 | ||
 | | |
Which is the Toughest Conference | |||||||||||||||||||
Back to the Articles Index | |||||||||||||||||||
Let me help clarify the great debate on which conference is the toughest. One of the most exciting things about NCAA Football is that the toughest conference changes on a yearly basis. I remember back in the late 1960's, when it could have been argued that the SWC was the top conference in the country with powerhouses like Texas and Arkansas battling it out for #1. Joe Paterno is still not too pleased with President Nixon's proclamation that Texas was #1 after they beat Arkansas in 1969 when his undefeated Penn St team finished #2. In later years, it was the Big 8 with Nebraska and Oklahoma dominating the landscape. The Big 10, of course, is usually at the top, as is the SEC. Both conferences have had their powerhouse years, with Bear Bryant's Crimson Tide and the rivalry between Woody Hayes (Ohio St) and Bo Schembechler (Michigan). They of course have also had some off years. There have been a lot of conference changes recently which have created some major shifts of power. Another interesting point is that there is not an exact science for picking the toughest conference. You cannot rely strictly on how many bowl wins a conference racks up during the postseason, or on its overall record in non-conference play. Let's face it, some leagues' non-conf slates are much tougher than others. Conferences can play non-conf games vs IAA or BCS opponents and if you go strictly on overall records, the wins and losses count the same. Before I take a look at 2006's results, let's look at the results for the previous five years for a historical perspective. After the 2001 season, the SEC was rated #1 when analyzing the Top 3 teams in each conference as Florida, Tennessee and LSU all finished in the Top 7. They were also rated #1 overall and were a deep and balanced league. The SEC had a winning bowl season (5-4) and the Top 3 won their bowls by an average of 24.7 ppg against tough opponents (Michigan, Maryland and Illinois). The Big 12 had FOUR of the Top 10 teams and was my #2 Toughest Conference for 2001, followed by the #3 Big East, #4 Big 10, #5 Pac 10 and the ACC finishing 6th. In 2002, the Big 10 made a big comeback and was the Top Conference. Not only did they produce the National Champion in Ohio St but they had the best record of any conference in bowl games at 5-2. The Big 10 also had the best record vs teams from other BCS conferences during the regular season. They were 8-5 (ACC #2 at 10-7). They narrowly edged out the Big 12 for my Toughest Conference honors, with the remainder of the order being: #3 Pac 10,#4 SEC, #5 Big East and #6 ACC. In 2003, I put together all the factors (non-conf record, record vs BCS conf, Average Power Ratings and bowl records) and rated the conferences with the SEC narrowly earning the title of 2003's Toughest Conference with the Big 10 and Big 12 finishing very close behind. The ACC, which only ranked #4 or lower in the other ratings, had the best bowl record at 5-1 and outscored opponents by an average of 21.3 pts!!! The SEC was #2 in the bowls with a 5-2 mark, while the Pac 10 was #3 at 4-2. For 2004, I eliminated wins vs IAA schools but did include losses vs IAA schools. USC had tremendous Power Rating numbers which are also a part of my equation. During the season the Big 12 had the best non-conf record and a slight lead but USC's demolition of Oklahoma in the Title game had me awarding the Pac 10 its first-ever Toughest Conference Title. The #2 conference was the Big 12, #3 SEC, #4 ACC and the Big 10 was #5. In 2005, the best non-conf record went to the Big 12 at 23-5 (82%), followed by the Big 10 at 26-6 (81%), the ACC at 24-9 (73%), the Pac 10 at 18-8 (69%) and the SEC at 20-9 (69%). Against BCS schools the Big 10 was #1 with a 6-4 mark, with the only other leagues over .500 being the Pac 10 & Big 12 at 4-3 each and the ACC at 9-7. The MWC (5-7) actually had a better record in the category than the Big East (4-9). Only 3 leagues had winning records in bowl games with the Big 12 at 5-3, the Pac 10 at 3-2 and the ACC at 5-3. Then I looked at the Power Ratings. I took the top 3 teams of each league and got a combined Power Rating and the best trifecta was from the Big 10 (Ohio St, Penn St, Michigan) followed by the Big 12 (Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech) and then the SEC (Auburn, LSU, Georgia). The SEC led with 3 teams in the Top 10, with the Big 10 & Big 12 having 2. After taking in all of the above information, here is how I ranked the 2005 conferences: #1 SEC, #2 ACC, #3 Big 10, #4 Big 12, #5 Pac 10 and #6 Big East. Last year you could have made a case on Nov 19th that the Big 10 was the top conference as Ohio St and Michigan were generally regarded as the top 2 teams in college football. After both lost big in their bowl games, the landscape changed back to a familiar league. The SEC was the CLEAR #1 conference. Lets look at some of that factors that led me to that conclusion. The SEC led in the amount of bowl teams with 9 followed by 8 for both the Big 12 and the ACC. The best conference record during the regular season vs IA teams was the SEC at 32-8 (80%) followed by the surprising Big East 27-7 (79.4%) then the Big 10 at 68.4%. The lowest mark among the BCS conferences was the ACC at 20-17 (54.1%). The best record for a conference vs BCS foes went to the Big East at 12-6 while the SEC was 9-6, followed by the Pac 10 (7-6) and the Big 10 (7-7). The ACC was just 4-11 (27%) in matchups vs other BCS conferences and the Big 12 was a lowly 3-8 (27.3%). Both the MAC and CUSA posted more wins (5) in non-conf BCS games than did the Big 12 or ACC!! The SEC led with 41 players drafted followed by the Big 10 (32), ACC (31), Pac 10 and Big 12 (28 each). The Big East only had 16 which was actually 1 behind the WAC! The SEC and Big 10 each had THREE Top 10 teams with the Big East being third with 2. The SEC had 6 Top 25 teams followed by the Big 10 (4) and three conf had 3 in the Big East, Pac 10 and ACC. The conference with the best bowl record was surprisingly the Big East with a perfect 5-0 record! The SEC was 6-3 but then had 4 wins over ranked teams in bowls, which led all conferences. The Big East had ONE win over a ranked foe (the only one they faced in the postseason) and the Big 10 and Pac 10 each topped that with two. All of the factors above were tossed into my computer and the result was a landslide win for the SEC. The Big East, which would have been EVERYONE'S #6 BCS conference heading into the year, snagged a shocking #2 spot. The Big 12, which was 3-8 vs BCS conf foes in the regular season and their 3 bowl wins were all over teams that finished the year 6-7, dropped to the bottom of the BCS conferences. | |||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | |||||||||||
 | ||
| | |
Now let's take a look at which conference will be the toughest in 2007. First let me explain how I derive the results. I complete 8 primary sets of power ratings at the start of the year. First is a pure Power Rating. I rank the positions (QB, RB, WR, etc.) from 4 to 10 points with 10 points being the highest. I then add up all of the positions, factor in coaching and special teams, and derive my Power Ratings for each team. The second Power Rating is based on my Power Plays Ratings (see page 305). These take into account the production of the team not only in terms of points, but yards gained and allowed. I compile a lengthy list of areas of improvement and spots that are weaker and either upgrade or downgrade each team's Power Plays numbers. I then add up all the different numbers and get my Preseason Power Play number for each team. Three other sets are based on last year's final numbers. I grade every position for each team (QB, RB, WR, OL, DL, LB, DB) on their scale of improvement from one year to the next. The scale ranges from +6 points to -6 points for each position. I take the total team number and factor it into last year's 3 final sets of Power Ratings. This gives me 3 very different ways of gauging the strength of the teams. The question is, how do I add up the points? Conferences all have a different number of teams. If I ranked the teams by the average of the entire conference, that would give a good indication of the average rating of all the teams. But the bigger the conference the weaker the grade could possibly be. I did use that as one factor. I added a second factor and that was an average grade of just the Top 5 teams. This would give me an even comparison of all the conferences. The only thing this rating does not show, of course, is the depth of the conference. For example, let's say one conference had 9 bowl caliber teams and 1 also- ran and another conference had 5 bowl caliber teams and 5 also-rans. The thinner conference would be rated higher if the Top 5 teams had a higher average, even though the deeper conference was probably tougher. I also rate leagues by the Top 3 and the Top 8. By merging the 4 ratings, I get a fairly accurate assessment of the strength of the conferences. Basically, after all of that is done, I have 4 different sets of rankings. They break down the conferences into the best strength of the Top 3 teams in each conference, the Top 5 teams, the Top 8 teams and then the overall strength of the whole conference. This year, the Pac 10 came in first in the Top 3 thanks to the presence of USC, the top team in the country. The Big 12 was #1 in the Top 5 teams and the SEC was #1 in the Top 8. The SEC and Big 12 each have 5 teams that make my preseason Top 25 with the Pac 10 right behind at 4. The Pac 10 leads with 6 teams in the top 27 of my Power Poll. Here are my preseason rankings for this year's Toughest Conferences and also 2006's final polls. | ||
| | |
 | ||
| | |
 | ||
| | |
[Home] [Newsletters] [FREE Plays] [Publications] | ||
| | |