Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
Author Message
slhNavy91 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 1622
I Root For: Navy
Location:
Post: #41
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-15-2020 03:06 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 10:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(01-14-2020 10:48 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think for a good G5 it helps to be in G5 to finish ranked.as you can rack up 9 or more wins easier.

I doubt most of those 7 finish ranked if they played in P5 conferences. Navy probably goes 6-6 in the SEC or B1G. Most others as well.

I'm old school, mainly because I am actually old. I would really prefer to see a ranking that only allowed voters to rank the Top 15 teams, not 25. Once you get past #15 there's too much of a tendency IMO to vote for "deserving" teams, based purely on their W-L record, instead of "best" teams who you would pick as favorites based on their demonstrated strength and performance against challenging competition.

How do you determine who is "deserving" vs. who is the "best"? How do you know an 8-5 P5 school is better than a 10-3 G5 school, particularly one that has beaten a couple P5 schools?

What you are really saying is that the schools that have the right name and are in the right conference should be the only ones that get ranked.

My first take got buried way back on page 1, but the conversation based on a presumption about Navy continues, so...

Using Massey's matchup widget, I put in Florida's SEC schedule home and away for Navy. 5-3.
Navy's Army, Air Force, ND schedule isn't changing regardless of conference home, so Massey has 8-4 for Navy in the SEC East. Bowl win -- since we would have either beaten KState in the Liberty Bowl in the SEC spot, or we would have beaten Florida's bowl opponent -- 9-4 SEC Navy
01-15-2020 03:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 21,880
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1171
I Root For: Jimmy Nippert
Location:
Post: #42
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-15-2020 03:32 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 03:06 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 10:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(01-14-2020 10:48 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think for a good G5 it helps to be in G5 to finish ranked.as you can rack up 9 or more wins easier.

I doubt most of those 7 finish ranked if they played in P5 conferences. Navy probably goes 6-6 in the SEC or B1G. Most others as well.

I'm old school, mainly because I am actually old. I would really prefer to see a ranking that only allowed voters to rank the Top 15 teams, not 25. Once you get past #15 there's too much of a tendency IMO to vote for "deserving" teams, based purely on their W-L record, instead of "best" teams who you would pick as favorites based on their demonstrated strength and performance against challenging competition.

How do you determine who is "deserving" vs. who is the "best"? How do you know an 8-5 P5 school is better than a 10-3 G5 school, particularly one that has beaten a couple P5 schools?

What you are really saying is that the schools that have the right name and are in the right conference should be the only ones that get ranked.

My first take got buried way back on page 1, but the conversation based on a presumption about Navy continues, so...

Using Massey's matchup widget, I put in Florida's SEC schedule home and away for Navy. 5-3.
Navy's Army, Air Force, ND schedule isn't changing regardless of conference home, so Massey has 8-4 for Navy in the SEC East. Bowl win -- since we would have either beaten KState in the Liberty Bowl in the SEC spot, or we would have beaten Florida's bowl opponent -- 9-4 SEC Navy

I get where you come up with your numbers... some others though want to use the subjective "eye test", or just assume TEAM A is better than TEAM B because TEAM A plays in the right conference.
01-15-2020 03:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #43
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-15-2020 03:32 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 03:06 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 10:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(01-14-2020 10:48 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think for a good G5 it helps to be in G5 to finish ranked.as you can rack up 9 or more wins easier.

I doubt most of those 7 finish ranked if they played in P5 conferences. Navy probably goes 6-6 in the SEC or B1G. Most others as well.

I'm old school, mainly because I am actually old. I would really prefer to see a ranking that only allowed voters to rank the Top 15 teams, not 25. Once you get past #15 there's too much of a tendency IMO to vote for "deserving" teams, based purely on their W-L record, instead of "best" teams who you would pick as favorites based on their demonstrated strength and performance against challenging competition.

How do you determine who is "deserving" vs. who is the "best"? How do you know an 8-5 P5 school is better than a 10-3 G5 school, particularly one that has beaten a couple P5 schools?

What you are really saying is that the schools that have the right name and are in the right conference should be the only ones that get ranked.

My first take got buried way back on page 1, but the conversation based on a presumption about Navy continues, so...

It wasn't buried, at least not with me. I just don't know the usefulness of the Massey Widget. We know that (pre-bowl) Massey has Navy as the #21 team in the country, which is ahead of all the SEC East teams save for Florida and Georgia, so presumably Massey thinks they would lose to those two but beat Mizzou, Kentucky, South Carolina, and Tennessee.

I don't buy that, I think if Navy had to play those teams, all of whom have better athletes, they'd get beat up pretty bad and there would be a negative carry-over week to week that they don't experience in the AAC.

E.g., I looked at last year's (2019) recruiting rankings, and South Carolina had seven four-star recruits. Tennessee had twelve. Not only did Navy not have any four-star recruits, the entire AAC had zero four-star recruits. Navy plays teams in the AAC that don't have a real talent advantage over them - Navy had 3-star recruits just like other AAC teams, in the SEC East they would, even against the bad teams.

There's nothing magical about Navy - you play the triple-option, which teams don't see a lot of. But once bigger/stronger/faster teams started to see it, they'd get used to it, and they would wear you down and out. Your smaller guys would get hit and banged up and knocked out. There would be a cumulative wear-tear effect that Massey can't capture.

The only team Navy regularly plays that has a significant talent advantage is Notre Dame, and we know how that goes - in the last 9 seasons, Navy is 1-8 vs Notre Dame and they won that game by a point.

So I think that after a season playing AAC teams, Navy very likely could beat UT, SC, Mizzou, or Kentucky in a bowl game. Likely go 1-0 versus each of them. Outprepare and scheme and hustle each of them in a single game, like they just did to K-State. But having to play those four, plus Georgia and Florida sequentially as part of a season? They couldn't last.

Just my opinion.
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2020 05:14 PM by quo vadis.)
01-15-2020 05:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 10,382
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 946
I Root For: Vandy/Memphis/DePaul/UNC
Location: Nashville
Post: #44
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
I don't care which 8-5 teams in the P5 are, hypothetically better than Army, Navy or Air Force at year's end. If any one of the service academy programs wins 11 or more games any given year ... rank ’em ahead of the eight- and seven-win P5s. Those young men at Army, Navy and Air Force are American heroes and deserve credit and respect that goes beyond how good their teams are vis-a-vis so-called conventional P5 programs.

