****The Official NEW (new)^3 conference realignment & shit talk thread****

[Pitt Gorilla]

in memory of Saul Good. He will be missed.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

The only team in your four that nobody cares about is Baylor. The other three are huge national brands. Baylor will lose at least once, maybe twice. The Big 12 is still a lot tougher than it gets credit for. They're better than the PAC from top to bottom this year. I'm not even sure it's close.

What do you mean "get credit for"?

The SEC West, Big 12 and Pac South are grouped 1,2,3.

I'm not sure anyone is seeing any disrespect towards the Big 12 except you.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

Except they're not, and we went through this already last winter when the Aub-FSU game had nearly every one of their top-20 metered markets located in the South quadrant.


Nobody outside the South gives one shit about Auburn.

Auburn is about as popular as Baylor.

FSU and Norte and good draws but I don't think Notre Dame is going undefeated.

If one of the Mississippi schools or TCU gets in the playoffs then CFB has an outright disaster on it's hands.

George Mason in the Final Four style.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by Pasta Giant Meatball

But hey wickedbitch gets to enjoy the Toilet Bowl against Iowa St.

Mizzou and South Carolina, Basketball's bitches.

[WhawhaWhat]

Baylor finally plays a decent team this week. Thus far they have played crap teams only. We'll see if they can keep it going.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by Bambi

Auburn is about as popular as Baylor.

FSU and Norte and good draws

Are they?


During the heady buildup to the Alabama-Notre Dame BCS title game, several reporters stated that the TV ratings for these two national brands might break the all-time record of the Texas-USC contest of 35 million viewers.

Mr. Football (Tony Barnhart) was drinking the kool-aid.

"The greatest game we've ever had in the BCS was Texas and USC. But our TV guys are telling me that if this game stays close, it's going to break the record," said Tony Barnhart, a columnist for CBSSports.com and a regular on CBS college football analysis shows. "USC and Texas are great programs, but they're not the great brand names of Notre Dame and Alabama."

Even those brand names need a competitive contest.

The early returns for Monday nights blowout win by 'Bama point to a very nice number for ESPN but nowhere near the record.

Overnight ratings for the game were 15.7 which translates to 26.8 million viewers. That is better than last year's SEC rematch between LSU and Alabama (22 Million) but not as good as the Auburn-Oregon game (28 Million).

['Hamas' Jenkins]

http://regressing.deadspin.com/chart...uit-1640831522

When college football teams fail to meet expectations, fans tend to turn to an old stand-by: Our coach is an all right recruiter, but he just can't coach. This is the narrative behind, for example, Will Muschamp's downturn at Florida. On the other hand, coaches who significantly exceed expectations are perceived as solid coaches despite meager recruiting skills. (This the case for Bill Snyder.) But these coaches are outliers. How does the rest of college football fare in translating expected talent to actual success?

We compared how teams recruited to where they ended up in computer polls at the end of each of the last five seasons. To measure on-field success, we used Kenneth Massey's ranking composite. Massey is a statistician whose work contributed to the BCS computer rankings; his composite index averages dozens of rankings including the six computers used in the BCS, the AP poll, and the USA Today coaches' poll.

Rivals rankings were used to measure recruiting. For each season, we used an average of the five previous recruiting classes. Even though upperclassmen generally contribute more than underclassmen, we avoided weighted averages because upperclassmen also transfer schools, declare for the NFL draft early, and have career-ending injuries.

To give an example of how we rated teams, 2009 teams are made up of recruiting classes from 2005-09. In 2009, USC had a 3.2 average, since the five recruiting classes that made up that team were, on average, ranked 3.2.

We then averaged results from 2009-2013 and compared the metrics. Doing this tells you that from 2009-2013, USC finished 22nd in Massey's poll on average with teams that had recruiting classes ranked 4.2 on average, meaning they "underperformed" their recruiting rankings by 17.8 spots on average. Perhaps as a consequence, Lane Kiffin got fired.

The further teams are from the chart's dotted red line, the greater the discrepancy between their recruiting and on-field rankings. Teams in the blue region did better on the field while teams in the red region were better at recruiting.

Of teams in the red region, Kansas had the most distance between its talent and team success. The Jayhawks are near the middle of the horizontal axis, so it's not like they recruited blue chippers. They've just been so awful on the field, as Charlie Weis lost 19 of 20 contests against Power 5 schools, that they haven't come close to meeting the expectations of their mediocre recruiting classes, underperforming their recruiting classes by 48.9 spots on average.

