Success rates in conference road games

[Blue Hen]

1996-2006 - source: Sportslinknetwork

Friends, if you prefer facts and reality over myths and perceptions....

BCS
"""""
B12 - .403
B10 - .414
BEC - .415
ACC - .432
P10 - .443
SEC - .467 ( 241-275 ) (.465 on road vs n/c BCS peers)

All Bowl Div
""""""""""""""""""

WAC - .391
B12 - .403
SBC - .412
B10 - .414
BEC - .415
MAC - .418
ACC - .432
CUSA-.433
P10 - .443
SEC - .467
MWC -.479

[GatorGrad]

Hen,

These are certainly interesting numbers. Can you provide a link to the source so that we can view other time periods / years? Also, to look at home winning % of each conference vs visiting OOC BCS schools would help (not counting I-AA or nonBCS teams.) I would also be interested in seeing the home winning % for the top 6-7 programs of each conference. As I noted earlier, I wasn't talking about schools like Vandy or Kentucky or even the Mississippi schools. These schools can drastically alter stats like this for all conferences involved in the research. I was talking about the major programs that are sold out every game with crazy atmospheres week in and week out. In other words, the # of feared road venues in each conference that are likely to cause a potential loss for a MNC contender.

Whether you are at home or away against schools like Vandy, Kentucky, Duke, Baylor, etc rarely matter. You really need to look at the top-end in each conference to get an idea for the number of hostile environments a team can play in year in and year out in any given conference. I know you think I'm being selective, but just like when I consider SOS, I am looking at it from the view of a MNC contender. In other words, it's all about the # of games you play where your team actually has a chance of losing. Playing home or away vs Vandy, Kentucky, Indiana, Duke, Baylor, etc rarely matters - a championship team should win that game either way. Just like a championship contender should beat a #100 team as easily as they would beat a #200 team.

It's games against the top programs at the top venues like Penn St, Nebraska, Florida, etc where HFA is magnified IMO. I hope this makes sense.

[Blue Hen]

Every conference has its Vandys and Mississippi schools. And remember, Mississippi State is 8% of the SEC..........same as Florida or LSU...8%..no more no less. Fact remains - conference wide, winning road games in the SEC is easier than winning road games anywhere else.

I don't know how to do 'links' ( I'm the most computer illiterate idiot you know -easily )...anyway, here is what it said on my printout :


www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1996&thy=2006& conf

Is that a link

[GatorGrad]

Hen,

To include a link, highlight the web address at the top of your browser, and then hold down the control key and press "c" and then click on the message where you are posting and hold down the control key and press "p." This will quickly cut and paste the link so that we can click on it and view the webpage you are talking about. I can't find the data you are talking about in the link you provided, although I will take your word for it. But if anyone can provide more time periods other than just 96-06 and a way to look at home vs road winning % for each BCS Conference vs other OOC BCS teams as well as a way to view it for individual schools, that would help.

I'm sorry, but I look at things like this from a different view. Schools like Vandy and Kentucky may be part of the SEC, but when considering SOS for a MNC or SEC Championship Contender, they just don't matter. Just like a true MNC contender should never lose a game to the 100th or 200th best team, an SEC contender should never lose to the 11th or 12th place conference opponent, regardless of if it is home or away. You can't just compute things like SOS and this topic based on an entire conference when your mission is to figure out SOS for only the top teams. What defines a tough vs easy schedule is different depending on what type of team you are.

For example, a championship contending team would view SOS as the # of teams on the schedule capable of beating them. So playing a lot of cupcakes along with 2-3 other championship contending teams, especially on the road, makes their specific mission (competing for championships) more difficult than playing a bunch of middle of the road teams that might collectively have a higher winning %. Meanwhile, a lesser team that already knows that they probably aren't competing for championships would probably prefer a schedule with as many bottom teams (sure wins) as possible, even if it means having to play the same 2-3 elite teams per year. Those 2-3 teams are sure losses, but the bottom teams provide more sure wins than if they played a schedule with all .500 teams where every single team had a chance of beating you. Going 8-4 for a mid to lower team by playing a few elite teams and mostly terrible teams is better than the risk of going 2-10 playing all average teams. However for an elite team, they are probably going 8-4 at the very worst already. But their goal is to go 12-0. To go 12-0, playing as few elite teams as possible and in as few tough road environments as possible drastically increases their chances of accomplishing their goal.

I don't know if I explained this properly, but hopefully you see the point. For my Gators, I would much prefer a schedule full of average teams vs a schedule vs 2-3 elite teams + the rest terrible teams, even if the schedule full of average teams statistically is "easier" on paper when you look at the winning percentages. Same deal for # of tough road games. Which is why you can't just look at total conference road winning % when trying to figure out which conference provides the toughest road games overall. HFA is magnified at the top with the top programs. For an elite team, you can't just say that a two-game road trip schedule to 0-10 Vandy & 10-0 Florida is easier than a two game road trip schedule to 6-4 Arkansas and 5-5 Miss St, even if the Arkansas/Miss St combination provides for a tougher road on paper when looking at the total records. If I am an elite team and my goal was to go 2-0 and I could pick either road, I would definitely take my chances with the Arkansas/Miss combo as both are likely wins whereas the Florida road game gives you a much greater chance at getting a loss.

Maybe this makes sense, maybe it does not. But I feel the need to explain as much as possible so that you don't think I am just "SEC Honking" or ignoring the stats that you have provided.

[Blue Hen]

I see many of your points, GG and enjoy your posts. We do tend to look at things a bit differently. 100% of something ALWAYS tells you more than 10% of something. I think you're more of the 'selective 10%' type viewer, sometimes, but I'm going to keep working on ya to become more of a '100%' guy .
I'll go back and research more of the conference 'road' success rates. What time frame would you recommend ? All time , last 20, last 30, 50 , BCS era? I think BCS era has great significance for all these contemporary conf vs conf debates.
Regarding this HFA thing, do you think it has more to do with the physical venue and crowd or are places like the Swamp or Tiger Stadium perceived to be difficult to win at because the home team is usually a very good football team ? IMO, it's 90% quality of home team and 10% noise/crowd etc.
There might be some mythology about the toughness of Tiger Stadium. Over the past 20 years or so, I see that relative 'lightweight' programs like Colorado State, Kentucky ( multiple times), Ole Miss ( multiple times), Southern Miss, Miami,OH, Houston, etc. have had no problem going in there and whipping LSU....and then there was that 04 Oregon State game in which the Beavers won the game on the field, but somehow not on the scoreboard.
I hope VT can at least 'scare' LSU down there on 9/8.
Hey thanks for the link instructions. I'll print it out and maybe try it. HYH instructed me on how to get a little Blue Hen on my signature and that's even challenging for me. That Sportslink trivia site is quite complicated to use. kittfan is very good at extracting data from it. I'm still learning.

[ktffan]

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1996&thy=2006&conf=on&curr=on&away=on&tIA=on&fcn=on

Hen, I've been asking people for years why it is that SEC teams do so well on the road, nobody has been able to give me a good reason. It's not only contrary to popular myth, it doesn't seem like it should be right.

If I had problems with what you're looking at here it's be these:

1. You chose 11 years. Due to the home and home factor, it's better to use even number of years, that way you are less likely to skew the numbers by having a powerhouse play more games on the road.

