So this is about the time of year that I start to trust computer rankings, as any filler data from last year is likely to have been flushed out of the formulas by now. Or maybe that's next week. But still.

Anyway, here are the rankings. I must admit that how the SEC is #1 is a head-scratcher to me:

1) SEC ... 8.12
2) PAC ... 8.02
3) B12 ... 7.96
4) B1G ... 7.93
5) ACC ... 7.74

6) SBC ... 7.14
7) MW .... 7.08
8) AAC ... 6.97
9) CUSA .. 6.72
10) MAC .. 6.71

https://masseyratings.com/cf/fbs/ratings?c=1

Big XII has only 2 of 14 schools getting more than 2 votes for the AP Top-25, yet has the #3 conference. The league has incredible depth.

(10-17-2023 10:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  So this is about the time of year that I start to trust computer rankings, as any filler data from last year is likely to have been flushed out of the formulas by now. Or maybe that's next week. But still.

Anyway, here are the rankings. I must admit that how the SEC is #1 is a head-scratcher to me:

1) SEC ... 8.12
2) PAC ... 8.02
3) B12 ... 7.96
4) B1G ... 7.93
5) ACC ... 7.74

6) SBC ... 7.14
7) MW .... 7.08
8) AAC ... 6.97
9) CUSA .. 6.72
10) MAC .. 6.71

https://masseyratings.com/cf/fbs/ratings?c=1

They're probably trying to make up for bama getting screwed out of the #4 slot last year...

(10-17-2023 10:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  So this is about the time of year that I start to trust computer rankings, as any filler data from last year is likely to have been flushed out of the formulas by now. Or maybe that's next week. But still.

Anyway, here are the rankings. I must admit that how the SEC is #1 is a head-scratcher to me:

1) SEC ... 8.12
2) PAC ... 8.02
3) B12 ... 7.96
4) B1G ... 7.93
5) ACC ... 7.74

6) SBC ... 7.14
7) MW .... 7.08
8) AAC ... 6.97
9) CUSA .. 6.72
10) MAC .. 6.71

https://masseyratings.com/cf/fbs/ratings?c=1

14 Universities. 10 States. Rising.

The ACC is about as top heavy as I can ever remember it, after the topo 6 teams there have been some ugly losses.

(10-17-2023 10:31 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Big XII has only 2 of 14 schools getting more than 2 votes for the AP Top-25, yet has the #3 conference. The league has incredible depth.

The B12 is a "thick" conference, a strong middle.

The dominance of TX and OU this year is worrisome going forward, though.

(10-17-2023 11:11 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  The ACC is about as top heavy as I can ever remember it, after the topo 6 teams there have been some ugly losses.

Yes, the ACC has benefitted from some high profile wins - FSU > LSU and Louisville > Notre Dame come to mind.

But as you say, the underbelly has some ugly losses

(10-17-2023 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-17-2023 10:31 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Big XII has only 2 of 14 schools getting more than 2 votes for the AP Top-25, yet has the #3 conference. The league has incredible depth.

The B12 is a "thick" conference, a strong middle.

The dominance of TX and OU this year is worrisome going forward, though.

By any measure- TV, recruiting, level of play they are huge losses for the conference. The narrative will be a bit tougher if they dominate their last year, but the loss is still huge even they didn't. But there are advantages to not having alpha dogs in a conference- more parity means easier for team to "level up" year to year. And even with relative parity/ strong "middle", with a 16 team league each year there will be 3 or 4 teams that will rise to the top and be top 25 teams in the mix for the post-season. While it won't be top heavy with blue bloods you can pencil in each year, it will be fun and more unpredictable. I'm really looking forward to the league.

(10-17-2023 11:51 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(10-17-2023 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-17-2023 10:31 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Big XII has only 2 of 14 schools getting more than 2 votes for the AP Top-25, yet has the #3 conference. The league has incredible depth.

The B12 is a "thick" conference, a strong middle.

The dominance of TX and OU this year is worrisome going forward, though.

By any measure- TV, recruiting, level of play they are huge losses for the conference. The narrative will be a bit tougher if they dominate their last year, but the loss is still huge even they didn't. But there are advantages to not having alpha dogs in a conference- more parity means easier for team to "level up" year to year. And even with relative parity/ strong "middle", with a 16 team league each year there will be 3 or 4 teams that will rise to the top and be top 25 teams in the mix for the post-season. While it won't be top heavy with blue bloods you can pencil in each year, it will be fun and more unpredictable. I'm really looking forward to the league.

Good insights here, IMO.

I agree, going forward the nB12 is going to be a very exciting league to watch. Especially if the scheduling is done correctly. IMO there is a danger of too many Arizona vs Cincinnati type matchups that don't make sense to the fan bases. TCU, at ground zero of the conference, doesn't really face that problem.

(10-17-2023 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-17-2023 10:31 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Big XII has only 2 of 14 schools getting more than 2 votes for the AP Top-25, yet has the #3 conference. The league has incredible depth.

The B12 is a "thick" conference, a strong middle.

