Started By
Message
re: CFB Program Rankings
Posted on 6/14/18 at 3:37 pm to lsupride87
Posted on 6/14/18 at 3:37 pm to lsupride87
quote:
LSU had a better winning pct than arky
As previously discussed, winning % is not part of the formula. Winning percentage numbers are not a good indicator of program strength because there is zero SOS factor.
quote:
bowl wins
Bowl wins are just dumb. First off the quantity of bowls has increased dramatically over time.... so a team that was the 10th or 12th best in the 1940s might not have received a bowl invite... meanwhile a team that is 60th best in 2017 might receive a bowl invitation.
Secondly, many teams (such as Notre Dame) chose for years not to play in bowl games because they were pointless.... even the National Title trophies were rewarded before the bowls up until 1965 (AP) and 1974 (UPI). Just because some programs valued playing in them more than others doesn't mean it is any indication as to how strong those programs are.
quote:
conference titles
So a team like USC who has outright dominated their 1-team league over history gets to count conference titles which are then compared to the gauntlet of winning the SEC? Not all conferences are equal, so putting that into the equation equals not very accurate rankings.
quote:
I think your system is fine, but the pre 1999 rankings showed faults to me.
That's fine. LSU pre 2000 showed many faults. One national title which was over 40 years prior.... and a horrific decade in the 1990s which featured multiple consecutive losing seasons. People can't be screaming that Tennessee should no longer be considered "Blue Blood" because of their horrible past 15 years but then think LSU in 1999 should have been put on an undeserved pedestal. Tennessee in 2017 is not too much different than LSU was in 1999... only LSU in 1999 was even less accomplished as a program.
1
Posted on 6/14/18 at 3:38 pm to VABuckeye
quote:
You omitted Ohio State on this list.
You are right. My bad. I think they came in at #5 if I remember correctly... would have to rerun the numbers.
Posted on 6/14/18 at 3:47 pm to BHMKyle
Thanks Kyle.
Posted on 6/14/18 at 3:47 pm to BHMKyle
Thanks for putting the time and effort into this. It makes for interesting discussion.
Posted on 6/14/18 at 4:45 pm to lsupride87
quote:
That isnt homerism
I think this guy’s main goal is to appear as the anti homer. Pat him on the back.
Posted on 6/14/18 at 4:47 pm to aufbfan
quote:
kind of think the “finish #1” points boost is far too heavily weighted over finishing 2nd.
Maybe your best point ever. More weight should be given to teams The better they are. Not just to one team. A #2 should be much closer to #1 than #25.
Posted on 6/14/18 at 7:44 pm to BHMKyle
quote:BEFORE 2000, lsu was top 13 all time in wins. make of that what you will
Pre 2000 LSU was not even close to blue blood status.... it was probably not even "elite."
quote:no, there isn't and the only people who say that are prepubescent ignoramuses or old farts who just want to hate on lsu because they're miserable since their life topped out in a double wide
So there is some truth to the "didn't play football before 2000" arguments
quote:but what about '89?
If you were to use this same ranking at the end of the 1999 season
Posted on 6/15/18 at 12:45 am to BHMKyle
quote:
Blue Bloods
Excellent thread. Thanks
Blue Bloods are, by definition, families and/or organizations that have been doing it better for longer ... agreed?
So applying your methodology, your metrics, how many points would SC, Mizzou, Miss State, et al, garner?
There's a reason I ask this question.
Posted on 6/15/18 at 11:06 am to bfniii
quote:
BEFORE 2000, lsu was top 13 all time in wins. make of that what you will
14th. per Stassen at least... with 610 wins. However, there were also 9 other programs at the time that were within 19 wins (591 or more) of LSU.... just ever so slightly behind. So its not like LSU was dominating at the #14 spot. The difference was razor-thin from #13 all the way down to #24 at the time.
quote:
the only people who say that are prepubescent ignoramuses or old farts who just want to hate on lsu because they're miserable since their life topped out in a double wide
Sensitive are we?
In 2018, LSU comes in at #11... bolstered by their strong performance sine 2000.
1999 woud be the worst possible year to evaluate the LSU program. It was the program's low point after accumulating an overall losing record from 1989-1999.
