Herd projected to win CUSA
- Thread starter Obialo1kanobe
- Start date
FBS conferences ranked by average projected SP+ rating
1. SEC (18.0, down 0.6 from 2018)
2. Big Ten (8.4, up 0.6)
3. Big 12 (6.9, down 0.9)
4. Pac-12 (6.7, up 0.6)
5. ACC (6.5, up 1.2)
6. AAC (-3.2, down 0.2)
7. MWC (-3.2, down 2.4)
8. Sun Belt (-7.7, down 0.1)
9. MAC (-9.8, down 0.5)
10. Conference USA (-10.8, down 0.5)
1. SEC (18.0, down 0.6 from 2018)
2. Big Ten (8.4, up 0.6)
3. Big 12 (6.9, down 0.9)
4. Pac-12 (6.7, up 0.6)
5. ACC (6.5, up 1.2)
6. AAC (-3.2, down 0.2)
7. MWC (-3.2, down 2.4)
8. Sun Belt (-7.7, down 0.1)
9. MAC (-9.8, down 0.5)
10. Conference USA (-10.8, down 0.5)
Explanation of SP+
What is SP+? In a single sentence, it's a tempo- and opponent-adjusted measure of college football efficiency. I created the system at Football Outsiders in 2008, and as my experience with both college football and its stats has grown, I have made quite a few tweaks to the system.
SP+ is intended to be predictive and forward-facing. That is important to remember. It is not a résumé ranking that gives credit for big wins or particularly brave scheduling -- no good predictive system is. It is simply a measure of the most sustainable and predictable aspects of football. If you're lucky or unimpressive in a win, your rating will probably fall. If you're strong and unlucky in a loss, it will probably rise.
The SP+ rankings generally perform well against the spread -- 52 to 54 percent success over a full season, which is excellent for a system projecting every game and not specifically adjusting for injury.
What goes into the projections?
The offseason projections -- which, like ESPN Stats & Information's Football Power Index, carry diminishing weight in the SP+ formulas throughout the season -- are comprised of three factors:
Recent history: I use a weighted five-year history as a way of gauging program health. For most programs, what they have done of late is what they will most likely do moving forward.
Returning production: Instead of using returning starters, I created a formula for returning production based on which units seem to have the most effect on a team's improvement or regression. As it turns out, continuity at quarterback, receiver and the secondary is far more impactful on SP+ rating the next year than continuity in other units. Accordingly, turnover in those areas takes on heavier weight.
Recent recruiting: Returning production measures what a program lost, and a two-year recruiting average fills in the gaps on what kind of talent and athleticism it has acquired to replace the lost producers.
What is SP+? In a single sentence, it's a tempo- and opponent-adjusted measure of college football efficiency. I created the system at Football Outsiders in 2008, and as my experience with both college football and its stats has grown, I have made quite a few tweaks to the system.
SP+ is intended to be predictive and forward-facing. That is important to remember. It is not a résumé ranking that gives credit for big wins or particularly brave scheduling -- no good predictive system is. It is simply a measure of the most sustainable and predictable aspects of football. If you're lucky or unimpressive in a win, your rating will probably fall. If you're strong and unlucky in a loss, it will probably rise.
The SP+ rankings generally perform well against the spread -- 52 to 54 percent success over a full season, which is excellent for a system projecting every game and not specifically adjusting for injury.
What goes into the projections?
The offseason projections -- which, like ESPN Stats & Information's Football Power Index, carry diminishing weight in the SP+ formulas throughout the season -- are comprised of three factors:
Recent history: I use a weighted five-year history as a way of gauging program health. For most programs, what they have done of late is what they will most likely do moving forward.
Returning production: Instead of using returning starters, I created a formula for returning production based on which units seem to have the most effect on a team's improvement or regression. As it turns out, continuity at quarterback, receiver and the secondary is far more impactful on SP+ rating the next year than continuity in other units. Accordingly, turnover in those areas takes on heavier weight.
Recent recruiting: Returning production measures what a program lost, and a two-year recruiting average fills in the gaps on what kind of talent and athleticism it has acquired to replace the lost producers.
Notable Herd opponents:
UC: 44th overall, 3rd in AAC.
Ohio: 80th overall, 3rd in MAC.
Boise: 24th overall, 1st in MWC.
UC: 44th overall, 3rd in AAC.
Ohio: 80th overall, 3rd in MAC.
Boise: 24th overall, 1st in MWC.
I am also surprised at the Ohio projection and ranking. I think they will be better than that. Considering who they are returning, and they usually overachieve, it would not surprise me to see them much higher end of year.
Always better to be picked first than last, but I'm not biting on these predictions. If we have very many injuries on defense, especially among the front seven, we're in trouble.
Regardless, this year is going to be fun, and 2020 and 2021 are setting up to be stupid good.
Regardless, this year is going to be fun, and 2020 and 2021 are setting up to be stupid good.
It’s actually not a lot of work.
Plus, there’s also rule #1 of running a website: if you want people to chat on your forums about a topic, don’t send them to another site to read about said topic.
Injuries can be an issue for any team so it's hard to look at it that way. The schedule also sets up favorably- No Southern Miss, and La Tech is a home. I don't think there is much of a fighters chance in Boise but I think every other game is winnable. Could be a double digit win season for sure.
Sam begs to differ on the conference ranking.
OU will be a very tough out.
OU will be a very tough out.
