Every week, I publish my college football Simple Rating System scores for each of the 128 FBS teams. But to run the calculation — using this methodology — I also have to derive ratings for each non-FBS school, too.
Below are the SRS Ratings for all non-FBS college football teams through nine weeks. [continue reading…]
I’ll be honest: I know nothing about FCS football. But that’s what the SRS is for! If you want to read a real FCS playoff preview, SB Nation has a good one, as does the Sports Network, but let’s be honest, I have no idea how good those previews are. If you were to tell me that SB Nation just made up the name “Terrence West”, I couldn’t offer a counterargument.
That said, here is what the SRS says about the first round of the playoffs. Here’s how to read the table below: South Dakota State has an SRS rating of 30.1, the 8th best among FCS schools. In the first round of the playoffs, they go on the road to face Northern Arizona, which has an SRS rating of 23.5, the 27th best school in the FCS. As a result, the projected Margin of Victory – always shown from the perspective of the home team, is 3.6 points in the favor of the visitors. The table is sorted in terms of Game Quality, in case you need to determine which one of these games to watch. Game Quality is a proprietary statistic which meas… nah, even I’m not that crazy. The Game Quality rank is just a combination of the average SRS ratings of the two teams and the projected competitiveness of the game.
| GQ | Visitor | SRS Rating | FCS Rk | Home | SRS Rating | FCS Rk | Proj MOV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | South Dakota St | 30.1 | 8 | Northern Arizona | 23.5 | 27 | -3.6 |
| 2 | Bethune-Cookman | 24.6 | 26 | Coastal Carolina | 27.5 | 12 | 5.9 |
| 3 | Samford | 22.9 | 30 | Jacksonville St | 25.5 | 21 | 5.6 |
| 4 | Furman | 18.9 | 43 | South Carolina St | 23.3 | 29 | 7.4 |
| 5 | Southern Utah | 17.3 | 46 | Sam Houston St | 25.2 | 23 | 10.9 |
| 6 | Lafayette | 16.3 | 52 | New Hampshire | 26.4 | 16 | 13.1 |
| 7 | Sacred Heart | 15.3 | 54 | Fordham | 23.4 | 28 | 11.1 |
| 8 | Tennessee St | 25 | 24 | Butler | 8.9 | 73 | -13.1 |
Every week, I publish my college football ratings for FBS teams. To generate those ratings – using this methodology — my program also generates ratings for teams at all other levels. This week, I will separate out the non-FBS teams based on their levels of play (instead of just lumping all non-FBS teams together). As always, thanks to Dr. Peter Wolfe for providing the final scores for every college football game.
Let’s start with the FCS schools:
[continue reading…]
Every week, I publish my college football ratings for FBS teams. To generate those ratings – using this methodology — my program also generates ratings for non-FBS team. So let’s take a look at the ratings through twelve weeks for all non-FBS teams. After posting the ratings, I’m going to dip my toe into the Butler/Marist debate. As always, thanks to Dr. Peter Wolfe for providing the final scores for every college football game. [continue reading…]
Every week, I publish my college football ratings for FBS teams. To generate those ratings – using this methodology — my program also generates ratings for non-FBS team. So let’s take a look at the ratings through eleven weeks for all non-FBS teams. As always, thanks to Dr. Peter Wolfe for providing the final scores for every college football game. [continue reading…]