If you run these rankings to see what they would have looked like in 1989, they'd look like this:
1. Notre Dame- 852
2. Oklahoma- 842
3. Alabama- 803
4. USC- 687
5. Ohio State- 586
Other SEC:
12. Tennessee- 357
13. Auburn- 338
14. LSU- 332
16. Arkansas- 316
17. Georgia- 308
23. Texas A&M- 192
If you go back to 1979, this is how it would look:
1. Notre Dame- 839
2. Alabama- 776
3. Oklahoma- 736
4. USC- 656
5. Texas- 563
Other SEC:
9. Tennessee- 356
11. LSU- 296
15. Arkansas- 278
16. Auburn- 245
19. Ole Miss- 229
22. Georgia- 166
23. Texas A&M- 159
35. Missouri- 142
So LSU looks pretty good coming out of the 1970s.
Is it fair to say LSU didn't start playing football until 2000? No, probably not. But its very fair to say that for a quarter of a century... from 1975-1999... LSU was very mediocre at best.
For those 25 years, LSU was 35th nationally in both Wins and Winning Percentage.... they were also 26th in AP Poll Points. This is why your program ranking at the end of the 1999 season was lacking. What do you expect when your program had essentially taken off the previous 25 seasons?
LSU in 1999 is about as close as you get to Tennessee 2017... as far as Big 6 SEC programs go. I don't know why its so difficult for LSU fans to acknowledge the fact that they had performed so poorly as a program for the last 25 years of the previous century.
This post was edited on 6/15/18 at 11:08 am
Posted on 6/15/18 at 11:25 am to BHMKyle
Where were FSU and Miami in 79. Both schools were contemplating shutting down the programs in the mid 70s
Posted on 6/15/18 at 11:46 am to Pdubntrub
quote:
Where were FSU and Miami in 79. Both schools were contemplating shutting down the programs in the mid 70s
I have no idea. I've only run the number for 46 different programs... and I only feel confident about the actual rankings of the Top 30 or 35 until I run the others.
I suspect there are plenty of other programs who would come out ahead of FSU/Miami in 1979 that I've not yet calculated.
Out of the 46 programs I have run data for, Miami comes in at #35 and Florida State comes in at #40 as of 1979. The bottom group would have looked like this in 1979:
#35- Miami- 62.6
#36- Florida- 62.2
#37- Mississippi St.- 47.2
#38- West Virginia- 44.4
#39- Oklahoma St.- 32.2
#40- Florida St.- 32.0
#41- BYU- 19.0
#42- Oregon- 12.3
#43- S. Carolina- 9.4
#44- Virginia Tech- 8.0
#45- Kansas State- zero
#46- Boise State- zero
However, as I noted above, I suspect there are plenty of programs not yet evaluated that would come in much higher than most of those on this list. There are still 22 current Power programs (including Kentucky and Vandy) who I've not yet run numbers for.... not to mention programs like SMU, Houston, Navy, etc. who had decent success several decades back.
This post was edited on 6/15/18 at 11:47 am
Posted on 6/15/18 at 11:50 am to BHMKyle
quote:What if you have a better win pct and sos factor, more national titles, more big bowl wins, more top 10s, and more years ranked and are still behind a team?
As previously discussed, winning % is not part of the formula. Winning percentage numbers are not a good indicator of program strength because there is zero SOS factor.
Look, your system is a good effort and fun new way to look at things. But clearly, like all rankings, it has its flaws
Posted on 6/15/18 at 11:52 am to Korin
quote:
You're just mad because Georgia isn't higher.
That's the bottom line. He expects the rest of the SEC to line up and suck Georgia's tiny dick because of one great season without pause or question. Should have seen him in the Pappoe commitment thread.
Posted on 6/15/18 at 11:53 am to BHMKyle
quote:
#35- Miami- 62.6 #36- Florida- 62.2 #37- Mississippi St.- 47.2 #38- West Virginia- 44.4 #39- Oklahoma St.- 32.2 #40- Florida St.- 32.0 #41- BYU- 19.0 #42- Oregon- 12.3 #43- S. Carolina- 9.4 #44- Virginia Tech- 8.0 #45- Kansas State- zero #46- Boise State- zero
Thanks man. Forget how bad UF was back then, all 3 florida schools made a major jump from 79-99
Posted on 6/15/18 at 11:55 am to BHMKyle
How tf is TCU in the top 25?