I'll never lose sleep if an 8-5 P5 that has played a rough schedule is ranked below an 11-2 Air Force that has not.

I'm a hard-ass about this.
01-15-2020 05:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #45
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-15-2020 05:18 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I don't care which 8-5 teams in the P5 are, hypothetically better than Army, Navy or Air Force at year's end. If any one of the service academy programs wins 11 or more games any given year ... rank ’em ahead of the eight- and seven-win P5s. Those young men at Army, Navy and Air Force are American heroes and deserve credit and respect that goes beyond how good their teams are vis-a-vis so-called conventional P5 programs.

I'll never lose sleep if an 8-5 P5 that has played a rough schedule is ranked below an 11-2 Air Force that has not.

I'm a hard-ass about this.

Bill, I don't mind it either. I really don't care who is ranked #23 and who isn't.

But if someone is going to boast and brag about it, which is clearly the intent of the OP, then that opens it up to discussion.

Speaking technically though, it is often the case that the final polls have more G5 in the rankings than initial polls. E.g., this past year there was 1 pre-season G5 in the polls, and 7 in the final rankings. Last year, 2018, it was the same - one in the pre-season, and counting Army as a G5, seven in the final rankings.

I do think that does reflect something interesting about poll mindset. The pollsters will vote for a 11-2 Navy over a 8-5 TAMU but they have no real way of knowing which G5 teams are going to win 9 or more games, so they tend to leave them out of initial polls in favor of bigger names.
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2020 05:23 PM by quo vadis.)
01-15-2020 05:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JHS55 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,407
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 173
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #46
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
Player compensation is going to change things for the better in the college football landscape
I think player compensation is going to blow up the recruiting structure and recruits will start to stay closer to home especially in big richer cities like my city Houston, Iam looking forward to great times for my cougars
This will also lead to a swift death to the A5 committee and the creation of a true playoff system at which point I’ll become a big college football fan again
Player compensation “PC” kicks in in 2023 and it is my opinion that by 2026 the AAC will dominate college... lol, Iam a homer
01-15-2020 05:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,292
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #47
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-15-2020 05:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 05:18 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I don't care which 8-5 teams in the P5 are, hypothetically better than Army, Navy or Air Force at year's end. If any one of the service academy programs wins 11 or more games any given year ... rank ’em ahead of the eight- and seven-win P5s. Those young men at Army, Navy and Air Force are American heroes and deserve credit and respect that goes beyond how good their teams are vis-a-vis so-called conventional P5 programs.

I'll never lose sleep if an 8-5 P5 that has played a rough schedule is ranked below an 11-2 Air Force that has not.

I'm a hard-ass about this.

Bill, I don't mind it either. I really don't care who is ranked #23 and who isn't.

But if someone is going to boast and brag about it, which is clearly the intent of the OP, then that opens it up to discussion.

Speaking technically though, it is often the case that the final polls have more G5 in the rankings than initial polls. E.g., this past year there was 1 pre-season G5 in the polls, and 7 in the final rankings. Last year, 2018, it was the same - one in the pre-season, and counting Army as a G5, seven in the final rankings.

I do think that does reflect something interesting about poll mindset. The pollsters will vote for a 11-2 Navy over a 8-5 TAMU but they have no real way of knowing which G5 teams are going to win 9 or more games, so they tend to leave them out of initial polls in favor of bigger names.

Pollsters have a hard time believing an 8-5 team belongs in the top 25.

I've mentioned this before, but look at Auburn. 9-4 and down at #14. They were 2-4 vs. the top 10 and lost by a combined 28 points. They were 7-0 vs. everyone else. Only LSU and Auburn had 2 wins vs. top 10. LSU had 5, Auburn 2. The other 9 losses were to 9 different teams (Clemson, Ohio St., Georgia, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas St., South Carolina, Arizona St.). You would expect a 5 or 6 team to be 3-3. 2-4 should be solidly in the bottom half of the top 10. But the pollsters don't want to rate a 4 loss team very high.

Realistically, there are several 5 loss teams that could be from 20-25. Texas, Virginia, Texas A&M, Washington, Oklahoma St., Kansas St. and probably a few others. Could Navy, Air Force, Boise and Cincinnati compete with those schools? Yes. Are they significantly better as the pollsters would tell you? Absolutely not. Boise lost 38-7 to Washington. Navy did beat KSU by 3.

So the G5 get more teams ranked at the end of the season because easier schedules give them better records and pollsters are loathe to rank a team that is barely over .500.
01-15-2020 06:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 10,382
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 946
I Root For: Vandy/Memphis/DePaul/UNC
Location: Nashville
Post: #48
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-15-2020 05:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 05:18 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I don't care which 8-5 teams in the P5 are, hypothetically better than Army, Navy or Air Force at year's end. If any one of the service academy programs wins 11 or more games any given year ... rank ’em ahead of the eight- and seven-win P5s. Those young men at Army, Navy and Air Force are American heroes and deserve credit and respect that goes beyond how good their teams are vis-a-vis so-called conventional P5 programs.

I'll never lose sleep if an 8-5 P5 that has played a rough schedule is ranked below an 11-2 Air Force that has not.

I'm a hard-ass about this.

Bill, I don't mind it either. I really don't care who is ranked #23 and who isn't.

But if someone is going to boast and brag about it, which is clearly the intent of the OP, then that opens it up to discussion.

Speaking technically though, it is often the case that the final polls have more G5 in the rankings than initial polls. E.g., this past year there was 1 pre-season G5 in the polls, and 7 in the final rankings. Last year, 2018, it was the same - one in the pre-season, and counting Army as a G5, seven in the final rankings.

I do think that does reflect something interesting about poll mindset. The pollsters will vote for a 11-2 Navy over a 8-5 TAMU but they have no real way of knowing which G5 teams are going to win 9 or more games, so they tend to leave them out of initial polls in favor of bigger names.