2. Current conference numbers will also skew it. Doing in-conference games makes it fairly balanced schedule for all conferences, but the numbers you're looking at here will count games played by teams that weren't in the same conference at the time as 'confernence games' and that could screw up the numbers as well. If you want to count games that were actually conference games, but are sorted in the current conference (hen style), click the actual OOC option.

[ktffan]

Hen,

These are certainly interesting numbers. Can you provide a link to the source so that we can view other time periods / years? Also, to look at home winning % of each conference vs visiting OOC BCS schools would help (not counting I-AA or nonBCS teams.) I would also be interested in seeing the home winning % for the top 6-7 programs of each conference.


Home percentage against visiting BCS schools (using historical affiliations):

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1996&thy=2006&ncnf=on&home=on&major=on&tmajor=on&tIA=on&fcn=on&tind=on

PAC-10 by team (http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1996&thy=2006&confname=Pac-10&ncnf=on&home=on&major=on&tmajor=on&tIA=on&ftm=on&tind=on)

ACC by team (http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1996&thy=2006&confname=ACC&ncnf=on&home=on&major=on&tmajor=on&tIA=on&ftm=on&tind=on)

Big 12 by team (http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1996&thy=2006&confname=Big%2012&ncnf=on&home=on&major=on&tmajor=on&tIA=on&ftm=on&tind=on)

Big East by team (http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1996&thy=2006&confname=Big%20East&ncnf=on&home=on&major=on&tmajor=on&tIA=on&ftm=on&tind=on)

Big Ten by team (http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1996&thy=2006&confname=Big%20Ten&ncnf=on&home=on&major=on&tmajor=on&tIA=on&ftm=on&tind=on)

SEC by team (http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1996&thy=2006&confname=SEC&ncnf=on&home=on&major=on&tmajor=on&tIA=on&ftm=on&tind=on)

I hope I got those right.

[GatorGrad]

ktffan,

Good stuff. Do you know how to use any of those links you posted and select different year periods? You don't have to do the work - but if you could just tell me how I could go about doing it, I would be happy to take the time. I would be interested in the same data for all-time, every individual decade since the 50's ie 50-59, 60-69, 70-79, 80-89, 90-99, and 2000-present. The sample size for the selected years is just too small, especially for the SEC, is too small! Yes, I know that this proves that the SEC doesn't schedule enough OOC BCS schools...but I've already admitted as much! :)

I would also be interested in the same data that Hen was trying to show earlier (HFA within the conference) but with emphasis on the top 6-8 programs of each conference...and of course during different time periods. That might be asking too much and might take more time than any of us are willing to invest in this project. You would first have to identify the top programs for each conference based on performance and then go from there. Probably more trouble than it's worth. But I just find this kind of stuff interesting.

[GatorGrad]

ktffan - by the way, what does your name stand for? are you a kentucky fan or a fan of another school?

[aufan59]

SEC - .467 ( 241-275 ) (.465 on road vs n/c BCS peers)



12 SEC teams that play 4 away games a year for 11 years.

12*4*11= 528

241+275= 516


Tell me where I assumed wrong or where you went wrong.

[GatorGrad]

12 SEC teams that play 4 away games a year for 11 years.

12*4*11= 528

241+275= 516


Tell me where I assumed wrong or where you went wrong.

Well, the Florida-Georgia game is at a neutral site (Jacksonville) every year as is the SEC Championship Game (Atlanta.) Not sure if either of these are being considered.

[ktffan]

ktffan,

Good stuff. Do you know how to use any of those links you posted and select different year periods? You don't have to do the work - but if you could just tell me how I could go about doing it, I would be happy to take the time. I would be interested in the same data for all-time, every individual decade since the 50's ie 50-59, 60-69, 70-79, 80-89, 90-99, and 2000-present. The sample size for the selected years is just too small, especially for the SEC, is too small! Yes, I know that this proves that the SEC doesn't schedule enough OOC BCS schools...but I've already admitted as much! :)

I would also be interested in the same data that Hen was trying to show earlier (HFA within the conference) but with emphasis on the top 6-8 programs of each conference...and of course during different time periods. That might be asking too much and might take more time than any of us are willing to invest in this project. You would first have to identify the top programs for each conference based on performance and then go from there. Probably more trouble than it's worth. But I just find this kind of stuff interesting.


Start at the query page:

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/teamrecord.php

The third line down you'll see the year ranges, those are self explainitory.

On the second line, you see 'View Team X Conf X. If you're looking for the numbers by conference, click the conference box.

Also, since you're looking for road games, in the middle of the first line are the home/away/Neut selections. By default none are selected and when none are selected all show, but if you click the middle box, for away, you'll get away games.

To get conference or non-conference games, the fourth line has a conf/non selection, Select the left box for conference games, the right box for non-conferences.

To get what Hen is using, you need to use the current conference box, to the right of the conf/non selection we just looked at.

The next lines filter your opponents out. Since you're just looking for 'major' opponents, go down to major/non and click the left box. The right box would get you non-major opponents.

To review, select 1996-2006, View CONF, Away games, conference games, current conference and major opponents to get Hen's stats.

If you want to split out which numbers show by limiting them to just major conference, on the right side of the screen select, major over there, however, it will only include teams that were major at the time, but not now, so that would affect the Big East numbers.

If you can figure out what each option does, it gets fairly simple. It might be better to test with the one that gives you the detail:

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/teamrecord.php

Select a team and then play with the options.

Feel free to ask questions.

[ktffan]

ktffan - by the way, what does your name stand for? are you a kentucky fan or a fan of another school?

The name is non-sports related and just something that popped into my head when I needed a name.

[ktffan]

12 SEC teams that play 4 away games a year for 11 years.

12*4*11= 528

241+275= 516


Tell me where I assumed wrong or where you went wrong.

Neutral site games:

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/detail.php?fry=1996&thy=2006&confname=SEC&conf=on&neut=on&tIA=on&tNIA=on&fcn=on

[Blue Hen]

You know what ? I got that 96-06 time frame from a post of yours back in Sept. of 06....no kidding. I wondered about the 11 year thing but I figured you knew what you were doing. So I just went back and updated the numbers to include the rest of the 06 season.

[Blue Hen]

I told you it was complicated, GG ;-).......but an amazing site.


One question - how do you determine the top 6 or 7 of each conference ?
Another question - the top 6-7 of an 8 team conference represents 75-88 % of the conf, while the top 6-7 programs of a 12 team represents 50-58% of that conference. How can that work ?
I don't think you can find anything meaningful based on that fuzzy query.

Go for the 100% knowledge approach ,,,it's better

[GatorGrad]

Yes, an amazing site. I don't think I have the patience to figure all of this out!

Again, my evaluation of things relating to SOS revolves around the total # of teams you play that have a realistic chance of beating you. So if my Gators are expected to contend for an SEC Championship, playing the 10th, 11th, or 12th best team in the SEC should not matter if it is home or away. These teams rarely provide a HFA anyways. It was almost 50/50 between Florida and Vandy fans last year when the Gators played in Nashville. Same for the fact that there is no difference to me whether my Gators play a 100th or 200th best team - we should win either way. You won't get me to change my mind on this. Counting the bottom teams in an equation for as much as the top teams just isn't realistic from my perspective. An away game in Nashville or Lexington is simply not the same as an away game in Baton Rouge or Gainesville IMO.

