Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
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!

Phil Steele: Biggest home fields advantages in the Pac 12

Quattro

Quattro

Banned
BANNED
Stole the link from rward over at Rivals.

Pac 12 Homefield Advantages (national rank):

1. Oregon +6 (#1)
2. USC +4.5 (#20)
3. Stanford +4.5 (#20)
4. California +4.5 (#20)
5. Oregon State +4.5 (#32)
6. Utah +4.5 (#32)
7. UCLA +4.25 (#41)
8. ASU +4.25 (#41)
9. Arizona +4 (#49)
10. Colorado +3.75 (#58)
11. Washington +3.5 (#68)
12. WSU +3 (#92)

OOC Teams:
Fresno State +3.25 (#82)
Colorado State +3 (#92)

Colorado Teams:
Colorado +3.75 (#58)
Colorado State +3 (#92)
Air Force +4 (#49)

Phil Steele's 2012 Homefield Edges

Thoughts? I don't see Stanford, OSU, Air Force, Arizona, and maybe Cal having a better home field advantage than us. UW is way too low as well with Cal and Furd being too high. UCLA may be as well.
 
Terrible list. I get that recent W/L record at home naturally has to play a role in his methodology, but Stanford is obviously not an intimidating home field advantage. Neither is Cal, neither is Arizona, etc. etc.
 
Creatini said:
Stole the link from rward over at Rivals.

Pac 12 Homefield Advantages (national rank):

1. Oregon +6 (#1)
2. USC +4.5 (#20)
3. Stanford +4.5 (#20)
4. California +4.5 (#20)
5. Oregon State +4.5 (#32)
6. Utah +4.5 (#32)
7. UCLA +4.25 (#41)
8. ASU +4.25 (#41)
9. Arizona +4 (#49)
10. Colorado +3.75 (#58)
11. Washington +3.5 (#68)
12. WSU +3 (#92)

OOC Teams:
Fresno State +3.25 (#82)
Colorado State +3 (#92)

Colorado Teams:
Colorado +3.75 (#58)
Colorado State +3 (#92)
Air Force +4 (#49)

Phil Steele's 2012 Homefield Edges

Thoughts? I don't see Stanford, OSU, Air Force, Arizona, and maybe Cal having a better home field advantage than us. UW is way too low as well with Cal and Furd being too high. UCLA may be as well.
Click to expand...

You are thinking about what our home field advantage should be. Altitude, low oxygen, possible winter storms, and a hostile crowd all get rendered useless by inept coaching.

There is a reason why we had such a long win less streak on the road.
 
CVilleBuff said:
Terrible list. I get that recent W/L record at home naturally has to play a role in his methodology, but Stanford is obviously not an intimidating home field advantage. Neither is Cal, neither is Arizona, etc. etc.
Click to expand...

Recent W/L is hardly a good indicator of true homefield advantage. If a team has been a perennial top 10 team in recent years then of course they're going to have a good home record over that same span.

All you need to about this list is that he has Boise tied for the top spot.
 
tante said:
You are thinking about what our home field advantage should be. Altitude, low oxygen, possible winter storms, and a hostile crowd all get rendered useless by inept coaching.
Click to expand...
Which should be factored in. His criteria is stadium capacity, actual attendance, % of capacity, last years W/L, three year home record, five year home record, his own personal grade (says he has 12 TV's on watching football at all time but this is not a good way to grade IMO) and then he used Vegas splits (to determine an opponets strength, kind of a meh way to determine it though because those splits aren't always based on the two teams) on a 0-6 scale. I did find this interesting though:
At the bottom are Fresno St 7-20 and Tulane at 9-22.
Click to expand...

Stadium Capacity:
2.4

Actual Attendance:
2.56
 
Air Force shouldn't be surprising. It is much higher than Folsom (by almost 2,000 feet) and closer to big mountains (worse weather).
 
