Behind the Steel Curtain: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Steve McNair Found Shot to Death


spread the word

What's the best College Football Conference?

Well, it's been a while since I posted any statistical analyses, but here's one I've been curious about researching for a couple of years. With excitement ramping up for the upcoming college football season, I thought it was the right time to post this analysis of how the top conferences stack up against each other. If any new BTSC readers enjoy this post, you may want to review my RB Analyses (Part 1 and Part 2), WR Analysis, or QB Analysis.

For years now, I've been hearing the SEC touted as the best college football conference, particularly by fans/alum of SEC schools. Being from an ACC school and spending the early part of my life in northwestern PA, I'm not one to just agree that the SEC is axiomatically the best conference without question. So, I wanted to research the conferences to see how each one really stacks up against another. Now, before I get into this, I'm going to say that I really wanted to get more details particularly about each conferences' non-conference schedule, but for the most part I'm forced to rely on a couple of ratings systems that I have found on the web, plus a few other websites with articles and statistics about how the conferences rate against each other.

Star-divide

The majority of my analysis is based off of data that I got off of Jeff Sagarin's rating website and Teamrankings.com, a website created by Mike Greenfield, as well as little bit of data pulled from this Stewart Mandel article on this very topic.

My basic approach here was to determine the overall conference rankings based on Sagarin's rating system and the system used at Teamrankings.com, and see how dominant or balanced the conferences have been. I was able to gather data for the last ten years from Sagarin's site, but only for the last seven years from Teamrankings' site. I also reviewed the relative values assigned to each conference for the years to determine if there was a large or small relative disparity between the conference values. For example, one year the top conference may have a large margin of superiority over the next best, while in another year, the top conference's margin may be much slimmer. 

So, let's start looking at the data from Sagarin's and Teamrankings sites and then we'll take a look at Stewart Mandel's article and data. First, we'll look at the Sagarin data:

Sagranks_medium  

Sagarin Conference Overall Rankings by Year

Sagrates_medium  

Sagarin Conference Rating Values by Year

Just a quick perusal of these tables indicates that the SEC has indeed lived up to its hype each of the last two years, finishing as the top conference each year, and also posting 2 of the 3 highest overall ratings values in the last ten years. However, the 8 years prior to 2006 indicate that the Conference relative strength has fluctuated between various different conferences. In fact, prior to 2006, three other conferences had finished at the top twice, which is twice as often as the SEC in that span. Also, the number of the ACC, Big 10, Big 12 and Pac-10 had finished in the top 3 was also right on par with the SEC in that span.

With that, let's take a look at the data from the Teamrankings website. First we'll look at the Overall Ratings just as with the Sagarin. Then, we'll take a look a conference Strength of Schedule and Non-League Rating (or rating versus their non-conference schedule).

Trranks_medium 

Teamrankings.com Conference Overall Rankings by Year

Trrates_medium 

Teamrankings.com Conference Ratings Values by Year

Looking at these tables, the SEC's argument appears even stronger, as Teamrankings.com ranked them the top conference for 4 out of the 7 years for which the data was available from the site. Unfortunately, we don't have the data from 1998-2000 to see if it also correlates with Sagarins' rankings. From looking over the data from both sources, there are some differences in the conference rankings, but, there are only 3 instances where the conference ranking differed by more than 2 between Sagarin and Teamrankings for a given year. There were 7 instances (out of a total 42) where the rankings differed by more than 1. So, with a couple of large discrepancies in 2002 and 2004, overall the rankings from both sets of data are consistent with each other. Based on this level of correlation, it seems safe to say that for at least two of the three years from 1998-2000, Teamrankings.com would have similar rankings as Sagarin. If that is the case, then we are again left to conclude that the SEC has been the dominant conference in the last two years, but prior to that, multiple conferences laid claim the title of the country's best football conference.

I didn't want to just look at overall rankings, because, I believe that what really determines relative strength between conferences is their non-conference strength of schedule and how they fair against that competition. Sagarin did not have that data broken out at all, and Teamrankings.com only had overall strength of schedule and non-conference Ratings. I was hoping to get to compare actuall non-conference strength of schedules, but I decided that this would have to do. So, here are the rankings and ratings values of each conferences overall strength of schedule and non-league (or non-conference) rating.