Well explained on all counts, Quo. I agree with you fully. This is a good point you make:

I do think that does reflect something interesting about poll mindset. The pollsters will vote for a 11-2 Navy over a 8-5 TAMU but they have no real way of knowing which G5 teams are going to win 9 or more games, so they tend to leave them out of initial polls in favor of bigger names.

I sometimes struggle to "feel sorry" for an 8-5 P5 team that has played a tough schedule and gets left out of the final poll (even though that team might be worthy of inclusion) because a G5 program with a better record (but lighter slate) is included instead. My reasoning is that P5 programs have so many resources to begin with that if they "somewhat get the shaft at the expense of a G5," well ... so be it.

Now, I'll show my hypocrisy here. If Indiana (after playing a brutal schedule) finished 8-5 and 25th in the last poll over a, for example 12-1 Louisiana Tech, ... I would be happy for the Hoosiers. I'm a fan of IU and the program never finishes in the Top 25 (or finds itself in the polls during the season, for that matter). BUT, I would still be pleased for La Tech (in this example) if it finished 25th instead of Indiana.
01-15-2020 09:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
whittx Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,703
Joined: Apr 2016
Reputation: 122
I Root For: FSU, Bport,Corn
Location:
Post: #49
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-15-2020 09:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 12:23 AM)colohank Wrote:  
(01-14-2020 10:48 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think for a good G5 it helps to be in G5 to finish ranked.as you can rack up 9 or more wins easier.

I doubt most of those 7 finish ranked if they played in P5 conferences. Navy probably goes 6-6 in the SEC or B1G. Most others as well.

On the other hand, you have to take into account the income disparity under which all G5 teams operate. Imagine how good some of them could be if they didn't have to compete year after year with one hand tied behind their backs.

Income disparity matters for sure, but it's probably not the main thing. Branding matters. No Louisiana kid ever dreamed as an 8 year old of playing for Louisiana-Monroe, plenty dream of playing for LSU. It's that way in most states.

That's why we see huge disparities in outcomes even within the P5. A school like Washington State can have big shiny facilities, but it's still going to be harder to convince a top recruit to go there instead of USC. USC has the brand image, the legacy, the status. It's like a kid with a 170 IQ who has a choice between USF and Harvard. USF may throw a ton of scholarship money at him, but Harvard is Harvard.

Of course things like branding, money, and fan and corporate support are all related in feedback loops. They all reinforce each other. I'm just saying money alone is unlikely to solve the problem.

The only way that kid would even consider USF is if he lives in Tampa, hates snow, and his GF is going there or UTampa.
01-16-2020 12:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
slhNavy91 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 1622
I Root For: Navy
Location:
Post: #50
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-15-2020 05:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 03:32 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 03:06 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 10:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(01-14-2020 10:48 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think for a good G5 it helps to be in G5 to finish ranked.as you can rack up 9 or more wins easier.

I doubt most of those 7 finish ranked if they played in P5 conferences. Navy probably goes 6-6 in the SEC or B1G. Most others as well.

I'm old school, mainly because I am actually old. I would really prefer to see a ranking that only allowed voters to rank the Top 15 teams, not 25. Once you get past #15 there's too much of a tendency IMO to vote for "deserving" teams, based purely on their W-L record, instead of "best" teams who you would pick as favorites based on their demonstrated strength and performance against challenging competition.

How do you determine who is "deserving" vs. who is the "best"? How do you know an 8-5 P5 school is better than a 10-3 G5 school, particularly one that has beaten a couple P5 schools?

What you are really saying is that the schools that have the right name and are in the right conference should be the only ones that get ranked.

My first take got buried way back on page 1, but the conversation based on a presumption about Navy continues, so...

It wasn't buried, at least not with me. I just don't know the usefulness of the Massey Widget. We know that (pre-bowl) Massey has Navy as the #21 team in the country, which is ahead of all the SEC East teams save for Florida and Georgia, so presumably Massey thinks they would lose to those two but beat Mizzou, Kentucky, South Carolina, and Tennessee.

I don't buy that, I think if Navy had to play those teams, all of whom have better athletes, they'd get beat up pretty bad and there would be a negative carry-over week to week that they don't experience in the AAC.

E.g., I looked at last year's (2019) recruiting rankings, and South Carolina had seven four-star recruits. Tennessee had twelve. Not only did Navy not have any four-star recruits, the entire AAC had zero four-star recruits. Navy plays teams in the AAC that don't have a real talent advantage over them - Navy had 3-star recruits just like other AAC teams, in the SEC East they would, even against the bad teams.

There's nothing magical about Navy - you play the triple-option, which teams don't see a lot of. But once bigger/stronger/faster teams started to see it, they'd get used to it, and they would wear you down and out. Your smaller guys would get hit and banged up and knocked out. There would be a cumulative wear-tear effect that Massey can't capture.

The only team Navy regularly plays that has a significant talent advantage is Notre Dame, and we know how that goes - in the last 9 seasons, Navy is 1-8 vs Notre Dame and they won that game by a point.

So I think that after a season playing AAC teams, Navy very likely could beat UT, SC, Mizzou, or Kentucky in a bowl game. Likely go 1-0 versus each of them. Outprepare and scheme and hustle each of them in a single game, like they just did to K-State. But having to play those four, plus Georgia and Florida sequentially as part of a season? They couldn't last.

Just my opinion.
In 2012, everyone opined that Navy would never survive week-after-week in the Big East of Rutgers and Louisville.
In 2015, everyone ALSO opined that Navy would never survive week-after-week in the American Athletic Conference.
Somehow Navy won 67.5% of AAC games in the five years since then.

I wouldn't bet on Navy vs the LSU, Auburn, UGA end of Florida's schedule, or even Florida.
But comparing the bottom of the East to the AAC teams Navy played this year...

