Final MAC Sagarins

40 Toledo
46 Temple
47 Northern Illinois
68 Ohio
78 Western Michigan
98 Miami-Ohio
99 Bowling Green
100 Ball State
116 Kent State
119 Eastern Michigan
135 Buffalo
137 Central Michigan
198 Akron

Final non-AQ Sagarin Averages

CUSA 66.04
MWC 65.86
WAC 63.73
MAC 63.53
SBC 58.58

Non-AQ Sagarin's post realignment

CUSA 62.86 (minus Houston, SMU, UCF)
MAC 62.73 (plus UMass)
MWC 60.04 (minus Boise, TCU, SDSU)(plus Nevada, Hawaii, Fresno)
WAC 57.60 (minus Nevada, Hawaii, Fresno)(plus UTSA, Texas St)
SBC 57.54 (plus South Alabama)

If the Alliance goes through, the MAC would be the best non-AQ conference.

A few points on the numbers worth noting:

-The combined Sagarin numbers between CUSA/MWC are lower than the MAC's. If the alliance as expected adds La Tech (74.34) and Utah State (67.43) they will add about a full sagarin point on both the MWC and CUSA sides of the division. Once all the changes are put in place the MAC will end up about statistically equal with the alliance.

-The WAC's numbers are up from earlier in the season and now approximate the projected numbers for the Sun Belt. That is likely where the WAC's numbers will stay if they add Montana, Montana State, Sac State, Portland State from the Big Sky.

-The top 8 of the MAC have an average Sagarin rating of 68.99. That is almost as good as the ACC (71.73) or Big East (72.41). Those leagues do a good job of keeping everybody in the top 100, not having the bottom fall out of any programs.

When second tier MAC teams lose in the non conference by 30-40 points against top 10 BCS competition it really hurts the overall numbers greatly because the Sagarin's operate as a score comparator. The weaker programs in the conference would be better served lightening the schedule and being more competitive.

(01-10-2012 03:32 AM)uakronkid Wrote:  If the Alliance goes through, the MAC would be the best non-AQ conference.

Maybe.

The alliance is looking at grabbing yet Utah State, La Tech and Florida International, some of the more prominent teams from the SBC/WAC.

The stature of the MAC's football conference has evolved relative to CUSA.

-Prior to 2005 CUSA (with Louisville, TCU) football was a tier above MAC football with 5 bowl games to the MAC's 2.

-From 2005-2012 CUSA has been about equal to the MAC in competitiveness and bowl games.

-From 2013 going forward the MAC will be as strong as CUSA and MWC combined. The MAC will have 14 teams, the alliance 18-20.

One could argue the alliance will have more deadwood than the MAC. It might be easier in a 7 team division for one really good MAC team to pull up an entire divison while the 9 team divisions of the alliance could be more weighed down.

Sagarin's rankings are such a joke. FCS went 6-91 against FBS, yet look at how many FCS teams are ranked higher than 120. In reality, the best FCS school should be around 100 and there should only be about 10 FCS schools ranked higher than the worst FBS school. UB was terrible this year, but they still smoked Stony Brook, which won its conference, finished 16th in one FCS final poll and 18th in another.

C-USA'ers seem to think they can entice Temple to join for all sports...guess I don't see why Temple would do that with Houston, UCF and SMU leaving and Memphis trying like heck to get a Big east invite. (not to mention the A10 is a better hoops league than C-USA). Maybe Temple would consider a football only offer but I would hope they'd stick with the MAC, particularly when the conference is adding UMass I think partly to give the Owls an eastern rival and travel partner of sorts.

(01-10-2012 10:39 AM)zibby Wrote:  Sagarin's rankings are such a joke. FCS went 6-91 against FBS, yet look at how many FCS teams are ranked higher than 120. In reality, the best FCS school should be around 100 and there should only be about 10 FCS schools ranked higher than the worst FBS school. UB was terrible this year, but they still smoked Stony Brook, which won its conference, finished 16th in one FCS final poll and 18th in another.

Disagree. I think the Sagarin ratings are passed down from God. Cannot disagree with the order at all. My only quibble would be that Toledo is not much higher in the overall and in that regard Sagarins fall short, but in terms of the MAC the Sagarin ratings capture the fact that NIU beating us at home , beating a better bowl team and having a better overall record should count for very little.

(01-10-2012 01:45 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote:  

(01-10-2012 10:39 AM)zibby Wrote:  Sagarin's rankings are such a joke. FCS went 6-91 against FBS, yet look at how many FCS teams are ranked higher than 120. In reality, the best FCS school should be around 100 and there should only be about 10 FCS schools ranked higher than the worst FBS school. UB was terrible this year, but they still smoked Stony Brook, which won its conference, finished 16th in one FCS final poll and 18th in another.

Disagree. I think the Sagarin ratings are passed down from God. Cannot disagree with the order at all. My only quibble would be that Toledo is not much higher in the overall and in that regard Sagarins fall short, but in terms of the MAC the Sagarin ratings capture the fact that NIU beating us at home , beating a better bowl team and having a better overall record should count for very little.

Disagree on the better Bowl team. That ASU team that showed up wasn't very good. SOS does mean something. So does margin of victory and loss. NIU lost to a CMU team whose other wins were over a non 1-A program and a 1 win Akron team. I wouldn't say that CMU was the better team. The BCS Champion Alabama was the better team but lost to LSU on 'Bama's hometurf.

I think if Temple is ahead of NIU in Sagarin ratings, they might need to be revised.

