Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Beating winners vs beating losers...the facts!
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 10
| visibility 4,153

Beating winners vs beating losers...the facts!


Oct 29, 2017, 8:59 PM

With all the hoopla surrounding the first rankings to be released from the CFP committee (CFPC), I thought I would take a look a little deeper look at the records of the teams most likely to be considered for the top 6 spots. I wanted to compare the records to see who was beating winning teams versus beating losing teams. In a nutshell, this provides a more accurate assessment of quality wins because it is not influenced by biased AP polling or anything else. It simply considers the records involved and clearly shows if a team is beating cupcakes or beating teams that know how to win.

For the list below W=team with winning record, E=team with even record, L=team with losing record.
A team with the record: 3W-2E-3L would be read as having beaten 3 teams with a winning record, 2 teams with even records, and 3 teams with losing records. Here are the facts/stats:

Alabama: 3W-5L
Georgia: 4W-4L
Clemson: 6W-1L
Ohio State: 2W-2E-3L
Penn State: 5W-2L
Wisconsin: 2W-2E-4L
Notre Dame: 4W-3L
Oklahoma: 1W-3E-3L
Miami: 2W-2E-3L
TCU: 3W-1E-3L

From these stats alone, Clemson appears to have played a tougher schedule and is beating "winners" and not feeding on losers and the mediocre like a majority of the top 10 teams. But taking this one step further I compared the same winner/even/loser records for only Power 5 Conference competition (for purpose of this I credited Notre Dame as a Power 5 level competitor). I wanted to remove the "gimmie" games (i.e. FCS and lessor Conference competition) from the records to see how the top teams fared. Here are the facts for the records against Power 5 Conference competition.

Alabama: 1W-5L
Georgia: 2W-4L
Clemson: 6W
Ohio State: 1W-2E-2L
Penn State: 3W-2L
Wisconsin: 1W-2E-2L
Notre Dame: 4W-1L
Oklahoma: 1W-3E-1L
Miami: 1W-1E-3L
TCU: 2W-1E-2L

Once again Clemson is at the top of the list for quality wins having beaten 6 winning Power 5 teams, with Notre Dame coming in second having beaten 4 winning Power 5 teams. It appears that the level of Power 5 competition for most of the "top teams" has been downright bad. Most of the professed powerhouses (Bama, UGA, Ohio State) are beating teams with even or losing records - mediocre wins at best. This pulls the cover off the mirage that Wisconsin, Oklahoma, or Ohio State should be in the top 5 right now - they have not earned it against tough competition. If the CFPC gives heavy consideration to not only the overall record but the quality of the wins (not a one game win but a body of work), then I would surmise the following as the top 4:

Georgia
Alabama
Clemson
Notre Dame

Of course the CFPC has to balance all of this against a team's loss record and to be honest, Clemson has among the worst loss of all those listed. With time the loss may be viewed less bad if Syracuse wins out (entirely possible) and ends up with an 8-4 record. Regardless of what the CFPC decides on Tuesday, I still think if Clemson wins out our strength of wins will get us into the playoffs.

For those that want to see the data here are the records I compiled for this post:



2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Beating winners vs beating losers...the facts!


Oct 29, 2017, 9:05 PM

The best wins by Alabama's conference opponents are Texas A&M over Florida and SC. All of the others have 2 conference win period, Ark over Ole Miss and Ole Miss over Vandy. Ole Miss is only conf win SCs conf opponents have!

2024 white level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Beating winners vs beating losers...the facts!


Oct 29, 2017, 9:10 PM

Great post & you put a lot of thought into this. Thanks for sharing this

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Cliffs Notes edition:


Oct 29, 2017, 9:15 PM

https://twitter.com/DavidHaleESPN/status/924648474708193280

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

THANK YOU!!! Well Researched, Very Cool***


Oct 29, 2017, 10:52 PM



2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives." - Jackie Robinson


Re: Beating winners vs beating losers...the facts!


Oct 29, 2017, 11:07 PM

This looks a little out of place, as in well thought out and actually researched. lol Thanks !

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Interesting. Kudos for the effort, too!


Oct 30, 2017, 6:50 AM

While I didn’t go to the point you did, I did peruse the opponents for bama, uga, osu, penn state y’day, and saw pretty much the same (always loved Cliff’s Notes....??). I think your line of thinking more closely reflects the CFP Committee’s process, and that we’ll be ‘okay’.

I, for one, am losing respect, confidence or trust in the other polling methods. I know my glasses have an orange tint, and I try to adjust for that, but I also think nationally, there IS a bias toward the ‘bluebloods’. And in current polls, that would be Bama, tOSU and ND.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Whatever choice(s) you make makes you. Choose wisely.


Invalid data! Clemson data should be listed first.


Oct 30, 2017, 7:36 AM

Good stuff!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Beating winners vs beating losers...the facts!


Oct 30, 2017, 10:47 AM

Thanks for a real Football post and the effort and research you put into it.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

That's a lot of data and thanks, but


Oct 30, 2017, 10:51 AM

Why didn't you wait until an odd week, that way you could have eliminated the E's and made it easier to read?

????

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

It was pretty similar to last year, wasn't it?


Oct 30, 2017, 12:14 PM

Thanks for the post.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 10
| visibility 4,153
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic