(06-16-2021 08:21 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote: (06-15-2021 08:58 PM)ken d Wrote: Interesting way to look at conferences. Using the 10 year average Sagarin strength rating for each school in the same groups of 25, this is what you get.
Conf...1-25...26-50...51-75...76-100...101+...Best (school)
SEC......7........5..........2..........0...........0........1 (Alabama)
B12......5........3..........1..........0...........1........4 (Oklahoma)
B1G......5........3..........3..........3...........0........2 (Ohio State)
PAC......4........5..........2...........1..........0........6 (Oregon)
ACC......2........7..........5...........0..........0........3 (Clemson)
AAC......0........1..........7...........4..........1........48 (UCF)
MWC.....1........0..........3...........4..........4........25 (Boise State)
MAC......0........0..........2...........4..........6........63 (Toledo)
SUN......0........0..........1...........4..........5........75 (Appalachian St)
USA......0........0..........1...........4..........9........73 (Louisiana Tech)
It seems any way you slice it, the AAC is clearly not P5 and just as clearly the strongest G5.
Is this a reliable data point considering that the AAC is only 8 years old. No disrespect intended just asking.
These aren't measures of how any conference performed during this period. They are measures of how the individual teams in the
current membership of each conference performed. Someone mentioned Idaho and New Mexico State being a drag on Sunbelt numbers, but they weren't in the numbers because they are no longer in the conference. Conversely, if BYU were to join a conference, their performance numbers for the preceding 10 years would be included in their new conference's total.
If you try to get numbers for comparison of conferences as they are configured today by using the different configurations each conference may have had over ten years, the "averages" would basically be a hash total.
By using current membership, it's easy to calculate the impact of realignment on both gaining and losing conferences, using data that's readily available and consistent from one year to the next. And by using ten years of data for each school, it's harder to cherry pick the time period that's most advantageous to whatever argument you are making.
So, yes, the AAC's performance in the past five years is better than its ten year performance. They went from a ten year average power rating of 67 to a five tear average of 68 (compared to the weakest P5 which tends to hover around 75). But over the span of just a few seasons, UCF went from a regular season record of 12-0 to one of 0-12. Depending on what short period of time you might choose, you can make them look much better or much worse. The longer time period of ten years virtually eliminates the impact of a single season's performance good or bad. And if you are looking at realignment, you need to be looking at data that isn't skewed by the potential impact of a single transcendent player or coach.