The fewer road games to places like Death Valley, Rocky Top, etc the better. I believe that the HFA is magnified when you are speaking in terms of the top teams. And it is my belief (yes belief, nothing that I can prove unfortunately) that the SEC just so happens to provide more of these tough road trips than any other conference. The big six SEC Programs of Florida, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, Auburn, and LSU all are about as big of a HFA as I can imagine in football on any level. I have been to all of them. I have also been to other venues in the country. It is my opinion (again, I know I cannot prove it) that there is no other conference with as many of these type of road environments. The Big Ten comes the closest IMO followed by the Big 12, ACC, then PAC 10. I bet if you were to poll college football fans around the country on what they think are the top 20 toughest road trips, the SEC would have at least 6 (50% of the conference) in the top 20, maybe the top 15.

Again, none of this can be proven really either way. It's just my opinion and perception. I admit that. So if that makes me an SEC Honk, so be it!

:)

[ktffan]

Yes, an amazing site. I don't think I have the patience to figure all of this out!


Try this. Start at the base query:

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/teamrecord.php

Click 'search' and you get the record of all current I-A teams.

Go back and to search for just home game, click the left box by 'home/away/neut' and click search. You'll get the record of every I-A team at home.

Go back and unclick home and click the next over and click search and you get the away record.

Go back, unclick away and click the left box by Division IA (on the left), click search and you get the record of teams against I-A opponents.

Go back unclick IA, go down to major/non (on the left) and click the left box and you'll get the record of teams vs major opponents. Go back, keeping those options and click home, and you get every team's home record against major opponent.

If you want to see just major teams, click the left box by 'major/non' on the right. It's not hard if you understand the concept.

[GatorGrad]

OK I think I am figuring this out. But trying to get the info I am looking for takes quite a while. It's easy looking up just "by conference," but going team by team is a project. Here's what I found on the "big six" SEC schools of Florida, Tennessee, Georgia, Auburn, Alabama, and LSU:

From 2000-2006 these six schools are a combined 131-54 (71%) against BCS teams at home.

From 1990-2006, these six schools are a combined 298-136 (69%) against BCS teams at home.

From 1980-2006, these six schools are a combined 478-212 (69%) against BCS teams at home.

* When I say "BCS schools" I am talking about home games against teams from the SEC, Big 12, PAC 10, Big Ten, ACC, and Big East using current conference configuration.

* The sample sizes for the individual conferences during each time period, other than games against the SEC of course, are very small. Of course this proves a lot of the anti-SEC fans' point that the SEC does not schedule many legit OOC games. I didn't include record against nonBCS or D-IAA teams as that would push the winning % much higher and tell us nothing.

* I don't have time right now to figure out the same data for the top schools in the other BCS Conferences. If anyone else would like to, feel free. Otherwise, I'll try to do it later. Based on the three time periods I researched above, it appears safe to say that the big six SEC Programs win approx 70% of their home games against fellow BCS teams. I would be interested in seeing how this would compare to the top six schools of the other conferences.

[GatorGrad]

Again, you're looking at the entire conference which includes the bottom teams which means nothing when considering a SOS for an elite team. That's where you and I disagree. Your data certainly could show that the SEC's structure allows average teams to have inflated records and thus more bowl berths (3 easy OOC games + 3 guaranteed wins before you even have to play a real game) which I actually agree with.

But if my goal is to figure out which conference provides the largest # of tough road environments that would give any elite team a potential loss, then the results of home games at Duke, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Indiana, Kentucky, Baylor, etc are irrelevant to my research and need to be taken out of the equation for this purpose.

I have already looked up the numbers for the top 50% (six) SEC programs. I would like to see how they compare to the top six or top 50% of the other BCS conferences for the same time periods. If no one else has the time to do the research, I'll do it later on when I have more time...my own research might very well prove me wrong in which case I'll have no problem admitting it.

[Blue Hen]

that's right....c'mon, join the 100% club, it's better than being selective ;-)

Actually GG, I deleted the post you responded to because I read something incorrectly. I've done the 'away' game query now for BCS era, last 10 years, and now last 20 ( 87-06 ). Same results

The results are conclusive : The SEC affords its members the greatest winning success rate in conference road games........it's the easiest conference for winning on the road........just no way around it.
The SUPER MEGA MYTH of 'tough to win on the road in the SEC'
can be put firmly to rest.

Here are the 20 year #s ( 1987-2006 )

Road winning %
"""""""""""""""""""""""

SEC - .451
B10 - .441
P10 - .438
ACC - .431
BEC - .411
B12 - .403

Among all Bowl Div leagues in last 20 years, only the MWC has been easier for 'road' winning.

[ktffan]

OK I think I am figuring this out. But trying to get the info I am looking for takes quite a while. It's easy looking up just "by conference," but going team by team is a project. Here's what I found on the "big six" SEC schools of Florida, Tennessee, Georgia, Auburn, Alabama, and LSU:
.

Here's a tip. If, instead of hitting view by conference, you select team (or team is the default), and then in the upper right hand corner, you select a conference, it'll give you a breakdown of the teams in the selected conference.

[ktffan]

Again, you're looking at the entire conference which includes the bottom teams which means nothing when considering a SOS for an elite team. That's where you and I disagree. Your data certainly could show that the SEC's structure allows average teams to have inflated records and thus more bowl berths (3 easy OOC games + 3 guaranteed wins before you even have to play a real game) which I actually agree with.


You can select out teams by conference winning percentage. If, on the right side of the screen, you click the left box by winning percentage, then enter the range of percentage you want and click the cnf box, it'll give you those with conference winning percentage in the range. For instance, click the left box, select .501-1.000, and cnf, you will get every team that finished above .500 in conference in the data that comes out. This also helps you with conferences that the top teams change around.

For instance, I clicked the view by conference, and the non-conference and the major selection on the left. On the right I selected just majors and the left by winning percentage, with .501-1.000 and the cnf. Also, the home game option:

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=2000&thy=2006&ncnf=on&home=on&major=on&tmajor=on&twpc=on&twpcc=on&fcn=on

[GatorGrad]

Thanks for the tips kttfan. What I am trying to do is figure out the home winning % against other BCS teams for the top six programs of the Big Ten, PAC 10, Big 12, and ACC based on current conference configuration for the same time periods that I figured out for the SEC above (2000-present, 1990-present, and 1980-present.) I have already done found this data for the SEC which I have already posted. In order to complete this research, I first need to identify the top six programs from the Big Ten, PAC 10, Big 12, and ACC (I'm not going to bother with the Big East given all of their recent turnover and only having eight teams.) Can you help me out by say giving me the following (or telling me how to find this data?) I can then compare home winning % for the top programs in each conference and figure out if my theory that road games within the SEC are tougher for the elite teams or not. Here's what I am looking for:

Big Ten - Top 6 programs based on winning % from 1980-present.

PAC 10 - Top 6 programs based on winning % from 1980-present.

ACC - Top 6 programs based on winning % from 1980-present.

Big 12 - Top 6 programs based on winning % from 1980-present.

Sorry to be a pain...someday I'll be as good as you with that neat little website!

[GatorGrad]

that's right....c'mon, join the 100% club, it's better than being selective ;-)

Actually GG, I deleted the post you responded to because I read something incorrectly. I've done the 'away' game query now for BCS era, last 10 years, and now last 20 ( 87-06 ). Same results

The results are conclusive : The SEC affords its members the greatest winning success rate in conference road games........it's the easiest conference for winning on the road........just no way around it.
The SUPER MEGA MYTH of 'tough to win on the road in the SEC'
can be put firmly to rest.