MrFrumpylane said:
Air Force shouldn't be surprising. It is much higher than Folsom (by almost 2,000 feet) and closer to big mountains (worse weather).
Click to expand...
True but they also averaged 75% capacity to our 94% capacity with an easier home slate. They don't have a better home field advantage than us or UW.
 
LA gang member.jpg
MrFrumpylane said:
Air Force shouldn't be surprising. It is much higher than Folsom (by almost 2,000 feet) and closer to big mountains (worse weather).
Click to expand...
Beautiful setting in the middle of a mountain forest. USC #2 - if USC loses the street gangs in South Central LA will mug you. If USC wins they will also mug you.
 
Last edited:
I can promise you Florida State is a top 25 homefield advantage team. Their warchant is deafening.
 
FLounder said:
I can promise you Florida State is a top 25 homefield advantage team. Their warchant is deafening.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just more proof that this list a joke. To have FSU even with North Carolina and Georgia Tech is laughable (not to mention Houston and UConn). UNC is a bunch of people sitting around eating wine and cheese politely applauding (and that's when they decide to actually show up), and Georgia Tech is about 10 guys waving pompoms and then the rest of the 40k crowd is 70 year old alums and a bunch of opposing fans.
 
FLounder said:
I can promise you Florida State is a top 25 homefield advantage team. Their warchant is deafening.
Click to expand...

I went to the CU FSU game in tally and don't even remember them doing a war chant. It must have been so loud I blacked out. I do remember the hottest stripper I have ever seen in Panama city though, which is strange because that city also had the nastiest stripper I had ever seen. I wouldn't have ****ed her with Rugged's ****
 
tante said:
I went to the CU FSU game in tally and don't even remember them doing a war chant. It must have been so loud I blacked out. I do remember the hottest stripper I have ever seen in Panama city though, which is strange because that city also had the nastiest stripper I had ever seen. I wouldn't have ****ed her with Rugged's ****
Click to expand...

That game was terribly attended by FSU fans so it was far from a true indication of the environment in Tallahassee. The game never should have been moved to Jax in the first place.

There's a simple recipe for killing the atmosphere of a college football game - move it to an NFL stadium.
 
I gotta say after reading the actual article of how he ranks these it is pretty retarded. You can't base toughest places to play on things like W-L records etc. Look at Miami in the early 2000's. The team was bad ass, possibly one of the best teams ever in 2001. Using his criteria Miami would have been one of the hardest places to play (big stadium, awesome records etc) but anyone who has seen a Miami game knows it is not a tough place to play..... Maybe a tough place to get out of alive after the game but thats a different issue. I know he was just trying to somehow quantify this to make a ranking list cause he can't just arbitrarily state which is #1-25 without some criteria, I just dont think he came close on this one. I mean come on Hawaii is #12? Boise is #1? Ive been to the swamp and boise and Ill tell you right now there is no chance in hell Boise St is a tougher place to play than the swamp! The list is littered with bad ranks.... But at least it was kinda interesting to read. And more importantly gets me excited for football in a few weeks
 
CarolinaBuff said:
That game was terribly attended by FSU fans so it was far from a true indication of the environment in Tallahassee. The game never should have been moved to Jax in the first place.

There's a simple recipe for killing the atmosphere of a college football game - move it to an NFL stadium.
Click to expand...

The game I went to was in 2003 and in Tallahassee so it should have had the full representation.
 
The only reason USC is that high is because the Coliseum is big and USC has been really really good. Of the stadiums I've been too, the least threatening place to play by a landslide. Its only hard to go into USC and win because they have 9 first rounders. Apathetic lousy crowd.
 
torerobuff said:
The only reason USC is that high is because the Coliseum is big and USC has been really really good. Of the stadiums I've been too, the least threatening place to play by a landslide. Its only hard to go into USC and win because they have 9 first rounders. Apathetic lousy crowd.
Click to expand...


Rose bowl was almost a home game for CU. There were that many CU fans there.
 
