Half of the American Conference is in the top 20:

2 Navy
4 East Carolina
8 Houston
11 Cincinnati
11 Memphis
18 Connecticut

32 USF
48 Temple
48 SMU
61 Tulsa
87 Tulane
93 UCF

http://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2017/JUN...une21.html

(06-22-2017 07:58 AM)Chappy Wrote:  Half of the American Conference is in the top 20:

2 Navy
4 East Carolina
8 Houston
11 Cincinnati
11 Memphis
18 Connecticut

32 USF
48 Temple
48 SMU
61 Tulsa
87 Tulane
93 UCF

http://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2017/JUN...une21.html

I see that Michigan is the least experienced team. I guess it is good that we have them early.

Now that's a BS metric. Ignores talent level of recruits. Do we really think ECU will be better than Michigan? Think about what 3rd/4th stringers practice against at Michigan or many other P5, while they may not get into a game, they have highly tested skill sets by the time they do.

(06-22-2017 10:05 AM)AusTxPony Wrote:  Now that's a BS metric. Ignores talent level of recruits. Do we really think ECU will be better than Michigan? Think about what 3rd/4th stringers practice against at Michigan or many other P5, while they may not get into a game, they have highly tested skill sets by the time they do.

It's a single metric, not intended to imply that ECU would be better than Michigan, or USF even.


It does show that the AAC has a lot of experience returning, which is good nine times out of ten.

(06-22-2017 10:05 AM)AusTxPony Wrote:  Now that's a BS metric. Ignores talent level of recruits. Do we really think ECU will be better than Michigan? Think about what 3rd/4th stringers practice against at Michigan or many other P5, while they may not get into a game, they have highly tested skill sets by the time they do.

it isn't a metric to determine the best teams, only the ones with the most experience. Though the Title and OP are a little confusing since it doesn't mention experience at all.

I'd prefer my team to be somewhere in the 60 range. The teams at the top could experience major step back next year due to graduation while the teams at the bottom would appear inexperienced for a great run. USF, Temple, and SMU seem like they are in the best position, experience wise.

(06-22-2017 07:58 AM)Chappy Wrote:  Half of the American Conference is in the top 20:

2 Navy
4 East Carolina
8 Houston
11 Cincinnati
11 Memphis
18 Connecticut

32 USF
48 Temple
48 SMU
61 Tulsa
87 Tulane
93 UCF

http://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2017/JUN...une21.html

Just like some of the other metrics, I'd like to see the current formula used for 2016 data. That way, you can see if the higher ranked teams trended better or worse than their pre-season predictions (which I realize also take into account experience).

(06-22-2017 10:13 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 10:05 AM)AusTxPony Wrote:  Now that's a BS metric. Ignores talent level of recruits. Do we really think ECU will be better than Michigan? Think about what 3rd/4th stringers practice against at Michigan or many other P5, while they may not get into a game, they have highly tested skill sets by the time they do.

it isn't a metric to determine the best teams, only the ones with the most experience. Though the Title and OP are a little confusing since it doesn't mention experience at all.

I'd prefer my team to be somewhere in the 60 range. The teams at the top could experience major step back next year due to graduation while the teams at the bottom would appear inexperienced for a great run. USF, Temple, and SMU seem like they are in the best position, experience wise.

There is probably a lot of context involved. Michigan is at the bottom because it broke a program record with 11 players drafted this year. Experience is helpful, but you're more likely to get great talent when recruits see that guys are getting drafted in less than 4 years.

Uh oh, Alabama is 106th - I guess they won;t even sniff the top 25 ranking this year

............ And Uconn will be awesome

(06-22-2017 12:29 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  Uh oh, Alabama is 106th - I guess they won;t even sniff the top 25 ranking this year

............ And Uconn will be awesome

It's an experience ranking, not a power ranking.

(06-22-2017 10:05 AM)AusTxPony Wrote:  Now that's a BS metric. Ignores talent level of recruits. Do we really think ECU will be better than Michigan? Think about what 3rd/4th stringers practice against at Michigan or many other P5, while they may not get into a game, they have highly tested skill sets by the time they do.

Spot on!

(06-22-2017 01:10 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 10:05 AM)AusTxPony Wrote:  Now that's a BS metric. Ignores talent level of recruits. Do we really think ECU will be better than Michigan? Think about what 3rd/4th stringers practice against at Michigan or many other P5, while they may not get into a game, they have highly tested skill sets by the time they do.

Spot on!

too bad its not a stripper/hooker ranking Louisville would be #1!

(06-22-2017 12:29 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  Uh oh, Alabama is 106th - I guess they won;t even sniff the top 25 ranking this year

............ And Uconn will be awesome

umass not require basic reading comprehension skills or are you somehow just a umass t-shirt fan with no fundamental education level?

(06-22-2017 01:12 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 12:29 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  Uh oh, Alabama is 106th - I guess they won;t even sniff the top 25 ranking this year

............ And Uconn will be awesome

umass not require basic reading comprehension skills or are you somehow just a umass t-shirt fan with no fundamental education level?

Did you fail sarcasm class?

(06-22-2017 10:05 AM)AusTxPony Wrote:  Now that's a BS metric. Ignores talent level of recruits. Do we really think ECU will be better than Michigan? Think about what 3rd/4th stringers practice against at Michigan or many other P5, while they may not get into a game, they have highly tested skill sets by the time they do.

Actually that's exactly what it means. On a neutral field ECU would crush Michigan's nuts.

(06-22-2017 01:11 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 01:10 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 10:05 AM)AusTxPony Wrote:  Now that's a BS metric. Ignores talent level of recruits. Do we really think ECU will be better than Michigan? Think about what 3rd/4th stringers practice against at Michigan or many other P5, while they may not get into a game, they have highly tested skill sets by the time they do.

Spot on!

too bad its not a stripper/hooker ranking Louisville would be #1!

I thought the board agreed that Louisville's two deep in that department were not really P6 quality?

(06-22-2017 10:16 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 07:58 AM)Chappy Wrote:  Half of the American Conference is in the top 20:

2 Navy
4 East Carolina
8 Houston
11 Cincinnati
11 Memphis
18 Connecticut

32 USF
48 Temple
48 SMU
61 Tulsa
87 Tulane
93 UCF

http://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2017/JUN...une21.html

Just like some of the other metrics, I'd like to see the current formula used for 2016 data. That way, you can see if the higher ranked teams trended better or worse than their pre-season predictions (which I realize also take into account experience).

Steele's 2016 blog entry was two clicks away. AAC's 2016 two deep experience rankings not/not a correlation to conference finish:

3. Navy
14. Memphis
15. ECU
18. Connecticut
36. Cincinnati
54. Temple
T64. Tulsa
T68 SMU
T68 UCF
111. Houston
114. USF
117. Tulane

Other interesting notes in hindsight of the 2016:
- Air Force, Navy and Army were 1,2, 7 in 2017. Which I would have said is more likely than not given the Academies' situations. In '16, though, Army was at #48, and had a good year.
- Notable G4s: WKU T11, Ark St T11, SDSU 32, Boise 42, Wyoming 111

- Dead last going into 2016? Clemson

(06-22-2017 01:52 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 01:12 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 12:29 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  Uh oh, Alabama is 106th - I guess they won;t even sniff the top 25 ranking this year

............ And Uconn will be awesome

umass not require basic reading comprehension skills or are you somehow just a umass t-shirt fan with no fundamental education level?

Did you fail sarcasm class?

Can you take Sarcasm online at UMass?

(06-22-2017 03:48 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 01:11 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 01:10 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 10:05 AM)AusTxPony Wrote:  Now that's a BS metric. Ignores talent level of recruits. Do we really think ECU will be better than Michigan? Think about what 3rd/4th stringers practice against at Michigan or many other P5, while they may not get into a game, they have highly tested skill sets by the time they do.

Spot on!

too bad its not a stripper/hooker ranking Louisville would be #1!

I thought the board agreed that Louisville's two deep in that department were not really P6 quality?

lol true, but based on pure quantity they get some respect.

(06-22-2017 04:20 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 01:52 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 01:12 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 12:29 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  Uh oh, Alabama is 106th - I guess they won;t even sniff the top 25 ranking this year

............ And Uconn will be awesome

umass not require basic reading comprehension skills or are you somehow just a umass t-shirt fan with no fundamental education level?

Did you fail sarcasm class?

Can you take Sarcasm online at UMass?

Go to Page 4 in the online class offerings - "Sarcasmic Thoughts and Speech" - it's only worth 1 credit though.

You don't want to be ranked high on this list. 70 - 80 spots are probably pretty good area. What this shows me is that next year Southern Miss will be playing with a lot of inexperienced players.