Trsosranks_medium 

Teamrankings.com Conference Strength of Schedule Rankings by Year

Trsosvalues_medium 

Teamrankings.com Conference Strength of Schedule Values by Year

Trnleagranks_medium 

Teamrankings.com Conference Non-League Rankings by Year

Trnleagvalues_medium 

Teamrankings.com Conference Non-League Ratings Values by Year

Looking at these numbers, what do they really tell us. While the SEC has the highest non-league rating 4 out of 7 years, it only has the strongest overall strength of schedule in one of those years (2nd in the other 3). Here is where it would be really nice to know exactly how the nonconference strength of schedules stack up. And that is where the data that I pulled from the Stewart Mandel article comes in. In his article, which I would recommend reading BTW, he looks at various different values to determine relative rank between the conferences. But, in my opinion, the best to measure each conference is through their non-conference results. So, from all of the measures that Mandel used, I pulled his Non-Conference RPI values for each conference and put it into a table format, shown below.

Simandelnonconfrpitable_medium

Nonconference RPI Values from Stewart Mandel article

Unfortunately, he did not break out his data year by year, so there we can't do a direct comparison, but this data is still worthwhile. According to this data, the Pac 10 has consisently, for the last 10 years played the toughest competition outside of their conference. For the years 1998-2003, the Big Ten and ACC both had better results against better competition than then SEC. Since then, both conferences have dropped in their non-conference achievements, being passed by the SEC and Big 12.

After looking at all of this data, what can we conclude with certainty? I would argue that the only thing we can really conclude is that the SEC has been the dominant conference for the last two years. However, prior to that, they were ranked 5th or 6th for the years 2004 and 2005 in both Sagarin and Teamrankings.com. And, going back to the 6 years before that, they were consisently a top 3 conference (certainly more consisently than any other conference). No conference really stood out as being dominant for any stretch between 1998 and 2005. According to Mandel's article, the Big 10 was the best conference from 1998-2003. But, according to the Sagarin data, the Big 12 did better, ranked in the top 2 for 4 out of the 5 years, while the Big 10 dipped as low as 5.

So, again, after looking at all of this data, the only thing really clear is that prior to 2006, conference strengths were pretty cyclical. In fact, the only conference that had very little change in their ranking was the Big East, who finished in last place every year until 2006. In the last two years, the SEC as clearly dominated, moreso than any other conference at any point in the past 10 years. And, that is probably to be expected when, according to Mandel's article their coaches' salaries have risen an average of 75% in the last five years. The average salary in the SEC is now $1.85 million, with 3 coaches making more than $3 million/year. So, for the foreseeable future it appears that the SECs recent dominance will continue.

With that said, I will say that, if you meet an SEC fan who tells you it's always been that way, you can know from multiple sources, that's just not the case. And if the Big 10 and Big 12, which were the dominant conferences not even a decade ago, start paying big money for the best coaches, they may catch up quite quickly.

Well, any thoughts? Hopefully, all of the tables are not too much data to digest all at once.

2 recs | Comment 17 comments | Share on Facebook Digg!

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Wolf Brother bringing some serious heat

Once again. Thank you!. Since I am not a math guy, I was wondering about two things. First, are conferences that have a playoff game at a disadvantage somehow? It seems that getting one more win is not as gainful as getting one more loss is damaging. Those conferences that have to play that extra week, against the toughest possible opponent while the non-playoff leagues (Big Ten) are safe in the clubhouse, have more to lose than gain when it comes to national championship implications.

Second, are conferences that are more balanced at a disadvantage? Of course, all leagues end up .500, but those leagues that are top-heavy (Big Ten again) ride the coattails of those top teams who have much less resistance throughout the season. Ohio State may not be better than Georgia this year, but they have an easier shot at a national title because of the lack of resistance.

