there are currently several FCS schools that play a tougher rated schedule than Marshall... so there's that......
when all of the metrics used to rate a team are identical, placing "1AA, FCS, FBS, ect" in front of the team makes no difference
Sagarin Conference Rankings
- Thread starter Gilbert09
- Start date
there are currently several FCS schools that play a tougher rated schedule than Marshall... so there's that......
when all of the metrics used to rate a team are identical, placing "1AA, FCS, FBS, ect" in front of the team makes no difference
But recruiting rankings say otherwise.
Outside of Houston (we will see if their class sticks once Herman bolts), C-USA and the AAC have very similar type recruiting classes in 2016. In fact, USM, FIU, La Tech would all have the 3rd best class in the AAC right now. MU, UAB and WKU would have the 4th best.
Add in the fact that C-USA schools can take props and the level of talent coming into schools from both conferences is actually extremely similar.
Now before you freak out, no, I'm not saying C-USA is as good as the AAC. Just pointing out that schools in the AAC aren't getting some ridiculous amount of talent.
This is a very good point.... Unless the conference schedule makers mess things up, we are guaranteed to be in South Florida every year. Plus and this is huge (Donald Trump HUGE) family and friends who quite possibly would never get a chance to see their son, grandson, nephew...etc. play except on TV, get to see them play in person once a year.
I guess I didn't get the memo. I didn't realize that Sagrin ratings were the final say on who's the best.
Thanks, you are so right. We finished behind the MWC last year but did well. I agree 110% there is no FCS conference better. I don't care what the Sagrin says. When we were in the Southern Conference it was a really good football conference. However when we moved up to the MAC it was a step up. The Mizz Valley is a quality FCS conference for sure. Not better than C-USA,
in 1996 our average score in conference games (8 regular season games) was 41-14.
in 1997 our average score in conference games (8 regular season games) was 38-17.
Sagarin rankings only go back to 1998, but i imagine the SoCon was easily ranked ahead of the 1996 MAC. Four SoCon teams finished ranked (#1 Marshall, 7 E. Tenn, 9 Furman, and 22 Appy). the MAC had 3 teams out of 10 finish with a WINNING record. the best was Ball State at 8-4.
to assume an FCS (1AA) conference is inferior to any FBS conference for "reasons" is just silly...
Last edited:
I didn't say they were end-all-to-be-all. I just meant I created this thread to discuss these specific rankings, so whenever everyone was comparing these rankings to others that might have had CUSA on top, it's an invalid comparison.
Also for everyone down about Missouri Valley beating us out in these standings, 7 of their 10 teams were greater than .500 both last year and so far this year, including a 15-1 and 13-2, and some of them played Power 5 teams.
okay I will use the logic used by P5 fans. If every school in C-USA played an FCS schedule how do you think we would fair?Really? So I guess we would struggle and so would WKU with a schedule filled with FCS schools.After all, since the only reason some on here think we have won a single game is due to us playing in C-USA which according to some of you is so low it is now below the Sun Belt and FCS conferences. Somebody call MH and see if he can get us back in the Southern Conference! We might as well drop back to FCS and get it over with. Now I would put our teams from top to bottom in a match up any day of the week against the MVC.Our top 4 teams vs their top 4 teams in home and away games matched up evenly. I would also take our next 4 vs their next 4. Why wouldn't you? No doubt C-USA comes out on top.PS I think the MVC plays really good FCS football.
So would Western Illinois and Youngstown win C-USA? . The question isn't how well our worst team would do but our conference as a whole. Who in the MVC would beat us and La Tech? Who would punish S.Miss and WKU? I say ODU and FAU could beat all of those teams with maybe the exception of the top 2. Do you really think South Dakota has better players than FIU? Why couldn't UTSA not beat Indiana State? Say what you will I guess there is no way to prove either view but you will never convince me any FCS conference is better.
Anybody who argues that any I-AA conference is even close to any I-A conference does not know enough about football to have their opinion taken seriously.
