• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Ranking The ACC at Mid-Season

S&P+ ACC Rankings

4. Clemson
5. Louisville
9. Florida State
14. Miami
19. Virginia Tech
33. Pittsburgh
37. North Carolina
39. N.C. State
57. Georgia Tech
67. Boston College
68. Syracuse
71. Wake Forest
82. Duke
94. Virginia
 
Pilchard said:
Glad that WF has a chance to prove its better than many of its fans think.

The State game was a tough scheduling spot for WF as State was coming off a bye, while WF was coming off a road win at IU. Had WF played State at home off a bye, think the outcome would have been very different. GT has struggled all year, and GT's, Pitt's and UNC's defense are levels below WF. Obviously, Clemson and L'ville are among the elite teams in the country. FSU has played a ridiculous schedule (including having to play 5-1 WF after Miami and before Clemson). After those 3, WF can hang with anyone else in the ACC with the possible exception of VT who had a very deceiving loss to Tennessee (VT was up 14-0, and VT had 5 fumbles lost in that game). VT is legit. (BTW, VT's AD is the f-ing man; knocked it out of the park with both Buzz and Fuente; VT could easily have fallen off a cliff in both the marquee sports with bad hires, and Whit Babcock got it done. Kudos!).

L'ville
Clemson

---

FSU

---

VT

---

Everyone other than UVA, BC, Duke and Cuse (none of whom are that bad). There are no truly awful teams in the ACC.
Click to expand...

What chance? Our five remaining games come against teams nobody thinks we will beat or teams everybody thinks are worse than us. Nothing would prove we are better than the fans think aside from beating FSU, Louisville, or Clemson. Even you have the two teams we beat and two we are likely to beat at the bottom of your list.
 
PhDeac said:
What chance? Our five remaining games come against teams nobody thinks we will beat or teams everybody thinks are worse than us. Nothing would prove we are better than the fans think aside from beating FSU, Louisville, or Clemson. Even you have the two teams we beat and two we are likely to beat at the bottom of your list.
Click to expand...

So, no one outside of WF in the ACC is playing football the rest of the season? Head to head is not the only way (and maybe not even the best way as a single game can have a fluke result) to determine where each team "ranks". Lets see where every team stands after playing the conference schedule. We will see how good each of the ACC teams are based upon on the outcome of conference games the rest of the way. Not a difficult concept to grasp.
 
WF isn't going to prove anything by other ACC teams playing. Regardless, you have the teams we play at the bottom of the league. Your post is more about our opponents proving they're better than our fans think.
 
PhDeac said:
WF isn't going to prove anything by other ACC teams playing. Regardless, you have the teams we play at the bottom of the league. Your post is more about our opponents proving they're better than our fans think.
Click to expand...

Is this a serious comment? So, if Miami loses out, and WF wins out, WF wouldn't prove to be a better team than Miami over this season? Dude, put some "PhD" thought into your posts.
 
I already said the only way Wake could "prove" anything would be to beat FSU, Clemson, and Louisville. So was your whole point that you're glad Wake is playing three of the best teams in the country?

If so, that seems like a weird thing to say but whatever.
 
The most likely outcome at this point is roughly 2.5-3.5, so around a 7.5 win total for the year.

If I had to take an O/U on 7.5 I would likely take under. There's very little chance that we beat one of the three heavyweights and a reasonable chance that we lose to one of the other three.
 
Don't know where we rank, but we're clearly getting better. That's all that matters to me.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
S&P+ ACC Rankings

4. Clemson
5. Louisville
9. Florida State
14. Miami
19. Virginia Tech
33. Pittsburgh
37. North Carolina
39. N.C. State
57. Georgia Tech
67. Boston College
68. Syracuse
71. Wake Forest
82. Duke
94. Virginia
Click to expand...

What metric does this use to grade? We have three power five wins, two of those being away. Without some mathematical equation, I would put wake right behind NC State. We'll know much more after the next 3-4 weekends.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
DeacLaw05 said:
Don't know where we rank, but we're clearly getting better. That's all that matters to me.
Click to expand...

True. Improving while putting up wins. I'll take it.
 
CharlotteDeac1 said:
What metric does this use to grade? We have three power five wins, two of those being away. Without some mathematical equation, I would put wake right behind NC State. We'll know much more after the next 3-4 weekends.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Seems about as ridiculous as that Coley guy. What has GT done to get a ranking 15 spots ahead of us?
 
Deacsfan27 said:
S&P+ ACC Rankings

4. Clemson
5. Louisville
9. Florida State
14. Miami
19. Virginia Tech
33. Pittsburgh
37. North Carolina
39. N.C. State
57. Georgia Tech
67. Boston College
68. Syracuse
71. Wake Forest
82. Duke
94. Virginia
Click to expand...

Interesting that Syracuse jumped us this week after we beat them by 19 points.
 
Yeah, this football season has the feeling of last year's basketball to me. We have overachieved a bit early with some good breaks. A few bounces the other direction could make the second half of the season look ugly give the competition. Carney gives me hope. He is exactly the back we need.
 