I don’t mean to overcomplicate this, but I was just wondering if those factors had anything to do with the whole ball of wax. Or, are my questions invalid to any of the ratings?

by maryrose on Aug 26, 2008 10:26 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Good questions

For both of your questions, it depends on what your thinking of. Having a playoff game will make it harder for that conference’s best team in the regular season make it to the BCS championship game, and having a more balanced conference will also make it harder for the best team to go undefeated. However, in terms of what makes the conference better overall (or what improves their ratings in the Sagarin and Teamrankings systems), I believe that both a more balanced conference and a conference championship game improve the overall conference ratings. The reason is that a championship gives the conference one extra game of the two best teams in the conference that is factored into their rating values. The strength of schedule, and overall team ratings for both of those teams is probably improved overall, thereby raising the conference average. Also, if you have more teams that are good, it’s possible that it will be harder for one of those teams to raise above the others, but the overall conference is still going to be better than if you only have one or two dominant teams surrounded by a bunch of cupcakes.

So, yeah, a team like Ohio State may have an easier path to the championship, but the overall conference rating will be better for the SEC (unless they fall off and lose a couple cupcake games). I guess, overall, your questions point more to the individual team, and not so much to the conference as whole. But, that’s alright. It’s just more to talk about. :)

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 27, 2008 10:27 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

TMQ

In his NFC preview brought up the practice of buying home games/cupcake games from 1-AA teams. Teams in the SEC often have 8 home games with four road games. So even if their SOS is high, they get a huge boost in playing mostly home games. The PAC-10 is 6-6 home road, with good competition to boot.

by zeke5123 on Aug 26, 2008 10:37 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Strength of Schedule

True, and I have seen that argument made against the SEC, as well. Here is an article that points out the historic shortcomings of the SEC’s out of conference schedule. I will give them some credit for beginning to change that in the last 2-3 years.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 27, 2008 10:35 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Big East needs love...

I am not about to say that the Big East dominates BUT I would say the do represent MUCH MUCH better than people thought they would when BC and Miami left… Just think, everyone said the Big East was left for the wolves…NOT SO FAST!

(that said I can’t wait till the Pitt and PSU rivalry is renewed! – It may take a certain AARP card holders plunge to the well first tho).

-Dave
http://www.eSellOut.com
Stillers tickets for yinzer’s from the local source out here in Plum Borough!

by esellout on Aug 26, 2008 11:02 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Big East

They definitely made some serious strides that last couple of years, with the emergence of WVA, Rutgers, Louisville, and S Fla. However, they may have peaked, since WVA lost Rodriguez, and Louisville looks to be on the downswing after losing Petrino.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 27, 2008 10:37 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

saturday afternoons

I suppose with college football there are so many teams that it leaves things too up in the air. I don’t know if it’s possible to accurately discuss a “best” conference, as there are way more variables than in the pro game. Ultimately, it comes down to a handful of items … for me, I’ve always enjoyed watching both the Big-10 and the Pac-10 (though I was very opposed to the Pac-10 before moving to California a number of years ago … they have since won me over, especially Dixon – now a Steeler – & the Ducks, & Cal despite their penchant for end-of-the-season collapses). And I believe that enjoyability is important in college ball.

At the end of the day, with college football, you should simply stick with the same politics that are relevant to baseball: always root against any team from Texas or Florida. After that, always root for small-market against big-market. Always root for the Midwest against the Northeast, and so on.

And so on.

by Fahey on Aug 27, 2008 1:43 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

SEC out of conference

The argument that I have heard (being a Gamecocks fan where the team moved into the SEC relatively recently in 1992 I think) is that the internal competition within the SEC is rough enough that they don’t need to travel outside so much.

Personally I don’t necessarily buy that one. When we were independent we played a lot of good teams from around the country, along with a few “easier” games, especially at homecoming. Now it seems as though there are a lot more games with colleges I’ve never really heard of. Now I’m not trying to sound stuck-up, and it does give those colleges a good chance to get in the national spotlight (and pull off huge upsets – right App State?) , but I’d rather see a somewhat stronger out of conference schedule. I can’t speak for other conferences out there really. Some of the SEC schools I think are getting out there more than others. Didn’t Tennessee play the Trojans last year?

