Part of the pay out for 2014 for the G5 conference money will be based on on conference strength. They haven't specified how they will measured this but using Sagarin Ratings here are the numbers after this week. I took Louisville and Rutgers out of AAC and added ECU,Tulsa,Tulane and Navy. CUSA I added WKY,ODU and Charlotte and SBC I added Idaho,NMSU,Georgia Southern and App State


1. AAC 6780
2. MWC 6642
3. MAC 6242
4. CUSA 5806
5. SBC 5789

I will update this weekly

If you are interested how the P5 rank
1. SEC 8184
2. Big12 7989
3. PAC 7787
4. BIG 7526
5 ACC 7493

That's with Maryland, Rutgers and Louisville moved

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sag...onference/

We are # 6.... WE ARE # 6!!

I've never understood these numbers how teams who lose to other teams can have higher rankings... and how say a team like Boise who gets blown out has a higher ranking number than Louisville who blew someone else out.

It bases a lot on strength of schedule, but apparently not so much on the actual outcomes?

(09-04-2013 05:43 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  We are # 6.... WE ARE # 6!!

Which will get us the largest amount of playoff money for any G5 outside of our champ going to BCS bowl.

So best deal have our champ be the BCS rep from G5 and be the highest G5 conference. Do that and we will get the largest share of any G5 conference.

Cbull, guess it is better to be the biggest fish in a small pond rather than the smallest. Though the biggest usually die first if the pump stops.

(09-04-2013 05:52 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  Cbull, guess it is better to be the biggest fish in a small pond rather than the smallest. Though the biggest usually die first if the pump stops.

Or you can look at it that as long as that the only pond you can be in. You can eat the others.

What happens if the AAC gains 700 points and surpasses the ACC? Do we get more money than them?*

I think the winner of that battle should claim the rights to the acronym. If the AAC is on top, we get to be called the AAC and the ACC can be called the Atlantic Coastal*

(09-04-2013 05:53 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(09-04-2013 05:52 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  Cbull, guess it is better to be the biggest fish in a small pond rather than the smallest. Though the biggest usually die first if the pump stops.

Or you can look at it that as long as that the only pond you can be in. You can eat the others.

Only if they are cute lil things of the female persuasion.

Not that bad considering what a train wreck the first week was.

(09-04-2013 05:44 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  I've never understood these numbers how teams who lose to other teams can have higher rankings... and how say a team like Boise who gets blown out has a higher ranking number than Louisville who blew someone else out.

It bases a lot on strength of schedule, but apparently not so much on the actual outcomes?

I was wondering the same thing. I'm guessing that past performance (previous season perhaps?) are somehow configured in the equation since only one game has been played this year..

(09-04-2013 06:39 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(09-04-2013 05:44 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  I've never understood these numbers how teams who lose to other teams can have higher rankings... and how say a team like Boise who gets blown out has a higher ranking number than Louisville who blew someone else out.

It bases a lot on strength of schedule, but apparently not so much on the actual outcomes?

I was wondering the same thing. I'm guessing that past performance (previous season perhaps?) are somehow configured in the equation since only one game has been played this year..

Yes, computer polls like Sagarin make assumptions about a school based on the previous year's performance to make initial rankings, and then as the season progresses that assumed-information is gradually deleted from the analysis, such that by game 7 or so the computer ranking is based purely on this year's performance.

That's one reason I prefer my BCS Conference Comparison, as it never uses anything but this year's information to rank conferences.

As Sagarin explains on his web site:

"For the first few weeks of the season, the starting ratings have weight
in the process(BAYESIAN), but once the teams are all WELL CONNECTED, then the starting ratings are no longer used and all teams are started equal and the RATING, ELO-CHESS, and PURE POINTS (PREDICTOR) are then done in an UNBIASED manner from that point on."