Evil Empire update

[Champ967]

There havent been as many bcs vs non-bcs matchups over the last few weeks, but some paterns are emerging, so it may be time for an update on the Evil Empire:

Weeks 1 -11 ....

bc$ 108
non-bcs 21

That's a win percentage of 16% for non-bcs teams. An aditional 21 games were decided by less that a touchdown. If we put those in the non-bcs win column, that 33% wins for the good-guys.

Ok ... Johnstonge and Feisenwog cheer. These are exactly the numbers a bcs-bootlicker would expect. BUT.....

Independents (not ND, they're bcs) and the dear SuckBelch Conference have so far combined for a record of 1-38 against bcs opponents. When we take their performances out of the picture suddenly non-bcs are winning 22% of games vs. bcs opposition. And give losses of a touch or less to the good guys and now they're winning 40% of their bcs games.

That's not quite the head-and-shoulders adavantage that the bcs spin doctors would have you believe exists! Parity, boys and girls. Parity. It's a-comin.

I wont have another big chunk of data until after bowl season. Until then, I'm gonna be figuring how well the bcs does against its own memebers, at home and on the road. When we compare that to our mid-major numbers, I think we'll see some surprises.

Parity. Hell, yeah.

[GrassyNoleHitman]

I'm gonna be figuring how well the bcs does against its own memebers, at home and on the road.

i'll save you some time. the winning % of BCS vs BCS will be .500. by definition every game will end up with 1 win and 1 loss. so at the end of the season you will have a bcs vs bcs record of like 457-457.

finding the home field advantage would be pretty interesting. i would wager that the home field winning percentage will be something like .550

[Champ967]

Thanks for catching that .... that's what I meant. Not straight up bcs vs. bcs, but rather bcs AT bcs. I suspect those numbers wont be too unlike non-bcs AT bcs.

I'll need a few days to finish up the numbers. But I suspect that much of the superiority traditionally understood to be a bcs monopoly is little more than good ol home field advantage.

[GrassyNoleHitman]

I suspect that much of the superiority traditionally understood to be a bcs monopoly is little more than good ol home field advantage.

home field advantage is very overrated. the orlando sports writer last year had a collumn "debunking the myth of the LSU home field advantage." it was laugh out loud funny only because it pointed out the stupidity of the old mantra "it's hard to win on the road in the SEC."
basically he pointed out the the LSU winning percentage at home was almost identical to their road winning percentage over the last 10 years. he then rattled off the list of distingushed teams that have gone into Baton Rouge and come home victorious. i'm not talking about the Florida's that go in there and win, i'm talking about UAB beating LSU for homecoming. i'm talking about a 2 win KY team beating LSU. there was quite a long list of teams that won in Baton Rouge that ended the season under .500 (i'm sure LSU fits that description too at one point)

look at the teams with tremendous home winning streaks over the years. Miami in the late 80's-94. FSU 90-2001. UF 93-99. Nebraska for most of the 90's. OU about 3 different times. i'm not sure if i should include Bammer under the Cub because they played all of their tough games in Birmingham.
what do those teams have in common. they were darned good teams. it was tough to win in Miami-Tallahassee-Lincoln-Norman-Gainesville-Tuscaloosa because you were playing Miami-FSU-Neb-OU-UF-UAT when their programs ruled college football.

my bet is that what causes a good home field advantage, and what causes the BCS teams of having a good record vs the non BCS teams is good old fashioned money. with money you can have those luxiourious locker rooms, weight rooms, practice fields that recruits will love to see. without money a great coach capable of building a program will bolt when a team like Alabama comes around.

FSU is damned lucky that Bowden is a stubborn man. back in 84 when Bammer wanted him, there was no way we could compete with them. but Bowden felt his job performance alone showed he was good enough for the job. he refused to jump through the hoops they wanted to make him jump through. and he stayed long enough that now FSU is one of the "haves".

[Champ967]

I agree with you ... sort of.

Home field advantage is just one of many factors from one game to the next. But over the course of seasons & decades, the extra wins at home start to add up, and a pattern develops. My hypothesis is that bcs schools win more games over time simply because they can afford to buy more home games.

[Dirtydawg]

I agree with you Champ on the homefield advantage. Hitman made a valid point about the amazing streaks by those powerhouses and the fact that they were powerhouse teams which made it harder to win at their stadiums. What he fails to realize, though, in his mention of the LSU article is that those were very mediocre teams at LSU and how much worse they would have fared if they had only played 3-5 home games and then playing those 3-5 games after playing 2 or 3 powerhouse teams on the road. I think he makes reference to it when he talks about money, but I think it's like you said as far as buying more home games in that they can afford to pay much less talented teams (The Citadel) to come play at their home, thereby increasing their win percentages, and not in fact that their money buys them better facilities (though that is a big help as well). This was especially true when they didn't have the BCS polls to contend with and they could schedule several very weak 1a teams and 1aa teams at home which further helped their at home wins.

Also, I think a major defining example of homefield advantage is Tech's home record when we were terrible for a good part of the 90's. We had some pretty bad teams but still managed a good home field record if I remember correctly.

[DONW]

I would just like to have the chance to play 7 home games to see how good we would do. I don't really see us having a big home field advantage but it would be better than having a big disadvantage on the road with those big schools that serve up homecooking with their refs.

[Dawgbitten]

What about that Nevada "Visitor cooking"?

[DogsWin]

What about that Nevada "Visitor cooking"?

The WAC's priorities are with it's 3 bowl games in the west (one of which, the SVC, has NO SPONSOR) and nobody wants to travel to any of them. Texas A&M has already stated that they WILL NOT attend the Humanitarian Bowl if invited.

Additionally the WAC's agreement with the Mobile Bowl is totally ridiculous. Even if an eastern WAC team was the conference champion & had a better record than all 14 MAC teams this year, the Mobile Bowl could still select a 6-6 SEC team with no questions asked by the WAC.

Without a 3rd bowl eligible western WAC team (Fresno, SJ State, or Nevada) the Silicon Valley Classic will be in "deep, deep do" financially just like the Independence Bowl in 1989.
________
VAPORIZER AFFILIATES