Here are the 20 year #s ( 1987-2006 )

Road winning %
"""""""""""""""""""""""

SEC - .451
B10 - .441
P10 - .438
ACC - .431
BEC - .411
B12 - .403

Among all Bowl Div leagues in last 20 years, only the MWC has been easier for 'road' winning.

Hen - Again, I would like to see if these #'s are also true when eliminating the bottom teams from each conference. By including the bad teams like Vandy, Kentucky, Baylor, Northwestern, Duke, etc where no real HFA exists, you are only proving that middle of the road SEC teams, South Carolina or Arkansas for example, are at an advantage. This is because the bottom teams are bad enough to where home/away means nothing and thus those games are usually automatic wins regardless of where the game is played which ultimately helps the 7th/8th best programs qualify for a bowl game. These teams usually beat the bottom teams, but find it much harder to beat the elite teams.

For the elite teams, they are going to beat the bottom teams most of the time regardless and so the difference between a BCS Bowl and an Outback Bowl could depend on whether or not a game against anoher elite team is home or away as I believe that the HFA factor is magnified for the better teams. Example - The difference between playing say VaTech at home instead of Blacksburg is bigger than the difference between playing Duke at home or in Durham. The HFA for Duke means nothing and an elite team should win home or away. Compare this to the HFA for VaTech which plays much more of a factor as to how tough it might be to win the game since VaTech actually has a significant "home field advantage.")

[Blue Hen]

We'll, help yourself to all that 'selective' research. Good luck. You're going to have a problem, I think, because your 'bad teams' aren't always bad ( NW, for example ) All conferences have strong, average and weakish teams within ( that fluctuate season to season ) and HFA venues that are more than others, so I'm not sure that what you want to know will apply, in any meaningful way , for comparing degree of difficulty in road winning among conferences. Anyway, keep us posted.

[ktffan]

Thanks for the tips kttfan. What I am trying to do is figure out the home winning % against other BCS teams for the top six programs of the Big Ten, PAC 10, Big 12, and ACC based on current conference configuration for the same time periods that I figured out for the SEC above (2000-present, 1990-present, and 1980-present.) I have already done found this data for the SEC which I have already posted. In order to complete this research, I first need to identify the top six programs from the Big Ten, PAC 10, Big 12, and ACC (I'm not going to bother with the Big East given all of their recent turnover and only having eight teams.) Can you help me out by say giving me the following (or telling me how to find this data?) I can then compare home winning % for the top programs in each conference and figure out if my theory that road games within the SEC are tougher for the elite teams or not. Here's what I am looking for:

Big Ten - Top 6 programs based on winning % from 1980-present.

PAC 10 - Top 6 programs based on winning % from 1980-present.

ACC - Top 6 programs based on winning % from 1980-present.

Big 12 - Top 6 programs based on winning % from 1980-present.

Sorry to be a pain...someday I'll be as good as you with that neat little website!

You're setting you dataset to favor the SEC. The SEC is more stable as far as the 'top 6' teams are than other conferences have been, so if you use the same set of teams every year, it's going to include a good amount of down years for other conferences. That's why I'd recommend selecting just teams with a certain conference winning percentage.

This approach would be a problem using current conference teams because conferences that might include former mid-majors, or independents would skew the results, but your approach has the same problem as well, since it's difficult to determine the top 6 of a conference when some teams haven't spent more than a few years in a conference. For instance, BC is #4 in winning percentage all-time in the ACC. Also, you have instances where Duke won the ACC in 1989, but they would not be included as a top 6 team in your study. Shouldn't a conference champ be considered top 6?

Using current conference messes up any statistical measure, as it tries to wedge history into what we have today and ignores changes. But if you're looking for the top 6 overall winning percentage in a conference you need to do three things:

1. Enter your date range (1980-2006).

2. Click the current conference option, 4th line in the middle.

3. Select the conference you're looking for at the top right.

ACC (http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1980&thy=2006&confname=ACC&curr=on)

SEC (http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1980&thy=2006&confname=SEC&curr=on)

Like I said, your methodology is set up to favor the SEC, so expect people to object to your results.

[Blue Hen]

So GG,..... you want to compare 55% of the B10 to 60% of the P10 to 50% of the SEC, ACC and B12 ? The 'bottom' 6 of the P10 also has two 'top 6' teams. And what happened to the 75% of the BE ?
Also, what does "top 6" mean ? What time frame does that "top 6" apply to and how is it determined ?
Jmo, but I think you're on a 'dead end research road here.

[GatorGrad]

OK - Due to the conference affiliation changes, higher turnover for the "top teams" in other conferences other than the SEC, and the different number of teams in each conference, there doesn't really appear to be any way that I could prove my own theory without some sort of flaw. So I'll just leave it as my own theory that the SEC provides the highest number of tough venues to play at and move on. But I can't prove it - you guys win.

Can we at least agree, and I know it has nothing to do with actual on the field results, that you can't beat the SEC for tailgating and overall gameday atmosphere/passion? The Swamp, Rocky Top, The Plains, Death Valley, Bama, and Between the Hedges is as good as it gets. Even The Grove at Ole Miss, Arkansas, and South Carolina are great on gameday. The only SEC road trips that don't really bring much to the table are Miss St, Kentucky, and Vandy. Maybe these atmospheres deceive us into thinking that the venues are actually tougher to win at - who knows. But I wouldn't trade playing in the SEC for anything!

[Blue Hen]

Your first paragraph, GG..... That's another indicator of why you are so well respected in these forums. Being able to discuss matters with reasonable, 'thinking' SEC fans is a treat.

Atmosphere, noise, crowds, big stadiums, hoopla, big bands, pretty women...and all that spectacle/showy stuff.........SEC #1 !!

Nobody can ever deny that folks in the Southeast actually ( sometimes comically ) think that football is important.

[ktffan]

OK - Due to the conference affiliation changes, higher turnover for the "top teams" in other conferences other than the SEC, and the different number of teams in each conference, there doesn't really appear to be any way that I could prove my own theory without some sort of flaw. So I'll just leave it as my own theory that the SEC provides the highest number of tough venues to play at and move on. But I can't prove it - you guys win.


I'm not arguing against you. To me, I THINK that the SEC should provide tough venues. The statistics seem to indicate otherwise and so I continue to ask people for a reasonable explaination of why it happens this way. I haven't got one yet. Here's the road record of teams that finish .500+ in conference games:

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1997&thy=2006&conf=on&away=on&tmajor=on&twpc=on&twpl=0.500&twpcc=on&fcn=on

The SEC scores very high here. Perhaps there's such a gap between the good and the bad in the confence, the numbers get pushed higher?

[GatorGrad]

Oh I definitely think that the SEC has a major gap between the haves and have-nots. Probably more so than any other conference. You have the six traditional powers, three in the west (Alabama, Auburn, and LSU) & three in the east (Florida, Tennessee, Georgia.) These programs carry most of the weight in the conference for sure. Bama not so much recently, but with Nick Saban, I am sure they'll be back as a top program ASAP.

The bottom six are made up of the 1992 additions, South Carolina in the east and Arkansas in the west, which I think are currently the 4th best programs in each division (7th and 8th overall) which creates good balance among the SEC Divisions. Then you have the Mississippi schools in the west and Vandy/Kentucky in the east. The balance of divisions is what makes the SEC Schedule w/ CCG format work so well compared to the Big 12 where the south has dominated ever since the new format started in 1996.

