Does the SEC circle jerk finally end today?

[Mavric]

Still, post season matchups are a better metric than early season games.

Why?

Because the matchups and locations are more favorable for his argument.

Because the end of the season is generally when both teams are at their best?

Based on what criteria? Just because they should have all the bugs worked out? I think you know not every team is playing their best at the end of the year.

 

Other (more likely) scenarios:

One team has a couple of their best players lost for the year.

One team has fired it's coach.

One team's coach has taken a new job and is no longer coaching the team.

One team spent a lot more time getting its younger players reps in practice and gets them some extra playing time to prep for next year.

One team is disappointed that they didn't have as good of a season as they wanted/didn't get the bowl game they wanted and isn't nearly as focused as the other team.

One team is way more excited to be in Las Vegas/San Diego/Orlando/wherever and is distracted by sight-seeing as opposed to preparing for the game.

[Michiganball]

We have this discussion every year, it seems. The the January bowls come along, SEC wins the series, wins the National Championship and everyone shuts up for a minute only to start grumbling when some SEC team(s) looks less than invincible. Until we (the Big 10) can win those NYD games and someone can beat an SEC team in the title game, "SEC circle-jerk" will (and should) continue.

 

When many SEC teams play the bowl games in their home state or the SEC backyard, yea statistically they will have a large advantage to win more then they loose like in any sport. As far as that "championship", there is no such thing, just that great big college football post season farce.

[The Dude]

The comments on that article are just a bunch of SEC fans making the "our team had injuries" excuse. So does Nebraska get a pass for Martinez not being 100% for the UCLA game?

No, Martinez was 100% last year against UCLA, and well, yeah.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

How bad do we want a more definitive answer to this question?

 

I could do it, but the data collection and analyses involved are time consuming and tedious. So if there isn't enough of an interest, I won't waste my time. If there is, I'll go ahead and get it done.

[The Dude]

How bad do we want a more definitive answer to this question?

 

I could do it, but the data collection and analyses involved are time consuming and tedious. So if there isn't enough of an interest, I won't waste my time. If there is, I'll go ahead and get it done.

[Ratt Mhule]

The comments on that article are just a bunch of SEC fans making the "our team had injuries" excuse. So does Nebraska get a pass for Martinez not being 100% for the UCLA game?

No, Martinez was 100% last year against UCLA, and well, yeah.

 

Last year is not this year

[tschu]

Again without showing the matchups IT'S WORTHLESS. Those matchups are largely worthless anyway. Missouri beat Indiana? SEC so good!. Rutgers beat Arkansas? Wow, SEC blows.

SEC vs. BCS

3-3 when both have winning record

4-0 when SEC has winning record & BCS losing

0-2 when SEC has losing record & BCS winning

0-0 when both have losing record

1-0 when SEC has winning record & BCS .500

0-1 when SEC is .500 & BCS has winning record

 

Looks to me like everything is equal except the SEC has beat more losing record teams from other conferences than the BCS has beat SEC teams.

Welp, looks good to me, open and shut case!

[fro daddy]

Let me ask this.

 

Why is Missouri ranked #5? I will give you that they are undefeated. However, the only major wins are against two three loss teams. One of those also lost to Vanderbuilt. The only other real tests they will have are this weekend against another 3 loss team and then against aTm and I have no clue how many losses they will have by the end of the year. They just got beat by the #24 team.

 

So....other than being in the mighty SEC, what is going to hold them up in that high spot? I really don't see any dominant teams on their schedule that they can hang their hat on as a major win.

 

I thought maybe they had all of a sudden started recruiting well. But, their average recruiting class is ranked 36 over the last 4 years.

 

#1 Missouri was under rated based on a fluke season last season where they rolled out a mash unit offense. and played a breakneck schedule

 

#2 They are a pretty darn good team who has beaten every opponent by at least 15, only Oregon can say the same. They have a top offense, and pretty good D, one of the very best if not the best team in the country when it comes to takeaways, ints, penalties, turnover margin & sacks. May not be a dominate team on the schedule, but there have been a lot of dominate victories of some pretty decent teams.