Posted on 6/15/18 at 12:05 pm to hogNsinceReagan
quote:
How tf is TCU in the top 25?
Why is that so hard to believe?
1. Without any weighting, they rank #28 all-time in AP Poll Points.
2. They have a National Championship on their resume, albeit from the 1930s, but it is still credited to them
3. Outside of the National Title year, the high water mark for their program has been in the recent Gary Paterson era.... which is going to be weighted higher due to being more recent.
Over the past decade (2008-2017), they come in at a stellar #5 in AP Poll Points:
1. Alabama- 226
2. Ohio State- 184
3. Oregon- 148
4. Oklahoma- 147
5. TCU- 134
6. Clemson- 121
7. Stanford- 118
8. Florida St.- 109
9. LSU- 106
10. Michigan St.- 104
That's a result of them finishing #9 last year... #7 in 2015... #3 in 2014... #14 in 2011... #2 in 2010... #6 in 2009... and #7 in 2008.
I would say based off all that, coming in at ONLY #24 in the All-Time program rankings seems about right.... kinda surprised its not higher actually. But from 1969-1999, they failed to have a single Top 25 finish in the AP, which is obviously what's holding them back from being much higher.
Posted on 6/15/18 at 12:32 pm to lsupride87
quote:
What if you have a better win pct
Georgia has a better win% than LSU. Does that mean then Georgia is the better program?
Since 1999, Boise State (83.5%) has a better winning percentage than LSU (73.7%) but nearly 10 whole percentage points. Does that make Boise the better program this century?
quote:
more national titles
Minnesota has more national titles than LSU. Does that make them the better program?
quote:
more big bowl wins
Georgia (31) has six more bowl wins than LSU (25). I guess that makes Georgia the better program in your mind? LSU also has the same number as Georgia Tech. So ya'll are equal to the Yellow Jackets I guess?
quote:
more top 10s
Georgia (22) has more Top 10 finishes than LSU (21). Wow that's now three of your categories that Georgia trumps LSU in.... I guess that means we're the better all-time program, right?
quote:
Look, your system is a good effort and fun new way to look at things. But clearly, like all rankings, it has its flaws
There is no perfect system. No one is saying this is. But when you add a myriad of different statistics into the equation, it actually muddies it even more.
For instance, winning percentage. What do you do with Boise State? Their winning percentage is tops in the country.... yet everyone knows they've played a ridiculously easy schedule and about half the number of games compared to most other programs.
Conference Titles? So Notre Dame scores a zero in this category? That's not going to produce very accurate rankings. Oklahoma has 47 conference titles to Alabama's 30. Does that seem fair? No not one bit.... because not all conferences are the same strength.
This is why the best system is to work with one major data point.... such as the AP Poll.
The strong points of a system like this:
1. The AP poll has a built in SOS factor
2. It goes back a long time... since 1936
3. All D1 programs are judged the same: by a panel of voters
To be honest, here are the negatives:
1. What about pre-1936 data?
2. Inconsistencies in the number of teams ranked in the poll (only 20 teams for a very long time... the only 10 teams throughout much of the 1960s... and then finally up to 25 teams beginning in the late 1980s).
What about all the teams that were the 11th best during some years in the 1960s? Those teams are getting no points while an 11th ranked team in todays rankings do get points.
So yes, no system is perfect. But I think this one is the best I've seen if I were being completely honest.
Posted on 6/15/18 at 12:35 pm to BHMKyle
Why did you ignore the part where I said “with a higher SOS rating”
Posted on 6/15/18 at 12:36 pm to BHMKyle
quote:
yes, no system is perfect. But I think this one is the best I've seen if I were being completely honest
Agree this seems like a good system
Posted on 6/15/18 at 12:42 pm to BHMKyle
quote:CFB data warehouse is the best IMHO
So yes, no system is perfect. But I think this one is the best I've seen if I were being completely honest.
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News