grizbeer
October 7th, 2005, 10:20 AM
This article is about I-A conferences, but the discussion about what makes the best conference is relevant to I-AA as well. given all the different ways to determine the "best" conference, I will stick with the GPI rankings.
http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/story/5235968p-4755275c.html
I think you have to register to read, so I will post the contents here:
Pac-10 makes its case as best
DON RUIZ; THE NEWS TRIBUNE
Published: October 7th, 2005 12:01 AM
The most unwinnable argument in this country involves neither politics nor religion.
The most unwinnable argument in this country involves picking the best of the major football conferences.
(There are two exceptions to this rule. Even fans of the Big East don’t bother trying to make a case for their conference. And fans of the Southeastern Conference tend to see no argument at all, since SEC superiority is viewed as a birthright. They say it, they believe it, and that settles it.)
Elsewhere, the nagging problem is that the issue can’t really be quantified. There is no round-robin competition between the conferences, and non-conference schedules vary so greatly that such records vary from meaningless to misleading.
Texas Tech, for example, swept through its non-conference schedule of Florida International, San Houston State and Indiana State. Such bullying says nothing about either the Red Raiders or the Big 12.
On a more basic level, there isn’t even any consensus about how a “best conference” should be judged.
Is it the conference with the best champion? (If so, congratulations Pacific-10 Conference.)
Is it the conference with the most Top 10 teams? (Tie between the SEC and the Atlantic Coast Conference, with three each.)
How about the most ranked teams? (Come on down, SEC – which has six. But how significant is that when you consider the Pac-10, ACC and Big-10 have five each. And should the Pac-10 be graded on a curve because it has fewer members?)
Sigh.
Washington coach Tyrone Willingham was asked recently about changes in the Pac-10 since he left Stanford. He made the case that it was a tougher league, but instead of pointing to the top, he pointed to the bottom.
“The Pac-10 is pretty good football,” he said. “I think it’s getting better and better.
“Years ago, when I was in the league before, you probably had one or two teams – and at one time I was part of one of those teams – people thought you didn’t have to worry about them, you can win no matter what. Now, it’s not that way in the conference. A lot of the teams that were once at the bottom have got their games together and are making their way to the top.”
Is that a fair way to judge a conference: How deep can you go before you get to a bad team?
And how many bad teams are there?
The problem is, “bad” is impossible to define, even if – as with Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart’s famous comment about obscenity – you know it when you see it.
We just don’t all see it the same way.
After all, Willingham was making the case that there are no easy games in the Pac-10. However, most fans would say the Pac-10 goes seven deep before you run into three programs that are clearly rebuilding: Washington, Arizona and Stanford.
That would mean 30 percent of Pac-10 teams aren’t very good.
But is the SEC weaker for having five bad teams – Kentucky, South Carolina, Arkansas, Mississippi and Mississippi State – among its 12 members?
And you can’t quantitatively prove there are any bad teams in the Big 12, where the whole dozen have records of .500 or better. But as noted, a lot of those wins are the product of shameless scheduling against mid-majors and even some minor-minors.
Limit those non-conference results to games involving only the Pac-10, Big 10, ACC and SEC, and the Big 12 falls to 3-3.
That kind of head-to-head play among those five top conferences probably would be the most revealing way to compare the conferences, except that such games have become disappointingly rare.
As of this first week of October – a time when most non-conference play has been concluded – there have been only 15 non-conference games matching schools from these five conferences.
The Pac-10 fared best, going 4-2. The Big 12 and ACC both went 3-3. The SEC and Big Ten fared worst, going 2-3 and 3-4, respectively.
That’s not enough for a meaningful conclusion. But the small sample speaks well for the Pac-10 and disputes the notion of SEC superiority.
Don Ruiz: 253-597-8808
[email protected]
http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/story/5235968p-4755275c.html
I think you have to register to read, so I will post the contents here:
Pac-10 makes its case as best
DON RUIZ; THE NEWS TRIBUNE
Published: October 7th, 2005 12:01 AM
The most unwinnable argument in this country involves neither politics nor religion.
The most unwinnable argument in this country involves picking the best of the major football conferences.
(There are two exceptions to this rule. Even fans of the Big East don’t bother trying to make a case for their conference. And fans of the Southeastern Conference tend to see no argument at all, since SEC superiority is viewed as a birthright. They say it, they believe it, and that settles it.)
Elsewhere, the nagging problem is that the issue can’t really be quantified. There is no round-robin competition between the conferences, and non-conference schedules vary so greatly that such records vary from meaningless to misleading.
Texas Tech, for example, swept through its non-conference schedule of Florida International, San Houston State and Indiana State. Such bullying says nothing about either the Red Raiders or the Big 12.
On a more basic level, there isn’t even any consensus about how a “best conference” should be judged.
Is it the conference with the best champion? (If so, congratulations Pacific-10 Conference.)
Is it the conference with the most Top 10 teams? (Tie between the SEC and the Atlantic Coast Conference, with three each.)
How about the most ranked teams? (Come on down, SEC – which has six. But how significant is that when you consider the Pac-10, ACC and Big-10 have five each. And should the Pac-10 be graded on a curve because it has fewer members?)
Sigh.
Washington coach Tyrone Willingham was asked recently about changes in the Pac-10 since he left Stanford. He made the case that it was a tougher league, but instead of pointing to the top, he pointed to the bottom.
“The Pac-10 is pretty good football,” he said. “I think it’s getting better and better.
“Years ago, when I was in the league before, you probably had one or two teams – and at one time I was part of one of those teams – people thought you didn’t have to worry about them, you can win no matter what. Now, it’s not that way in the conference. A lot of the teams that were once at the bottom have got their games together and are making their way to the top.”
Is that a fair way to judge a conference: How deep can you go before you get to a bad team?
And how many bad teams are there?
The problem is, “bad” is impossible to define, even if – as with Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart’s famous comment about obscenity – you know it when you see it.
We just don’t all see it the same way.
After all, Willingham was making the case that there are no easy games in the Pac-10. However, most fans would say the Pac-10 goes seven deep before you run into three programs that are clearly rebuilding: Washington, Arizona and Stanford.
That would mean 30 percent of Pac-10 teams aren’t very good.
But is the SEC weaker for having five bad teams – Kentucky, South Carolina, Arkansas, Mississippi and Mississippi State – among its 12 members?
And you can’t quantitatively prove there are any bad teams in the Big 12, where the whole dozen have records of .500 or better. But as noted, a lot of those wins are the product of shameless scheduling against mid-majors and even some minor-minors.
Limit those non-conference results to games involving only the Pac-10, Big 10, ACC and SEC, and the Big 12 falls to 3-3.
That kind of head-to-head play among those five top conferences probably would be the most revealing way to compare the conferences, except that such games have become disappointingly rare.
As of this first week of October – a time when most non-conference play has been concluded – there have been only 15 non-conference games matching schools from these five conferences.
The Pac-10 fared best, going 4-2. The Big 12 and ACC both went 3-3. The SEC and Big Ten fared worst, going 2-3 and 3-4, respectively.
That’s not enough for a meaningful conclusion. But the small sample speaks well for the Pac-10 and disputes the notion of SEC superiority.
Don Ruiz: 253-597-8808
[email protected]