• 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!

Don't Blame the Deacs for Conference's Troubles

YankeeInAtlanta said:
Yes. An "I'm a Fan" townie booster level for locals that did not attend Wake. Could help raise several thousand dollars towards Mannings buy out.
Click to expand...

I was a little disappointed when the minimum Deacon club membership went to $125. They should have kept the entry level at $100 or even $99. Give that level a decal, Gold Rush and two ticket priority buying. You want more? Join at a higher level.
 
TheReff said:
Yep and this year like last year is Clemson and nobody else. Until our other teams quit struggling against the non-conference teams it will be that way. We can't have teams like BC losing bad at home to hapless Kansas. Or NC State getting pounded on the road to West 'by God" Virginia. Miami beaten in week 1 by Florida and FSU beaten on home turf by Boise St. Then of course our other ranked team, Syracuse getting pummeled by Maryland in Week 2 and Pitt getting beat in week 3 by Penn State.

What we need now to get some national recognition is for UVa to go into South Bend on Sept 27 and beat the Irish. I think it can happen. First off UVa is good but second it is a real good position for them as ND is going to be coming off a HUGE national tilt at UGa this weekend that will be rugged. Good spot! Then of course if we can keep winning and go up to BC and capture a win, that really helps our stature as the 3rd best team in the ACC.
Click to expand...

We do not want UVA to beat ND. Would make it much more difficult to finish higher than them and get to the Orange Bowl.
 
NjDeac77 said:
thought this was crazy and Kansas would also be on the list. but we dropped out of the rankings in 2008 one week before Kansas did... we were #15 after beating FSU on the road then lost to Navy at home, beat Clemson at home, then got shutout by Maryland on the road to drop out.

that was right before the infamous genius Lobo game in Miami where we barely threw the ball and had the lead at halftime, then tried to keep running in the second half after they adjusted which of course failed miserably and we lost.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/game/_/gameId/282992390
Click to expand...

that Navy game was miserable -- Riley threw 4 INTs. Then we had to play them again in the bowl game, which is pretty boring. The game the following year in Annapolis was equally miserable -- I think I'm still drying out from it.

But, Clemson fans do owe us a debt of gratitude for that game as it gave them Dabo.
 
Good article. I think the major issue the ACC has is no clear cut second or third best team that is also competitive for a top 10-15 spot in the country. I mean look at the metrics ranks for other teams in the ACC through three weeks - tons of middling teams:


Clemson (3rd SP; 2nd Sagarin) = 2.5 average



Miami (21st SP; 20th Sagarin) = 20.5 average
Virginia (31st SP; 28th Sagarin) = 29.5 average

Florida State (42nd SP; 32nd Sagarin) = 37 average

Wake Forest (51st SP; 40th Sagarin) = 45.5 average
NC State (43rd SP; 54th Sagarin) = 48.5 average
Pittsburgh (59th SP; 42nd Sagarin) = 50.5 average
North Carolina (64th SP; 39th Sagarin) = 51.5 average
Duke (55th SP; 52nd Sagarin) = 53.5 average

Syracuse (66th SP; 56th Sagarin) = 61 average
Virginia Tech (40th SP; 85th Sagarin) = 62.5 average
Louisville (67th SP; 58th Sagarin) = 62.5 average



Boston College (72nd SP; 96th Sagarin) = 84 average
Georgia Tech (89th SP; 88th Sagarin) = 88.5 average
 
Baconwfu said:
agreed
Wake could end up being just as good as FSU/Miami/VT on any given year (save for years where they've been Natty contenders) and people would still say" the ACC sucks, look Wake is the 2/3rd best team"....nevermind if we are actually good or not.
If wake can hold it's own, I'd guess there's a reasonable chance Clemson, Wake, UVA and maybe someone else (Duke/UNC or someone else) end the year ranked in the top 25
That's not exactly a killer conference, but it's not a weak one either (4 teams in the top 25), but because (save for Clemson) none of those teams are traditional football schools it must be because the ACC sucks as opposed to those schools actually being good.
That is to say, the ACC is a bit down, but it'll get more grief than it should because teams that are traditionally not good might be legitimately decent/good this year and the traditionally good schools look pretty bad so far.
Click to expand...

