Page 1 of 1

The Congrove Rankings and SMU: A 20 Year View

Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:26 pm
by ponyboy
Image

The SMU ranking percentile graph above was created from data at the Congrove Computer Rankings http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/curr ... kings.html

It shows for the last twenty years where SMU football ranked in comparison to the rest of Division I football programs. Note that this is not a graph of win percentage, but an actual ranking. For instance, in 1996, SMU was in the 38th percentile. So 62 percent of the teams in Division I had a higher ranking that year.

A few things that stand out to me. The first is in 1997, the first year Mike Cavan took over from Tom Rossley and for the first time post DP, we approached the 50th percentile in ranking vis a vis the rest of Div I. But things went quickly downhill for Cavan, due in great part to the self imposed sanctions stemming from the Manlin situation.

The second thing is Bennett's fourth and fifth seasons in 2005 and 2006 when we seemed to have turned a bit of a corner. But 2007 would get him fired.

It wouldn't be until June Jones' second and fourth years that we crossed over the 50th percentile line and we could say we were better than most of college football.

Last season, 2012, we were at exactly the 50th percentile. Where will we go from here?

Re: The Congrove Rankings and SMU: A 20 Year View

Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:31 pm
by DiamondM75
Going down hill. June is out of Bennett recruits.

Such a shame, we had a coach who could recruit, but could not coach. Now we have a coach who can coach, but can not recruit.

I want a BennJones coach.

Re: The Congrove Rankings and SMU: A 20 Year View

Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:50 pm
by MustangStealth
ponyboy wrote: A few things that stand out to me. The first is in 1997, the first year Mike Cavan took over from Tom Rossley and for the first time post DP, we approached the 50th percentile in ranking vis a vis the rest of Div I. But things went quickly downhill for Cavan, due in great part to the self imposed sanctions stemming from the Manlin situation.
I would also add that moving from the SWC to the WAC hurt recruiting.

Re: The Congrove Rankings and SMU: A 20 Year View

Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:30 pm
by mr. pony
MustangStealth wrote:
ponyboy wrote: A few things that stand out to me. The first is in 1997, the first year Mike Cavan took over from Tom Rossley and for the first time post DP, we approached the 50th percentile in ranking vis a vis the rest of Div I. But things went quickly downhill for Cavan, due in great part to the self imposed sanctions stemming from the Manlin situation.
I would also add that moving from the SWC to the WAC hurt recruiting.
BIGTIME.

Re: The Congrove Rankings and SMU: A 20 Year View

Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:36 pm
by Stallion
Didn't hurt Franchione and TCU who immediately brought in better classes in WAC than TCU brought in SWC.

Re: The Congrove Rankings and SMU: A 20 Year View

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:02 am
by StangEsq
And is now doing it at Texas state...

Re: The Congrove Rankings and SMU: A 20 Year View

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:16 am
by WordUpBU
How does this system rank teams? What is their methodology? Are SOS, margin of victory, or other factors considered?

Re: The Congrove Rankings and SMU: A 20 Year View

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:24 am
by Stallion
since there are about 124 teams now in Division 1A-about 20 more teams than 20 years ago a hypothetical 50% percentile team actually would have dropped about 10 places on the national ladder

Re: The Congrove Rankings and SMU: A 20 Year View

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:32 am
by ponyboy
Yes, the number of Division 1A teams has varied over the last 20 years. In 1993, there were 106. 107 teams in 1994. 108 in 1995. 111 in 1996. 112 teams in 1997 and 1998. 114 in 1999. 115 in 2000. 117 from 2001-2004. 119 from 2005 - 2007. 120 from 2008 - 2011. And 124 in 2012.

I adjusted for this in my calculations, so the percentiles displayed are accurate.

Re: The Congrove Rankings and SMU: A 20 Year View

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:14 pm
by ponyboy
WordUpBU wrote:How does this system rank teams? What is their methodology? Are SOS, margin of victory, or other factors considered?
I'm not entirely sure. It's clear they use SOS and then a combination of what they call POWER and actual W-L record. But how they derive their POWER rankings -- and what the ultimate formula is -- is beyond me.

FWIW, in 2012 SMU was ranked 57 by Sagarin where Congrove had us at 62.