95. Tulane - .44953 / 502-619-38
99. Temple - .43970 / 437-564-52
Not included: Connecticut, UCF, USF
Source: http://football.stassen.com/records/comp...quest.html
so memphis has pretty much sucked for a hundred years but
still
leads
the
series
against
Cincy
just damn man. stahp
(This post was last modified: 04-09-2015 11:02 PM by shere khan.)
|
|
04-09-2015 11:01 PM |
|
Knightbengal
All American
Posts: 2,664
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 55
I Root For: UCF
Location:
|
AAC Football Programs by Winning %
(04-09-2015 06:07 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: Feel free to disregard the all-time records if you wish. The 5-, 10-, and 25-year intervals are solid information either way.
Robert thanks for putting it together. It's good info
|
|
04-11-2015 02:22 AM |
|
rosewater
Heisman
Posts: 5,666
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 158
I Root For: cincy
Location:
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
(04-09-2015 11:01 PM)shere khan Wrote: (04-06-2015 02:56 AM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: All rankings are among current FBS programs. No agenda -- just some stats I compiled out of my own curiosity, shared with you because why not?
PAST 5 YEARS (minimum 50 games, 122 qualifying programs)
17. UCF - .71212 / 47-19-0
28. Cincinnati - .65625 / 42-22-0
37-T. Houston - .60938 / 39-25-0
37-T. Navy - .60938 / 39-25-0
48. East Carolina - .57812 / 37-27-0
61. Tulsa - .53125 / 34-30-0
74. Temple - .48333 / 29-31-0
84. SMU - .43750 / 28-36-0
94. Connecticut - .37705 / 23-38-0
101. USF - .36066 / 22-39-0
106. Memphis - .32787 / 20-41-0
113. Tulane - .29032 / 18-44-0
PAST 10 YEARS (minimum 100 games, 119 qualifying programs)
19. Cincinnati - .67969 / 87-41-0
29. Navy - .63566 / 82-47-0
31-T. Houston - .62308 / 81-49-0
31-T. UCF - .62308 / 81-49-0
37. Tulsa - .59231 / 77-53-0
41. East Carolina - .58140 / 75-54-0
70. USF - .49600 / 62-63-0
79. Connecticut - .46341 / 57-66-0
95. Temple - .40000 / 48-72-0
96. SMU - .39516 / 49-75-0
102. Memphis - .35772 / 44-79-0
115. Tulane - .27273 / 33-88-0
PAST 20 YEARS (minimum 150 games, 117 qualifying programs)
34. Cincinnati - .58943 / 145-101-0
46. UCF - .54978 / 127-104-0
49. East Carolina - .54286 / 133-112-0
50. Navy - .54098 / 132-112-0
52. USF - .53254 / 90-79-0
66. Houston - .49590 / 121-123-0
76. Connecticut - .46961 / 85-96-0
81. Tulsa - .45714 / 112-133-0
97. Memphis - .38397 / 91-146-0
102. Tulane - .36441 / 86-150-0
106. SMU - .35021 / 83-154-0
110. Temple - .31034 / 72-160-0
ALL-TIME (minimum 500 games, 108 qualifying programs)
47. Tulsa - .55901 / 588-461-27
50. Navy - .55339 / 681-544-58
58. Houston - .53442 / 404-351-15
63. East Carolina - .52381 / 423-384-12
71. Cincinnati - .50835 / 584-564-50
90. SMU - .47992 / 475-517-54
92. Memphis - .47454 / 450-500-32
95. Tulane - .44953 / 502-619-38
99. Temple - .43970 / 437-564-52
Not included: Connecticut, UCF, USF
Source: http://football.stassen.com/records/comp...quest.html
so memphis has pretty much sucked for a hundred years but
still
leads
the
series
against
Cincy
just damn man. stahp
Congratulations, maybe you can get a commemorative coin for that achievement.
