Agree to disagree.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Official 2022 Fall Camp Thread
- Thread starter SINKRATZ
- Start date
Do you have specific statistical rankings you're referring to?
Sp+ is generally what I use. Look at 2017 for example. 5-7, great. Our best win was a home win against Cal, a team with a losing record. Our second-best win was against a crappy CSU team, in a game in which they outgained us, but lost the turnover battle. Other wins: Northern Colorado, 2-10 Texas St, 1-11 Oregon St (which was a last-minute comeback win but they clearly played better). That team was absolute dog ****. In absolutely no way was that a top 50 team. SP+ had us at 84 which feels about right. 2018 was better, but still pretty bad. SP+ had us at 58, and our best win by far was against 6-6 ASU.
Do you have a link to the sp+ rankings? Can't seem to find a specific site for it
They removed everything after 2018 after Bill Connelly left for ESPN.
2018 COLLEGE FOOTBALL DEFENSIVE S/P+ RATINGS | Football Outsiders
S&P+ defensive ratings for 2018.
Check that. That was def rankings. Here's total.
2018 COLLEGE FOOTBALL S/P+ RATINGS | Football Outsiders
2018 college football S&P+ ratings.
Do they adjust those numbers for all the players that transferred out?
Any way to get official simulations?
Not just SP+. Look at Sagarin rankings which hold up pretty darn well predictively.
He had that somewhat better 2018 squad at 72nd.
College football team ratings 2018 - Jeff Sagarin Ratings
Thanks.They removed everything after 2018 after Bill Connelly left for ESPN.
2018 COLLEGE FOOTBALL DEFENSIVE S/P+ RATINGS | Football Outsiders
S&P+ defensive ratings for 2018.www.footballoutsiders.com
2015 they ranked us 71st with 21 G5 programs ranked ahead. Adjust for P5 only that's 50th
2016 they ranked us 28th with 4 G5 programs ahead. Adjusted for P5 only that 24th
2017 they ranked us 84th with 25 G5 programs ranked ahead. Adjusted for P5 only that's 59th.
2018 they ranked us 58th with 16 G5 programs ranked ahead. Adjusted for P5 only that's 42nd.
The average adjusted numbers over that 4 year span is 43.75. Seems pretty in line with the record analysis.
Coaching matters
Edit: I was talking about winning the conference, not magical recruiting rankings.
Last edited:
Adjusted for P5Not just SP+. Look at Sagarin rankings which hold up pretty darn well predictively.
He had that somewhat better 2018 squad at 72nd.
College football team ratings 2018 - Jeff Sagarin Ratings
sagarin.usatoday.com
2016 24th
2017 52nd
2018 59th
2019 49th
2021 60th
Avg 5 year = 48.8
No matter how you spin it, CU falls in that 40-50 range among P5 programs on an average basis across the last 5 years, which is in line with their recruiting rankings. If you remove 2016, they fall to 55th, which is 10 spots lower than the initial ranking I put them tied with in the record analysis. End of the day as a P5 program, CU has recruited in the bottom third for years, and the results on the field have matched that.
That’s a lot of G5 programs with far less resources ranked ahead of us each year. Almost like we’re not allocating the money effectively or hiring competent coaches.
We’ve been doing less with less for so long there’s no reason for people to part with their hard earned cash until they can at least get mediocre results with what they have
We’ve been doing less with less for so long there’s no reason for people to part with their hard earned cash until they can at least get mediocre results with what they have
hawg1
Well-Known Member
SP+ and FPI probably best sources to use. Adjusting for SOS is essential.
It's a lot of G5 programs playing a lot of mediocre to bad G5 teams. There are also FCS programs in the top 20-40 as well, and no, North Dakota State wasn't the 19th best team in the entire country in 2018. I don't care if those metrics claim they are adjusting for SOS and opponent, it's still a G5 player making a play or not making a play against another G5 player that determines the the data going into the statistics. You can't compare that to a P5 player making or not making a play against another P5 player and then saying the G5 player would have the same outcome vs the P5 player across an entire season.
You're reaching Yak. Teams that recruit in the 40s should make bowl games more often than once every 15 years.
Yes, I agree with the once every 15 years part, but I see a lot of Arizona, Texas Tech, Rutgers, Maryland, Missouri, Vanderbilt, Duke, etc showing up in the 40s. Teams that maybe average 1 bowl game every 3-4 years. That's recruiting that gets you a lot of 5-7 type records, which was my initial point.
Just hope that PM doesn’t come from Burrito, cause you don’t want those circumstances to develop.
Master Blaster
Ramblin Wreck from Golden Tech
Beta_rank is pretty good as well. It's also not behind a paywall like SP+
You got a link for that?
Master Blaster
Ramblin Wreck from Golden Tech
Sharp College Football | Beta_Rank | Advanced CFB Stats| College Football Covera
The home of Beta_Rank the most advanced CFB stats model and other advanced CFB stats, podcasts, and college football coverage
www.sharpcollegefootball.com
Website is a little clunky but once you've figured out where everything is it's pretty handy. Does well against the spread too once the model starts only using in season data around week 6 or so
Just imagine what it must be like as a Husker fan...getting excited for the only thing that matters in the state.
What is the reasoning behind not letting the public observe any practices/scrimmages?
Ummm. The media covering CU football is not that swift (nor impartial). I would discount anything they say.