On 247, I see:
2019 -- This year's freshmen or redshirts
S.Carolina one 5*, five 4*, seventeen 3*
Kentucky three 4*, nineteen 3*
Missouri three 4*, nineteen 3*
Vanderbilt zero 4-5 *, twenty-one 3* score of 182.42, #57
Memphis twenty-two 3* score of 172.84, #67
SMU seventeen 3* #68
Houston seventeen 3*
USF nineteen 3*

2016 -- This year's seniors or rs juniors
S.Carolina six 4*, twenty 3*
Kentucky three 4* twentythree 3* score of 204.7, #34
Houston one 5*, three 4*, fourteen 3* score of 201.5 #36
Missouri two 4* eighteen 3* score of 188.37 #43
Vanderbilt one 4* eighteen 3* score of 171.54 #54
Memphis eighteen 3* score of 165.98 #61
USF one 4*, fifteen 3*
SMU seventeen 3*


You really think that Navy can play half that group week after week after week and not the other half?
That those couple of guys with a fourth star make that much difference and would break all twenty-two of Navy's starter?

And more to the point, that Houston (when they're not tanking in their red shirts), Memphis, UCF (omitted on these because I started with games Navy played this year, but would have rasied the AAC profile), USF, SMU couldn't play them week after week and do better than 6-6?

Sorry, I'm not buying it.

It is plain that the TOP of the autonomous conferences - the CFP contenders - are a level above the best of the AAC this year. But the bottom half (or more than half) just aren't. Not in performance and results, and not in recruits/athletes.
01-16-2020 03:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #51
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-16-2020 03:45 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 05:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 03:32 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 03:06 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 10:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  I'm old school, mainly because I am actually old. I would really prefer to see a ranking that only allowed voters to rank the Top 15 teams, not 25. Once you get past #15 there's too much of a tendency IMO to vote for "deserving" teams, based purely on their W-L record, instead of "best" teams who you would pick as favorites based on their demonstrated strength and performance against challenging competition.

How do you determine who is "deserving" vs. who is the "best"? How do you know an 8-5 P5 school is better than a 10-3 G5 school, particularly one that has beaten a couple P5 schools?

What you are really saying is that the schools that have the right name and are in the right conference should be the only ones that get ranked.

My first take got buried way back on page 1, but the conversation based on a presumption about Navy continues, so...

It wasn't buried, at least not with me. I just don't know the usefulness of the Massey Widget. We know that (pre-bowl) Massey has Navy as the #21 team in the country, which is ahead of all the SEC East teams save for Florida and Georgia, so presumably Massey thinks they would lose to those two but beat Mizzou, Kentucky, South Carolina, and Tennessee.

I don't buy that, I think if Navy had to play those teams, all of whom have better athletes, they'd get beat up pretty bad and there would be a negative carry-over week to week that they don't experience in the AAC.

E.g., I looked at last year's (2019) recruiting rankings, and South Carolina had seven four-star recruits. Tennessee had twelve. Not only did Navy not have any four-star recruits, the entire AAC had zero four-star recruits. Navy plays teams in the AAC that don't have a real talent advantage over them - Navy had 3-star recruits just like other AAC teams, in the SEC East they would, even against the bad teams.

There's nothing magical about Navy - you play the triple-option, which teams don't see a lot of. But once bigger/stronger/faster teams started to see it, they'd get used to it, and they would wear you down and out. Your smaller guys would get hit and banged up and knocked out. There would be a cumulative wear-tear effect that Massey can't capture.

The only team Navy regularly plays that has a significant talent advantage is Notre Dame, and we know how that goes - in the last 9 seasons, Navy is 1-8 vs Notre Dame and they won that game by a point.

So I think that after a season playing AAC teams, Navy very likely could beat UT, SC, Mizzou, or Kentucky in a bowl game. Likely go 1-0 versus each of them. Outprepare and scheme and hustle each of them in a single game, like they just did to K-State. But having to play those four, plus Georgia and Florida sequentially as part of a season? They couldn't last.

Just my opinion.
In 2012, everyone opined that Navy would never survive week-after-week in the Big East of Rutgers and Louisville.
In 2015, everyone ALSO opined that Navy would never survive week-after-week in the American Athletic Conference.
Somehow Navy won 67.5% of AAC games in the five years since then.

I wouldn't bet on Navy vs the LSU, Auburn, UGA end of Florida's schedule, or even Florida.
But comparing the bottom of the East to the AAC teams Navy played this year...

On 247, I see:
2019 -- This year's freshmen or redshirts
S.Carolina one 5*, five 4*, seventeen 3*
Kentucky three 4*, nineteen 3*
Missouri three 4*, nineteen 3*
Vanderbilt zero 4-5 *, twenty-one 3* score of 182.42, #57
Memphis twenty-two 3* score of 172.84, #67
SMU seventeen 3* #68
Houston seventeen 3*
USF nineteen 3*

2016 -- This year's seniors or rs juniors
S.Carolina six 4*, twenty 3*
Kentucky three 4* twentythree 3* score of 204.7, #34
Houston one 5*, three 4*, fourteen 3* score of 201.5 #36
Missouri two 4* eighteen 3* score of 188.37 #43
Vanderbilt one 4* eighteen 3* score of 171.54 #54
Memphis eighteen 3* score of 165.98 #61
USF one 4*, fifteen 3*
SMU seventeen 3*


You really think that Navy can play half that group week after week after week and not the other half?
That those couple of guys with a fourth star make that much difference and would break all twenty-two of Navy's starter?

And more to the point, that Houston (when they're not tanking in their red shirts), Memphis, UCF (omitted on these because I started with games Navy played this year, but would have rasied the AAC profile), USF, SMU couldn't play them week after week and do better than 6-6?

Sorry, I'm not buying it.

It is plain that the TOP of the autonomous conferences - the CFP contenders - are a level above the best of the AAC this year. But the bottom half (or more than half) just aren't. Not in performance and results, and not in recruits/athletes.

I noticed you threw Vanderbilt in there, who I never mentioned. I concede you would regularly beat Vanderbilt, LOL.

As I said, just in this recruiting class, the entire AAC has no 4-star players, Tennessee alone has a bunch of them. Doesn't that close the door on the talent discussion?

But since you mentioned earlier classes, I checked Rivals for 2018: Tennessee had 8 four-star guys, SC had 9, UK had 3, Mizzou had 2, even Vandy had 4.

The entire AAC? Cincy had 3, UCF 1, everyone else, meaning the entire AAC West ... zero. Vandy had as many 4-star recruits in 2018 as the entire AAC. The *lowest* rated SEC East team was #42. The highest AAC West team was rated #58.

