Overall win %:
.880 Clemson
.646 Florida State
.619 Miami
.575 Louisville
.571 NC State
.570 Pitt
.565 Virginia Tech
.513 UNC
.500 Boston College
.495 Wake Forest
.491 Duke
.464 Georgia Tech
.427 Virginia
.385 Syracuse
Conference win%
.892 Clemson
.616 Miami
.597 Florida State
.587 Pitt
.554 Virginia Tech
.541 Louisville
.514 UNC
.459 NC State
.438 Georgia Tech
.392 Boston College
.384 Virginia
.375 Wake Forest
.351 Duke
.284 Syracuse
Any surprises?
Clemson, UNC and Pitt have a higher win% in conference than their overall %. Since everyone has an FCS buy game to pad their win totals, that's mildly surprising to me.
Not surprised...but it is depressing.
We've been better than Syracuse...oh wait, we lost this year.
I'm slightly surprised at Louisville ....
A little above 500 in conference play isn't surprising.
The higher overall number does though. Sadly, Kentucky has owned us lately. I guess we've truly taken care of business with the rest of the OOC ... but I know Bama, Auburn, Ole Miss also beat us. We've owned UCF winning two. We took one from Notre Dame, but they took the other 2.
I guess the rest we've played are cupcakes and easily forgettable.
(10-04-2022 10:00 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]Clemson, UNC and Pitt have a higher win% in conference than their overall %. Since everyone has an FCS buy game to pad their win totals, that's mildly surprising to me.
Pitt usually schedules a pretty stiff OOC schedule. Just at a quick glance I see 4 games against Penn State during this time period, a couple games against Iowa, Tennessee plus Navy and UCF (when the later two were still pretty good).
(10-04-2022 10:00 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]Clemson, UNC and Pitt have a higher win% in conference than their overall %. Since everyone has an FCS buy game to pad their win totals, that's mildly surprising to me.
Easy explanation.
Most teams schedule 2 or 3 easy OOC wins - that's .500 or .750 OOC
If their ACC win% is greater than .750, their OOC% will bring down the overall; even if they are between .750 and .500 in ACC play, likely OOC brings it down.
OTOH, teams which win less than half of their ACC games will be pulled up by OOC.
Really, if you're that weak in conference, you should probably play 4 cupcakes OOC!
(10-04-2022 09:29 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]Overall win %:
.880 Clemson
.646 Florida State
.619 Miami
.575 Louisville
.571 NC State
.570 Pitt
.565 Virginia Tech
.513 UNC
.500 Boston College
.495 Wake Forest
.491 Duke
.464 Georgia Tech
.427 Virginia
.385 Syracuse
Conference win%
.892 Clemson
.616 Miami
.597 Florida State
.587 Pitt
.554 Virginia Tech
.541 Louisville
.514 UNC
.459 NC State
.438 Georgia Tech
.392 Boston College
.384 Virginia
.375 Wake Forest
.351 Duke
.284 Syracuse
Any surprises?
Yes, a direct comparison between the Coastal and the Atlantic.
In the time since Pitt and Syracuse joined and divisions existed - the Atlantic Division has put a team in the playoffs and had at least one team ranked 1-5 in eight out of nine years. 2021 was the only aberration in this and in 2020 when no divisions existed Clemson and ND were 3 and 5.
Georgia Tech, NC State, Syracuse, WF, Louisville, BC, and FSU since 2015 start the season with one more league loss than the remaining 6 Coastal teams.
On top of that WF got UNC's best squad ranked about 12 at the time, iirc 2015 despite just an 18% chance and NC State got that same UNC team in 2015 and the year before with an 18% chance got GT's only top 10 team in the 2010's.
That will change going forward, but the lucky ones have been Duke, UNC, VT, UVa, and Pitt, less so Miami, and S.O.L. for GT.
I’m actually surprised at SU. I thought they would of had a higher win % than UVA and Duke.
