re: Big East should not be a BCS confrence

quote:

---

Big East and Pac 10 should not be a BCS confrences

---

Fixed it for you.

I'll take the Big East over the ACC in football

quote:

---

ACC defenders say its better based on no real facts

---

The only 'fact' that I've seen on here is the BCS bowl game record comparison. If one game decides the strength of the entire conference, well then you may be correct...but a reasonable person has to assume that this is not the tell-all...

I like the Sagarin ratings for conferences because he compares both the central mean and simple average. One tends to bring out the relative strength of the overall conference as it negates the effect of having one or two really, really good or bad teams. It takes the whole body of work. The simple average is there for a comparison to this.

Since the ACC expansion in 2004, it has looked like this...

2004:

CONFERENCE CENTRAL MEAN SIMPLE AVERAGE TEAMS

1 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 77.91 78.09 ( 2) 11
2 PAC-10 (A) = 77.84 78.89 ( 1) 10
3 I-A INDEPENDENTS (A) = 76.98 76.98 ( 4) 2
4 BIG 12 (A) = 76.42 77.08 ( 3) 12
5 BIG TEN (A) = 75.63 75.29 ( 5) 11
6 SOUTHEASTERN (A) = 74.13 74.31 ( 6) 12
7 MOUNTAIN WEST (A) = 72.08 72.91 ( 7) 8
8 BIG EAST (A) = 71.98 71.56 ( 8) 7

2005:

1 BIG TEN (A) = 80.72 80.55 ( 1) 11
2 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 78.96 78.26 ( 4) 12
3 BIG 12 (A) = 78.96 80.02 ( 2) 12
4 PAC-10 (A) = 77.92 78.65 ( 3) 10
5 SOUTHEASTERN (A) = 75.28 74.92 ( 6) 12
6 I-A INDEPENDENTS (A) = 74.44 75.02 ( 5) 3
7 BIG EAST (A) = 72.12 72.42 ( 7) 8
8 MOUNTAIN WEST (A) = 69.51 69.58 ( 8) 9

2006:

1 SOUTHEASTERN (A) = 81.60 81.23 ( 1) 12
2 BIG EAST (A) = 79.57 79.90 ( 2) 8
3 PAC-10 (A) = 78.78 79.15 ( 3) 10
4 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 75.49 73.79 ( 6) 12
5 BIG TEN (A) = 74.89 75.62 ( 4) 11

2007:

CONFERENCE CENTRAL MEAN SIMPLE AVERAGE TEAMS

1 SOUTHEASTERN (A) = 81.99 81.83 ( 1) 12
2 PAC-10 (A) = 79.47 79.63 ( 2) 10
3 BIG 12 (A) = 78.62 78.35 ( 3) 12
4 BIG EAST (A) = 77.46 77.12 ( 4) 8
5 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 75.21 74.98 ( 5) 12
6 BIG TEN (A) = 74.63 74.17 ( 6) 11

2008:

CONFERENCE CENTRAL MEAN SIMPLE AVERAGE TEAMS

1 SOUTHEASTERN (A) = 78.31 79.08 ( 1) 12
2 BIG 12 (A) = 77.86 77.80 ( 2) 12
3 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 77.70 77.67 ( 3) 12
4 PAC-10 (A) = 76.14 75.39 ( 4) 10
5 BIG EAST (A) = 75.23 74.11 ( 5) 8

2009:

CONFERENCE CENTRAL MEAN SIMPLE AVERAGE TEAMS WIN50%

1 SOUTHEASTERN (A) = 80.93 81.33 ( 1) 12 81.30 ( 1)
2 PAC-10 (A) = 79.31 78.23 ( 2) 10 78.65 ( 2)
3 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 76.28 76.20 ( 3) 12 76.22 ( 3)
4 BIG EAST (A) = 76.22 76.19 ( 4) 8 76.20 ( 4)
5 BIG 12 (A) = 74.67 75.10 ( 5) 12 74.95 ( 5)
6 BIG TEN (A) = 72.48 72.85 ( 6) 11 72.78 ( 6)


So, since the expansion, the ACC was ranked higher than the Big East 4 out of 6 times.

This is the MSB. We never let facts get in the way of a debate. I guess this hols true for the OT and esp the Poli Board too.

Go Ga Tech

quote:

---

has always had a hard on for the ACC

---

So you're saying he modifies his formula to give the ACC an advantage in his conference rankings? Look whether he has a hard on for the ACC or not is irrelevant.

It's a well known, reputable ranking system that's been around for ~15 years. I'm bringing facts that do not just look at bowl games, but the whole body of work.

Also, FWIW, it's fairly undisputed that the SEC has been the dominant conference in the past few years and his rankings have reflected that as well.