In 2017, the SEC East teams not counting FLA and UGA ranged from 15 to 58 in the recruiting rankings. The best AAC West team was #64.

The only year of the last five years, 2015 - 2019, when *any* AAC West team was ranked higher than *any* of the lesser 5 SEC East teams was 2016, when Houston had a monster recruiting year by their standards. They were #41 that year, ahead of #47 MZ and #56 Vandy. Those latter two were still ahead of all other AAC West schools. I also noticed that Navy is 2-3 during its time in the AAC vs Houston, a team that typically has more athletes than it has coaches. Athletes trouble Navy.

And all of that is not counting Florida and Georgia, both typically loaded with big rangy fast NFL-bound athletes, both of whom would get to blast Navy and soften them up for games vs the lesser teams in the SEC East.

That's the thing - it's a cumulative effect of getting banged up.

As for performance, looking at the Sagarin rankings, the SEC East has been ahead of the AAC West all of the past 5 years, with a range of 4 - 16 Sagarin points. Even this year, a banner year for the AAC West, in which it finished ahead of both ACC divisions, the SEC East was better.

The talent gap is big, and IMO Navy would just get beat up and knocked out, worn down week after week playing bigger/stronger/faster guys.

Who knows? Maybe Navy will join the SEC one day and we will find out?
(This post was last modified: 01-16-2020 05:08 PM by quo vadis.)
01-16-2020 04:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
slhNavy91 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 1622
I Root For: Navy
Location:
Post: #52
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-16-2020 04:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-16-2020 03:45 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 05:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 03:32 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 03:06 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  How do you determine who is "deserving" vs. who is the "best"? How do you know an 8-5 P5 school is better than a 10-3 G5 school, particularly one that has beaten a couple P5 schools?

What you are really saying is that the schools that have the right name and are in the right conference should be the only ones that get ranked.

My first take got buried way back on page 1, but the conversation based on a presumption about Navy continues, so...

It wasn't buried, at least not with me. I just don't know the usefulness of the Massey Widget. We know that (pre-bowl) Massey has Navy as the #21 team in the country, which is ahead of all the SEC East teams save for Florida and Georgia, so presumably Massey thinks they would lose to those two but beat Mizzou, Kentucky, South Carolina, and Tennessee.

I don't buy that, I think if Navy had to play those teams, all of whom have better athletes, they'd get beat up pretty bad and there would be a negative carry-over week to week that they don't experience in the AAC.

E.g., I looked at last year's (2019) recruiting rankings, and South Carolina had seven four-star recruits. Tennessee had twelve. Not only did Navy not have any four-star recruits, the entire AAC had zero four-star recruits. Navy plays teams in the AAC that don't have a real talent advantage over them - Navy had 3-star recruits just like other AAC teams, in the SEC East they would, even against the bad teams.

There's nothing magical about Navy - you play the triple-option, which teams don't see a lot of. But once bigger/stronger/faster teams started to see it, they'd get used to it, and they would wear you down and out. Your smaller guys would get hit and banged up and knocked out. There would be a cumulative wear-tear effect that Massey can't capture.

The only team Navy regularly plays that has a significant talent advantage is Notre Dame, and we know how that goes - in the last 9 seasons, Navy is 1-8 vs Notre Dame and they won that game by a point.

So I think that after a season playing AAC teams, Navy very likely could beat UT, SC, Mizzou, or Kentucky in a bowl game. Likely go 1-0 versus each of them. Outprepare and scheme and hustle each of them in a single game, like they just did to K-State. But having to play those four, plus Georgia and Florida sequentially as part of a season? They couldn't last.

Just my opinion.
In 2012, everyone opined that Navy would never survive week-after-week in the Big East of Rutgers and Louisville.
In 2015, everyone ALSO opined that Navy would never survive week-after-week in the American Athletic Conference.
Somehow Navy won 67.5% of AAC games in the five years since then.

I wouldn't bet on Navy vs the LSU, Auburn, UGA end of Florida's schedule, or even Florida.
But comparing the bottom of the East to the AAC teams Navy played this year...

On 247, I see:
2019 -- This year's freshmen or redshirts
S.Carolina one 5*, five 4*, seventeen 3*
Kentucky three 4*, nineteen 3*
Missouri three 4*, nineteen 3*
Vanderbilt zero 4-5 *, twenty-one 3* score of 182.42, #57
Memphis twenty-two 3* score of 172.84, #67
SMU seventeen 3* #68
Houston seventeen 3*
USF nineteen 3*

2016 -- This year's seniors or rs juniors
S.Carolina six 4*, twenty 3*
Kentucky three 4* twentythree 3* score of 204.7, #34
Houston one 5*, three 4*, fourteen 3* score of 201.5 #36
Missouri two 4* eighteen 3* score of 188.37 #43
Vanderbilt one 4* eighteen 3* score of 171.54 #54
Memphis eighteen 3* score of 165.98 #61
USF one 4*, fifteen 3*
SMU seventeen 3*


You really think that Navy can play half that group week after week after week and not the other half?
That those couple of guys with a fourth star make that much difference and would break all twenty-two of Navy's starter?

And more to the point, that Houston (when they're not tanking in their red shirts), Memphis, UCF (omitted on these because I started with games Navy played this year, but would have rasied the AAC profile), USF, SMU couldn't play them week after week and do better than 6-6?

Sorry, I'm not buying it.

It is plain that the TOP of the autonomous conferences - the CFP contenders - are a level above the best of the AAC this year. But the bottom half (or more than half) just aren't. Not in performance and results, and not in recruits/athletes.

I noticed you threw Vanderbilt in there, who I never mentioned. I concede you would regularly beat Vanderbilt, LOL.

As I said, just in this recruiting class, the entire AAC has no 4-star players, Tennessee alone has a bunch of them. Doesn't that close the door on the talent discussion?

But since you mentioned earlier classes, I checked Rivals for 2018: Tennessee had 8 four-star guys, SC had 9, UK had 3, Mizzou had 2, even Vandy had 4.