The dominance of TX and OU this year is worrisome going forward, though.

I agree it hurts some.

I think it would be worse if the playoffs weren’t expanding. With the strong middle and good parity, the conference schedule is going to be tough and probably not a ton of nBig 12 teams will have undefeated seasons. With 4 team playoff they probably cannibalize themselves and have a hard time making the cfp. Fortunately the new expanded playoff helps there.

(10-17-2023 10:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  So this is about the time of year that I start to trust computer rankings, as any filler data from last year is likely to have been flushed out of the formulas by now. Or maybe that's next week. But still.

Anyway, here are the rankings. I must admit that how the SEC is #1 is a head-scratcher to me:

1) SEC ... 8.12
2) PAC ... 8.02
3) B12 ... 7.96
4) B1G ... 7.93
5) ACC ... 7.74

6) SBC ... 7.14
7) MW .... 7.08
8) AAC ... 6.97
9) CUSA .. 6.72
10) MAC .. 6.71

https://masseyratings.com/cf/fbs/ratings?c=1

I can't seem to find the MC ratings by team. Have they been released?

(10-17-2023 12:52 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-17-2023 10:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  So this is about the time of year that I start to trust computer rankings, as any filler data from last year is likely to have been flushed out of the formulas by now. Or maybe that's next week. But still.

Anyway, here are the rankings. I must admit that how the SEC is #1 is a head-scratcher to me:

1) SEC ... 8.12
2) PAC ... 8.02
3) B12 ... 7.96
4) B1G ... 7.93
5) ACC ... 7.74

6) SBC ... 7.14
7) MW .... 7.08
8) AAC ... 6.97
9) CUSA .. 6.72
10) MAC .. 6.71

https://masseyratings.com/cf/fbs/ratings?c=1

I can't seem to find the MC ratings by team. Have they been released?

https://masseyratings.com/cf/fbs/ratings

(10-17-2023 11:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-17-2023 11:51 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(10-17-2023 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-17-2023 10:31 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Big XII has only 2 of 14 schools getting more than 2 votes for the AP Top-25, yet has the #3 conference. The league has incredible depth.

The B12 is a "thick" conference, a strong middle.

The dominance of TX and OU this year is worrisome going forward, though.

By any measure- TV, recruiting, level of play they are huge losses for the conference. The narrative will be a bit tougher if they dominate their last year, but the loss is still huge even they didn't. But there are advantages to not having alpha dogs in a conference- more parity means easier for team to "level up" year to year. And even with relative parity/ strong "middle", with a 16 team league each year there will be 3 or 4 teams that will rise to the top and be top 25 teams in the mix for the post-season. While it won't be top heavy with blue bloods you can pencil in each year, it will be fun and more unpredictable. I'm really looking forward to the league.

Good insights here, IMO.

I agree, going forward the nB12 is going to be a very exciting league to watch. Especially if the scheduling is done correctly. IMO there is a danger of too many Arizona vs Cincinnati type matchups that don't make sense to the fan bases. TCU, at ground zero of the conference, doesn't really face that problem.

I hope the Big 12 doesn't make the opposite mistake and swing too far in the other direction. Hopefully they implement a schedule similar to the Big Ten where teams have one or may be two annual rivalry games and you cycle through the conference more frequently.

I don't want BYU locked into Utah, Arizona, ASU, and Colorado every year at the expense of fewer games against everyone else. Other than Utah, I want BYU to play TCU, Baylor, Kansas, UCF, WVU, Cincinnati, etc. as often as we play Arizona, ASU, and Colorado.

Sagarin also puts the SEC first.

The list below is using simple average so that division rankings can be averaged (Sagarin numbers are broken down by division). Big breaks ("=="are a gap more than twice the average gap of 2.6, small breaks ("--") are gaps more than twice the next two gaps above

79.90 SEC
77.78 PAC
77.47 Big12
76.80 Big Ten
-------
73.85 ACC
====
64.70 MWC
63.83 Sunbelt
62.90 AAC
-------
59.58 MAC
57.69 CUSA
55.65 MVC
====
52.20 Big Sky
49.63 United Athletic
47.21 CAA
45.51 Southern
44.63 Ivy
-------
41.36 Big South
40.24 Southland
38.42 Patriot
-------
35.20 MEAC
33.78 SWAC
31.31 Northeast
====
24.85 Pioneer

(10-17-2023 11:51 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(10-17-2023 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-17-2023 10:31 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Big XII has only 2 of 14 schools getting more than 2 votes for the AP Top-25, yet has the #3 conference. The league has incredible depth.

The B12 is a "thick" conference, a strong middle.

The dominance of TX and OU this year is worrisome going forward, though.

By any measure- TV, recruiting, level of play they are huge losses for the conference. The narrative will be a bit tougher if they dominate their last year, but the loss is still huge even they didn't. But there are advantages to not having alpha dogs in a conference- more parity means easier for team to "level up" year to year. And even with relative parity/ strong "middle", with a 16 team league each year there will be 3 or 4 teams that will rise to the top and be top 25 teams in the mix for the post-season. While it won't be top heavy with blue bloods you can pencil in each year, it will be fun and more unpredictable. I'm really looking forward to the league.

