Mid Season Reviews and Rankings | The Boneyard

Mid Season Reviews and Rankings

Joined
Aug 6, 2023
Messages
74
Reaction Score
1,205
Bye Week with half the season finished. So let's see where the team stands compared to the rest of CFB. Reminder, there are 134 FBS schools.

Computers:
MasseySagarinESPN
UConn93 (+2)92 (-4)72 (-5)

Offense Overall:
StatValueRank
Points/Game30.447
Yards/Game414.846
Points/Play0.40354
3D Conversion %35.14%95
4D Conversion %40.00%105
Redzone Scoring %88.24%56

Even with some of our recent shortcomings against Temple, we're still an above average offense.

Defense Overall:
StatValueRank
Points/Game22.645
Yards/Game351.642
Points/Play0.32840
3D Conversion %24.66%2
4D Conversion %37.50%23
Redzone Scoring %70.59%12

We also have an above average defense. Our third down and red zone defense is elite. Not just against bad teams as some of you might say. Duke was 6/18 against us on 3rd downs. Maryland was 6/16 on 3rd downs.

Offensive Rushing:
StatValueRank
Rush Play %58.36%28
Yards/Rush4.746
Rushes/Game4412
Rush Yards/Game208.817

You don't need stats to know that our rushing attack has been great.

Offensive Passing:
StatValueRank
Pass Play %41.64%107
Completion %53.59%120
Yards/Pass6.792
Passes/Game30.669
Passing Yards/Game20684
Int %3.27%91
QB Sacked %2.55%18

However, our passing offense has been subpar by a number of different metrics. Shoutout to the elite o-line though! My take: we do have better skill players, but a combination of QB play and passing schemes has been lacking.

Misc:
StatValueRank
TO Margin/Game-0.6103
Fumbles/Game1.8109
INTs/Game1.282
INT Throw %3.27%91
Penalties/Play0.0442
Penalties/Game5.851
Opp Penalties/Play0.0547
Opp Penalties/Game7.239

We don't cause many fumbles or INTs per game but we seem to be an above average disciplined team.

Overall, we're an above average team. Somewhere in the 40-60 range of all FBS schools. That would put us in the middle of the pack with the B12 and ACC. And we're doing this without anywhere near the funding that they have. The computer rankings are derived from several years of data, so it will take time for those to reflect the current state of things.

Player Stats:
Joe Fagnano is #26 in the country with 11 TDs.
Durell Robinson is #7 with 7.7 yards/rush. #42 in total yard at 421.
Skyler Bell is 18th in total receiving yards at 508.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,581
Reaction Score
7,809
Bye Week with half the season finished. So let's see where the team stands compared to the rest of CFB. Reminder, there are 134 FBS schools.

Computers:
MasseySagarinESPN
UConn93 (+2)92 (-4)72 (-5)

Offense Overall:
StatValueRank
Points/Game30.447
Yards/Game414.846
Points/Play0.40354
3D Conversion %35.14%95
4D Conversion %40.00%105
Redzone Scoring %88.24%56

Even with some of our recent shortcomings against Temple, we're still an above average offense.

Defense Overall:
StatValueRank
Points/Game22.645
Yards/Game351.642
Points/Play0.32840
3D Conversion %24.66%2
4D Conversion %37.50%23
Redzone Scoring %70.59%12

We also have an above average defense. Our third down and red zone defense is elite. Not just against bad teams as some of you might say. Duke was 6/18 against us on 3rd downs. Maryland was 6/16 on 3rd downs.

Offensive Rushing:
StatValueRank
Rush Play %58.36%28
Yards/Rush4.746
Rushes/Game4412
Rush Yards/Game208.817

You don't need stats to know that our rushing attack has been great.

Offensive Passing:
StatValueRank
Pass Play %41.64%107
Completion %53.59%120
Yards/Pass6.792
Passes/Game30.669
Passing Yards/Game20684
Int %3.27%91
QB Sacked %2.55%18

However, our passing offense has been subpar by a number of different metrics. Shoutout to the elite o-line though! My take: we do have better skill players, but a combination of QB play and passing schemes has been lacking.

