(10-03-2016 09:30 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 09:17 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 08:57 AM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 08:23 AM)KSDTROJAN99 Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 07:56 AM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  Don't look now (or do) but on Massey's composite rankings we have the following ranks. Please note that Massey's ratings might change as more ratings become available.

37.49 SEC
43.24 ACC
43.50 PAC 12
48.83 Big Ten
54.85 Big 12
62.50 AAC
77.87 Independents
85.68 SBC
85.74 MWC
86.45 MAC
100.11 CUSA

This is very encouraging. SunBelt keeps growing and becoming more competitive each year.

I remember saying the same thing before the conference was torn apart the last time.

Yep.

But instead of building their own, some wanted to go live off the ghosts of ECU/Houston/USM glory. A "shortcut".

And you guys are doing it with us not helping. Impressive.

One thing I like about Sun Belt 2.0 is the DEPTH the conference has. In some prior years, once 1 or 2 teams racked up some OOC losses, you could probably just pack it in for the season. Not anymore.

ULL and stAte are having bad years, especially out of conference. But others are picking up the slack. Not one team, but three of them. The team currently in DEAD LAST in the conference has a win over a ranked team and a SEC team. Teams that might not be our best teams have good wins (Texas State has a road win at an Ohio team that is probably bowling, and even Idaho and NMSU have gotten in on the OOC win game). And OMG, had App managed to hang on versus Tennessee...wow. Troy came close to impacting the National Playoff picture.

Also, the depth of the conference bodes very well for future realignment protection. The presence of more better teams enhances rivalries, provides greater incentives for teams to stay, and helps remove the stigma the Conference richly earned (although those who played a big part in 'earning it' are now elsewhere).

Not sure I necessarily agree with what you are saying but it shines a positive light on the SBC...so...I'll blindly accept it and move on with a smile.

(10-03-2016 08:47 AM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 08:23 AM)KSDTROJAN99 Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 07:56 AM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  Don't look now (or do) but on Massey's composite rankings we have the following ranks. Please note that Massey's ratings might change as more ratings become available.

37.49 SEC
43.24 ACC
43.50 PAC 12
48.83 Big Ten
54.85 Big 12
62.50 AAC
77.87 Independents
85.68 SBC
85.74 MWC
86.45 MAC
100.11 CUSA

This is very encouraging. SunBelt keeps growing and becoming more competitive each year.

Next year we add CCU and lose Idaho and NMSU. I don't know what impact CCU will have but if we were to take out Idaho and NMSU as if it were next year already our rating would move to 81.08. Pretty encouraging indeed.

Don't NMSU and Idaho have 1 more year in the conference after this year? I'd wager that GaSouthern has a down year after this year so someone that's down this year will need to step up.

(10-03-2016 08:57 AM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 08:23 AM)KSDTROJAN99 Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 07:56 AM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  Don't look now (or do) but on Massey's composite rankings we have the following ranks. Please note that Massey's ratings might change as more ratings become available.

37.49 SEC
43.24 ACC
43.50 PAC 12
48.83 Big Ten
54.85 Big 12
62.50 AAC
77.87 Independents
85.68 SBC
85.74 MWC
86.45 MAC
100.11 CUSA

This is very encouraging. SunBelt keeps growing and becoming more competitive each year.

I remember saying the same thing before the conference was torn apart the last time.

I was saying the same thing then too.

(10-03-2016 10:16 AM)EagleNationRising Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 08:47 AM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 08:23 AM)KSDTROJAN99 Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 07:56 AM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  Don't look now (or do) but on Massey's composite rankings we have the following ranks. Please note that Massey's ratings might change as more ratings become available.

37.49 SEC
43.24 ACC
43.50 PAC 12
48.83 Big Ten
54.85 Big 12
62.50 AAC
77.87 Independents
85.68 SBC
85.74 MWC
86.45 MAC
100.11 CUSA

This is very encouraging. SunBelt keeps growing and becoming more competitive each year.

Next year we add CCU and lose Idaho and NMSU. I don't know what impact CCU will have but if we were to take out Idaho and NMSU as if it were next year already our rating would move to 81.08. Pretty encouraging indeed.

Don't NMSU and Idaho have 1 more year in the conference after this year? I'd wager that GaSouthern has a down year after this year so someone that's down this year will need to step up.

You're right. I keep thinking this is the last year but you are correct.

(09-26-2016 01:27 PM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(09-15-2016 11:59 AM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(09-15-2016 10:28 AM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  Crap rating that does not weigh for conference members. With every conference having more teams, even an FCS win is going to push them ahead. Quantity does not equal quality.

I agree completely.

To better grade the G5 conferences I would propose
1 point for FCS Win/-3 for a FCS loss
2 points for a G5 Win/-2 for a G5 loss
3 pints for a P5 win/-1 for a P5 loss
3 bonus points for a win over a ranked FBS/2 bonus points for a one score loss to ranked FBS/1 bonus point for a loss to a ranked FBS (unless team qualified for the 2 point bonus)

All conference games are 0/0

After adding up all of the points you divided them by the number of teams to get the conference average.

So using my formula after week 2 the G5 ranks:
1. American (1.92)
2. MW (1.08)
3. Sun Belt (0.45)
4. MAC (0.33)
5. CUSA (0.15)

With all of the gloom and doom around the Belt board I though I would share an update of my G5 conference rankings after week 4:

1. American (3.67)
2. MAC (0.67)
2. MW (0.67)
4. Sun Belt (.10)
5. CUSA (-1.23)

With the bulk of the OOC games played there is no way Coosa can climb out of the hole they are in.

After week 5 I have:
1. American (3.67)
2. Sun Belt (0.55)
3. MAC (0.42)
3. MW (0.42)
5. CUSA (-1.23)

Where are you guys seeing that the SBC is 2nd in the G5? I keep seeing in Massey that we are 3rd behind the AAC and MWC.

(10-03-2016 10:48 AM)EagleNationRising Wrote:  Where are you guys seeing that the SBC is 2nd in the G5? I keep seeing in Massey that we are 3rd behind the AAC and MWC.

On the field...

(10-03-2016 11:00 AM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 10:48 AM)EagleNationRising Wrote:  Where are you guys seeing that the SBC is 2nd in the G5? I keep seeing in Massey that we are 3rd behind the AAC and MWC.

On the field...

(10-03-2016 11:00 AM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 10:48 AM)EagleNationRising Wrote:  Where are you guys seeing that the SBC is 2nd in the G5? I keep seeing in Massey that we are 3rd behind the AAC and MWC.

On the field...

(10-03-2016 10:48 AM)EagleNationRising Wrote:  Where are you guys seeing that the SBC is 2nd in the G5? I keep seeing in Massey that we are 3rd behind the AAC and MWC.

We were ahead this morning, but it was close. Additional ratings have been added and the MWC is now ahead of the Sun Belt again, but it is close.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca.../91309140/

(10-03-2016 01:07 PM)Oldyeller Wrote:  http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca.../91309140/

Sun Belt has the #3 strength of schedule? That right there tells you how many ridiculous Power 5 opponents we have.