If the SEC went Big East Style (8-team conference) and trimmed the fat by dropping Miss, Miss St, Vandy, and Kentucky, you would have one heck of a conference made up of the big six programs plus Arkansas and South Carolina. I doubt anyone could argue against the SEC being the best conference from top to bottom then. The bottom 3-4 teams in the SEC are usually really bad. Other conferences have more "parity" from top to bottom I think.

Having such a big difference from top to bottom causes the SEC to look weaker when you are looking at 100% of the conference (the view an average team just looking for a bowl berth and winning record would look at.) The SEC's strength is in the top half of the conference IMO which affects elite teams looking to go unbeaten IMO. It all depends what perspective you are looking at it from which was the point I was trying to make earlier.

[ktffan]

The balance of divisions is what makes the SEC Schedule w/ CCG format work so well compared to the Big 12 where the south has dominated ever since the new format started in 1996.


I'm just going to point out that the Big 12 North dominated prior to 2000.

[GatorGrad]

True...but the south has pretty much rules ever since. I know these things go in cycles though. We'll see. I know some of the Big 12 schools do not like the current setup and we could see some changes in the future - either an elimination of their CCG or some teams leaving the Big 12. Some schools in the Big 12 are not happy.

[Blue Hen]

Hey GG...just for fun and more enlightenment. Those 6 SEC traditional powers you refer to ? Here's how they've fared within the SEC and out of the SEC vs other BCS leagues in the 2000s :

SEC power.........vs other BCS leagues...........vs SEC competition
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Florida..........7-9, .438............................45-15, .750
Alabama........3-6, .333............................26-29, .473
Georgia.........13-3, .813...........................39-18, .684
Tennessee.....8-7, .571............................34-20, .630
LSU...............8-3, .727............................43-16, .729
Auburn..........6-8, .429.............................44-15, .746

Power 6..........43-35, .551.........................228-109, .677

As you can see it's has been much safer for these teams (collectively) playing SEC foes (including themselves) than playing teams from other leagues. Still, probably too small a sample to draw conclusions or start talking about the 'relative safety of the SEC'.....so I won't. Just thought you might find this interesting.

[GatorGrad]

Hen,

I'm well aware of those numbers. I have never claimed that the SEC has been the best conference recently ie since the BCS Era (98) of 2000. Just that the SEC was the best MOST recently (last season in 2006.) But I also think if you look at all of the SEC vs BCS Conference matchups in the era that you selected, you will find that the matchups have favored the other conference more often than not ie 4th place SEC team vs 2nd place Big Ten team, 5th place SEC team vs 3rd place ACC team, etc. Not a huge deal, and certainly not anything that would change the fact that the SEC has been only average in the BCS era overall, but just something to note as well.

Serious Question: Which conference do you think historcially has been the best overall conference (all-time?)

[ktffan]

Hen,

I'm well aware of those numbers. I have never claimed that the SEC has been the best conference recently ie since the BCS Era (98) of 2000. Just that the SEC was the best MOST recently (last season in 2006.) But I also think if you look at all of the SEC vs BCS Conference matchups in the era that you selected, you will find that the matchups have favored the other conference more often than not ie 4th place SEC team vs 2nd place Big Ten team, 5th place SEC team vs 3rd place ACC team, etc. Not a huge deal, and certainly not anything that would change the fact that the SEC has been only average in the BCS era overall, but just something to note as well.

Serious Question: Which conference do you think historcially has been the best overall conference (all-time?)

Well, let's see. Of those games those 6 teams had against BCS conference opponents, 19 (11-8) were against teams with equal conference records, 31 (24-7)were against teams where the SEC team had the better record and 29 (10-19) were against teams where the SEC had the worse record.

[GatorGrad]

kttfan - Do you have a link to that data? I admit that I am surprised. Technically, I did say "place" within a conference as a 2nd place Big Ten team can have a lower conference winning % than a 3rd place SEC team for example. But, your point is well taken and I admit I am nitpicking, and the results might not be all that different any way you slice it. The SEC certainly hasn't been any better than any other BCS Conference in the BCS Era when you look at the stats. I do think that the sample size is a bit limited, but it's really all we have. I guess I assumed too much because I am pretty sure that out of those BCS Matchups for my Gators, our opponent had a better conference record 9 or 10 times vs Florida having the better conference record only 2 or 3 times. Feel free to double check my memory, as I am pulling this from my own head. And it seems like the Capital One, Outback, Cotton, and Peach Bowls often seem to match up lower placed SEC teams vs higher placed teams from other conferences overall. But I haven't really researched that to be sure.

[Hubbs]

Every conference has its Vandys and Mississippi schools. And remember, Mississippi State is 8% of the SEC..........same as Florida or LSU...8%..no more no less. Fact remains - conference wide, winning road games in the SEC is easier than winning road games anywhere else.

I don't know how to do 'links' ( I'm the most computer illiterate idiot you know -easily )...anyway, here is what it said on my printout :


www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1996&thy=2006& conf

Is that a link


I remember when Mississippi State was a dang good football team. In 2000 they beat Florida and Auburn in consecutive weeks. That WAS a dang good defense and Joe Lee Dunn pissed it away by blitzing every dang down. That was one of the best defenses I have seen in some years. They lost some players to injury and didnt have the depth to fill the spots but their top 22 on defense that season was wicked. They were the only team to really keep Rudi Johnson in check that season.

[Blue Hen]

yeah , I remember some tough MSU teams. I hope Crooms can win enough this season to keep his job. He's a good guy. MSU actually won the SEC championship........back in 1941

[Blue Hen]

fellers,

I haven't done extensive research on this or have large sample #s to offer, but I do believe that it is somewhat of a myth and non legitimate excuse that when SEC teams lose to other conference teams it's because of a huge relative match-up disadvantage.

I have researched this for the last 3 PSEG seasons (04-06). SEC teams played 20 PSEGs vs other BCS league teams. Based on the in conference winning percentages, the SEC was :

Disadvantaged - 9 games
Advantaged - 5 games
Equal relative match-up -6 games


Also , I researched the Music City Bowls when the BE and SEC had tie ins. The BE , of course, whipped the SEC in all 4 bowls, quite easily. I remember some SEC types (in forums) saying that it was because the best BE teams were playing the weakest SEC teams. Nope ! In 3 of those 4 games the SEC teams had better in-conference winning percentages. In the one game that the BE did have a relative match-up advantage, Va Tech completely toyed with Alabama....38-7

[ktffan]

kttfan - Do you have a link to that data? I admit that I am surprised. Technically, I did say "place" within a conference as a 2nd place Big Ten team can have a lower conference winning % than a 3rd place SEC team for example. But, your point is well taken and I admit I am nitpicking, and the results might not be all that different any way you slice it.

No, no link.

What you have to consider here, is that since these are the teams that are the best in the SEC, you'd expect them to play a whole lot of weaker teams. That not really that case. I think that if you compare the 'top' teams of other conferences the same way you'll find that they will be the 'better' team more often than here. What the Hen always conviently leaves out of his argument is that these teams have played a very high quality of opponent in these numbers.

Anyway, here is the breakdown. I've got year the game was played, teamnames, conference winning percentages and result.