Misc:
StatValueRank
TO Margin/Game-0.6103
Fumbles/Game1.8109
INTs/Game1.282
INT Throw %3.27%91
Penalties/Play0.0442
Penalties/Game5.851
Opp Penalties/Play0.0547
Opp Penalties/Game7.239

We don't cause many fumbles or INTs per game but we seem to be an above average disciplined team.

Overall, we're an above average team. Somewhere in the 40-60 range of all FBS schools. That would put us in the middle of the pack with the B12 and ACC. And we're doing this without anywhere near the funding that they have. The computer rankings are derived from several years of data, so it will take time for those to reflect the current state of things.

Player Stats:
Joe Fagnano is #26 in the country with 11 TDs.
Durell Robinson is #7 with 7.7 yards/rush. #42 in total yard at 421.
Skyler Bell is 18th in total receiving yards at 508.
Huh? You showed three computer rankings that put us at an average of about 85. And then jumped to a conclusion that we are somewhere between 40 and 60. I can tell you where that delta comes from (I think). You're using stats that aren't adjusted for strength of opponents, but our rankings absolutely are based on results against our particular strength of opponents.

Having said that, I do appreciate the work laying everything out like that.
 
Joined
Apr 23, 2014
Messages
21
Reaction Score
144
Huh? You showed three computer rankings that put us at an average of about 85. And then jumped to a conclusion that we are somewhere between 40 and 60. I can tell you where that delta comes from (I think). You're using stats that aren't adjusted for strength of opponents, but our rankings absolutely are based on results against our particular strength of opponents.

Having said that, I do appreciate the work laying everything out like that.
"The computer rankings are derived from several years of data, so it will take time for those to reflect the current state of things."
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,581
Reaction Score
7,809
"The computer rankings are derived from several years of data, so it will take time for those to reflect the current state of things."
Would you mind sharing what you are quoting from. I thought, at least as to Sagarin and Massey, that they start the season using prior year’s stats but that by now they are ranked just on this year?
 
Joined
Feb 14, 2013
Messages
1,258
Reaction Score
2,406
Would you mind sharing what you are quoting from. I thought, at least as to Sagarin and Massey, that they start the season using prior year’s stats but that by now they are ranked just on this year?
might depend... but my understanding is roughly yours. I'm running a model right now that's very wonky based on a similar idea to massey but worse.... but mostly because I wanted an idea on why Alabama was so high despite losing to vandy. I still don't have an answer other than the idea they may be leaning heavy on last year's data but it may be that I'm using a crappy input... which I am.

I think your criticism is fair for the record. He didn't provide any links.
---
Personally hoping if Saragin is retiring he makes his method public.
 
Joined
Feb 14, 2013
Messages
1,258
Reaction Score
2,406
Found that somebody figured out Ken Massey's method... well, I wish I knew about this 18 years ago.


Based on that I fit the model on Division 1 data only for this year only with a collective home field calculation. UConn sits 57. Between Cal and Baylor. Ahead of Duke.

I suspect that if Massey's function is still current that its most likely using previous year's data as a non-trivial input. Keep in mind he ranks all of NCAA and NAIA on the same sheet so he will NEED to use some amount of previous data as a lot of D2/D3/NAIA stay with insular schedules until the end of the year. I have no real idea of what's under the hood.

Now, I don't believe Massey's method is justifiable under statistical methods but these become a means to an end... he may have messed with it an incredible number of ways since 2005.

edit: My last statement is true for virtually all computer ranking systems. I have an idea of the model I'd want to use but I haven't figured out how to write it but I have some "on the way" models I'd like to try. Bayesian nonparametrics and copulas.

edit #2: One reason not to use the new season's data immediately. Navy 15, Army 13 as described the model fit that put uconn at 57... current Massey has them 53 and 57 respectively. Again, he may have also changed his outcome function but I highly doubt he's fundamentally changed his method.
 
Last edited:

Online statistics

Members online
197
Guests online
1,605
Total visitors
1,802

Forum statistics

Threads
158,900
Messages
4,172,855
Members
10,042
Latest member
twdaylor104


.
Top Bottom