(04-24-2021 01:14 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(04-23-2021 09:14 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(04-20-2021 03:31 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  Ah yes, start the pre-season with the designated two-team conference slot. Let's get the bias rolling so conference wins have no upside.

Lol...

If this league would quit crapping the bed OOC (including Memphis) then in league games would matter. We cant blame ESPN for that

You've missed the point, which is that the pre-season rankings and pre-tournament seedings have systematically overestimated the quality of the ranked and seeded P5 teams, while systematically underestimating the quality of the ranked/unranked and seeded/unseeded non-P5 teams.

This has been a pervasive, persistent, and growing problem since the P5 came into existence.

For example:

........Number of non-P5 FB teams listed in the AP Top 25

.............Preseason AP Top 25.......Final AP Top 25..........Error Margin


2013..........1 non-P5 team............1 non-P5 teams........0 non-P5 teams

2014..........0 non-P5 teams...........3 non-P5 teams.......3 non-P5 teams

2015..........1 non-P5 teams...........3 non-P5 teams.......2 non-P5 teams

2016..........0 non-P5 teams..........3 non-P5 teams........3 non-P5 teams

2017..........1 non-P5 team............4 non-P5 teams........3 non-P5 teams

2018..........2 non-P5 teams...........6 non-P5 teams.......4 non-P5 teams

2019..........1 non-P5 teams...........7 non-P5 teams.......6 non-P5 teams

2020..........2 non-P5 teams...........8 non-P5 teams.......6 non-P5 teams


What the data in this table show is that, as a group, the sports journalists that vote in the pre-season football AP poll have been getting worse and worse at predicting how many non-P5 teams there would be in the final AP top 25 poll.

They have only increased the number of non-P5 teams in the pre-season polls very slightly since 2013, and their pre-season rankings suggest that they failed to take any notice of the fact that the number of non-P5 teams in the Final AP Top 25 increased seven-fold (i.e., by 600%) between 2013 and 2019.

.

Moreover, the claim that the AAC has had a "bad" OOC record is inaccurate. If it had, it wouldn't be the #6 FBS conference and the #7 D1 MBB conference.

Exactly. It's the bias that allows the B1G & others to schedule weak OOC to build wins that would mean nothing to us then build a resume against similar programs in-conference where they get 8-10 or more Q1-Q2 opportunities which allows them to play .500 in-conference & be virtually guaranteed an at- large bid. It's bias, pure & simple.