I'll let you be the judge. Using the Pomeroy ratings which go back to 1999 on my computer. Our highest rating was in 2002, #110. During our current coaches regime, our best rating was #128 in 2005. The last eleven years, our average rating is #186. From 1999 through 2003, prior to this coaching staff, our average rating was #185. From 2004 through current, which is our current staff's regime, our average rating is #186. Since there are 344 D1 teams, that means we're in the lower half of all D1 teams. No progress to speak of since 1999. Figures don't lie. These are disappointing figures to me. I had no idea we had made absolutely no progress in where our program is going. Looks like LRTrojan has been the most accurate in appraising our program.

I think we have somewhat in the last two years, but we had two down years before that,

(01-03-2009 11:28 AM)Dr. J. Wrote:  I'll let you be the judge. Using the Pomeroy ratings which go back to 1999 on my computer. Our highest rating was in 2002, #110. During our current coaches regime, our best rating was #128 in 2005. The last eleven years, our average rating is #186. From 1999 through 2003, prior to this coaching staff, our average rating was #185. From 2004 through current, which is our current staff's regime, our average rating is #186. Since there are 344 D1 teams, that means we're in the lower half of all D1 teams. No progress to speak of since 1999. Figures don't lie. These are disappointing figures to me. I had no idea we had made absolutely no progress in where our program is going. Looks like LRTrojan has been the most accurate in appraising our program.

Figures don't lie? Let's all of us posters go on record now and keep a tally of where we are at any given moment on our opinions as to the credibility of Pomeroy, Sagarin, or any other similar rankings. 0= absolute BS; no cred; 300 = the figures don't lie. Rule: You can change your mind and your vote on the record at any time. Might be fun to see how our opinions of the services vary from each other and how our own opinions change in light of changed circumstances. I'll take the first leap.

Sagarin 150
Pomeroy 60

No opinion yet on the others. Will wait for comments and other evidence from all of you.

(01-03-2009 11:43 AM)Ynocpirt Wrote:  Figures don't lie? Let's all of us posters go on record now and keep a tally of where we are at any given moment on our opinions as to the credibility of Pomeroy, Sagarin, or any other similar rankings. 0= absolute BS; no cred; 300 = the figures don't lie. Rule: You can change your mind and your vote on the record at any time. Might be fun to see how our opinions of the services vary from each other and how our own opinions change in light of changed circumstances. I'll take the first leap.

Sagarin 150
Pomeroy 60

No opinion yet on the others. Will wait for comments and other evidence from all of you.

I honestly don't know if those ratings mean crap. I do know that almost all the 75 teams from the BCS conferences are going to rank ahead of us due to the biases inherent in the system. That leaves 269 nonBCS schools. Pomeroy currently has us at 168, so if you subtract the NonBCS schools we are 93 out of the remaining 269 schools. That means we are in the Top 35% of nonBCS schools. Is that good or bad? I don't know. I do know you have to compare apples to apples and it's ridiculous to try and compare us to programs with resources like UNC, Kentucky, and even Memphis (which is not BCS).

I'll tell you at the end of the season. Consecutive 20 win seasons by non-BCS schools are not all that common. If we do that, then, yes, we are making progress.

(01-03-2009 12:04 PM)mjs Wrote:  

(01-03-2009 11:43 AM)Ynocpirt Wrote:  Figures don't lie? Let's all of us posters go on record now and keep a tally of where we are at any given moment on our opinions as to the credibility of Pomeroy, Sagarin, or any other similar rankings. 0= absolute BS; no cred; 300 = the figures don't lie. Rule: You can change your mind and your vote on the record at any time. Might be fun to see how our opinions of the services vary from each other and how our own opinions change in light of changed circumstances. I'll take the first leap.

Sagarin 150
Pomeroy 60

No opinion yet on the others. Will wait for comments and other evidence from all of you.

I honestly don't know if those ratings mean crap. I do know that almost all the 75 teams from the BCS conferences are going to rank ahead of us due to the biases inherent in the system. That leaves 269 nonBCS schools. Pomeroy currently has us at 168, so if you subtract the NonBCS schools we are 93 out of the remaining 269 schools. That means we are in the Top 35% of nonBCS schools. Is that good or bad? I don't know. I do know you have to compare apples to apples and it's ridiculous to try and compare us to programs with resources like UNC, Kentucky, and even Memphis (which is not BCS).

I don't know that the Pomeroy ratings are any better than the "mjs ratings", and I would bet they wouldn't be as good as the "michaelspappy ratings". Regardless, using his numbers here are the average ratings of WKU and USA since 1999. I'm using these two schools since most seem to believe they are the "elite" programs in the conference that we are striving to be. WKU comes in at an average of 109, so I guess that would be our ultimate goal- to be on the level of the best team in our conference. USA comes in at 163, just ahead of us. So you throw out Sidney's year (I really think that was just a bad dream) and we probably come out right at #2 in the conference, and including it we are still #3. When you compare "apples to apples" we aren't doing that bad.

WKU and USA definitely are ahead of us over the Porter-Shields era. We are probably about fourth in the conference over that period, I would guess, without running the numbers. Usually, that would mean that every few years we would hit a home run. But for some reason the law of averages hasn't been bouncing our way lately.

[quote='MICHAELSPAPPY' pid='3866230' dateline='1231004768']
WKU and USA definitely are ahead of us over the Porter-Shields era. We are probably about fourth in the conference over that period, I would guess, without running the numbers. Usually, that would mean that every few years we would hit a home run. But for some reason the law of averages hasn't been bouncing our way lately

I have to believe the ball hasn't bounced our way because our talent level is never up to that of the top teams, those being Western and USA in the Porter/Steve era. The one year I really thought we had a chance, I think we lost in the first round of the tournament to FIU, so that's not the ball bouncing bad. That's just bad playing, IMO. If we had lost to Western or USA, or even Middle in the first round that year, I might not have felt so bad, but FIU?

I'm not saying we're the worst team in D1 by a long stretch. But we've been mediocre by any standards you want to measure us by. We're normally among the top four or five teams in our league, but our league isn't that great a league, so that's not very good. Let's compare our program with some of the top Mid Majors. How does our budget and facility compare with Gonzaga, Davidson, Butler, St. Mary's, Cleveland State, Portland State, all in the current Mid Major Top 10? Maybe Pappy can figure it out. But I would say we should be able to compete with these programs now. In the past, with poor facilities, I would cut us some slack, but we have no excuses any more. At some point, we've got to make some upward progress. And I'm not talking about one season. I'm talking about most seasons.

I don't read or keep up with any "official" ratings. That's a bunch of bull as far as I'm concerned. I don't put much stock in computer rating for anything. The only thing I pay any attention to is how we compare with the rest of the Sun Belt, and from what I see, we usually would rank somewhere around third, fourth or fifth in the Sun Belt if there was only one division. We never win it, and only one time I can remember us finishing second in the tournament. That's not particularly bad, but we're still third, fourth, fifth or so. To me that's just mediocre.