Where the SEC was 'better':

Year SEC SEC Pct Opponent Opp Pct Result
2001 Georgia 0.62 Boston College 0.57 L
2001 Georgia 0.62 Georgia Tech 0.50 W
2001 Tennessee 0.87 Michigan 0.75 W
2001 Tennessee 0.87 Syracuse 0.85 W
2002 Auburn 0.62 Syracuse 0.28 W
2002 Georgia 0.87 Clemson 0.50 W
2002 Georgia 0.87 Georgia Tech 0.50 W
2002 LSU 0.62 Virginia Tech 0.42 L
2002 Tennessee 0.62 Rutgers 0.00 W
2003 Auburn 0.62 Georgia Tech 0.50 L
2003 Auburn 0.62 Wisconsin 0.50 W
2003 Florida 0.75 Iowa 0.62 L
2003 Georgia 0.75 Clemson 0.62 W
2003 Georgia 0.75 Georgia Tech 0.50 W
2003 LSU 0.87 Arizona 0.12 W
2003 Tennessee 0.75 Clemson 0.62 L
2003 Tennessee 0.75 Duke 0.25 W
2004 Auburn 1.00 Virginia Tech 0.87 W
2004 Georgia 0.75 Georgia Tech 0.50 W
2004 LSU 0.75 Oregon St. 0.62 W
2004 Tennessee 0.87 Texas A&M 0.62 W
2005 Auburn 0.87 Georgia Tech 0.62 L
2005 Auburn 0.87 Wisconsin 0.62 L
2005 Georgia 0.75 Georgia Tech 0.62 W
2005 LSU 0.87 Arizona St. 0.50 W
2005 LSU 0.87 Miami (FL) 0.75 W
2006 Alabama 0.25 Duke 0.00 W
2006 Auburn 0.75 Washington St. 0.44 W
2006 Florida 0.87 Florida St. 0.37 W
2006 Georgia 0.50 Colorado 0.25 W
2006 LSU 0.75 Arizona 0.44 W

Equal:

Year SEC SEC Pct Opponent Opp Pct Result
2000 Alabama 0.37 UCLA 0.37 L
2000 Auburn 0.75 Michigan 0.75 L
2000 Georgia 0.62 Virginia 0.62 W
2001 Alabama 0.50 Iowa St. 0.50 W
2001 Alabama 0.50 UCLA 0.50 L
2001 Auburn 0.62 North Carolina 0.62 L
2001 Florida 0.75 Florida St. 0.75 W
2002 Alabama 0.75 Oklahoma 0.75 L
2002 Auburn 0.62 Penn St. 0.62 W
2002 Florida 0.75 Michigan 0.75 L
2002 Georgia 0.87 Florida St. 0.87 W
2003 Georgia 0.75 Purdue 0.75 W
2004 Alabama 0.37 Minnesota 0.37 L
2004 Georgia 0.75 Wisconsin 0.75 W
2005 Alabama 0.75 Texas Tech 0.75 W
2005 Florida 0.62 Florida St. 0.62 W
2005 Florida 0.62 Iowa 0.62 W
2006 Auburn 0.75 Nebraska 0.75 W
2006 Tennessee 0.62 Penn St. 0.62 L

Worse:

Year SEC SEC Pct Opponent Opp Pct Result
2000 Florida 0.87 Florida St. 1.00 L
2000 Florida 0.87 Miami (FL) 1.00 L
2000 Georgia 0.62 Georgia Tech 0.75 L
2000 LSU 0.62 Georgia Tech 0.75 W
2000 Tennessee 0.62 Kansas St. 0.75 L
2001 Auburn 0.62 Syracuse 0.85 L
2001 Florida 0.75 Maryland 0.87 W
2001 LSU 0.62 Illinois 0.87 W
2002 Auburn 0.62 USC 0.87 L
2002 Florida 0.75 Florida St. 0.87 L
2002 Florida 0.75 Miami (FL) 1.00 L
2002 LSU 0.62 Texas 0.75 L
2002 Tennessee 0.62 Maryland 0.75 L
2002 Tennessee 0.62 Miami (FL) 1.00 L
2003 Alabama 0.25 Oklahoma 1.00 L
2003 Auburn 0.62 USC 0.87 L
2003 Florida 0.75 Florida St. 0.87 L
2003 Florida 0.75 Miami (FL) 0.85 L
2003 LSU 0.87 Oklahoma 1.00 W
2003 Tennessee 0.75 Miami (FL) 0.85 W
2004 Florida 0.50 Florida St. 0.75 W
2004 Florida 0.50 Miami (FL) 0.62 L
2004 LSU 0.75 Iowa 0.87 L
2005 Georgia 0.75 West Virginia 1.00 L
2006 Alabama 0.25 Oklahoma St. 0.37 L
2006 Florida 0.87 Ohio St. 1.00 W
2006 Georgia 0.50 Georgia Tech 0.87 W
2006 Georgia 0.50 Virginia Tech 0.75 W
2006 Tennessee 0.62 California 0.77 W

[ktffan]

Also, about 'places' in conference. I've tried that, it just doesn't work. How do you determine those places? Way too much opinion involved. Winning percentage is fact.

[GatorGrad]

Great stuff, kttfan. So I was right in my guess for Florida's matchups against non conference BCS teams. We had 12 such matchups:

Florida had the higher conference winning % two (2) times.

Florida had the lower conference winning % ten (10) times.

So in Hen's selected time period, my school has played non conference BCS conference teams with a higher conference winning % five times as much as vice versa! Of course, many of these matchups are against FSU and Miami. But you see my point. At least I have reason for my theory.

Unfortunately, it doesn't appear as if this same ratio carries over to the other five SEC teams in the analysis. But I agree that when you look over those games, the SEC is usually being matched up with a pretty darn good team from another conference. I only count 10-11 teams that were below .500 from those three lists combined. The rest were .500 or better in their conferences.

[GatorGrad]

I have researched this for the last 3 PSEG seasons (04-06). SEC teams played 20 PSEGs vs other BCS league teams. Based on the in conference winning percentages, the SEC was :

Disadvantaged - 9 games
Advantaged - 5 games

Hen - That is almost a 2 to 1 ratio...do you not agree that the SEC having to play a team with a higher conference winning % almost twice as many times as vice versa in their bowl games is significant?

For what it's worth, I also believe that most (not all) of the games where the SEC is disadvantaged occur in the Capital One, Outback, Cotton, and Chickfila Peach Bowls. I seem to recall the Capital One & Outback Bowls often choosing a "better" Big Ten team to match up with an SEC team. Same for the Cotton with Big 12 vs SEC and definitely the Chickfila Peach Bowl which I believe matches up the ACC's 3rd choice with the SEC's 5th (sometimes 6th) choice. I could be wrong though, and I don't really have the time to look it up right now. Of course a lot of this depends on whether or not a conference sends two teams to a BCS Bowl Game as the pecking order is affected when that happens.

[Blue Hen]

Yes, in 45% (9 of 21) of the SEC's PSEGs in the last 3 years, their teams were at a slight relative match up disadvantage, based on conference winning percentage...equal or advantaged 55% of time. Very small sample (3 PSEG seasons) here. And, GG, the more I think about it, I would have to guess that over the years, maybe the SEC would tend to have a slight relative match-up disadvantage simply based on the fact that more SEC teams have appeared in PSEGs.
However, and this is a 'mega' HOWEVER........this is more than offset by the SEC's huge numerical HFA and relative HFA advantage in these PSEGs.