 

#3 Rival stars have nothing to do with success when you recruit to your system and have an eye for players that you can grow and develop. Missouri has done more that enough to prove that over the past years. only Alabama and florida have had more NFL first rounders since 2006. Multiple stars at the same positions going back 10 years one following the next (QB, WR, TE, DL & LB)

 

#4 Compared to the other top ten, our schedule isn't too bad. Remove the victory from the ranked team and here are the win/loss of the top tens opponents. (found this on a MU message board)

 

Alabama 22-20 (0-6 from Georgia State hurts here, balanced out by 6-0 from VTech)

Florida State 27-7 (6-0 from Bethune-Cookman is a little misleading)

Oregon 22-20

Ohio State 24-17

Mizzou 27-16

Stanford 27-15

Miami 14-21

Baylor 19-15 (with a combined 10-2 from Buffalo and Wofford)

Clemson 27-12

Texas Tech 18-21

 

listen... I know MU is good. Might be very, very good. May even be great. I don't know if they are top #5 good right now. They are top 10 good I think. But I think they have about as good of a claim on that rank as any other team has. This team, if it would have been healthy would have performed well last year. Unfortunately we were playing with a 3rd string o-line, a back up QB, back up TE's, back up RB among a few more on our defense. And for those who know nothing about mizzou they cant seem to understand that last year was not the real mizzou. I think those who pay attention are not that surprised. Maybe surprised that Mizzou is undefeated, but not that they are a good team finding success.

 

 

[wildman]

How bad do we want a more definitive answer to this question?

 

I could do it, but the data collection and analyses involved are time consuming and tedious. So if there isn't enough of an interest, I won't waste my time. If there is, I'll go ahead and get it done.

 

I don't know if these are the stats you were thinking of. But these are the stats I gathered and compiled.

 

The first thing I looked at is the overall win loss records for each conference combined.

 

1. SEC 64 - 36

2. ACC 58 - 34

3. BIG 53 - 28

4. Pac12 53 - 29

5. MAC 42 - 54

6. Big 12 39 - 25

7. MWC 38 - 43

8. Con. USA 38 - 54

9. AAC 31 - 32

10. Sunbelt 26 - 29

 

I then calculated the win percentage.

 

1. Big 10 65.43%

2. Pac 12 64.53%

3. SEC 64%

4. ACC 63.04%

5. Big 12 60.94%

6. AAC 49%

7. Sunbelt 47.27%

8. MWC 46.91%

9. MAC 43.75%

10. Independent 42.86%

11. Conf. USA 41.30%

 

I then went and calculated the ooc opponents win loss records. Also the percentage of those ooc games were FCS opponents.

 

1. MAC 176 - 135

2. Independent 173 - 145

3. Conf. USA 165 - 136

4. AAC 148 - 118

5. ACC 133 - 145

6. SEC 130 - 124

7. Pac 12 127 - 110

8. MWC 122 - 111

9. BIG 118 - 149

10. Sunbelt 117 - 115

11. Big 12 99 - 124

 

Also the percentages of those ooc games that were FCS opponents

 

1. Sunbelt 47.62% with 10 games FCS

2. Pac 12 27.03% with 10 games FCS

3. Big 12 26.67% with 8 games FCS

4. ACC 25.58% with 11 games FCS

5. MWC 24.39% with 10 games FCS

6. MAC 23.08% with 12 games FCS

7. BIG 21.74% with 10 games FCS

8. AAC 20.51% with 8 games FCS

9. SEC 19.51% with 8 games FCS

10. Independent 12.24% with 6 FCS

11. Conf. USA 11.32% with 6 FCS

 

I noticed 3 things out of this doing this.

1. SEC doesn't have the best win loss percentage despite playing more games so far. With each loss not affecting the stats as much.

2. SEC is thought of playing a lot of FCS schools. Even though these stats shows results through games 10/24 SEC is near the bottom of FCS games played. They do still have some left but shouldn't move them much further up the chart than maybe midway.

3. I have way to much time on my hands.

 

All of the information I used to gather this info. Came from ESPN. Out of curiosity I have started on 2012's results but havn't completed them as of yet.

[BigRedBuster]

How bad do we want a more definitive answer to this question?

 

I could do it, but the data collection and analyses involved are time consuming and tedious. So if there isn't enough of an interest, I won't waste my time. If there is, I'll go ahead and get it done.

 

I don't know if these are the stats you were thinking of. But these are the stats I gathered and compiled.

 

The first thing I looked at is the overall win loss records for each conference combined.