The only problem with too much parity is it creates confusion about who is good and the default assumption becomes that everyone is "meh". Too much parity and you run into PAC problems where their top teams constantly cannibalized each other in the CFP race.

Positives are, CFP expansion should blunt any concerns about parity preventing Big 12 teams from reaching the playoff. The Big 12 added some decent sized schools and fanbases in expansion and should see a good groundswell of support depending on who is successful in a given year. The teams the Big 12 added also have better cultural and geographic fits, so there should be plenty of the regional interest that makes college football great even if it is decidedly more Southwestern.

I've noticed some programs that act as natural bridges between groups due to shared history.

BYU/Utah/ASU/Arizona=CU=KSU/Kansas/ISU/OSU=Texas Tech=Baylor/TCU=Houston=UCF/Cincy=WVU.

(10-17-2023 01:35 PM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  

(10-17-2023 11:51 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(10-17-2023 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-17-2023 10:31 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Big XII has only 2 of 14 schools getting more than 2 votes for the AP Top-25, yet has the #3 conference. The league has incredible depth.

The B12 is a "thick" conference, a strong middle.

The dominance of TX and OU this year is worrisome going forward, though.

By any measure- TV, recruiting, level of play they are huge losses for the conference. The narrative will be a bit tougher if they dominate their last year, but the loss is still huge even they didn't. But there are advantages to not having alpha dogs in a conference- more parity means easier for team to "level up" year to year. And even with relative parity/ strong "middle", with a 16 team league each year there will be 3 or 4 teams that will rise to the top and be top 25 teams in the mix for the post-season. While it won't be top heavy with blue bloods you can pencil in each year, it will be fun and more unpredictable. I'm really looking forward to the league.

The only problem with too much parity is it creates confusion about who is good and the default assumption becomes that everyone is "meh". Too much parity and you run into PAC problems where their top teams constantly cannibalized each other in the CFP race.

Positives are, CFP expansion should blunt any concerns about parity preventing Big 12 teams from reaching the playoff. The Big 12 added some decent sized schools and fanbases in expansion and should see a good groundswell of support depending on who is successful in a given year. The teams the Big 12 added also have better cultural and geographic fits, so there should be plenty of the regional interest that makes college football great even if it is decidedly more Southwestern.

I've noticed some programs that act as natural bridges between groups due to shared history.

BYU/Utah/ASU/Arizona=CU=KSU/Kansas/ISU/OSU=Texas Tech=Baylor/TCU=Houston=UCF/Cincy=WVU.

Having followed C-USA (in its early days), the Big East and the AAC, this is well put.

G5's by rank (0 losses, 1 loss)

30 James Madison
31 Air Force
38 Tulane
40 Fresno State
48 SMU
51 Troy
55 Liberty
57 Wyoming
64 Memphis
68 Georgia State
71 Toledo
72 Western Kentucky
74 Miami(O)
75 Marshall
77 Boise State
78 UNLV
79 Ohio
80 Louisiana

(10-17-2023 10:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  So this is about the time of year that I start to trust computer rankings, as any filler data from last year is likely to have been flushed out of the formulas by now. Or maybe that's next week. But still.

Anyway, here are the rankings. I must admit that how the SEC is #1 is a head-scratcher to me:

1) SEC ... 8.12
2) PAC ... 8.02
3) B12 ... 7.96
4) B1G ... 7.93
5) ACC ... 7.74

6) SBC ... 7.14
7) MW .... 7.08
8) AAC ... 6.97
9) CUSA .. 6.72
10) MAC .. 6.71

https://masseyratings.com/cf/fbs/ratings?c=1

I am curious what the rankings would be using next year"s alignment.

I would expect both the Big Ten and SEC to make big increases in their scores. Big 12 and ACC would go down I am guessing?

And I assume PAC would be gone completely, at least as a power conference.

I am guessing a MWC/P2 merger would be higher than the old MWC. And the AAC would go down?

Hey look it's the Massey!

(10-17-2023 01:07 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Sagarin also puts the SEC first.

The list below is using simple average so that division rankings can be averaged (Sagarin numbers are broken down by division). Big breaks ("=="are a gap more than twice the average gap of 2.6, small breaks ("--") are gaps more than twice the next two gaps above

79.90 SEC
77.78 PAC
77.47 Big12
76.80 Big Ten
-------
73.85 ACC
====
64.70 MWC
63.83 Sunbelt
62.90 AAC
-------
59.58 MAC
57.69 CUSA
55.65 MVC
====
52.20 Big Sky
49.63 United Athletic
47.21 CAA
45.51 Southern
44.63 Ivy
-------
41.36 Big South
40.24 Southland
38.42 Patriot
-------
35.20 MEAC
33.78 SWAC
31.31 Northeast
====
24.85 Pioneer

I'm not sure that an FCS conference has ever been this close to an FBS conference. Strong work by the MVFC!