I’ve noticed that we are picking up some more ACC games the last few years, and this is good in my opinion.

In terms of the better conference (once again stats aren’t my fav) maybe it would be useful to look at which conferences send the most players into the pro ranks, also bowl game records would show inter-conference results.

I don’t think that one is better than the rest, in general, and there are always the little guys out there that really put together an awesome performance (Boise vs Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl – one of the best). I think it is all cycles as you said, and right now there is a lot of attention on the SEC, and that gets the top recruits, gets more money for the programs, and tends to spiral. Just this week the SEC got a major new deal on TV rights with ESPN that certainly won’t hurt that equation.

In the ACC, you guys seem to currently lacking a few consistent national-level hitters, but I’m sure that will change in time. FSU and Miami used to be the big dogs just a few years ago for instance.

BTW – side note – just read that if the Gamecocks beat the Wolfpack this Thursday it will tie the win/loss record between the schools – who knew?

by SCSteeler on Aug 27, 2008 3:21 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Bowl results

You can take a look at the Stewart Mandel article for the bowl results and for the number of players sent to the NFL. Once you get to the article, you would need to click on the Conference Power Index (in fact just click here for the SEC’s, then you can get to any other conference from this site).

I can see using number of players sent to the NFL as a measure, and Mandel looked at that, in addition to % of teams in AP, bowl records, and non-conference RPI. But, I think that AP and players drafted are both things that are impacted by human opinions, and if there is already a pre-disposed bias to favor a team or conference, then that hurts the objectivity of the analysis. That’s I would favor the a way of more strongly analyzing the non-conference schedules (including bowls). The non-conference RPI is the closest thing that I could find to that, and it is less favorable to the SEC due to their history of never scheduling tough non-conference competition. Like I said, they are improving that, and it coincides with the conference emergence as a dominant conference the last two years.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 27, 2008 10:54 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Pete Carroll

Haha, juding by pro ranks, USC is a conference to themselves…

by zeke5123 on Aug 27, 2008 10:40 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

its tough

really to say which conference is truly the best. As a fan of both an SEC and a Big 10(PSU) team, I get to see two vastly different conferences. I grew up a few miles from Happy Valley, and have lived in Arkansas for the last 13 years.

Firstly, I think that as far as championship games go, either all the conferences should have one, or all of them should not. A loss at the end of the season is devastating in this system, even between a 1 and 2 team, like the OSU-Mich game two years ago. Mich was 2, OSU was 1, they played the final game of the season and Mich lost and fell to 3. So, for example, if Florida and LSU both go undefeated and then play each other in the SEC champ, the loser has little chance at the NC, usually since another team is undefeated or at 1 loss.

Secondly, your arguments about non-con games are dead on. The SEC is notorious for scheduling easy cheesy games. Arkansas had two Div II opponents last year. Its something that the league is trying to address, with teams like Tennessee and others scheduling touger non-con games. The Pac-10 though routinely schedules games against touger opps.

Thirdly, the conferences themselves. The SEC from nearly top to bottom is competitive, with the last few years seeing even perennial doormat Vanderbilt showing up lately. Sure there is a team or two every year that loses nearly every conference game. But as a whole, the conference is very competitive and routinely beats up on each other. The ACC and the Big East are up there too, but the Big 10 is a joke. Once in a while PSU or Iowa or in last year’s case Illinois will have a good year, but it really should be named the Big 2.

by steelerark on Aug 27, 2008 11:07 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Your first point: I agree with this, but, unfortunately, college football doesn’t actually have an overriding league. The NCAA has some rules, but there are other things that are up to the conferences or individual schools. I would be in favor of setting up a system where every BCS conference is required to play their non-conference games against other BCS conference opponents, each conference has a championship game, and there is a playoff based on those standings and championship results. But, since each team makes their own non-conference schedule, that’s never going to happen. So, in that case, I say just go with the Plus 1 proposal. Any team not in the top 4 BCS standings doesn’t really need to be considered anyway.