|
|
04-11-2015 07:37 AM |
|
Kandy Atz
1st String
Posts: 1,473
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 49
I Root For: Mustangs
Location: Dallas, TX
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
(04-06-2015 02:56 AM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: ALL-TIME (minimum 500 games, 108 qualifying programs)
47. Tulsa - .55901 / 588-461-27
50. Navy - .55339 / 681-544-58
58. Houston - .53442 / 404-351-15
63. East Carolina - .52381 / 423-384-12
71. Cincinnati - .50835 / 584-564-50
90. SMU - .47992 / 475-517-54
92. Memphis - .47454 / 450-500-32
95. Tulane - .44953 / 502-619-38
99. Temple - .43970 / 437-564-52
Its amazing after 25 truly dreadful years of wandering in the desert after the death penalty, that SMU is anywhere close to 50%. And those numbers prior to the DP were recorded in the SWC, where there were very few gimmes.
|
|
04-11-2015 01:15 PM |
|
ecumbh1999
Keeper of the Code
Posts: 11,888
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 255
I Root For: East Carolina
Location:
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
(04-09-2015 03:32 PM)boxedlunch Wrote: (04-09-2015 03:11 PM)ecumbh1999 Wrote: ECU joined the NCAA in1961, not 1966.
I didn't say they joined the NCAA in 1966, I said the were not in the top division of the NCAA until 1966.
Ah, no we joined at the D1 level in 1961. We were never D2 or lower, D1 had no split at the time. We hosted Wake Forrest for the first game in Dowdy Ficklen Stadium in 1963 which we won. Don't try to tell an ECU fan about ECU's history.
(This post was last modified: 04-12-2015 01:38 AM by ecumbh1999.)
|
|
04-12-2015 01:32 AM |
|
boxedlunch
Water Engineer
Posts: 46
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 3
I Root For: College Footbal
Location:
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
(04-12-2015 01:32 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote: (04-09-2015 03:32 PM)boxedlunch Wrote: (04-09-2015 03:11 PM)ecumbh1999 Wrote: ECU joined the NCAA in1961, not 1966.
I didn't say they joined the NCAA in 1966, I said the were not in the top division of the NCAA until 1966.
Ah, no we joined at the D1 level in 1961. We were never D2 or lower, D1 had no split at the time. We hosted Wake Forrest for the first game in Dowdy Ficklen Stadium in 1963 which we won. Don't try to tell an ECU fan about ECU's history.
Well, I got that information from the NCAA. If you have a better source, feel free to share it.
|
|
04-13-2015 05:07 PM |
|
ecumbh1999
Keeper of the Code
Posts: 11,888
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 255
I Root For: East Carolina
Location:
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
|
|
04-13-2015 06:02 PM |
|
perimeterpost
All American
Posts: 4,977
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 132
I Root For: OHIO
Location:
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
(04-06-2015 02:56 AM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: All rankings are among current FBS programs. No agenda -- just some stats I compiled out of my own curiosity, shared with you because why not?
PAST 5 YEARS (minimum 50 games, 122 qualifying programs)
4. Boise State - .83333 / 55-11-0
5. Northern Illinois - .81429 / 57-13-0
17. UCF - .71212 / 47-19-0
28-T. Cincinnati - .65625 / 42-22-0
28-T. Toledo - .65625 / 42-22-0
30. San Diego State - .63077 / 41-24-0
33. Utah State - .62121 / 41-25-0
37-T. Houston - .60938 / 39-25-0
37-T. Navy - .60938 / 39-25-0
48. East Carolina - .57812 / 37-27-0
61. Tulsa - .53125 / 34-30-0
74. Temple - .48333 / 29-31-0
84. SMU - .43750 / 28-36-0
94. Connecticut - .37705 / 23-38-0
101. USF - .36066 / 22-39-0
106. Memphis - .32787 / 20-41-0
113. Tulane - .29032 / 18-44-0
PAST 10 YEARS (minimum 100 games, 119 qualifying programs)
1. Boise State - .85606 / 113-19-0
19. Cincinnati - .67969 / 87-41-0
28. Northern Illinois - .64662 / 86-47-0
29. Navy - .63566 / 82-47-0
31-T. Houston - .62308 / 81-49-0
31-T. UCF - .62308 / 81-49-0
37. Tulsa - .59231 / 77-53-0
39. Nevada - .58915 / 76-53-0
41. East Carolina - .58140 / 75-54-0