The ten year average win% based on each conference's current membership:
..Tot..........OOC
.600.. SEC. .814
.562.. B1G. .706
.557.. B12. .705
.556.. ACC. .650
.547.. PAC. .666
(10-04-2022 11:36 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]The ten year average win% based on each conference's current membership:
..Tot..........OOC
.600.. SEC. .814
.562.. B1G. .706
.557.. B12. .705
.556.. ACC. .650
.547.. PAC. .666
PSA reminder: without realignment, every conference by definition is .500 internally - the only way to improve overall win% (without counting wins that happened under different circumstances) is to win more OOC games. You will now be returned to your previous programming, already in progress...
(10-04-2022 10:10 AM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote: [ -> ]I'm slightly surprised at Louisville ....
A little above 500 in conference play isn't surprising.
The higher overall number does though. Sadly, Kentucky has owned us lately. I guess we've truly taken care of business with the rest of the OOC ... but I know Bama, Auburn, Ole Miss also beat us. We've owned UCF winning two. We took one from Notre Dame, but they took the other 2.
I guess the rest we've played are cupcakes and easily forgettable.
Even after that awful 2018 season Louisville had been comfortably 3rd and 4th in overall winning percentage and conference winning percentage.
If only Satterfield could coach up these recruiting classes...
(10-04-2022 12:08 PM)ColumbusCard Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 10:10 AM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote: [ -> ]I'm slightly surprised at Louisville ....
A little above 500 in conference play isn't surprising.
The higher overall number does though. Sadly, Kentucky has owned us lately. I guess we've truly taken care of business with the rest of the OOC ... but I know Bama, Auburn, Ole Miss also beat us. We've owned UCF winning two. We took one from Notre Dame, but they took the other 2.
I guess the rest we've played are cupcakes and easily forgettable.
Even after that awful 2018 season Louisville had been comfortably 3rd and 4th in overall winning percentage and conference winning percentage.
If only Satterfield could coach up these recruiting classes...
There's an awful lot of G5 coaches that have been performing well and then there's always Matt Campbell at Iowa State if you want to shell out $7-8 mil a year. Maybe it's time for Louisville to make a change? With the upcoming recruiting classes, I don't think Louisville waits another year.
(10-04-2022 10:00 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]Clemson, UNC and Pitt have a higher win% in conference than their overall %. Since everyone has an FCS buy game to pad their win totals, that's mildly surprising to me.
Clemson because they are the best. Pitt and UNC because they don't play Clemson as often as the Atlantic.
(10-04-2022 01:04 PM)GoWulfPak Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 10:00 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]Clemson, UNC and Pitt have a higher win% in conference than their overall %. Since everyone has an FCS buy game to pad their win totals, that's mildly surprising to me.
Clemson because they are the best. Pitt and UNC because they don't play Clemson as often as the Atlantic.
Pitt record vs Clemson is 2-2
(10-04-2022 01:32 PM)curtis0620 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 01:04 PM)GoWulfPak Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 10:00 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]Clemson, UNC and Pitt have a higher win% in conference than their overall %. Since everyone has an FCS buy game to pad their win totals, that's mildly surprising to me.
Clemson because they are the best. Pitt and UNC because they don't play Clemson as often as the Atlantic.
Pitt record vs Clemson is 2-2
Pitt has a very bad habit of playing up - or down - to its competition. They even have a word for it.
(10-04-2022 01:32 PM)curtis0620 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 01:04 PM)GoWulfPak Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 10:00 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]Clemson, UNC and Pitt have a higher win% in conference than their overall %. Since everyone has an FCS buy game to pad their win totals, that's mildly surprising to me.
Clemson because they are the best. Pitt and UNC because they don't play Clemson as often as the Atlantic.
Pitt record vs Clemson is 2-2
4 games...how many years have they been in the ACC? 9?
(10-04-2022 01:04 PM)GoWulfPak Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 10:00 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]Clemson, UNC and Pitt have a higher win% in conference than their overall %. Since everyone has an FCS buy game to pad their win totals, that's mildly surprising to me.
Clemson because they are the best. Pitt and UNC because they don't play Clemson as often as the Atlantic.
