(05-28-2016 09:47 AM)Dawgxas Wrote: So a side by side comparison of Top 50 non-conference teams played is a biased stat. Okay. I got nothing for you because there is nothing more unbiased and unfiltered than that. BTW Nebraska was 9-4 and #28. BYU was 8-5 and #53 go ahead and include them it won't make a difference in your false assertion.
Surely someone with your "analytical" prowess knows the inherit bias of SOS. USM played #3 Alabama and #11 Miss State and was ranked #112 according to your SOS Memphis played #10 UCLA and #17 Ole Miss and was ranked #18 according to your SOS.
Your false assertion of that the AAC played a "dramatically harder" non-conference and that's why CUSA was ranked higher has been proven to be lie. Nothing shows that more than the unbiased and unfiltered side by side list of non-conference games. Good luck with your great analytical mind, I'm out on this one
so at the end of the day you couldn't find not even 1 nonconfernce sos ranking.. i noted that sure 1 computer may have analytic outliers but the gap was huge and every other computer that calculates non conference sos had the AAC with a huge gap above C-usa ( teamrankings, sbnation, college football rpi, Anderson & Hester{bcs computer})
100% of the computers are saying the same thing and with a big gap to booth
Anderson & Hester said the aac played the hardest Non conference schedule of any league in the nation... and c-usa the second worst g5, only second to the mac
and clealry you dont understand bias
"So a side by side comparison of Top 50 non-conference teams played is a biased stat"...
a stat like that allows you to chose the cut of point of what qualifies (top50) where you can manipulate what shows up. then you can use a site that favors your conference especially since you didnt reference when you got the data from..that is the definition of bias
and complete sidenote: while looking at the bcs computers to see which ones ranked non conference SOS, i found this on the massey site even though they didnt have that stat:
this is the average of over a 125 rankings systems on the massey site that they collected together
this is posteason prebowl in the 2014 season (scroll to the bottom). despite the AAC having only about a 35% win percentage in OOC, and C-usa having close to 50% the AAC was ranked higher
http://www.masseyratings.com/cf/arch/compare2014-15.htm
This goes against the very 2 points you have stated from the get go
1) C-usa clearly benefited from the weaker bowl schedule and was the only reason they were ranked higher at seasons end (125 different computers agree)
2) a conference with a 35% non-con win percentage being ranked over a conference with a 50% non-con win percentage for everyone with common sense means the 35% conference played a harder schedule (125 computer back this statement)
ps- im sure you will post some sort of manipulated data that is completely full of bias to prove your point and say what a 125 computers agree with me on is a lie and proven wrong
your c-usa homerism is blinding.. im not even mad at it, if c-usa had more fans like you, this conference would have a bright future. im glad you are willing to look the other way and see the good in your conference (or what you perceive it as)
if a 125 computers cant prove my points to you..neither can i. no need to drag this out