Lots of those relative match-up advantages and disadvantages were fractionally tiny, like .500 vs.571 or .778 vs .750, but still using conference WP is much better than using 'places' for determining RMA ( relative match-up advantage)

[GatorGrad]

Well almost a 2 to 1 ratio (throwing out the even matchups) in favor of the conference going against the SEC is significant IMO. Do you have an easier way to look up more than just three years to see if that ratio is consistent in the last 10, 20, or 25 years? Pay special attention to the four bowl matchups that I pointed out if you can. That said, I actually value regular season OOC games more so than bowl games for this purpose. In the regular season, teams are giving it their all and are usually game-ready. These bowl games with their 30 day rests, NFL Draft distractions, etc make them one of the toughest games to predict in all of sports. Unless you're in the BCS Title Game, it truly is the definition of an exibition game, as you like to point out.

BTW, I disagree on the homefield advantage thing in bowl games. Tickets are split 50/50. In fact, I have been to several Florida bowl games in the south where the Big Ten actually brought more fans (Penn St, Michigan and Iowa come to mind.) I was at the BCS Championship Game last January, and it was easily 75% Ohio State fans. It was a "road game" for us. The weather is warmer in the south in Dec/Jan, but that's it. It's not like the PAC 10, Big 12, or ACC teams are playing in a winter wonderland all fall and aren't used to playing in 60 or 70 degree weather. Not to mention, there's a reason bowl games are in the south. You want the best possible weather conditions to allow for the most accurate and realistic game between the two participating teams. Nobody wants to play football in a snowstorm in Minneapolis in January.

[ktffan]

Records against major conference opponents since 1982.

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1982&thy=2006&ncnf=on&major=on&tmajor=on&fcn=on&ind=on&tind=on

Of these 412 games for the SEC, in 155, the SEC has the better conference winning percentage, (118-33-4)--0.774, 64 games where conference percentages were equal (42-21-1)--0.664, and 193 were where the opponent had the higher (79-109-5)--0.422.

In bowls:

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1982&thy=2006&ncnf=on&major=on&tmajor=on&bowl=on&fcn=on&ind=on&tind=on

The SEC had better in 37, (23-14-0)--0.622, equal in 34, (24-10-0)--0.706, Worse in 58, (29-28-1)--0.509.

FWIW, the Big Ten plays the toughest bowl slate, the SEC second.

[Blue Hen]

Weather acclimation, less travel, food,water, familiaritry.....lots of little things make 'home cooking' a clear advantage. All you have to do is look at how the Florida teams performed in and out of the Sunshine State during PSEG seasons.

Start with your Gators ;

12-6 in Sunshine state PSEGs, 4-12 in all other PSEGs (.667 vs .250 )
That's not a coincidence, GG

UF, UCF, Miami, FSU and USF (collectively) :

30-13-2 (.689) in PSEGs played within the relative safety of the Sunshine state.
23-33 (.411) in PSEGs played everywhere else.

Not even debatable. HFA and RHFA is huge.

The B10 teams are 24-35 (.407) vs SEC teams, all time in PSEGs with all those games played in the South. Are you, seriously, trying to say that if all 59 of those games were played up in B10 country in December and January that the record would be exactly the same ?


GG, I'm not inspired to go back 20-30-40 yrs etc. to research SEC relative match-ups in all those PSEGs ( mostly laziness , sorry)...but I'll keep my research going that I started in the 04 PSEG season.

[GatorGrad]

Records against major conference opponents since 1982.

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1982&thy=2006&ncnf=on&major=on&tmajor=on&fcn=on&ind=on&tind=on

Of these 412 games for the SEC, in 155, the SEC has the better conference winning percentage, (118-33-4)--0.774, 64 games where conference percentages were equal (42-21-1)--0.664, and 193 were where the opponent had the higher (79-109-5)--0.422.

In bowls:

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=1982&thy=2006&ncnf=on&major=on&tmajor=on&bowl=on&fcn=on&ind=on&tind=on

The SEC had better in 37, (23-14-0)--0.622, equal in 34, (24-10-0)--0.706, Worse in 58, (29-28-1)--0.509.

FWIW, the Big Ten plays the toughest bowl slate, the SEC second.

So if I am reading those links correctly, the SEC has been the best conference against major non conference teams in the last 25 years. The SEC won 59% of the time with the PAC 10 and Big Ten being tied for 2nd at 52%. All other conferences have losing records. This despite the opponents having a better conference record 193 times vs 155 times for the SEC.

And the results in bowl games are similar with the SEC leading the pack by winning 59% of their games despite only having the better conference record compared to their opponent 39% of the time (37 vs 58.) Looks like the SEC hasn't been all that bad in recent history! Of course it all depends on what one would call "recent." So the SEC was the best last year, and the best in the last 25 years...but just average in the BCS Era or in the 2000's. Can we all agree on that?

[GatorGrad]

Weather acclimation, less travel, food,water, familiaritry.....lots of little things make 'home cooking' a clear advantage. All you have to do is look at how the Florida teams performed in and out of the Sunshine State during PSEG seasons.

Start with your Gators ;

12-6 in Sunshine state PSEGs, 4-12 in all other PSEGs (.667 vs .250 )
That's not a coincidence, GG

UF, UCF, Miami, FSU and USF (collectively) :

30-13-2 (.689) in PSEGs played within the relative safety of the Sunshine state.
23-33 (.411) in PSEGs played everywhere else.

Not even debatable. HFA and RHFA is huge.

The B10 teams are 24-35 (.407) vs SEC teams, all time in PSEGs with all those games played in the South. Are you, seriously, trying to say that if all 59 of those games were played up in B10 country in December and January that the record would be exactly the same ?


GG, I'm not inspired to go back 20-30-40 yrs etc. to research SEC relative match-ups in all those PSEGs ( mostly laziness , sorry)...but I'll keep my research going that I started in the 04 PSEG season.

"Less travel, food, water???" Huh? Most teams check in SEVERAL days prior to the game. Food and water? Come on Mr. Hen. That is silliness. The only excuse should be weather. And here's why I think it isn't that big of a deal...

The bowl games in the south are not freezing, but they usually aren't 98 degrees in December or January either. Some are even in domes in controlled environments. Most games during these months, even in the south are in the 50's, 60's, 70's, sometimes 80's. Perfect weather conditions. It's not The Swamp in September or anything like that. My point is, these are typical weather conditions for most teams during the fall anyways. Certainly for the PAC 10, Big 12, and most of the ACC schools. The Big Ten might get some colder games in November, but those places are hot in September too just like the rest of the country. So the weather for most bowl games is very close to the weather that the participating teams played in during the season.

Remember, the regular season games for the Big Ten end before Thanksgiving which leaves about 1.5 months before the bowl games! By the time the nasty winter comes in, the season is over. So it's not like the Big Ten teams have been playing all season in a frozen tundra or anything like that. No, I am not saying that if SEC teams played all bowl games up north they would have the same exact bowl record. But I don't think it would be significantly different. And that wouldn't be a fair comparison anyways - the bowl game weather in the south only asks players to play in similar conditions to what they have played in all season, including the other conferences! Making a southern team play in the snow when many of the players have never even SEEN snow is a much more clear advantage. Players in the south don't play in severe cold weather during the regular season...but players in the north DO play in 50, 60, or 70 degree temperatures during the regular season.