No it isn't. I looked it up. In 2014 FCS schools played 108 games against FBS schools. They had a record of 8 wins and 100 losses.
If you are talking about the MVC they were 2-14 in OOC games against FBS schools. Most of those games were against G5 schools. It really doesn't matter I say. . The point is this, all of this talk about how bad C-USA is and how we aren't even as good as a FCS conference because of some Sagrin rating is not IMO a valid way to look at things. By the way they were one of the better conferences. Here are 2 links to help put things in perspective. Don't forget last year we had the best record of any of the G5 aginst one another in head to head match up's
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/6/24/5832920/college-football-conferences-best-2014
Granted this is one writers view but curiously absent is any mention of any FCS conference.
Here is the bowl record from last year:
http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/index.ssf/2015/01/conference_bowl_records_2014-1_2.html
Notice we were 4-1, not hardly the laughingstock of college football by any stretch. You might notice we are the only g5 conference with a winning record in bowls.
So why is Sagrin now the Holy Grail of college football. Here is a link and a quote.
Sagarin actually compiles two different sets of rankings for college football. From the beginning way back in 1998, Sagarin has been part of the BCS equation. But along the way, the BCS decided that “quality wins” and “margin of victory” shouldn't be part of the equation—mainly in response to the botched selections for the 2004 games which resulted in a split national championship the BCS was created to avoid. Of course, the selections after the following 2004 season weren't much better, as any Auburn or Utah fan will tell you. So why do we constantly get rating controversies? That's the million-dollar question. Sagarin, and others like him, won't release his methodology to anyone, and the masses are simply left to trust he knows what he's doing. But does he? Even if we ignore the unknown method he uses, what can we infer from his results?
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...esnt-deserve-to-have-a-hand-in-the-bcs/page/2
I'm not buying it sorry folks!
I am not saying a FCS conference is better. What I am saying is 75% of CUSA sucks and the conference as a whole is a cake walk. We are basically in a pseudo IAA league. The bottom of this league is terrible and has no, zero, none tradition.
how does 2014 prove that the 1996 MAC was better than the 1996 SoCon?
and more to the tune of this entire discussion, how does it prove that the 1996 MAC was "significantly" better than the 1996 SoCon?
well how does your coming on here and saying that prove that the MAC was not as good? Because you say so? Look, feel free to believe that but I choose to say that the MAC was better then and C-USA is better now even with recent departures. At least I took time to give you the results of last season to show how I came to my conclusion. I say 8-100 shows a pattern. I see no real difference in the conferences now as compared to then.If anything the FCS conferences would be weaker with most of the better teams having moved up. (of course that goes to your point of the 1996 So. Conf). I still say the MAC was better even if only marginally which is a point I am not sure I concede. Furthermore, the point of my response wasn't pertaining to any given year.,I just feel that when people post Sagrin rating that show a FCS conference is better than C-USA that doesn't prove a thing.
Charlotte is supposed to be expanding their stadium in phases over the next few years to a 35-40K stadium. They will have the facilities in the future so they will be tough if they can get their recruiting up to the required level to compete championships.
How do you get that the 1996 SC was better than the MAC 1997, when our average margin of victory in conference was 27 PPG in SC 1996 and 21 PPG in MAC 1997?
Last edited:
They have stadium in middle of campus which is good for student access, etc. However, parking may be a big issue with additional traffic, number of cars, etc., to be expected with expanded stadium and larger crowds.
Enjoyed the stadium during our win there. Well laid out concessions and concourse room, exits, etc. Obviously designed with expansion in mind. Give them another 10-15000 and their stadium venue will be better than almost all of the MAC schools, like OU's Peden Stadium. The one exception would be the expensive new stadium at Akron which typically draws crowds in the 5-10 thou. range.
re-read my post...
i said '96 SoCon with MU was better than '96 MAC not '97.
i posted the '96 avg score and the '97 avg score to show that the transition was marginal at best. others have posted that there is a "significant" gap between any FCS conference and any FBS conference.
