(12-26-2020 10:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote: (12-26-2020 10:21 AM)Foreverandever Wrote: (12-26-2020 09:28 AM)quo vadis Wrote: (12-26-2020 01:15 AM)Foreverandever Wrote: (12-25-2020 10:21 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote: I looked again - after CCG weekend (oh, and Sagarin may have already been running numbers bowl game by bowl game, in addition to having the FCS all in there), the conferences' average of five average rankings:
AAC 64.6
SBC 78.68
mwc 80.45
MAC 90.71
CUSA 97.98
What of the p5, I expected our usual performance versus the g4 and suspected the belt had passed the Mountain West for the year, although the MAC being better than CUSA is enlightening.
Even with limited data, one thing we can say about the AAC vs other G5 is that the AAC has not been nearly as good as it was last year.
Last year, the AAC finished the season (regular and bowls) with a whopping 20-2 record vs other non-P5 (G5 and Indies other than Notre Dame).
This year, the overall record was 8-8 against the same group of opponents. You don't need to be a math whiz to see that this is much closer to the 2018 performance, when the AAC went 9-10 against that crew and finished behind the MW in the CFP conference rankings than to last year's exceptional run.
As always Quo you are spinning. Which is why I asked SLH about it and not you or Jed.
Its amusing to watch you explain how the numbers don't really mean anything because.......but the AAC sucks anyway, because of the numbers.
Talk about an amusing spin. I said computers are basically useless. Computers use formula that include a lot of different variables and then combine them using mathematical operations to derive values. That's a bit different than looking at just wins and losses. So not the same "numbers" at all.
Also, I did not say the AAC 'sucked' this year. I said the AAC was not nearly as good compared to other G5 this year versus last year. And that's absolutely true, the wins/losses tell us that.
The AAC may have been the best G5 this year, as it often is. But last year, the AAC was not only far ahead of the other G5, it was essentially equal with the ACC, meaning it did perform like a P6 conference. This year, definitely more like pre-2019 years.
AAC before the bowls:
4-0 vs FCS
3-1 vs SunBelt
2-0 vs CUSA
0-1 vs mwc (sorry, conference colleagues).
Yeah, 5-2 not nearly as good as last year but far from terrible vs the G4 conferences.
Add in independents - AAC was 0-2 vs BYU and 2-1 vs Army. For comparison at the conference level, mwc was 0-2 vs BYU and 0-1 vs Army. For all the value the 5 December win brought Coastal Carolina, it doesn't say much about overall conference comparison, because the Belt was 1-2 vs BYU.
Anyway, add in 1-1 vs the ACC and 0-1 vs B12.
12-7 ooc
8-7 ooc FBS
Anderson & Hester had that 12-7 being against the strongest OOC schedule strength (half the conferences listed as N/A) leading to the AAC being their second ranked conference in OOC performance (ACC-AAC-B12-Belt-CUSA). Or that's an example of the computers doing poorly with small, not-connected datasets.
Catching up with the bowl results to date.
2 Ls vs the mwc. Bummer. 3-3 in conference lost to 4-4 in conference and 3-5 in conference lost to 6-2 in conference.
Another L to BYU
W vs CUSA - AAC's #3 vs CUSA #3-#5
Totals up to date 26 December:
4-0 vs FCS
3-1 vs SunBelt
3-0 vs CUSA
0-3 vs mwc
0-3 vs BYU
2-1 vs Army
So there's no way we should be closer to the "P5" than to the G4, right?
Massey Composite as of 26 December (60 rankings compiled):
#5 ACC 52.87
#6 AAC 63.62
#7 SBC 74.34
#8 mwc 79.63
#9 MAC 81.31
#10 CUSA 92.2
The gap from #5 to #6 is .03 avg ranking spots more than the gap from #6 to #7. AAC is closer to #1 than to #8-10.
Might be worth putting an asterisk on this if computers are basically useless in 2020.
Except it looks a lot like most every other year.
2020 AAC #6, 0.03 away from being closer to #5 than to #7 SBC. Closer to #1 than to #8-10
2019 AAC #5, Ahead of the ACC at #6. Closer to #2 than to the #7 mwc. Closer to #1 SEC than to #8-#10
2018 AAC #7. mwc at #6 was 2.48 avg ranking spots better...in the AAC's six years as #6 (or #5) deltas to #7 have averaged 12.18
2017 AAC #6. Closer to #5 than to #7-10. Closer to #1 than to #9-10.
2016 AAC #6. Closer to #5 than to #8-10. Gap from #6-7 58% of the gap from #5-6.
2015 AAC #6. Closer to #5 than to #7-10.
2014 AAC was #8. But from the #8 slot, closer to #6 than any G4 has been to the AAC at #6 since then.
2013 AAC #6.