The entire AAC? Cincy had 3, UCF 1, everyone else, meaning the entire AAC West ... zero. Vandy had as many 4-star recruits in 2018 as the entire AAC. The *lowest* rated SEC East team was #42. The highest AAC West team was rated #58.

In 2017, the SEC East teams not counting FLA and UGA ranged from 15 to 58 in the recruiting rankings. The best AAC West team was #64.

The only year of the last five years, 2015 - 2019, when *any* AAC West team was ranked higher than *any* of the lesser 5 SEC East teams was 2016, when Houston had a monster recruiting year by their standards. They were #41 that year, ahead of #47 MZ and #56 Vandy. Those latter two were still ahead of all other AAC West schools. I also noticed that Navy is 2-3 during its time in the AAC vs Houston, a team that typically has more athletes than it has coaches. Athletes trouble Navy.

And all of that is not counting Florida and Georgia, both typically loaded with big rangy fast NFL-bound athletes, both of whom would get to blast Navy and soften them up for games vs the lesser teams in the SEC East.

That's the thing - it's a cumulative effect of getting banged up.

As for performance, looking at the Sagarin rankings, the SEC East has been ahead of the AAC West all of the past 5 years, with a range of 4 - 16 Sagarin points. Even this year, a banner year for the AAC West, in which it finished ahead of both ACC divisions, the SEC East was better.

The talent gap is big, and IMO Navy would just get beat up and knocked out, worn down week after week playing bigger/stronger/faster guys.

Who knows? Maybe Navy will join the SEC one day and we will find out?

My point wasn't that the AAC is better than the SEC, or even equivalent. Definitely a gap from the Bama, LSU, tOSU, teams in all the autonomy conferences. But we are going to disagree on the gap between the bottom half of the SEC East and the top half of the AAC.
It isn't a slam dunk looking at recruiting, even before reminding onesself that every fan of a non-contract-bowl-conference team has a story about a 4* getting down graded to 3* upon signing with their school, or a commit getting upgraded after flipping to an autonomy conference school.

My other point is that the talent gap is already big between Navy and other AAC teams. From 2019 and counting back, Navy recruiting was 12th, 12th, 9th, 9th, and 12th.

Again, we're supposed to get beat up playing ND and these eight AAC teams. Navy is out-athleted 9 games out of twelve, in size across both lines and in speed all over the field. You want me to believe Kentucky's, Missouri's players are going to be harder for Navy to play than Ed Oliver or Shaquem Griffin or Zay Jones, and I don't.

I'm pretty sure we won't ever find out what Navy as an SEC member ends up doing, and I am quite all right with that, too.
(This post was last modified: 01-16-2020 05:26 PM by slhNavy91.)
01-16-2020 05:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
slhNavy91 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 1622
I Root For: Navy
Location:
Post: #53
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-15-2020 05:18 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I don't care which 8-5 teams in the P5 are, hypothetically better than Army, Navy or Air Force at year's end. If any one of the service academy programs wins 11 or more games any given year ... rank ’em ahead of the eight- and seven-win P5s. Those young men at Army, Navy and Air Force are American heroes and deserve credit and respect that goes beyond how good their teams are vis-a-vis so-called conventional P5 programs.

I'll never lose sleep if an 8-5 P5 that has played a rough schedule is ranked below an 11-2 Air Force that has not.

I'm a hard-ass about this.
Rankings that follow in Massey Composite, 77 ranking systems compiled

Impressive to have lost to #1,3,4,7,12 (A&M's) but Navy or Air Force coulda woulda chalked up those "quality losses."
Texas' don't even look as good: lost to #1,10,18, 36, 53 vs Navy losing to #9, 13 and AF to #20,#23. Navy had 3 or 4 wins better than two of those Texas losses.

So, instead of talking about the quality losses, let's look at wins.

Navy: #22, 31, 32, 49, 78, 86, 97, 99, 117, 125, FCS
Texas: #17, 32, 33, 56, 71, 84, 106, 119
TA&M: #33, 47, 62, 74, 115, 120, 121, FCS

AF: #46, 52, 55, 65, 67, 98, 99, 101, 109, 123, FCS
Texas: #17, 32, 33, 56, 71, 84, 106, 119
TA&M: #33, 47, 62, 74, 115, 120, 121, FCS

I would say it is a pretty solid case to rank Navy over both of those (Texas is closer, but the losses to teams that would have been in the middle of Navy's wins give the edge to Navy).
AF less so versus Texas, but easily over TA&M when you look at the resume, especially the bottom half of A&M's wins.
01-16-2020 08:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #54
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-16-2020 05:19 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-16-2020 04:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-16-2020 03:45 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 05:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 03:32 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  My first take got buried way back on page 1, but the conversation based on a presumption about Navy continues, so...

It wasn't buried, at least not with me. I just don't know the usefulness of the Massey Widget. We know that (pre-bowl) Massey has Navy as the #21 team in the country, which is ahead of all the SEC East teams save for Florida and Georgia, so presumably Massey thinks they would lose to those two but beat Mizzou, Kentucky, South Carolina, and Tennessee.

I don't buy that, I think if Navy had to play those teams, all of whom have better athletes, they'd get beat up pretty bad and there would be a negative carry-over week to week that they don't experience in the AAC.

E.g., I looked at last year's (2019) recruiting rankings, and South Carolina had seven four-star recruits. Tennessee had twelve. Not only did Navy not have any four-star recruits, the entire AAC had zero four-star recruits. Navy plays teams in the AAC that don't have a real talent advantage over them - Navy had 3-star recruits just like other AAC teams, in the SEC East they would, even against the bad teams.

There's nothing magical about Navy - you play the triple-option, which teams don't see a lot of. But once bigger/stronger/faster teams started to see it, they'd get used to it, and they would wear you down and out. Your smaller guys would get hit and banged up and knocked out. There would be a cumulative wear-tear effect that Massey can't capture.

The only team Navy regularly plays that has a significant talent advantage is Notre Dame, and we know how that goes - in the last 9 seasons, Navy is 1-8 vs Notre Dame and they won that game by a point.