IF the ACC is good or not will shake out in all the bowls at year end.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Good article. I think the major issue the ACC has is no clear cut second or third best team that is also competitive for a top 10-15 spot in the country. I mean look at the metrics ranks for other teams in the ACC through three weeks - tons of middling teams:


Clemson (3rd SP; 2nd Sagarin) = 2.5 average



Miami (21st SP; 20th Sagarin) = 20.5 average
Virginia (31st SP; 28th Sagarin) = 29.5 average

Florida State (42nd SP; 32nd Sagarin) = 37 average

Wake Forest (51st SP; 40th Sagarin) = 45.5 average
NC State (43rd SP; 54th Sagarin) = 48.5 average
Pittsburgh (59th SP; 42nd Sagarin) = 50.5 average
North Carolina (64th SP; 39th Sagarin) = 51.5 average
Duke (55th SP; 52nd Sagarin) = 53.5 average

Syracuse (66th SP; 56th Sagarin) = 61 average
Virginia Tech (40th SP; 85th Sagarin) = 62.5 average
Louisville (67th SP; 58th Sagarin) = 62.5 average



Boston College (72nd SP; 96th Sagarin) = 84 average
Georgia Tech (89th SP; 88th Sagarin) = 88.5 average
Click to expand...

So the metrics rank a 1-2 team that lost to UNC, who Wake beat, 25 spots ahead, and another team that is 1-2 with a G5 loss at home and a near-loss to ULM, 15 spots ahead of Wake? I'm gonna go ahead and say that these metrics are trash.
 
Seems like a name brand is worth 30+ spots. Only explanation for having Miami and FSU at those rankings.
 
tigerswood said:
So the metrics rank a 1-2 team that lost to UNC, who Wake beat, 25 spots ahead, and another team that is 1-2 with a G5 loss at home and a near-loss to ULM, 15 spots ahead of Wake? I'm gonna go ahead and say that these metrics are trash.
Click to expand...

They still have some preseason weighting included (SP has a high amount still as he’s found one of if not the best single predictor of future performance is performance over the last few years). Unc dropped after their loss to Wake in both metrics. Wake just didn’t move much or dropped minimally. SP is over 55 percent ATS so far this year (has wake winning by three last week)
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Miami has two close losses to P5 schools and neither were home games.
Click to expand...

Miami is also getting credit for a 63-0 win over Bethune Cookman. Analytics have a problem with a small sample size (as an example Ken Pom admits his rankings aren't valid early in the season, but there are so many more basketball games that outlier results don't adversely impact ratings as much once teams approach double digits in games) and with lopsided wins over crappy opponents when some coaches take their foot off the gas and others do not (see, Maryland). Miami should not be rated 20 spots ahead of WF. Similarly, maybe FSU will get its act together, but right now, WF is a better football team than FSU.
 
Pilchard said:
Miami is also getting credit for a 63-0 win over Bethune Cookman. Analytics have a problem with a small sample size (as an example Ken Pom admits his rankings aren't valid early in the season, but there are so many more basketball games that outlier results don't adversely impact ratings as much once teams approach double digits in games) and with lopsided wins over crappy opponents when some coaches take their foot off the gas and others do not (see, Maryland). Miami should not be rated 20 spots ahead of WF. Similarly, maybe FSU will get its act together, but right now, WF is a better football team than FSU.
Click to expand...

Yeah some metrics do have this issue - SP+ has a garbage time metric it uses to help prevent this (KP does not). Small sample size for football is generally an issue overall. Wake is ranked 28th in "recent" rating on Sagarin (one ahead of Miami and six ahead of UNC) which is a better indicator of where a team may be headed v. heavy preseason weighting.
 
Last edited:
Wakeforest22890 said:
They still have some preseason weighting included (SP has a high amount still as he’s found one of if not the best single predictor of future performance is performance over the last few years). Unc dropped after their loss to Wake in both metrics. Wake just didn’t move much or dropped minimally. SP is over 55 percent ATS so far this year (has wake winning by three last week)
Click to expand...

What does the preseason weighting include? We finished the season 3-1 all against bowl teams.
 
Sagarin doesn't have any information about his model that I've ever found.

Connelly explained the following:

"My S&P+ projections incorporate recent performance, recent recruiting, and returning production; early in the season, they carry significant weight, and they are phased out with increasing speed. After a team has played seven games, its preseason projections are completely phased out of the S&P+ equation.

There is a decent case for keeping the preseason numbers involved for much longer than that, but maintaining anything beyond seven weeks has not, in my experience, changed predictive accuracy to any major degree."

https://www.sbnation.com/college-fo...ge-football-advanced-stats-analytics-rankings
 
Wake is likely undervalued offensively from preseason rankings because of Newman taking starting job as well as the fact that he's outperformed what anyone would expect.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Miami has two close losses to P5 schools and neither were home games.
Click to expand...

True. But I doubt we'd be ranked that high at 1-2 with an FCS blowout and two close road losses to P5 teams.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top