 

1. SEC 64 - 36

2. ACC 58 - 34

3. BIG 53 - 28

4. Pac12 53 - 29

5. MAC 42 - 54

6. Big 12 39 - 25

7. MWC 38 - 43

8. Con. USA 38 - 54

9. AAC 31 - 32

10. Sunbelt 26 - 29

 

I then calculated the win percentage.

 

1. Big 10 65.43%

2. Pac 12 64.53%

3. SEC 64%

4. ACC 63.04%

5. Big 12 60.94%

6. AAC 49%

7. Sunbelt 47.27%

8. MWC 46.91%

9. MAC 43.75%

10. Independent 42.86%

11. Conf. USA 41.30%

 

I then went and calculated the ooc opponents win loss records. Also the percentage of those ooc games were FCS opponents.

 

1. MAC 176 - 135

2. Independent 173 - 145

3. Conf. USA 165 - 136

4. AAC 148 - 118

5. ACC 133 - 145

6. SEC 130 - 124

7. Pac 12 127 - 110

8. MWC 122 - 111

9. BIG 118 - 149

10. Sunbelt 117 - 115

11. Big 12 99 - 124

 

Also the percentages of those ooc games that were FCS opponents

 

1. Sunbelt 47.62% with 10 games FCS

2. Pac 12 27.03% with 10 games FCS

3. Big 12 26.67% with 8 games FCS

4. ACC 25.58% with 11 games FCS

5. MWC 24.39% with 10 games FCS

6. MAC 23.08% with 12 games FCS

7. BIG 21.74% with 10 games FCS

8. AAC 20.51% with 8 games FCS

9. SEC 19.51% with 8 games FCS

10. Independent 12.24% with 6 FCS

11. Conf. USA 11.32% with 6 FCS

 

I noticed 3 things out of this doing this.

1. SEC doesn't have the best win loss percentage despite playing more games so far. With each loss not affecting the stats as much.

2. SEC is thought of playing a lot of FCS schools. Even though these stats shows results through games 10/24 SEC is near the bottom of FCS games played. They do still have some left but shouldn't move them much further up the chart than maybe midway.

3. I have way to much time on my hands.

 

All of the information I used to gather this info. Came from ESPN. Out of curiosity I have started on 2012's results but havn't completed them as of yet.

 

 

OK.....so.....this is very interesting. Tell me this. Looking at this, what makes the SEC God's gift to football other than having one or two really good teams at the top? This year it even looks like maybe it's just one good team at the top.

[Mavric]

2. SEC is thought of playing a lot of FCS schools. Even though these stats shows results through games 10/24 SEC is near the bottom of FCS games played. They do still have some left but shouldn't move them much further up the chart than maybe midway.

Nice work on the research.

 

Regarding the quoted, assuming those are numbers for games so far this year, a lot of the SEC OOC games are backloaded in the schedule so there are still several FCS games yet to come (e.g., LSU plays Furman this week, Kentucky plays Alabama St. next week).

[It'sNotAFakeID]

How bad do we want a more definitive answer to this question?

 

I could do it, but the data collection and analyses involved are time consuming and tedious. So if there isn't enough of an interest, I won't waste my time. If there is, I'll go ahead and get it done.

 

I don't know if these are the stats you were thinking of. But these are the stats I gathered and compiled.

 

The first thing I looked at is the overall win loss records for each conference combined.

 

1. SEC 64 - 36

2. ACC 58 - 34

3. BIG 53 - 28

4. Pac12 53 - 29

5. MAC 42 - 54

6. Big 12 39 - 25

7. MWC 38 - 43

8. Con. USA 38 - 54

9. AAC 31 - 32

10. Sunbelt 26 - 29

 

I then calculated the win percentage.

 

1. Big 10 65.43%

2. Pac 12 64.53%

3. SEC 64%

4. ACC 63.04%

5. Big 12 60.94%

6. AAC 49%

7. Sunbelt 47.27%

8. MWC 46.91%

9. MAC 43.75%

10. Independent 42.86%

11. Conf. USA 41.30%

 

I then went and calculated the ooc opponents win loss records. Also the percentage of those ooc games were FCS opponents.

 

1. MAC 176 - 135

2. Independent 173 - 145

3. Conf. USA 165 - 136

4. AAC 148 - 118

5. ACC 133 - 145

6. SEC 130 - 124

7. Pac 12 127 - 110

8. MWC 122 - 111

9. BIG 118 - 149

10. Sunbelt 117 - 115

11. Big 12 99 - 124

 

Also the percentages of those ooc games that were FCS opponents

 

1. Sunbelt 47.62% with 10 games FCS

2. Pac 12 27.03% with 10 games FCS

3. Big 12 26.67% with 8 games FCS

4. ACC 25.58% with 11 games FCS

5. MWC 24.39% with 10 games FCS

6. MAC 23.08% with 12 games FCS

7. BIG 21.74% with 10 games FCS

8. AAC 20.51% with 8 games FCS

9. SEC 19.51% with 8 games FCS

10. Independent 12.24% with 6 FCS

11. Conf. USA 11.32% with 6 FCS

 

I noticed 3 things out of this doing this.

1. SEC doesn't have the best win loss percentage despite playing more games so far. With each loss not affecting the stats as much.

2. SEC is thought of playing a lot of FCS schools. Even though these stats shows results through games 10/24 SEC is near the bottom of FCS games played. They do still have some left but shouldn't move them much further up the chart than maybe midway.

3. I have way to much time on my hands.

 

All of the information I used to gather this info. Came from ESPN. Out of curiosity I have started on 2012's results but havn't completed them as of yet.

 

That wasn't exactly what I was looking for, but good work!

 

There seems to be a lot of talk that the SEC moves down less when they lose and moves up more when they win than teams from other conferences. So the variables that I would need would be:

 

1) Any matchup involving a team who was either ranked or receiving votes for each the AP and Coaches Poll

2) The conference of the team

3) The conference of the opponent

4) Whether the team won or lost

5) Whether the team they played was ranked above or below them

6) The change in rank

 

From there, because all but the 6th variable is qualitative, ANOVAs can be ran to determine if the SEC does benefit in the polls from their perceived strength.

[KJ.]

How bad do we want a more definitive answer to this question?

 

I could do it, but the data collection and analyses involved are time consuming and tedious. So if there isn't enough of an interest, I won't waste my time. If there is, I'll go ahead and get it done.

 

I don't know if these are the stats you were thinking of. But these are the stats I gathered and compiled.

 

The first thing I looked at is the overall win loss records for each conference combined.

 

1. SEC 64 - 36

2. ACC 58 - 34

3. BIG 53 - 28

4. Pac12 53 - 29

5. MAC 42 - 54

6. Big 12 39 - 25

7. MWC 38 - 43

8. Con. USA 38 - 54

9. AAC 31 - 32

10. Sunbelt 26 - 29

 

I then calculated the win percentage.

 

1. Big 10 65.43%

2. Pac 12 64.53%

3. SEC 64%

4. ACC 63.04%

5. Big 12 60.94%

6. AAC 49%

7. Sunbelt 47.27%

8. MWC 46.91%

9. MAC 43.75%

10. Independent 42.86%

11. Conf. USA 41.30%

 

I then went and calculated the ooc opponents win loss records. Also the percentage of those ooc games were FCS opponents.

 

1. MAC 176 - 135

2. Independent 173 - 145

3. Conf. USA 165 - 136

4. AAC 148 - 118

5. ACC 133 - 145

6. SEC 130 - 124

7. Pac 12 127 - 110

8. MWC 122 - 111

9. BIG 118 - 149

10. Sunbelt 117 - 115

11. Big 12 99 - 124

 

Also the percentages of those ooc games that were FCS opponents

 

1. Sunbelt 47.62% with 10 games FCS

2. Pac 12 27.03% with 10 games FCS

3. Big 12 26.67% with 8 games FCS

4. ACC 25.58% with 11 games FCS

5. MWC 24.39% with 10 games FCS

6. MAC 23.08% with 12 games FCS

7. BIG 21.74% with 10 games FCS

8. AAC 20.51% with 8 games FCS

9. SEC 19.51% with 8 games FCS

10. Independent 12.24% with 6 FCS

11. Conf. USA 11.32% with 6 FCS

 

I noticed 3 things out of this doing this.

1. SEC doesn't have the best win loss percentage despite playing more games so far. With each loss not affecting the stats as much.

2. SEC is thought of playing a lot of FCS schools. Even though these stats shows results through games 10/24 SEC is near the bottom of FCS games played. They do still have some left but shouldn't move them much further up the chart than maybe midway.

3. I have way to much time on my hands.

 

All of the information I used to gather this info. Came from ESPN. Out of curiosity I have started on 2012's results but havn't completed them as of yet.

