Its good to see Temple firmly on the side of the “Admirable” scale, now if they can just move to the right towards the “Powerhouse” side a few spots they would be in good shape.
As a side note, i cant wait to sit back and see the s#*t storm some of these rankings start, it's a slow afternoon for me and i can use the entertainment.
(08-28-2014 12:10 PM)bearcatfan1211 Wrote: So there methodology says they are using the average projected 2014 finish. There AAC projections from an on-field (powerhouse) standpoint:
There are some major errors there. Tulane is behind ULM, ULL and La Tech for Louisiana schools, yet we are 32-7 all time against those three schools. How is Rice ranked so much better than TU, they are the same thing.
The ECU ranking really stands out, give me a break.
The X axis (Weakling to Powerhouse) is an avaerage of the 2014 projected finish by three media outlets (Athlon, Phil Steele and USA Today) and two predictive models (Football Outsiders and ESPN).
The Y axis (Embarrassing to Admirable) is an off-the-field rating subjective ranking of six elements: four-year APR, recent history of major NCAA violations and probation, percentage of athletic-department revenues subsidized by student fees and state support, number of players arrested in the off-season, attendance at last season's games, and general "ick" factor.
As for UCF's X axis, how the hell are they behind Memphis, USF, Ball State, Northern Illinois, UTSA, and South Alabama? There's NOBODY who actually thinks UCF is worse on the field than South Alabama, and certainly not Athlon, Phil Steele, or USA Today.
The Y axis makes some sense based on the issues a few years ago with the moron Keith Tribble that led to our sanctions. Based on their criteria I don't think UCF would ever be that high on there. We have too much of our budget coming from student fees. But UCF has consistently had an outstanding APR and players just don't get in trouble.
I'd love to hear what other people think about their schools' placements.
(08-28-2014 12:17 PM)wavefan12 Wrote: There are some major errors there. Tulane is behind ULM, ULL and La Tech for Louisiana schools, yet we are 32-7 all time against those three schools. How is Rice ranked so much better than TU, they are the same thing.
The ECU ranking really stands out, give me a break.
Might as have thrown darts at a board. The power ranking doesn't appear to correlate to any of the ranking services referenced at the bottom. Also, I understanding that off-field ranking is subjective, but what weighting are they using for the criteria listed when an Ohio State team two years off a bowl ban, under probation, with scholarship reductions, is listed on the Admirable side?
UCF's APR is great, but I can't argue with them dinging us on the current scholarship restrictions and student fees used for athletics. I'm guessing the subjective "ick" factor listed actually accounts for 90% of the score. I'm not sure how FSU ended up close to Penn State and UNC... the crab legs? Is that it?
The on the field though is way off. Of all the sources listed, I don't think UCF is ranked lower than 50 and most have UCF in or near the top 25.
(08-28-2014 12:33 PM)RobUCF Wrote: Might as have thrown darts at a board. The power ranking doesn't appear to correlate to any of the ranking services referenced at the bottom. Also, I understanding that off-field ranking is subjective, but what weighting are they using for the criteria listed when an Ohio State team two years off a bowl ban, under probation, with scholarship reductions, is listed on the Admirable side?
Check out UGA. Probably kicked off more kids for trouble with drugs and the law than anyone else in the offseason. Yet they are more admirable than Air Force?
Second... ECU's placement is really pretty good. ECU has cultivated a "bad-ass" image that goes along with the Pirate mascot, so their ranking on the "Despicable" axis I don't find troubling. If they start rattling off 11 win seasons, their "Powerhouse" rate will climb.
Third... If there is one team/program that I think is grossly mis-represented, it would be Minnesota, which should (IMO) be right at the cross-hairs... the MEH! position. Not a powerhouse, not a weakling, not admired, not hated or feared. Just "MEH!". That's where NOBODY really wants to be...
(08-28-2014 12:41 PM)TN Knightfan Wrote: Oh, and apparently Northwestern is the MOST admirable program in the country because they're moving towards unionizing. Give me a break.
Apparently you don't know much about Northwestern. Great school, great student athletes.
(08-28-2014 12:57 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote: First... Realize this is "perception"
Second... ECU's placement is really pretty good. ECU has cultivated a "bad-ass" image that goes along with the Pirate mascot, so their ranking on the "Despicable" axis I don't find troubling. If they start rattling off 11 win seasons, their "Powerhouse" rate will climb.
Third... If there is one team/program that I think is grossly mis-represented, it would be Minnesota, which should (IMO) be right at the cross-hairs... the MEH! position. Not a powerhouse, not a weakling, not admired, not hated or feared. Just "MEH!". That's where NOBODY really wants to be...
It is cool if they just consider ECU a "bad ass". But look at this years Fulmer Cup. We got 2 TOTAL points. Which funny enough, tied us with USF with the MOST points in the AAC. We were the only two programs to get dinged (which is GOOD).
(08-28-2014 12:57 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote: First... Realize this is "perception"
Second... ECU's placement is really pretty good. ECU has cultivated a "bad-ass" image that goes along with the Pirate mascot, so their ranking on the "Despicable" axis I don't find troubling. If they start rattling off 11 win seasons, their "Powerhouse" rate will climb.
Third... If there is one team/program that I think is grossly mis-represented, it would be Minnesota, which should (IMO) be right at the cross-hairs... the MEH! position. Not a powerhouse, not a weakling, not admired, not hated or feared. Just "MEH!". That's where NOBODY really wants to be...
???? Bad-ass image ?????? Maybe on the field, but not off, not by a long shot.