Pitt's record vs Atlantic (including conf champ games)
Louisville 2-0
Wake 2-0
Syracuse 8-1
Clemson 2-2
FSU 1-1
BC 1-2
NC State 0-2
16-8 (.667)
without Syracuse (8-7, .533)
(10-04-2022 02:26 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 01:32 PM)curtis0620 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 01:04 PM)GoWulfPak Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 10:00 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]Clemson, UNC and Pitt have a higher win% in conference than their overall %. Since everyone has an FCS buy game to pad their win totals, that's mildly surprising to me.
Clemson because they are the best. Pitt and UNC because they don't play Clemson as often as the Atlantic.
Pitt record vs Clemson is 2-2
Pitt has a very bad habit of playing up - or down - to its competition. They even have a word for it.
What is that word?
NC State S H I T and Hokie Chokey are already taken.
Many many years ago I remember the phrase "Choking Dean Smith" until he finally turned the corner in the early 80's.
(10-04-2022 06:05 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 01:04 PM)GoWulfPak Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 10:00 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]Clemson, UNC and Pitt have a higher win% in conference than their overall %. Since everyone has an FCS buy game to pad their win totals, that's mildly surprising to me.
Clemson because they are the best. Pitt and UNC because they don't play Clemson as often as the Atlantic.
Pitt's record vs Atlantic (including conf champ games)
Louisville 2-0
Wake 2-0
Syracuse 8-1
Clemson 2-2
FSU 1-1
BC 1-2
NC State 0-2
16-8 (.667)
without Syracuse (8-7, .533)
As I mentioned in another thread, Pitt and Syracuse are rarely good in the same year and Syracuse has been bad for most of its ACC history. It has rarely ever been a rivalry where wins are exchanged every other year or even in 2 year cycles for one and then 2 year cycle for the other. And even though we have rarely been good in the same year, we have both been mediocre to downright bad in many of the same years.
It's why the "rivalry" has never truly taken hold in either of our fanbases.
Cheers,
Neil
(10-04-2022 12:46 PM)ChrisLords Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 12:08 PM)ColumbusCard Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2022 10:10 AM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote: [ -> ]I'm slightly surprised at Louisville ....
A little above 500 in conference play isn't surprising.
The higher overall number does though. Sadly, Kentucky has owned us lately. I guess we've truly taken care of business with the rest of the OOC ... but I know Bama, Auburn, Ole Miss also beat us. We've owned UCF winning two. We took one from Notre Dame, but they took the other 2.
I guess the rest we've played are cupcakes and easily forgettable.
Even after that awful 2018 season Louisville had been comfortably 3rd and 4th in overall winning percentage and conference winning percentage.
If only Satterfield could coach up these recruiting classes...
There's an awful lot of G5 coaches that have been performing well and then there's always Matt Campbell at Iowa State if you want to shell out $7-8 mil a year. Maybe it's time for Louisville to make a change? With the upcoming recruiting classes, I don't think Louisville waits another year.
That's the thing ... Satt got the commitments from what would be Louisville's BEST recruiting class
in it's history (which I know isn't saying much, but there are some really good prospects in this group). So ... firing him could easily result in that class going *POOF*.
By and large, the fanbase is ready to make a change, recruiting class or not.
The annoying part of the fanbase thinks that Jeff Brohm should be the replacement.
The rest of the fanbase wants a coach who will field a good defense and not give it lip service (like Brohm and Petrino before him).
I'm sad to see the Satt tenure go the way it has. I was really hopeful that he could establish a program like he did at his alma mater Appalachian State. He announced some changes in how the staff will operate this week going forward. After this week, there's a BYE ... which could be a good time to make a change. If we lose at UVA this weekend, I think that could happen. If he wins, well, the Cards would be 3-3 ... I don't see a change happening then. But we have a stretch coming up that I think dooms him ....
Pitt
Wake
James Madison
@ Clemson
NC State
@ Kentucky
Even our "cupcake" is really no cupcake.
Anyway .... such is life.