47. Fresno State - .56923 / 74-56-0
49. Ohio - .56250 / 72-56-0
70. USF - .49600 / 62-63-0
79. Connecticut - .46341 / 57-66-0
95. Temple - .40000 / 48-72-0
96. SMU - .39516 / 49-75-0
102. Memphis - .35772 / 44-79-0
115. Tulane - .27273 / 33-88-0
PAST 20 YEARS (minimum 150 games, 117 qualifying programs)
2. Boise State - .78099 / 189-53-0
24. Toledo - .63730 / 155-88-1
28. Marshall - .62555 / 142-85-0
34. Cincinnati - .58943 / 145-101-0
35. Air Force - .58300 / 144-103-0
39. Fresno State - .57647 / 147-108-0
46. UCF - .54978 / 127-104-0
49. East Carolina - .54286 / 133-112-0
50. Navy - .54098 / 132-112-0
52. USF - .53254 / 90-79-0
66. Houston - .49590 / 121-123-0
76. Connecticut - .46961 / 85-96-0
81. Tulsa - .45714 / 112-133-0
97. Memphis - .38397 / 91-146-0
102. Tulane - .36441 / 86-150-0
106. SMU - .35021 / 83-154-0
110. Temple - .31034 / 72-160-0
ALL-TIME (minimum 500 games, 108 qualifying programs)
20. Miami(OH) - .60384 / 670-432-44
23. Central Michigan - .59902 / 596-393-36
27. Fresno State - .59533 / 585-393-29
30. Bowling Green - .58717 / 523-360-52
34. Southern Miss - .57908 / 555-400-25
47. Tulsa - .55901 / 588-461-27
50. Navy - .55339 / 681-544-58
58. Houston - .53442 / 404-351-15
63. East Carolina - .52381 / 423-384-12
71. Cincinnati - .50835 / 584-564-50
90. SMU - .47992 / 475-517-54
92. Memphis - .47454 / 450-500-32
95. Tulane - .44953 / 502-619-38
99. Temple - .43970 / 437-564-52
Not included: Connecticut, UCF, USF
Source: http://football.stassen.com/records/comp...quest.html
I added the top 5 remaining teams in the G5 to give an idea of the best of the rest for each time frame.
|
|
04-13-2015 07:10 PM |
|
oldtiger
Forgiven Through Jesus' Grace
Posts: 23,014
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 1181
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Germantown
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
(04-13-2015 06:02 PM)ecumbh1999 Wrote: http://www.ecupirates.com/history/ecu-tr...ights.html
Full membership didn't happen until 1966. But, we never completed in D-II or lower. It was the transition period. We were full member but, did compete at the D-1 level from 1961 onward.
I understand the struggle in proving either side of this argument and thus, I'd side with the ECU fans. They best know what ECU was attempting to do in the early to mid 60s.
The 50's and early 60's were a bit confusing. Small college VS Large college was a common term used that later evolved into 1A vs 1AA and FCS/FBS. Scholarship rules were very relaxed, if they existed at all. Regardless of actual designation, if any; from a fan's perspective, folks looked at your schedule or conference to mentally designate if you were attempting to play major college football.
(This post was last modified: 04-14-2015 08:53 AM by oldtiger.)
|
|
04-14-2015 08:52 AM |
|
boxedlunch
Water Engineer
Posts: 46
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 3
I Root For: College Footbal
Location:
|
RE: AAC Football Programs by Winning %
(04-14-2015 08:52 AM)oldtiger Wrote: (04-13-2015 06:02 PM)ecumbh1999 Wrote: http://www.ecupirates.com/history/ecu-tr...ights.html
Full membership didn't happen until 1966. But, we never completed in D-II or lower. It was the transition period. We were full member but, did compete at the D-1 level from 1961 onward.
I understand the struggle in proving either side of this argument and thus, I'd side with the ECU fans. They best know what ECU was attempting to do in the early to mid 60s.
The 50's and early 60's were a bit confusing. Small college VS Large college was a common term used that later evolved into 1A vs 1AA and FCS/FBS. Scholarship rules were very relaxed, if they existed at all. Regardless of actual designation, if any; from a fan's perspective, folks looked at your schedule or conference to mentally designate if you were attempting to play major college football.
There is no struggle at all at "proving" this. The NCAA keeps a record of when teams enter the top division. They say 1966, and I've not seen anything that says any different.
|
|
04-14-2015 10:59 AM |
|