 

That wasn't exactly what I was looking for, but good work!

 

There seems to be a lot of talk that the SEC moves down less when they lose and moves up more when they win than teams from other conferences. So the variables that I would need would be:

 

1) Any matchup involving a team who was either ranked or receiving votes for each the AP and Coaches Poll

2) The conference of the team

3) The conference of the opponent

4) Whether the team won or lost

5) Whether the team they played was ranked above or below them

6) The change in rank

 

From there, because all but the 6th variable is qualitative, ANOVAs can be ran to determine if the SEC does benefit in the polls from their perceived strength.

I'd love to see the output of those ANOVAs and get the definitive answer, if you wouldn't mind sparing 6-7 hours to get that tedious and mind-draining work done, Nate.

[tschu]

Don't bother posting stats guys. No matter what, people will just yell and scream about ESPN and media bias and overrated blah blah blah ez scheduling blah blah blah!!!! Screw your facts! Don't need 'em! SEC SUX!!!!!111

[beanman]

How bad do we want a more definitive answer to this question?

 

I could do it, but the data collection and analyses involved are time consuming and tedious. So if there isn't enough of an interest, I won't waste my time. If there is, I'll go ahead and get it done.

 

I don't know if these are the stats you were thinking of. But these are the stats I gathered and compiled.

 

The first thing I looked at is the overall win loss records for each conference combined.

 

1. SEC 64 - 36

2. ACC 58 - 34

3. BIG 53 - 28

4. Pac12 53 - 29

5. MAC 42 - 54

6. Big 12 39 - 25

7. MWC 38 - 43

8. Con. USA 38 - 54

9. AAC 31 - 32

10. Sunbelt 26 - 29

 

I then calculated the win percentage.

 

1. Big 10 65.43%

2. Pac 12 64.53%

3. SEC 64%

4. ACC 63.04%

5. Big 12 60.94%

6. AAC 49%

7. Sunbelt 47.27%

8. MWC 46.91%

9. MAC 43.75%

10. Independent 42.86%

11. Conf. USA 41.30%

 

I then went and calculated the ooc opponents win loss records. Also the percentage of those ooc games were FCS opponents.

 

1. MAC 176 - 135

2. Independent 173 - 145

3. Conf. USA 165 - 136

4. AAC 148 - 118

5. ACC 133 - 145

6. SEC 130 - 124

7. Pac 12 127 - 110

8. MWC 122 - 111

9. BIG 118 - 149

10. Sunbelt 117 - 115

11. Big 12 99 - 124

 

Also the percentages of those ooc games that were FCS opponents

 

1. Sunbelt 47.62% with 10 games FCS

2. Pac 12 27.03% with 10 games FCS

3. Big 12 26.67% with 8 games FCS

4. ACC 25.58% with 11 games FCS

5. MWC 24.39% with 10 games FCS

6. MAC 23.08% with 12 games FCS

7. BIG 21.74% with 10 games FCS

8. AAC 20.51% with 8 games FCS

9. SEC 19.51% with 8 games FCS

10. Independent 12.24% with 6 FCS

11. Conf. USA 11.32% with 6 FCS

 

I noticed 3 things out of this doing this.

1. SEC doesn't have the best win loss percentage despite playing more games so far. With each loss not affecting the stats as much.

2. SEC is thought of playing a lot of FCS schools. Even though these stats shows results through games 10/24 SEC is near the bottom of FCS games played. They do still have some left but shouldn't move them much further up the chart than maybe midway.

3. I have way to much time on my hands.

 

All of the information I used to gather this info. Came from ESPN. Out of curiosity I have started on 2012's results but havn't completed them as of yet.

 

That wasn't exactly what I was looking for, but good work!

 

There seems to be a lot of talk that the SEC moves down less when they lose and moves up more when they win than teams from other conferences. So the variables that I would need would be:

 

1) Any matchup involving a team who was either ranked or receiving votes for each the AP and Coaches Poll

2) The conference of the team

3) The conference of the opponent

4) Whether the team won or lost

5) Whether the team they played was ranked above or below them

6) The change in rank

 

From there, because all but the 6th variable is qualitative, ANOVAs can be ran to determine if the SEC does benefit in the polls from their perceived strength.

I'd love to see the output of those ANOVAs and get the definitive answer, if you wouldn't mind sparing 6-7 hours to get that tedious and mind-draining work done, Nate.

You nerds