Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

My method was to rank each team in each conference based on the Sagarin predictor. For example, LSU would finish 3rd in the ACC.

I then took the top 8 teams from the 6 major conferences, averaged where these teams would finish (baseline 4.5) in each of the other conferences.

Ranks came out as follows:

Big 10 (3.06)
ACC (4.69)
Pac 10 (4.77)
Big 12 (5.17)
SEC (5.66)
Big East(7.44)

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

SEC (5.66)

so glad to see that

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

[ QUOTE ]
Top-to-Bottom

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I then took the top 8 teams

[/ QUOTE ]

???

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Top-to-Bottom

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I then took the top 8 teams

[/ QUOTE ]

???

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't sure if it would be fair since some conferences have 12 and others have 8. I wanted to make the scoring the same for each conference. I'll post those results of using all teams too.

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

New baseline of 5.91

Rankings are:

Big 10 (4.69)
Pac 10 (5.63)
ACC (6.19)
Big 12 (6.67)
Big East (7.15)
SEC (7.35)

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

literally taking a conference from top to complete bottom is pointless in my opinion. The paper differences in the bottom teams will make distort the real differences in the conferences. I like the 8 teams approach

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

[ QUOTE ]
My method was to rank each team in each conference based on the Sagarin predictor. For example, LSU would finish 3rd in the ACC.

I then took the top 8 teams from the 6 major conferences, averaged where these teams would finish (baseline 4.5) in each of the other conferences.

Ranks came out as follows:

Big 10 (3.06)
ACC (4.69)
Pac 10 (4.77)
Big 12 (5.17)
SEC (5.66)
Big East(7.44)

[/ QUOTE ]

Your title says "Top Conferences Top-To-Bottom," yet you only take the "top 8 teams" from each conference? That's pretty ridiculous, and the result is the seriously flawed rankings you've posted...

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

[ QUOTE ]
The paper differences in the bottom teams will make distort the real differences in the conferences. I like the 8 teams approach

[/ QUOTE ]

I strongly disagree.

First of all, having only bad teams is clearly better than having incredibly awful teams, because it makes it tougher for other teams to win all of the games they "should" win.

Also, the 8th place team in an 8-team league is obviously going to be worse than the 8th place team in a 12-team league. You don't get to just match them up head-to-head like that.

As an ACC person, I've always been annoyed that when the ACC and Big East both get six teams into the NCAA tournament, people think they're even. They're not. If I get 2/3 of my league in and you get less than half, I did better with respect to that category (which is not even a great measure of conference strength anyway, since it's binary and also ignores the strength of the non-tourney teams, but now I'm way off topic).

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

[ QUOTE ]
As an ACC person, I've always been annoyed that when the ACC and Big East both get six teams into the NCAA tournament, people think they're even.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I just hear an ACC'er cry about mens basketball? ACC Mens Basketball is EASILY the most jerked off conference in all of sports. It's quite funny to hear them cry of something "unjust".

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

[ QUOTE ]
ACC Mens Basketball is EASILY the most jerked off conference in all of sports. It's quite funny to hear them cry of something "unjust".

[/ QUOTE ]

(1) My point is ACC-independent. I notice it because I like the ACC, but the logic applies whether or not the ACC is overrated.

(2) You put something I didn't say in quotes.

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

The problem with the using the Sagarin for this is that such a large part of it is based on Strength of Schedule which is a pretty meaningless measure in college football since there are so few non-conference games and the vast majority of them are bought and paid for by schools from the big conferences.

9 of the top 10 teams for Strength of Schedule according to Sagarin are from the Big 10. The other two Big Ten teams, Iowa and Wisconsin are ranked 13 and 18 respectively. So you figure maybe the Big 10 dominated its non-conference games huh? Well, sort of.

Here was the Big 10s record against some of the other conferences:

W L
Big 12 0 2

ACC 1 0

Pac-10 1 2

SEC 1 0

NotreDame 1 2

Big 10 was an underwhelming 4-6 against the more respected opposition. They fared a lot better against the rest though going a combined 16-0 against the M/WAC and 3-0 against the dying Big East with all but 2 or 3 of those 19 games being played at Big 10 stadiums.

All the Sagarin and your rankings have shown is that the Big 10 is indeed awesome at scheduling patsies at home and not screwing them up. But we all knew that already.