(01-10-2012 10:39 AM)zibby Wrote:  Sagarin's rankings are such a joke. FCS went 6-91 against FBS, yet look at how many FCS teams are ranked higher than 120. In reality, the best FCS school should be around 100 and there should only be about 10 FCS schools ranked higher than the worst FBS school. UB was terrible this year, but they still smoked Stony Brook, which won its conference, finished 16th in one FCS final poll and 18th in another.

Sagarin's is a useless tool (built-in bias'), read and believed in by tools (present company excepting).

In my opinion, the biggest problem with the Sagarin's (or any other rating system, for that matter) is the failure to report the STANDARD DEVIATION for each rating value. Such data would inform the reader as to the variability of the ratings, meaning they are NOT perfect predictors.

(01-10-2012 04:14 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I think if Temple is ahead of NIU in Sagarin ratings, they might need to be revised.

Sagarins are all about margin of victory, not wins.

With Temple blasting Maryland and Wyoming while playing Penn State close one can see why they are so highly rated in the Sagarins.

As for Ohio they are paying the price of playing on a very weak schedule though playing NIU in the MAC title game helped to move the Bobcats from #76 to #68 in the final Sagarins.

The East is weak, largely due to Akron being dreadful. Most of the top tier MAC football programs (CMU, Toledo, Ball State, BGSU, NIU) are now in the East.

Next year in the East it will probably be Ohio at the top with a bunch of 6-6 MAC football schools in the middle and Akron/UMass at the bottom. The MAC East will be lucky to place two schools in a bowl game next season.

(01-10-2012 10:56 AM)exCincy Kid Wrote:  C-USA'ers seem to think they can entice Temple to join for all sports...guess I don't see why Temple would do that with Houston, UCF and SMU leaving and Memphis trying like heck to get a Big east invite. (not to mention the A10 is a better hoops league than C-USA).

Maybe Temple would consider a football only offer but I would hope they'd stick with the MAC, particularly when the conference is adding UMass I think partly to give the Owls an eastern rival and travel partner of sorts.

Temple can only bus its football team to 2 schools in CUSA; Marshall and East Carolina. For UMass the travel situation would be even worse.

I think Temple (and all MAC schools for that matter) are going to sit tight in the near term. Temple and UMass could be ready for the Big East in 4 or 5 years so there is no point in messing around with CUSA.

I see Temple's defense and wondering how do they lose. Loaded with jocks and an NFL RB. QB or coach not good.

(01-10-2012 05:09 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(01-10-2012 04:14 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I think if Temple is ahead of NIU in Sagarin ratings, they might need to be revised.

Sagarins are all about margin of victory, not wins.

With Temple blasting Maryland and Wyoming while playing Penn State close one can see why they are so highly rated in the Sagarins.

As for Ohio they are paying the price of playing on a very weak schedule though playing NIU in the MAC title game helped to move the Bobcats from #76 to #68 in the final Sagarins.

The East is weak, largely due to Akron being dreadful. Most of the top tier MAC football programs (CMU, Toledo, Ball State, BGSU, NIU) are now in the East.

What?

(01-11-2012 01:19 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(01-10-2012 05:09 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(01-10-2012 04:14 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I think if Temple is ahead of NIU in Sagarin ratings, they might need to be revised.

Sagarins are all about margin of victory, not wins.

With Temple blasting Maryland and Wyoming while playing Penn State close one can see why they are so highly rated in the Sagarins.

As for Ohio they are paying the price of playing on a very weak schedule though playing NIU in the MAC title game helped to move the Bobcats from #76 to #68 in the final Sagarins.

The East is weak, largely due to Akron being dreadful. Most of the top tier MAC football programs (CMU, Toledo, Ball State, BGSU, NIU) are now in the East.

What?

Typo sorry.

These rankings really make you question them.

Anyone who knows football knows the MAC was better than the WAC. Their best team was 8-5, meanwhile the MAC had four teams with 9+ wins.

We blew out ASU yet the previous rankings had ASU as the favorite.

(01-10-2012 09:48 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(01-10-2012 10:56 AM)exCincy Kid Wrote:  C-USA'ers seem to think they can entice Temple to join for all sports...guess I don't see why Temple would do that with Houston, UCF and SMU leaving and Memphis trying like heck to get a Big east invite. (not to mention the A10 is a better hoops league than C-USA).

Maybe Temple would consider a football only offer but I would hope they'd stick with the MAC, particularly when the conference is adding UMass I think partly to give the Owls an eastern rival and travel partner of sorts.

Temple can only bus its football team to 2 schools in CUSA; Marshall and East Carolina. For UMass the travel situation would be even worse.

I think Temple (and all MAC schools for that matter) are going to sit tight in the near term. Temple and UMass could be ready for the Big East in 4 or 5 years so there is no point in messing around with CUSA.

Not much talk around the program about moving to C-USA for Temple. Your right on the mark, with the loss of SMU, Houston, and UCF there isn’t any real substantial step up moving from the MAC, especially for all sports. That would be increased even more if the AQ status goes away, then it’s every team for itself! The A-10 is a great home for basketball and all sports, and the MAC is fine for football. Honestly I think Temple is content with sitting and waiting for all the Big East options to have been exhausted before they make any move, if it’s not one of the 6 major conferences it really doesn’t make sense for them to make a move, at least not yet.

LT: Would C-USA fall below the MAC or WAC if Houston, SMU and UCF are all taken out (as they will be)?

Miami finished 6th in the MAC in these Sagarin ratings, which is quite a bit higher than some of you have been rating us in other threads.