Tough and Soft OOC

[donovan]

I am now going to show my ignorance. Where does the NCAA rank? My understanding they do not rank Division I...whatever they call it now. They use the BCS which uses the well known listed ones. I have never seen a NCAA ranking for Division I.

They do rank Divisions II and III and the rest and their formula is what it is, probably weighted heavily on win/loss...that argument can be made and as teams are less covered more difficult to get data for a more sophisticated ranking..so lets forget this group...

[billybud]

Ktffan...Steele is talking about the NCAA releasing a preseason rating of each teams's schedule based on their opponents win-loss record the previous year...He says "it is a good method but does have obvious flaws".

Besides the simplicity of counting straight wins and losses, Steele also objects to using last year's record. He points to anomalies like Illinois (at 2-10) in 2006. NCAA would count them as a 2-10 team and thus weak. Steele, in preseason 2007, had Illinois ranked as an above average opponent (they went on to beat #1 Ohio Stater and played in the Rose Bowl).

I think that he is comparing the NCAA method to his preseason SOS method (he uses THIS YEAR's strength of opponents based on his analyzing methodolgy).

Using the straight Winning Percentage (2008) for all 2009 opponents...Steele has FSU with the highest winning percentage at 64.7% (101-55). But, on his "2009 Toughest Schedules", he has South Carolina as his #1. FSU as #2.

[billybud]

Link to Steele's NCAA "suurrogate" list for 2009 SOS>>>

http://www.philsteele.com/fbsinfo/09WINLOSSOPP.html

[ktffan]

Ktffan...Steele is talking about the NCAA releasing a preseason rating of each teams's schedule based on their opponents win-loss record the previous year...He says "it is a good method but does have obvious flaws".

Besides the simplicity of counting straight wins and losses, Steele also objects to using last year's record. He points to anomalies like Illinois (at 2-10) in 2006. NCAA would count them as a 2-10 team and thus weak. Steele, in preseason 2007, had Illinois ranked as an above average opponent (they went on to beat #1 Ohio Stater and played in the Rose Bowl).

I think that he is comparing the NCAA method to his preseason SOS method (he uses THIS YEAR's strength of opponents based on his analyzing methodolgy).

Using the straight Winning Percentage (2008) for all 2009 opponents...Steele has FSU with the highest winning percentage at 64.7% (101-55). But, on his "2009 Toughest Schedules", he has South Carolina as his #1. FSU as #2.

Oh, I agree with him, but he doesn't seriously believe that the NCAA counts FCS opponents, does he?

[ktffan]

Link to Steele's NCAA "suurrogate" list for 2009 SOS>>>

http://www.philsteele.com/fbsinfo/09WINLOSSOPP.html

Well, I guess he does believe it. Neither is his chart correct. Just from the top down I see he has Oklahoma State's opponents at 97-55.

Oklahoma State's 2009 opponents with 2008 wins:

Georgia 10
Houston 8
Rice 10
Grambling St. 11
Texas A&M 4
Missouri 10
Baylor 4
Texas 12
Iowa State 2
Texas Tech 11
Colorado 5
Oklahoma 12

10+8+10+11+4+10+4+12+2+11+5+12 = 99

I thought Steele was better than that.

[billybud]

No..he doesn't. I typed in New Mexico State as a bad example...should have typed in New Mexico.

[billybud]

Oklahoma won 11 (FBS)...

[ktffan]

Wow, he's got some serious problems there. He's got South Carolina at 98-58 when their opponents were 92-63. Perhaps that's why he feels South Carolina has the toughest schedule?

[billybud]

I think that you must be counting FCS..he is obviously not.


Edit...Nope, I might be wrong...I do not know what he is doing. I'll have to look at this...

[ktffan]

Oklahoma won 11 (FBS)...

Oklahoma won 12:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/standings

Think about it, they played 12 regular season games, a CCG and a bowl. Only two teams beat them. That's 12-2.

And yes, Steele does believe it based on what he said in the header you linked to. New Mexico and NMSU have nothing to do with that.

[ktffan]

I think that you must be counting FCS..he is obviously not.


Edit...Nope, I might be wrong...I do not know what he is doing. I'll have to look at this...

Yes, he's counting FCS. Otherwise you drop 11 wins off Grambling, which leaves OSU at 88 wins.

[billybud]

One game was Tennessee-Chattanooga...Non IA

[billybud]

Yeah...I saw that...I thought i was on the rifgth track with Oklahoma...than got to Grambling and did my "edit"

[ktffan]

One game was Tennessee-Chattanooga...Non IA

Remove all non-IA teams and you get a WHOLE lot less than 97. This is the Big 12 you're talking about.

[ktffan]

Yeah...I saw that...I thought i was on the rifgth track with Oklahoma...than got to Grambling and did my "edit"

I've already done all this checking. Since that's the way (unknown to Steele) the NCAA calculates, I checked that right off, but the differences in removing I-AA are more than 2 losses.