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

Notre dame 1-2 is completely fine, considering Purdue, MSU, and Michigan aren't the class of the Big Ten, and Notre Dame is a top 10 team.

OSU loses to Texas, and that's fine, because Texas is the second best team in the country.

ISU (4th best in Big 12) (a decent team) beat Iowa (6th best in Big Ten).

Illinois (worst team in Big Ten) loses to California (4th best in Pac-10).

ASU (5th best in Pac-10) beats Northwestern (7th best in Big Ten).

All of these losses are a superior team beating a worse one. The Big Ten's cream of the crop hasn't lost to any bad teams, and they've beaten some decent ones. Of those 6 losses to teams in major conferences, 1's against Texas, 2 are against Notre Dame, another is because of Illinois, and the others are lesser teams from the Big Ten against good teams out of conference.

The evidence is not damning.

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

I'm going to add the Sagarin rankings for each of these matchups.

[ QUOTE ]

Here was the Big 10s record against some of the other conferences:

W L
Big 12 0 2

Big 10 #1 vs Big 12 #1 (Texas vs. OSU) L
Big 10 #6 vs Big 12 #4 (Iowa vs Iowa St.) L

ACC 1 0
Big 10 #7 vs. ACC #9 (Wisconsin vs. NC) W

Pac-10 1 2
Big 10 #11 vs. Pac-10 #5 (Illinois vs. Cal) L
Big 10 #9 vs. Pac-10 #4 (NW vs. ASU) L
Big 10 #8 vs. Pac-10 #8 (Purdue vs Arizona) W

SEC 1 0
Big 10 #10 vs. SEC #11 (Indiana vs. Kentucky) W

NotreDame 1 2
Big 10 #3 (Michigan) L
Big 10 #5 (Michigan St) W
Big 10 #8 (Purude) L


[/ QUOTE ]

So the better teams of some of the top conferences are better than some of the weaker teams of the Big 10. And Texas beat OSU in a close game.

Doesn't every major conference schedule patsy non-conference games? But I guess the MAC Champion is just as much a patsy as Rice or Louisiana Lafayette.

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

The fact that your Predictor has a 2-6 Mich. St. ahead of Wisconsin, NW, and Iowa is evidence enough that it is deeply flawed. Not to mention that it rates Minnesota ahead of Iowa after getting completely blown of the field by the Hawkeyes on Saturday. Just because the Sagarin might be the best ranking out there doesn't mean it still doesn't suck.

And yes, all the conferences schedule the patsy games which as I said makes the sample size to judge these conferences against each other way, way too small.

The Big 10 may just be the best conference this year, but you can't prove it using a computer ranking with such an inadequate sample size.

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

[ QUOTE ]
The fact that your Predictor has a 2-6 Mich. St. ahead of Wisconsin, NW, and Iowa is evidence enough that it is deeply flawed.

[/ QUOTE ]

No it's not. What it means is that you have to look beyond just win-loss record. You have to look at who a team played and how close their games were.

For example, one of MSU's out-of-conference games was a win over Notre Dame. They went to OT with Michigan and played at Ohio State and against Penn State to approximately 10-point losses. They destroyed the bad teams they played. That sounds like the profile of a decent team.

[ QUOTE ]
Not to mention that it rates Minnesota ahead of Iowa after getting completely blown of the field by the Hawkeyes on Saturday.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what? This type of "conflict" is unavoidable when you rank teams. Georgia Tech beat Miami, who beat Virginia Tech, who beat Georgia Tech, who beat Miami...

If the predictor is so bad, why do experts use it to predict games?

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

[ QUOTE ]
So you figure maybe the Big 10 dominated its non-conference games huh?

[/ QUOTE ]

But the Big Ten atleast played some games against more respected opponents. look at the SEC, who have any of them played? LSU barely beat ASU, and Tenn got blown out by ND. What other games have there been?

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

[ QUOTE ]
LSU barely beat ASU

[/ QUOTE ]

On the road and not long after Hurricane Katrina. Let's not forget that ASU kept USC to 38 as well.

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

[ QUOTE ]
If the predictor is so bad, why do experts use it to predict games?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to see an expert who would set Mich. St. as a point spread favorite against any of the three teams I mentioned.

I find it funny that on a poker board where people talk about needing tens of thousands of hands to have a relevant sample size people are willing to accept a computer ranking to compare these conferences based on a handful or two of interconference games.

The simple fact is we don't have even close to enough quantitative information to say one football conference is better than the others.

