My team didn't make playoffs, so i had a little more free time than some of you. but the playoff results got me thinking about conference cannibalization.
And before I throw some stats out there which I think will help meaure conference cannibalization as it relates to FCS selection committee peformance this year .. I want to first congratulate the selection committee for doing a decent job in a very tough year. There were some mistakes, but it seemed like there were far less glaring mistakes than in past seasons. I also want to say it is still generally improving since the utter stupidity that went on from 2011-13 that saw MVFC get 2, 3, and 2 teams. Biggest mistake this year did come at expense of MVFC .. getting just 3 teams, but again ... far less glaring issues in a year that will go down as the "Year of Parity".
So here is a measure of conference cannibalization I think fairly/objectively represents how much a conference cannibalizes itself. The committe should pay much closer attention to this .. it is simple math, nothing more, if you accept Massey picking the top 6 teams from each conference. I'll only use the top 3 conferences with arguable premise these 3 are equally good if you focus ONLY on their top 6 teams .. granted it is per Massey, but if you look these 6 teams, you could maybe argue 1 or 2 of the 18 not being top 6 in their respective conferences .. those 6 teams are in Massey order:
- MVFC: NDSU, SDSU, UNI, ISUb, ISUr, WIU
- CAA: Maine, JMU, Delaware, Towson, SB, Elon
- Big Sky: EWU, Weber, UCD, Mont St, Idaho St, Mont
So the measure is simply to count the # of games played by each of the above teams against the other 5 top 6 teams in each conference. So each team can play a max of 5 games against top 6 teams ... you can't play yourself, it's frowned upon (on airplanes anyway, thanks a lot Bin Laden). So counting by conference:
- MVFC has 10 total teams, so our top 6 teams logically played the most at 27 of 30 possible games against each other (90%), and went 14-13 in those 27 games; for entire MVFC it is on avg 8 of 9 = 89% ... close enough
- CAA has 12 total teams, so their top 6 teams played 2nd most at 20 of 30 possible games against each other (67%), and went 10-10 in those 20 games; for entire league it is on avg 8 of 11 = 73% .. close enough
- Big Sky has 14 teams, so their top 6 teams logically played the least at just 18 of 30 possible games against each other (60%), and went 9-9 in those 18 games; for entire league ist is on avg 8 of 13 = 62% .. close enough
So the obvious point being if we on-leveled the top 6 teams records so that all cannibalized each other at same % ... take MVFC at 90% ....
- MVFC would have same # of losses
- CAA would have 7 more games with 7 more losses shared among those 6 teams
- Big Sky would have 9 more games with 9 more losses shared among those 6 teams
How would that have impacted playoff selections ??
The math is very simple and objective .. the only aspect that can really be argued is picking top 6 per Massey and my assumption the 3 conferences are pretty equal in their top 6. Also, this does not factor anything in for OOC results or SOS.
Thoughts on this ? Any flaws in my thinking ?
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks