Here comes the offseason: Projected S&P+ Rankings for 2017

Saunders

Saunders

Heisman Trophy Winner
The preseason S&P+ projections are a pretty simple mix of three factors: recent history, returning production, and recruiting. Over the last few days, I have posted about each.

To come up with preliminary projections, I create projected ratings based on each factor. Here’s how the process currently works:

  • Recruiting is easy. I simply create a projected rating based on these two-year recruiting rankings. The recruiting-based projection makes up 25 percent of the overall S&P+ projection.
  • For returning production, I apply projected changes (based on each team’s returning offensive and defensive production, which are on different scales) to last year’s S&P+ averages. The projection based on returning production accounts for 56 percent.
  • For recent history, I’ve gotten a little weird. I found that the previous year’s S&P+ ratings were carrying a little too much weight in the projections, so what you see below is a projection based solely off of seasons two to five years ago. Recent history now carries less weight in the overall formulas, only 19 percent. It basically acts as a slight supplement to the two factors above.
Enough talk. Here are the preliminary projected S&P+ rankings for 2017.
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2017/2/3/14496224/2017-college-football-rankings-projections
Click to expand...
Huskers check in at #42.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I figured we'd get dinged returning production.

Didn't think we'd be that low on the 5-year average. Did 2015 drag us down that much?

 
How returning production in four different offensive stats correlates with changes in Offensive S&P+ ratings:

(The higher the number, the more likely returning production in these areas is to coincide with strong offense.)

Receiving yards correlation: 0.320
Passing yards correlation: 0.231
Rushing yards correlation: 0.126
Offensive line starts correlation: 0.096

The conclusion remains: Continuity in the passing game matters a hell of a lot, and continuity in the run game doesn’t have as strong an impact.
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight: According to SBnation, we're gonna be starting either Tanner Lee or POB (or perhaps Tristan Gebbia) instead of Tommy, and our passing game is going to get *worse*?? Ha ha! That's not happening.
default_laugh.png

 
Last edited by a moderator:
MichiganDad3 said:
Perhaps more sacks due to lack of mobility is causing the worse in passing?
Click to expand...
They don't look deep into the rosters for this. It's a simple cut and paste on how much production you have returning. Losing Armstrong is a huge statistical loss and why that part of the formula hurts our ratings so bad

 
Final Sagarin NU ranking:

2013---38

2014---29

2015---42

2016---45

Our starting lineup doesn't look to be much different overall compared to the recent past (13, 14 had 3 stars AA, Kenny, Randy). Expecting NU to end way higher like 20, 15, etc, you need to make the significant upgrades arguments.

Maybe OL, maybe QB, maybe D and ST coaching...will upgrade enough for a 25 spot jump, but mostly likely not.

 
NUance said:
How returning production in four different offensive stats correlates with changes in Offensive S&P+ ratings:

(The higher the number, the more likely returning production in these areas is to coincide with strong offense.)

Receiving yards correlation: 0.320
Passing yards correlation: 0.231
Rushing yards correlation: 0.126
Offensive line starts correlation: 0.096

The conclusion remains: Continuity in the passing game matters a hell of a lot, and continuity in the run game doesn’t have as strong an impact.
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight: According to SBnation, we're gonna be starting either Tanner Lee or POB (or perhaps Tristan Gebbia) instead of Tommy, and our passing game is going to get *worse*?? Ha ha! That's not happening.
default_laugh.png
Click to expand...
It's not an in-depth personnel look, but a statistical analysis. It doesn't take into account scheme changes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not overly worried about this. We lost pretty much all of our production on offense and tacklers on defense. We have people who we think can step up. That 72 that is killing the average won't look the same next year. Interesting way to look at it though.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top