Of teams in the blue region, Navy had the most distance between talent and success. Despite military-academy restrictions that make recruiting top players difficult, Navy made bowl games in four of the last five seasons as they outperformed their recruiting expectations by 57.4 spots on average.

There was a significant correlation (r=0.77) between recruiting and on-field rankings. The mean difference between recruiting and on-field rankings was 16.6, and the median difference was 14.8. Arizona and Nebraska had the smallest discrepancies with a 0.2 difference, while Navy had the largest with a 57.4 difference. Recruiting obviously isn't an exact science and has its flaws. But given there's more than 120 teams in FBS college football, these rankings give a decent idea of where teams will sit in upcoming years.

Below are sortable tables to make more sense of the data. "BCS" refers to Massey's on-field ratings. The first table shows team averages, rankings (which just order the averages), and standard deviations for Rivals and Massey ratings. "BCSAvg" is where teams sit on the vertical axis in the chart above, "RecAvg" is where teams are on the horizontal axis. "Diff" is the difference between on-field and recruiting averages. A negative "Diff" means teams "underperformed" their recruiting. A positive "Diff" means they "outperformed" their recruiting.

The second table shows how on-field rankings fluctuated. The third table shows year-by-year recruiting rankings.

[Prison Bitch]

I saw that the other day. Just goes to show you how good Briles/Snyder/Patterson are and how dreadful the KU & Colorado coaches have been.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

Are they?





During the heady buildup to the Alabama-Notre Dame BCS title game, several reporters stated that the TV ratings for these two national brands might break the all-time record of the Texas-USC contest of 35 million viewers.



Mr. Football (Tony Barnhart) was drinking the kool-aid.

"The greatest game we've ever had in the BCS was Texas and USC. But our TV guys are telling me that if this game stays close, it's going to break the record," said Tony Barnhart, a columnist for CBSSports.com and a regular on CBS college football analysis shows. "USC and Texas are great programs, but they're not the great brand names of Notre Dame and Alabama."

Even those brand names need a competitive contest.



The early returns for Monday nights blowout win by 'Bama point to a very nice number for ESPN but nowhere near the record.



Overnight ratings for the game were 15.7 which translates to 26.8 million viewers. That is better than last year's SEC rematch between LSU and Alabama (22 Million) but not as good as the Auburn-Oregon game (28 Million).

Texas is the biggest program in CFB and perhaps that could change in 50 years but I doubt it.

USC - UT will never be broken. Played at the height of college football's popularity with real star power all over the field.

Still the greatest CFB game I've ever seen.

[Saul Good]

That was a great game. Schools are recruiting kids that were 6 years old when that game was played, though. I'm old enough to remember when the Big 12 used to be a part of the national conversation. A lot of people probably don't remember it, but current members of the Big 12 have won 2 football titles and a basketball title as members of the conference.

As it sits, this is the worst Texas team I can remember. They had a really good run for about 5 years, but they've regressed back to where they were for most of their time since the merger. They've got to get it together somehow. Private religious schools can't carry a conference.

[Bambi]

Interesting how much "SEC West" is being mentioned now by media and websites as opposed to "SEC".

The East hasn't won the conference since 2008. Incredibly unbalanced conference.

[Titty Meat]

Kansas brings the big 12 down.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Bambi

Auburn is about as popular as Baylor.

FSU and Norte and good draws but I don't think Notre Dame is going undefeated.

If one of the Mississippi schools or TCU gets in the playoffs then CFB has an outright disaster on it's hands.

George Mason in the Final Four style.

Auburn has hosted Gameday 9 times. Baylor is also a school.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by Chocolate Hog

Kansas brings the big 12 down.

All schools have their strengths.

Then there's Nebraska who apparently after this weekend have none.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Auburn has hosted Gameday 9 times. Baylor is also a school.

I understand Gameday going to southern schools. Most of the other parts of the country have more important things to do at 9am than stand behind guys filming tv shows.

But hey, Auburn right?

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/D...B-Ratings.aspx

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Bambi

Interesting how much "SEC West" is being mentioned now by media and websites as opposed to "SEC".

The East hasn't won the conference since 2008. Incredibly unbalanced conference.

Maybe the Big 12 will luck out and get to play a team from the SEC East this year. It didn't work out so well last year, but they nearly kept it to single digits.