So I think that after a season playing AAC teams, Navy very likely could beat UT, SC, Mizzou, or Kentucky in a bowl game. Likely go 1-0 versus each of them. Outprepare and scheme and hustle each of them in a single game, like they just did to K-State. But having to play those four, plus Georgia and Florida sequentially as part of a season? They couldn't last.

Just my opinion.
In 2012, everyone opined that Navy would never survive week-after-week in the Big East of Rutgers and Louisville.
In 2015, everyone ALSO opined that Navy would never survive week-after-week in the American Athletic Conference.
Somehow Navy won 67.5% of AAC games in the five years since then.

I wouldn't bet on Navy vs the LSU, Auburn, UGA end of Florida's schedule, or even Florida.
But comparing the bottom of the East to the AAC teams Navy played this year...

On 247, I see:
2019 -- This year's freshmen or redshirts
S.Carolina one 5*, five 4*, seventeen 3*
Kentucky three 4*, nineteen 3*
Missouri three 4*, nineteen 3*
Vanderbilt zero 4-5 *, twenty-one 3* score of 182.42, #57
Memphis twenty-two 3* score of 172.84, #67
SMU seventeen 3* #68
Houston seventeen 3*
USF nineteen 3*

2016 -- This year's seniors or rs juniors
S.Carolina six 4*, twenty 3*
Kentucky three 4* twentythree 3* score of 204.7, #34
Houston one 5*, three 4*, fourteen 3* score of 201.5 #36
Missouri two 4* eighteen 3* score of 188.37 #43
Vanderbilt one 4* eighteen 3* score of 171.54 #54
Memphis eighteen 3* score of 165.98 #61
USF one 4*, fifteen 3*
SMU seventeen 3*


You really think that Navy can play half that group week after week after week and not the other half?
That those couple of guys with a fourth star make that much difference and would break all twenty-two of Navy's starter?

And more to the point, that Houston (when they're not tanking in their red shirts), Memphis, UCF (omitted on these because I started with games Navy played this year, but would have rasied the AAC profile), USF, SMU couldn't play them week after week and do better than 6-6?

Sorry, I'm not buying it.

It is plain that the TOP of the autonomous conferences - the CFP contenders - are a level above the best of the AAC this year. But the bottom half (or more than half) just aren't. Not in performance and results, and not in recruits/athletes.

I noticed you threw Vanderbilt in there, who I never mentioned. I concede you would regularly beat Vanderbilt, LOL.

As I said, just in this recruiting class, the entire AAC has no 4-star players, Tennessee alone has a bunch of them. Doesn't that close the door on the talent discussion?

But since you mentioned earlier classes, I checked Rivals for 2018: Tennessee had 8 four-star guys, SC had 9, UK had 3, Mizzou had 2, even Vandy had 4.

The entire AAC? Cincy had 3, UCF 1, everyone else, meaning the entire AAC West ... zero. Vandy had as many 4-star recruits in 2018 as the entire AAC. The *lowest* rated SEC East team was #42. The highest AAC West team was rated #58.

In 2017, the SEC East teams not counting FLA and UGA ranged from 15 to 58 in the recruiting rankings. The best AAC West team was #64.

The only year of the last five years, 2015 - 2019, when *any* AAC West team was ranked higher than *any* of the lesser 5 SEC East teams was 2016, when Houston had a monster recruiting year by their standards. They were #41 that year, ahead of #47 MZ and #56 Vandy. Those latter two were still ahead of all other AAC West schools. I also noticed that Navy is 2-3 during its time in the AAC vs Houston, a team that typically has more athletes than it has coaches. Athletes trouble Navy.

And all of that is not counting Florida and Georgia, both typically loaded with big rangy fast NFL-bound athletes, both of whom would get to blast Navy and soften them up for games vs the lesser teams in the SEC East.

That's the thing - it's a cumulative effect of getting banged up.

As for performance, looking at the Sagarin rankings, the SEC East has been ahead of the AAC West all of the past 5 years, with a range of 4 - 16 Sagarin points. Even this year, a banner year for the AAC West, in which it finished ahead of both ACC divisions, the SEC East was better.

The talent gap is big, and IMO Navy would just get beat up and knocked out, worn down week after week playing bigger/stronger/faster guys.

Who knows? Maybe Navy will join the SEC one day and we will find out?

My point wasn't that the AAC is better than the SEC, or even equivalent. Definitely a gap from the Bama, LSU, tOSU, teams in all the autonomy conferences. But we are going to disagree on the gap between the bottom half of the SEC East and the top half of the AAC.
It isn't a slam dunk looking at recruiting, even before reminding onesself that every fan of a non-contract-bowl-conference team has a story about a 4* getting down graded to 3* upon signing with their school, or a commit getting upgraded after flipping to an autonomy conference school.

My other point is that the talent gap is already big between Navy and other AAC teams. From 2019 and counting back, Navy recruiting was 12th, 12th, 9th, 9th, and 12th.

Again, we're supposed to get beat up playing ND and these eight AAC teams. Navy is out-athleted 9 games out of twelve, in size across both lines and in speed all over the field. You want me to believe Kentucky's, Missouri's players are going to be harder for Navy to play than Ed Oliver or Shaquem Griffin or Zay Jones, and I don't.

I'm pretty sure we won't ever find out what Navy as an SEC member ends up doing, and I am quite all right with that, too.

You are moving goalposts around. The comparison is AAC West which Navy plays in to SEC East, which you chose I guess because you thought you could make a case for Navy going 9-4 in the SEC better from.

Recruiting rankings are what they are. They show a big gap between the AAC West and SEC East even taking out UGA and Florida, who of course Navy would have to play too. I just looked at first three rounds of 2019 NFL draft and there were 6 SEC East picks to 2 AAC West picks, and that is omitting Florida And Georgia.

And I never heard many say Navy when you joined could not compete vs AAC teams. My recollection on the AAC board at the time was that most thought Navy was a strong addition and would more than hold their own. Seemed and seems like a good fit to me. If Navy doesn't fit in AAC than where? And even if some were, Navy overcoming small talent gap vs AAC West is quite different than doing so vs SEC East.

Anyway, enjoy the Top 25 finish, you earned it.
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2020 09:12 AM by quo vadis.)
01-17-2020 05:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,099
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #55
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-16-2020 03:45 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  In 2012, everyone opined that Navy would never survive week-after-week in the Big East of Rutgers and Louisville.

