Bulldogs shut out of I-AA playoffs

[R.A.]

Bulldogs shut out of I-AA playoffs
By THOMAS GRANT,T&D Senior Sports Writer

The news was somewhat expected, but nonetheless, still hard to fathom for South Carolina State head football coach Oliver “Buddy” Pough...

-The complete story at www.thetandd.com

[ASU Kep]

Shocking.

[*****]

Go Pough!

[TexasTerror]

The writer mentioned SC St having the 5th toughest schedule. If this was the case, why does everyone keep saying they had a weak schedule?

[GAD]

FlyYtown winning your conference is the only way you don't get hosed Coastal Carolina got hosed nobody else.
Take care of business in your conference and you won't have those problems

[thirdgendin]

FlyYtown winning your conference is the only way you don't get hosed Coastal Carolina got hosed nobody else.
Take care of business in your conference and you won't have those problems

A 9-2, second-place team from the Big South got hosed?

[Tribe4SF]

The writer mentioned SC St having the 5th toughest schedule. If this was the case, why does everyone keep saying they had a weak schedule?

It is not the case. Sagarin ranks their schedule as 77th among I-AA, and most other services rank them comparably. I emailed the author asking where he got that. If he replies, I'll post his source.

[rokamortis]

FlyYtown winning your conference is the only way you don't get hosed Coastal Carolina got hosed nobody else.
Take care of business in your conference and you won't have those problems

GAD thanks for the support but CCU didn't get hosed by the committee. We knew we had to win the last game to have a shot and we imploded in the last 10 seconds and overtime. I think Lafayette deserved to be in over us.

[ASU Kep]

I think somebody answered the 5th ranking question sometime along the line by saying that the 5 ranking was from the NCAA *before* the season began, so basically based off of last season only I suppose, and it was still WAY off of what all the other pre-season polls were saying. Pretty creative use of words on their part, if you ask me.

[GAD]

I didn't have my facts together I though CCU won the Big South I was wrong
"a thousand pardons" :o

[Cocky]

It might have came out of the writer's own computer service. His is probably about as good as Sagarin's or any other computer service poll,ranking, index or whatever name you care to use.

[colgate13]

I believe it is strictly based on won/loss record of opponents.

[89Hen]

Maybe it was 5th toughest in the MEAC? :p

[AppGuy04]

I believe it is strictly based on won/loss record of opponents.


It is, and actually, they are 8th now
http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/Internet/toughest%20schedule/iaa_9games_cumm.pdf

[bandl]

It is, and actually, they are 8th now
http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/Internet/toughest%20schedule/iaa_9games_cumm.pdf

Wow...look at all those ivy league teams!!! I've always thought it was a shame they don't participate in the playoffs...it would have been interesting to see how good Harvard really was last year.


Just something of note...
Look at team #20.
Then look at team #95.

[Mr. C]

The writer mentioned SC St having the 5th toughest schedule. If this was the case, why does everyone keep saying they had a weak schedule?
Maybe he meant fifth best schedule in the MEAC.

[AppGuy04]

Maybe he meant fifth best schedule in the MEAC.

Hell, the toughest schedule in the MEAC ain't anything to brag about

[arranger101]

Well, no need to post anymore threads about SCSU...for now :cool: . Let's get these playoffs started and crown a new I-AA champ. Hopefully Pough will schedule a few SoCon teams to strengthen our schedule for next year.......see you then!

:nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod:

[bigchocolate]

I believe it is strictly based on won/loss record of opponents.


You are correct colgate13. Win-loss records of opponents is where the 5th rated schedule came from.

[Hansel]

It is not the case. Sagarin ranks their schedule as 77th among I-AA, and most other services rank them comparably. I emailed the author asking where he got that. If he replies, I'll post his source.
Probably the NCAA, they list the "toughest schedules" based solely upon opponents winning percentage with no consideration given to opponents SOS

[DB_Atlantic10]

Even in this bogus chart, Hampton is still at 83....Hmmm

[JohnStOnge]

The writer mentioned SC St having the 5th toughest schedule. If this was the case, why does everyone keep saying they had a weak schedule?

He's probably talking about the NCAA schedule strength ratings. I'm guessing they were at #5 there going into the weekend. They're number 8 there now.

On one hand I think the NCAA schedule strength ratings are nonsense. They're purely bassed on won/loss records of opponents. Thus, until this past weekend, playing Coastal Carolina was equivalent to playing LSU. If you look at power ratings systems that try to gauge actual team strengths the Bulldogs' schedule was rated low. Bottom line is South Carolina State had a weaker than average schedule among playoff-league I-AAs, nowhere close to something like #5 or #8.

On the OTHER hand...hey...it's the NCAA's schedule strength rating that has them at #8 and it's the NCAA that makes the selections.

[JohnStOnge]

It might have came out of the writer's own computer service. His is probably about as good as Sagarin's or any other computer service poll,ranking, index or whatever name you care to use.

No, it's not. I see others have noted that it's the NCAA schedule strength rating. It's pretty worthless.

Power rating systems work well. The better ones do about as well as the closing line does in terms of picking point spreads as well as winners. A schedule strength rating indicated by something like Sagarin or Massey is far more credible than the NCAA schedule strength rating is. Sagarin doesn't take D2 games into account but you'll find that it's pretty well correlated with systems, like Massey's, that do.

By the NCAA schedule strength rating, South Carolina State got more credit for playing Delaware State than Youngstown State got for playing Pittsburgh. They got more credit for playing Hampton than Appalachian State got for playing LSU. It's a total joke.

[rokamortis]

No, it's not. I see others have noted that it's the NCAA schedule strength rating. It's pretty worthless.

Power rating systems work well. The better ones do about as well as the closing line does in terms of picking point spreads as well as winners. A schedule strength rating indicated by something like Sagarin or Massey is far more credible than the NCAA schedule strength rating is. Sagarin doesn't take D2 games into account but you'll find that it's pretty well correlated with systems, like Massey's, that do.

By the NCAA schedule strength rating, South Carolina State got more credit for playing Delaware State than Youngstown State got for playing Pittsburgh. They got more credit for playing Hampton than Appalachian State got for playing LSU. It's a total joke.

Do you think that many teams get too much credit for playing and losing to I-A teams with the computer rankings?

[JohnStOnge]

Do you think that many teams get too much credit for playing and losing to I-A teams with the computer rankings?

Not in the good ones because they look at who you lost to and how much you lost by. The best ones, I think, don't even consider whether you won or lost. They look strictly at the margin in the context of schedule strength.

So if App State, for example, probably got more credit for losing by 24 to LSU than would have for beating some very weak I-AA by a bunch. And if a I-AA loses to a top 25 I-A by 10 it's going to get a lot more credit than if it lost by 50.

The things work very well in terms of predicting outcomes. In games for which lines were established, for instance, favorites by the Sagarin system won a higher percentage of their games than favorites by the closing line did in both 2003 and 2004. Looks like that's not going to happen in 2005 but the difference isn't going to be much.

Point is, when you look at the favorite and spread by a good power rating system like Sagarin or Massey it's got about as much credibility as the Vegas line does. They're good.

And, though lines aren't established for I-AA games, the first full results at Todd Beck's site suggest systems like Sagarin and Massey work as well for I-AA games as they do for I-A games.