01-05-2016, 01:12 PM
We all know how hard it is to compare conferences, and that any comparisons will always have a subjective element. This year, I did an analysis using only points scored, for and against. I thought the results were interesting.
Following is how each conference scored against teams in P5 conferences, using only OOC games. These numbers equal total points scored divided by the number of games played against P5 opponents.
CONF....FOR....AGAINST
ACC......25......26
B1G......25......26
B12......27......27
PAC......26......30
SEC,,,,,,25......24
AAC......26......32
MAC.....18......34
MWC....18......34
SBC......14.......47
USA.......19......41
I also wanted to test scoring results against the Sagarin ratings, to see if there is any correlation between the two. For this analysis, I included points scored in all FBS games, excluding only those against FCS opponents.
The Sagarin ratings are comparative in nature. That is, theoretically, the difference between one team's rating and another team's is the average expected difference in point spread if they played each other a number of times on a neutral field. So I compared each conference's average point differential against Sagarin's highest rated conference - the SEC. I then compared this differential to the differential in that conference's Sagarin rating compared with the SEC. These were the results:
CONF...SAGARIN.....POINTS
SEC............0...................0
PAC............1...................2
XII.............2..................-1
B1G............4...................5
ACC............5...................7
AAC...........13.................14
MWC..........18.................27
MAC...........20.................23
USA...........24.................28
SBC...........25.................34
To me, that's a pretty close correlation, suggesting that MOV is an important element in the Sagarin ratings, despite the fact that his algorithm was changed some years ago by mandate from the BCS to reduce the weight given to margin of victory as a condition of being included in the BCS rankings.
I had earlier done a study comparing the point spreads Sagarin predicted with the composite Las Vegas betting lines, and found a similar correlation. FWIW, Sagarin would have Alabama as a 6 point favorite against Clemson next week, and the Vegas line is 6 1/2.
I realize a lot of fans don't like the Sagarin ratings, and would prefer someone else. As I said, none of them are "correct". But until somebody shows me data - not just opinion - that suggests a different algorithm is demonstrably better, I assume his is as good as any out there.
And when all is said and done, I doubt anybody is surprised at the results shown by my analysis. No matter how you slice it, the SEC is the strongest conference (and have been for several years), the ACC and B1G are fighting to avoid being labeled as the weakest P5, and there is a large and measurable gap between the P5 and G5. I think we knew that by our own eye tests.
Following is how each conference scored against teams in P5 conferences, using only OOC games. These numbers equal total points scored divided by the number of games played against P5 opponents.
CONF....FOR....AGAINST
ACC......25......26
B1G......25......26
B12......27......27
PAC......26......30
SEC,,,,,,25......24
AAC......26......32
MAC.....18......34
MWC....18......34
SBC......14.......47
USA.......19......41
I also wanted to test scoring results against the Sagarin ratings, to see if there is any correlation between the two. For this analysis, I included points scored in all FBS games, excluding only those against FCS opponents.
The Sagarin ratings are comparative in nature. That is, theoretically, the difference between one team's rating and another team's is the average expected difference in point spread if they played each other a number of times on a neutral field. So I compared each conference's average point differential against Sagarin's highest rated conference - the SEC. I then compared this differential to the differential in that conference's Sagarin rating compared with the SEC. These were the results:
CONF...SAGARIN.....POINTS
SEC............0...................0
PAC............1...................2
XII.............2..................-1
B1G............4...................5
ACC............5...................7
AAC...........13.................14
MWC..........18.................27
MAC...........20.................23
USA...........24.................28
SBC...........25.................34
To me, that's a pretty close correlation, suggesting that MOV is an important element in the Sagarin ratings, despite the fact that his algorithm was changed some years ago by mandate from the BCS to reduce the weight given to margin of victory as a condition of being included in the BCS rankings.
I had earlier done a study comparing the point spreads Sagarin predicted with the composite Las Vegas betting lines, and found a similar correlation. FWIW, Sagarin would have Alabama as a 6 point favorite against Clemson next week, and the Vegas line is 6 1/2.
I realize a lot of fans don't like the Sagarin ratings, and would prefer someone else. As I said, none of them are "correct". But until somebody shows me data - not just opinion - that suggests a different algorithm is demonstrably better, I assume his is as good as any out there.
And when all is said and done, I doubt anybody is surprised at the results shown by my analysis. No matter how you slice it, the SEC is the strongest conference (and have been for several years), the ACC and B1G are fighting to avoid being labeled as the weakest P5, and there is a large and measurable gap between the P5 and G5. I think we knew that by our own eye tests.