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

I'd ask Jeff Sagarin about it myself, but he seesm obsessed with time zones lately. I have seen him at the courthouse a few times in the last month arguing that Indiana should be on central time. It is pretty sad to watch a bunch of politicians ignore the smartest person in the room.
He has a strange web page befitting a statistical guru http://www.sagarin.com/
His sports stuff can be found here. <font color="yellow"> </font>

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the predictor is so bad, why do experts use it to predict games?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to see an expert who would set Mich. St. as a point spread favorite against any of the three teams I mentioned.

[/ QUOTE ]

MSU is 0.05 ahead of Iowa.
MSU is 1.31 ahead of Wisconsin.
MSU is 4.94 ahead of Northwestern.

So what this says is that MSU, Iowa, and Wisconsin are all pretty close, and that all three are clearly better than Northwestern, but not by a ton. None of this strikes me as incorrect.

EDIT: I do compare predictor numbers to the actual lines, and they're almost always very close. So I think the line would be about 0 against the first two teams, and about 4 against Northwestern. Maybe Iowa or Wisconsin would be favored by a point or two because of public perception. Any more than that, and I'm on MSU.

When Alabama was playing LSU, everyone thought Bama was such a steal as a home dog. Predictor had LSU favored by about 2.

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

I think its hard for MSU to be clearly better than Northwestern when they lost to the Wildcats by 5 touchdowns in East Lansing.

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

That was a total fluke. Are the Bobcats better than the Pacers? After all, they beat them by 32!

Of course, despite this, the Pacers are still better, and a few days after they got blasted, they beat the Bobcats, and I'm sure they were favored in the game. Because the rest of the available evidence suggests they're a better team, we can regard that game as an aberration. We should assume that {all the games} are a better measure than {one game}. You have to look at the whole season.

Since we're talking about MSU, is Michigan State better than Notre Dame?

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

Try looking at the common opponents:

NW and MSU had 5 common opponents:

NW went 2-3 and MSU went 1-4 and got housed by NW at home.

Iowa and MSU have 7 common opponents:

Iowa went 4-3 while MSU was 2-5

Wisconsin and MSU have 7 common opponents:

Wisconsin went 5-2 while MSU was 2-5

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So you figure maybe the Big 10 dominated its non-conference games huh?

[/ QUOTE ]

But the Big Ten atleast played some games against more respected opponents. look at the SEC, who have any of them played? LSU barely beat ASU, and Tenn got blown out by ND. What other games have there been?

[/ QUOTE ]


that game was at ASU where they handed USC a victory, Tenn got beat by ND which isnt saying much at all. In fact if you watched the game the score didn't really indicate the closeness of the game. Tenn's defense only actually allowed 24 of ND points while a blown punt coverage and defensive turnovers were the rest, and NDs defense allowed 21 points from a completely confused offense that barely managed to squeek that many points against their previous three opponents in the sec. I beleive if you put the following sec schools int the big ten the results would be as follow. 1. Penn st. 2. auburn( yes their better then LSU)3.Georgia 4.Ohio st 5.LSU 6. Michigan I know that's just me being partially biased, and I know most of you are from the north and you are biased as well the best thing I can say is just let the bowl games do the talking

Re: Top Conferences Top-to-Bottom Using Sagarin Predictor
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So you figure maybe the Big 10 dominated its non-conference games huh?

[/ QUOTE ]

But the Big Ten atleast played some games against more respected opponents. look at the SEC, who have any of them played? LSU barely beat ASU, and Tenn got blown out by ND. What other games have there been?

[/ QUOTE ]


that game was at ASU where they handed USC a victory, Tenn got beat by ND which isnt saying much at all. In fact if you watched the game the score didn't really indicate the closeness of the game. Tenn's defense only actually allowed 24 of ND points while a blown punt coverage and defensive turnovers were the rest, and NDs defense allowed 21 points from a completely confused offense that barely managed to squeek that many points against their previous three opponents in the sec. I beleive if you put the following sec schools int the big ten the results would be as follow. 1. Penn st. 2. auburn( yes their better then LSU)3.Georgia 4.Ohio st 5.LSU 6. Michigan I know that's just me being partially biased, and I know most of you are from the north and you are biased as well the best thing I can say is just let the bowl games do the talking

[/ QUOTE ]

good to see that SEC schools focus on Acedemics and not football.