Stanford @ #3?!?!?!

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

I suppose if an intimidating or hostile atmosphere/environment has no part in home field advantage, that could be true... Stanford's field is almost a neutral site from what I've heard.
 
DesertDawg526 said:
Stanford @ #3?!?!?!

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

I suppose if an intimidating or hostile atmosphere/environment has no part in home field advantage, that could be true... Stanford's field is almost a neutral site from what I've heard.
Click to expand...

Makes sense to me. Figures the nerds would perform best in an environment that resembles a library.
 
Sketchy, but this is def true for Cal. No matter how good or how bad we may be, the difference between home and away is night and day. It's a pretty common talking point around the PAC. Only USC and Oregon State have been able to win on multiple occasions there. Even Oregon has like one win in Tedford's tenure at memorial. That was their Title run year.

This includes OOC wins over Illinois, Michigan State, Minnesota, and an SEC division Champ Tennesseee(the same season we finished middle of the PAC)
 
Last edited:
newkid said:
Sketchy, but this is def true for Cal. No matter how good or how bad we may be, the difference between home and away is night and day. It's a pretty common talking point around the PAC. Only USC and Oregon State have been able to win on multiple occasions there. Even Oregon has like one win in Tedford's tenure at memorial. That was their Title run year.

This includes OOC wins over Illinois, Michigan State, Minnesota, and an SEC division Champ Tennesseee(the same season we finished middle of the PAC)
Click to expand...

This ties in with what's being mentioned earlier in this thread, including Stanford. You've had a nice run of mostly winning seasons under Tedford and thus won a solid amount of home games. Does that mean Cal is a raucous environment that brings extreme noise? No offense, but not really. Frankly the Big XII was at another level than the Pac on average in terms of loud, raucous home field advantage. It's obviously easier for Steele to base it off of recent W/L than experiencing every stadium and who crates the most intimidating atmospheres, but there's just no way CU is 10th or Washington 11th. False.
 
But the last three years have not been good. Which I think is what he used. And yet Cal scored well. Its obvious that these are not loud and crazy stadiums. That doesn't change that certain teams just perform well at home. Cal is the perfect example. Stanford on the other hand has been very good the last three years, that is more in line with what is being said here.

The title of this ranking was not "Loudest and craziest Stadiums". What ever the magic is at memorial, it results in a great home field advantage.

Last example, in 06 cal was co PAC champs, won 10 games and beat TAM in our bowl, finished ranked in the top 20, and yet we crapped the bed at Tenn. The following year we rocked them at home even though we had a terrible year.
But yes, I agree that CU and UW are incorrectly ranked.
 
Last edited:
newkid said:
But the last three years have not been good. And yet Cal scored well. Its obvious that these are not loud and crazy stadiums. That doesn't change that certain teams just perform well at home. Cal is the perfect example. Stanford on the other hand has been very good the last three years, that is more in line with what is being said here.
Click to expand...

I agree. Some teams are just comfortable at home and pull out the wins, even if it's not necessarily what would be deemed as an intimidating atmosphere. There's two ways to look at it, basically.
 
the top Pac schools at #20. ouch. CU's ranking, should this metric continue, will continue to rise....no reason to get bent here.
 
It's NOT home win/loss record that establishes the strength of your home field advantage. Anyone who uses that metric over any time period is just stupid.

It's the difference between your home and away records, and the difference between your size of victories/losses home vs away. The basketball stats nerds get this right, some football stat geeks also get it right. Steele doesn't get it right, he gets it stupid.
 
skibum said:
It's NOT home win/loss record that establishes the strength of your home field advantage. Anyone who uses that metric over any time period is just stupid.

It's the difference between your home and away records, and the difference between your size of victories/losses home vs away. The basketball stats nerds get this right, some football stat geeks also get it right. Steele doesn't get it right, he gets it stupid.
Click to expand...

This, I agree with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top