From the S&P+ website since there are a few questions on it:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaa

The S&P+ Ratings are a college football ratings system derived from the play-by-play and drive data of all 800+ of a season's FBS college football games (and 140,000+ plays).
The components for S&P+ reflect opponent-adjusted components of four of what Bill Connelly has deemed the Five Factors of college football: efficiency, explosiveness, field position, and finishing drives. (A fifth factor, turnovers, is informed marginally by sack rates, the only quality-based statistic that has a consistent relationship with turnover margins.)

Here are the components of the ratings shared below:

Second-Order Wins (2ndO Wins): Defined here and discussed in further detail here and here, second-order wins compare the advanced statistical components of a given game, and the single-game win expectancy they create, to the actual results of the game.

This projected win total is a cousin of the Pythagorean record, a concept common in many sports. They are presented below, with the difference between a team's wins and second-order wins in parentheses.

S&P+ rating: Using the five-factors concept above, the S&P+ ratings take into account efficiency (Success Rates), explosiveness (IsoPPP), and factors related to field position and finishing drives. It is now presented in two forms: the first is a percentile, and the second is an adjusted scoring margin specific for this specific season's scoring curve.

Off. S&P+ rating: A team's offense-specific S&P+ rating, presented in the form of an adjusted scoring average.

Def. S&P+ rating: A team's defense-specific S&P+ rating, presented in the form of an adjusted scoring average (and since this is defense, the lower the average, the better).

Special Teams S&P+ rating: This is an initial attempt to measure play-for-play special teams efficiency, weighted for overall importance.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
From the S&P+ website since there are a few questions on it:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaa

The S&P+ Ratings are a college football ratings system derived from the play-by-play and drive data of all 800+ of a season's FBS college football games (and 140,000+ plays).
The components for S&P+ reflect opponent-adjusted components of four of what Bill Connelly has deemed the Five Factors of college football: efficiency, explosiveness, field position, and finishing drives. (A fifth factor, turnovers, is informed marginally by sack rates, the only quality-based statistic that has a consistent relationship with turnover margins.)

Here are the components of the ratings shared below:

Second-Order Wins (2ndO Wins): Defined here and discussed in further detail here and here, second-order wins compare the advanced statistical components of a given game, and the single-game win expectancy they create, to the actual results of the game.

This projected win total is a cousin of the Pythagorean record, a concept common in many sports. They are presented below, with the difference between a team's wins and second-order wins in parentheses.

S&P+ rating: Using the five-factors concept above, the S&P+ ratings take into account efficiency (Success Rates), explosiveness (IsoPPP), and factors related to field position and finishing drives. It is now presented in two forms: the first is a percentile, and the second is an adjusted scoring margin specific for this specific season's scoring curve.

Off. S&P+ rating: A team's offense-specific S&P+ rating, presented in the form of an adjusted scoring average.

Def. S&P+ rating: A team's defense-specific S&P+ rating, presented in the form of an adjusted scoring average (and since this is defense, the lower the average, the better).

Special Teams S&P+ rating: This is an initial attempt to measure play-for-play special teams efficiency, weighted for overall importance.
Click to expand...

nerdss.gif
 
tigerswood said:
I see it more as 3 tiers. Wake at the bottom of the 2nd tier. As long as we can avoid the bottom tier entirely in future years, most Wake fans will be happy. The future looks bright.

Clemson
Louisville
FSU

Va Tech
Miami
UNC
NCSU
WFU
Pitt

Ga Tech
UVA
Duke
Cuse
BC
Click to expand...

Interesting - we play all three of the top ones, and 4/5 of the bad ones. Only play one of the similar quality teams
 
deac85 said:
Interesting - we play all three of the top ones, and 4/5 of the bad ones. Only play one of the similar quality teams
Click to expand...

Didn't even notice that. Very interesting.

I still think this schedule is almost ideal, as it gives the slight chance of a "program-changing win" while also hopefully maximizing our win total. Would rather have it that way than just a bunch of games where we would be slight to moderate underdogs and hope to eek out 6 wins.
 
I think we are losing touch with the ultimate goal here. I understand this S&P+ mumbo jumbo is based on valuable advanced analytics - explosively, field position, efficiency, etc. However, at the end of the day all that matters is wins and losses. The Deacs are 5-1! Let enjoy it and not wallow over our special team efficiency %. Only Wake fans would try to manipulate the Indiana win to where it deserves some sort of asterisk or something...F that! We forced 5 turnovers and would've won by 10+ barring a garbage touchdown...."We won but we would've lost if we only forced 2 turnovers vs 5" is such a LOWF masochistic mindset.

All will likely change this weekend. But, as of today, the conference rankings are unequivocally as follows (Based on wins and losses...excludes expectations, upside potential or upcoming games):

Atlantic Division
Clemson 3-0, 6-0
Wake Forest 2-1, 5-1
Louisville 2-1, 4-1
NC State 1-0, 4-1
FSU 1-2, 4-2
Syracus 0-2, 2-4
Boston College 0-3, 3-3

Coastal Division
VT 2-0, 4-1
UNC 2-1, 4-2
UVA 1-0, 2-3
MIA 1-1, 4-1
Pitt 1-1, 4-2
GT 1-3, 3-3
Duke 0-2, 3-3
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top