In 2015, everyone ALSO opined that Navy would never survive week-after-week in the American Athletic Conference.

Pretty sure I didn't.

Line weight matters, but the Academies build their schemes assuming a line weight disadvantage, and the cumulative impact of adding 5 lbs to the differential does depend a lot on where the differential started ... and on that score, Army is under a more extreme disadvantage than Navy. Looking at the weight difference the Navy O-line would give up to UCF, Army might be giving up that much or more five weeks in a row.

If Army were to be playing an AAC regular conference schedule, they would get beat up week after week, just as they were in the version of CUSA that they played in.

But I do think the same thing would happen to Navy in the SEC, Big 12 or Big Ten. The only way I can see a P5 possibly making sense for Navy is if Notre Dame felt they were forced into joining a conference and there was an opening for Navy at #16 in the ACC. In the ACC there would be some weeks when there would be a relative respite.
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2020 08:53 AM by BruceMcF.)
01-17-2020 08:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 10,382
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 946
I Root For: Vandy/Memphis/DePaul/UNC
Location: Nashville
Post: #56
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
Maybe I've overlooked in this thread, but is seems a key element in the hypothetical debate "put XXXX team from a G5 league in a P5 league and that XXXX team would not do as well."

Will post tonight. I just consumed a vegan sausage and taters sandwich and the stomach is a bit unsettled.
01-17-2020 09:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #57
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-16-2020 08:58 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-15-2020 05:18 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I don't care which 8-5 teams in the P5 are, hypothetically better than Army, Navy or Air Force at year's end. If any one of the service academy programs wins 11 or more games any given year ... rank ’em ahead of the eight- and seven-win P5s. Those young men at Army, Navy and Air Force are American heroes and deserve credit and respect that goes beyond how good their teams are vis-a-vis so-called conventional P5 programs.

I'll never lose sleep if an 8-5 P5 that has played a rough schedule is ranked below an 11-2 Air Force that has not.

I'm a hard-ass about this.
Rankings that follow in Massey Composite, 77 ranking systems compiled

Impressive to have lost to #1,3,4,7,12 (A&M's) but Navy or Air Force coulda woulda chalked up those "quality losses."
Texas' don't even look as good: lost to #1,10,18, 36, 53 vs Navy losing to #9, 13 and AF to #20,#23. Navy had 3 or 4 wins better than two of those Texas losses.

So, instead of talking about the quality losses, let's look at wins.

Navy: #22, 31, 32, 49, 78, 86, 97, 99, 117, 125, FCS
Texas: #17, 32, 33, 56, 71, 84, 106, 119
TA&M: #33, 47, 62, 74, 115, 120, 121, FCS

AF: #46, 52, 55, 65, 67, 98, 99, 101, 109, 123, FCS
Texas: #17, 32, 33, 56, 71, 84, 106, 119
TA&M: #33, 47, 62, 74, 115, 120, 121, FCS

I would say it is a pretty solid case to rank Navy over both of those (Texas is closer, but the losses to teams that would have been in the middle of Navy's wins give the edge to Navy).
AF less so versus Texas, but easily over TA&M when you look at the resume, especially the bottom half of A&M's wins.

I agree, you don't need to give Navy a "service academy bonus" of some kind to conclude they deserved to be ranked ahead of Texas and TAMU. The numbers say they should. Even though I have little doubt that Texas and TAMU are better than Navy and that Navy couldn't have survived their schedules playing against the more talented teams. I would expect Navy to do worse vs TAMU's schedule than TAMU did, and TAMU to do better vs Navy's schedule than Navy did. But that is a speculative opinion not a fact.

BTW, with 82 rankings in, the AAC is still a smidge better than the ACC in the MC conference rankings.
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2020 09:25 AM by quo vadis.)
01-17-2020 09:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BearcatJerry Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,092
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 506
I Root For: UC Bearcats
Location:
Post: #58
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
Eh... I'm going to take a different track on this...

It would be more honest to just exclude the non-Power ("g5") schools from the polls.

Putting a bunch of "g" schools in above 17 is just a farcical way maintaining that "Hey, 'the system' is open and equitable..." It is a lie.

A subdivision has occurred in FBS. NO member of a "g" conference will ever break the "Top 4" or the "Top 8." Just be honest about it for once. Put the equivalent notice up "Now Hiring...Irish need not apply." instead of playing this "gotcha" game.
01-17-2020 10:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #59
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-17-2020 10:11 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  Eh... I'm going to take a different track on this...

It would be more honest to just exclude the non-Power ("g5") schools from the polls.

Putting a bunch of "g" schools in above 17 is just a farcical way maintaining that "Hey, 'the system' is open and equitable..." It is a lie.

A subdivision has occurred in FBS. NO member of a "g" conference will ever break the "Top 4" or the "Top 8." Just be honest about it for once. Put the equivalent notice up "Now Hiring...Irish need not apply." instead of playing this "gotcha" game.

Well except UCF was ranked #8 last year.

Beyond that though, the CFP rankings do track the computers pretty closely
01-17-2020 10:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 21,880
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1171
I Root For: Jimmy Nippert
Location:
Post: #60
RE: G5 Has 7 in Final AP Top 25
(01-17-2020 09:21 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Maybe I've overlooked in this thread, but is seems a key element in the hypothetical debate "put XXXX team from a G5 league in a P5 league and that XXXX team would not do as well."

Will post tonight. I just consumed a vegan sausage and taters sandwich and the stomach is a bit unsettled.

Correct and it is a bad argument. First, said G5 school would gain all advantages afforded to P5 schools- including more revenue, media exposure, ability to retain and attract coaches, recruiting, etc. Said G5 school would not be participating in a P5 league with the same athletes as they do in their present home- there would be more quality depth. So the argument that these G5 schools would be "beat up" from the rigorous schedule is a fallacy. Schools in urban markets with a lot of home grown talent would prosper the most-- namely (and in no particular order) UCF, USF, ,Cincinnati, Houston, Memphis, San Diego State and SMU.
01-17-2020 10:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.