Second point: I already touched on this in the above paragraph, but I will just add that I’m glad to hear two SEC guys admit that SEC is notorious for their non-conference scheduling. How many times to LSU need to destroy Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisiana-Monroe, and SW Missouri St? But, again, give Tennesses credit for going to Cal, Georgia for going to ASU this year, and a few other schools for making an effort to address that.

Third point: The SEC’s doormat teams have clearly improved the last two years: Vandy, SC, and Kentucky have all been respectable, and Ole Miss and Miss St, after being just atrocious 3-4 years ago, have really improved as well. But, go back about 10-15 years, and Vandy, SC and Kentucky were doormats, while Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, and Wisconsin were perennial top 15 teams, with Iowa, Purdue, Michigan State, and even Northwestern being pretty solid most of the 90s. So, while the Big 10 has taken a dive in the last 8-10 years, it’s not impossible for that to occur to some of these SEC teams as well.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 27, 2008 12:22 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

oh, and yeah

I know that the NCAA can’t change conference rules, I just meant that that was what need to happen. Never will, but it needs to. I like what u said in your first paragraph. I wish they would implement those things.

by steelerark on Aug 27, 2008 2:08 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Not technically within your range,

but the Gamecocks beat Ohio State two years running after the 2000 and 2001 seasons at the Outback Bowl…actually I suppose that does fall in your dive period, but OSU won a national championship after the 2002 season.

Also, SC may not be a doormat these days, probably more of a door-man these days considering the way Vandy, Arkansas, LSU, and the Gators ran all over us last year.

by SCSteeler on Aug 27, 2008 7:11 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That's right

I believe that SC won 10 games in 2000 or 2001. Lou Holtz really seemed to have them on a roll for a couple of years. That 2002 OSU championship was a surprise, though, because I remember that it was Tressel’s second year, and they had been 6-6 (or 6-5) John Cooper’s last year which must have been 2000.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 27, 2008 7:23 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

totally agree

especially with the last point. I guess I was speaking in present day terms. The Big 10 used to be solid 7 or 8 teams deep. And it is embarrasing the non-con games that the SEC schedules. Absolutely embarrassing. I hope that more follow Tennessee’s suit and schedule tougher games. Arkansas has started, last 2 years they got thumped by USC, and this year we start a series with Texas again. But overall the SEC as a well deserved bad rap for this.

by steelerark on Aug 27, 2008 2:06 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yup...

One or two a year is ok – gives the smaller colleges a chance to smack someone in the face, but it’s a little too much it seems to me. Plus, I’d rather get whooped up on by a really good opponent than by the skin of our teeth win against a smaller school punching “above their weight.”

When I was a kid I went to see USC vs USC and we beat the Trojans!!!! YEAH! I remember some big talk on the radio about Michigan the next week…..it was ugly I’m not even sure we showed up at the next game, but the point was we used to schedule in quite a few tougher opponents before we joined the SEC, but then again we didn’t have a conference back then.

by SCSteeler on Aug 27, 2008 7:02 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to BTSC, a blog dedicated to the SIX-time world champion Steelers.

"Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history."

Art Rooney Jr.

"Level-headed thinking." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Start posting about the Steelers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Pc290207_small
Top 5 NFL Players I'd like to punch in the face
Small
Six time the charm
P4070003_small
Signature Moments / The Top 8 of 2008-09 For The Pittsburgh Steelers

Recent FanPosts

2163310289_196904cec9_small
Steve McNair found shot to death
Horns_small
A poll...
Small
53 man roster
Horns_small
Troy Polamalu
A546203962b8877l_small
My Pittsburgh Steelers 2008-2009 Tribute Video
Small
AFC CHAMPIONSHIP GAME LOSSES-WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN?
Small
Steelers radio broadcast question
Small
Maybe Aaron Smith isn't so underrated
Small
I cant help myself, I'mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm baccccccckkkkk!

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini

SPONSORS


Site Founder & Editor

Mbean_small Blitzburgh

Steelers Historian

Steeler_small maryrose

Bringing You Your Daily Six Pack

Plainview_small drinkyourmilkshake

Official Partner of Yahoo! Sports