|
|
Post by FUBeAR on Jul 26, 2016 15:03:27 GMT -5
This website ( KEEPER'S COLLEGE FOOTBALL RATINGS ) analyzes roster data in the Spring and calculates the data on a national basis for FBS and FCS from which I further analyzed and created the SoCon data & Rankings below... | National Rank | Team | Average O & D Starters Lost | Average % O & D Production Lost | Average Starters AND Production Lost Combined | | 1 | Mercer | 0.75 | 8% | 0.41 | | 3 | ETSU | 1.50 | 13% | 0.81 | | 5 | VMI | 1.70 | 15% | 0.93 | | 10 | Wofford | 2.30 | 17% | 1.23 | | 47 | Chattanooga | 3.60 | 36% | 1.98 | | 53 | Furman | 3.75 | 29% | 2.02 | | 68 | The Citadel | 4.20 | 30% | 2.25 | | 84 | Samford | 4.65 | 40% | 2.53 | | 99 | WCU | 5.15 | 41% | 2.78 |
|
|
|
|
Post by mercerfan on Jul 26, 2016 17:33:05 GMT -5
This website ( KEEPER'S COLLEGE FOOTBALL RATINGS ) analyzes roster data in the Spring and calculates the data on a national basis for FBS and FCS from which I further analyzed and created the SoCon data & Rankings below... | National Rank | Team | Average O & D Starters Lost | Average % O & D Production Lost | Average Starters AND Production Lost Combined | | 1 | Mercer | 0.75 | 8% | 0.41 | | 3 | ETSU | 1.50 | 13% | 0.81 | | 5 | VMI | 1.70 | 15% | 0.93 | | 10 | Wofford | 2.30 | 17% | 1.23 | | 47 | Chattanooga | 3.60 | 36% | 1.98 | | 53 | Furman | 3.75 | 29% | 2.02 | | 68 | The Citadel | 4.20 | 30% | 2.25 | | 84 | Samford | 4.65 | 40% | 2.53 | | 99 | WCU | 5.15 | 41% | 2.78 |
The correlation between the two categories is pretty high. The only difference is UTC which is probably due to QB Huesman. |
|
|
|
Post by mercerfan on Jul 26, 2016 17:46:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by wcugrad95 on Aug 2, 2016 14:11:59 GMT -5
@fubear - does this mean ETSU and VMI are going to battle you guys for the conference crown while the rest of the league battles for 4th through 8th place???
|
|
|
|
Post by FUBeAR on Aug 2, 2016 16:34:26 GMT -5
@fubear - does this mean ETSU and VMI are going to battle you guys for the conference crown while the rest of the league battles for 4th through 8th place??? Sure 95, if that's the way they teach statistical inference in Cullowhee, then you should take your conclusion straight to your local bookmaker. Also - counting all the way up to 9 might be a good goal for you to consider. |
|
|
|
Post by wcugrad95 on Aug 3, 2016 10:14:39 GMT -5
Good one - I keep "not counting" ETSU for some reason :-)
Don't get me wrong - I absolutely believe Mercer is going to be battling for a win in pretty much every SoCon game they play (they have done that for the most part already). I also think the conference is as balanced as it has been in a long time with the exception of ETSU. I will not be surprised if we have co-champs and have multiple teams in the top-half that have 2, 3, or even 4 conference losses.
I personally expect Mercer and VMI to have the biggest improvements in regards to conference records this year - Mercer because of all the experience you have coming back (so your ranking on this list makes sense) and the close games you have been playing, and VMI because of Al Cobb. I still think UTC, Samford, and WCU have lots of very talented and athletic players. VMI is my darkhorse to be a top-5 SoCon team, but at this stage I think it is throwing darts to know 1-5 other than I think VMI will be low on that list. I think they will win several games and scare many other teams kind of like Mercer has in the past 2 seasons.
But for the list itself, I think it is a good example of finding some facts and figures that support a very specific agenda (which I don't blame you for doing by the way - it is what fans should do). I would put more weight into the quality of a team's returning starters (i.e. do you have players who got post-season awards last year or have been recognized for pre-season awards this year coming back). I am very concerned about WCU because we lost our all-time offensive statistical leader and 3 starting offensive lineman, but per our coaching staff we probably have a better (i.e. the "more potential" coach-speak) offensive line this year and we have 2 very capable QBs who don't need to try and win games individually and do things like Troy Mitchell did. It is all what-ifs and high-hopes right now - we will all find out starting in about a month and we should all be excited about the SoCon this year and for the foreseeable future.
|
|
|
|
Post by FUBeAR on Aug 4, 2016 23:58:08 GMT -5
I would put more weight into the quality of a team's returning starters (i.e. do you have players who got post-season awards last year or have been recognized for pre-season awards this year coming back). I am very concerned about WCU because we lost...3 starting offensive lineman, but per our coaching staff we probably have a better offensive line this year 1) Award selections are crap - I put zero stock in the Coaches 'horse-traded' selections nor the Media's uninformed, or at best, under-informed, ones. 2) Two of those 3 OLmen lost were VERY good players - 1 of them was just a bada$$ and I think should have won the Jacobs Blocking Trophy. The 2nd one held ridiculously badly on almost every play, but he was rarely called, so 'more power to him' - he effectively completed his assignment on almost every play and teams can WIN with that! I think the 3rd guy was a very smart player; Coach on the field-type who played an important role in the cohesiveness and consistency of the OL - not the best 'pure player' but those types can be even harder to replace than the talent-monsters. No way is the OL @ WCU as good as last year's, right now. Probably not even close. That said, once the newbies gain some game experience and get used to playing together, they very well may be better than last year's OLine....But not NOW...Coaches are just urinating in your ear and tellin' you it's rainin' if you believe that crap. 3) I didn't post that chart as any sort of 'predictive analytics tool.' I posted info that had been derived from a raft of data gleaned by someone else and applied a more relevant framework to present the data. Thinking about how one could use that data as a predictive tool, I think you would have to add a factor for # of conference wins and another for Margin of Difference in conference games...Then, you might have a predictive tool as this, I believe, would add some type of quality component into the metrics used. Imma let 95 get to work on adding those factors/columns and re-posting his findings. Looking forward to seeing 'em. |
|