So neither team is at a huge "disadvantage" by playing bowl games in the south in Dec/Jan since both sides have played in such conditions. I could even argue that with the 1.5 month layoff, the northern teams would have played in similar temperatures MORE SO than the southern teams. If an SEC team finishes up Nov 17th and then plays in the SEC Title Game (in a dome) and their next game is in Dallas for the Cotton Bowl. I'm willing to bet that a team like Nebraska had played in temperatures closer to Dallas on Jan 1st than an SEC team played in the state of Alabama in November. A TRUE advantage would be making the southern teams play in the north in winter. Or making the northern teams play bowl games in the south in July maybe. But playing a bowl game in California, Arizona, Texas, or Florida in December or January is just not that big of a deal IMO. The weather in those states is perfect in Dec/Jan and very similar weather to what any northern team would have seen during the first 75% of their regular season.

[ktffan]

So if I am reading those links correctly, the SEC has been the best conference against major non conference teams in the last 25 years. The SEC won 59% of the time with the PAC 10 and Big Ten being tied for 2nd at 52%. All other conferences have losing records. This despite the opponents having a better conference record 193 times vs 155 times for the SEC.

And the results in bowl games are similar with the SEC leading the pack by winning 59% of their games despite only having the better conference record compared to their opponent 39% of the time (37 vs 58.) Looks like the SEC hasn't been all that bad in recent history! Of course it all depends on what one would call "recent." So the SEC was the best last year, and the best in the last 25 years...but just average in the BCS Era or in the 2000's. Can we all agree on that?


No. I've said it a thousand times, maybe you haven't read it. The SEC has flat out been the best if you go back into the 90s or back, or if you go all-time. There's no denying it, though some try. Occasionally, you'll see some guy did out some limited stat to 'prove' the SEC hasn't been all that, but it doesn't stand up.

There is one factual matter which is fairly common to attack the SEC with, and that's weak scheduling. The SEC's schedule HAS been weak, very weak. Some try to make the point that it's only because of weak scheduling that the SEC has won so much. Not true as show in this stats and a bunch of others I can give you. Yes, the SEC's scheduling has been weak, but that doesn't mean it's not been the best. It makes it deceptive just how much better than SEC has been (due to weak scheduling, it looks like they've been better), but there's no denying to an objective observer that they've been the best.

Recently, it's not been the case and SEC fans and the media living in the past like to pretend that nothing has changed. Also, since the SEC was the best last year (or close to it), you'll see all sorts of people digging up last year as an example of how the SEC has been great, ignoring the previous 6 years. The years of SEC dominance appears to be at an end.

[GatorGrad]

Right...the SEC has been the best all time, and the best in the last 25 years. But NOT the best in the last 5-10 years. I agree. What am I missing? Why did you say "no?" I also agree that weak OOC scheduling leads to inflated winning %, bowl berths, and higher rankings which is why I never point to those stats when defending the SEC. But using OOC games against "BCS teams" as we have been doing helps weed out the week OOC scheduling factor.

[ktffan]

Right...the SEC has been the best all time, and the best in the last 25 years. But NOT the best in the last 5-10 years. I agree. What am I missing? Why did you say "no?" I also agree that weak OOC scheduling leads to inflated winning %, bowl berths, and higher rankings which is why I never point to those stats when defending the SEC. But using OOC games against "BCS teams" as we have been doing helps weed out the week OOC scheduling factor.

Excuse me, the 'no' meant 'No, you're not reading it wrong'.

The SEC has schedule week, but when they've played the big team, they've won more than the other conferences. The critism that the SEC pads their wins is valid, plus that they get extra ranked teams through padding is also valid, however the conference is good as evidenced by their performance in non-conference. It's the lack of the non-conference performance in recent years that I conclude they've not been 'dominate'. They've been good, but not great.

[GatorGrad]

Excuse me, the 'no' meant 'No, you're not reading it wrong'.

The SEC has schedule week, but when they've played the big team, they've won more than the other conferences. The critism that the SEC pads their wins is valid, plus that they get extra ranked teams through padding is also valid, however the conference is good as evidenced by their performance in non-conference. It's the lack of the non-conference performance in recent years that I conclude they've not been 'dominate'. They've been good, but not great.

Agreed.

[Blue Hen]

Ok..given all that , I ask again..If all 59 B10/SEC PSEGs had been played in the North, among the B10 states, in December and January ( that's when PSEGs are played ) would the record still have been 35-24 in favor of the SEC ?

If you think maybe not....then why ?


Its not a matter of this or that cold weather team played a warm weather game here or there at some point so weather/climate is not a factor...its life long weather acclimation for the players from the various areas. Its all about 'comfort zone'. That's why the Florida teams are tough in Florida Bowls and get spanked around in non Florida bowls. Anyway, weather /climate, imo , is just a small component of the overall disadvantage of being the travelling team. You can research every team sport in history and HFA and RHFA always provides some small advantage.

[GatorGrad]

Ok..given all that , I ask again..If all 59 B10/SEC PSEGs had been played in the North, among the B10 states, in December and January ( that's when PSEGs are played ) would the record still have been 35-24 in favor of the SEC ?

If you think maybe not....then why ?


Its not a matter of this or that cold weather team played a warm weather game here or there at some point so weather/climate is not a factor...its life long weather acclimation for the players from the various areas. Its all about 'comfort zone'. That's why the Florida teams are tough in Florida Bowls and get spanked around in non Florida bowls. Anyway, weather /climate, imo , is just a small component of the overall disadvantage of being the travelling team. You can research every team sport in history and HFA and RHFA always provides some small advantage.

Hen - I already said in my prior post that the records probably wouldn't be identical if all of those bowl games were played in the north. My point was that 1) the difference would not be nearly as significant as you seem to think it might be and 2) the comparison is just not the same...

Big Ten teams playing in 50 or 60 or 70 degree weather in the south in January is weather that they have been playing in for most of the season, even up north. So it's not like they are being thrown for a loop having to play in Arizona, Texas, or Florida in January when it is 60 degrees. They aren't asking northern teams to play in the south during June or July, which would be a much more fair comparison to a southern team playing in the north in January.

Asking a team from the south to play in 10 degree weather in January is a much larger difference in temperature. The RHFA is magnified even more when a southern team goes from playing games in the south from Sept through Nov to playing a game in the north in January vs a team from the north playing games in the north from Sep-Nov and then playing a game in the south in January. The georgraphical change and the 1.5 months in between really make a difference.

That's all I am saying.

[Blue Hen]

Sorry GG, I must have missed where you said that the record for those 59 games would be different.

[GatorGrad]

Post #52, paragraph #3. Although it was a long post, so I see how you could have missed it!

:)

[aufan59]

What exactly is home field advantage?

Most people seem to define home field advantage as having a large, loud crowd backing you.

The SEC has the most hostile crowds. What else are we supposed to do than put 2 and 2 together?

[Blue Hen]

It's surprising for sure, aufan, but you've got a 47% success rate for SEC road teams.........the highest rate among all BCS leagues and the 2nd highest among all BD leagues. Hard to say why winning on the road in the SEC is so relatively easy....but it is.

[ktffan]

It's surprising for sure, aufan, but you've got a 47% success rate for SEC road teams.........the highest rate among all BCS leagues and the 2nd highest among all BD leagues. Hard to say why winning on the road in the SEC is so relatively easy....but it is.

Breaking things up, the huge disparity lies in the east division. One blip could be because three of the weaker teams in the conference reside there and play 4 home games, while two of those teams only play 3.

[Blue Hen]

3 of the 6 East teams (weaker ones) play 4 home games vs East opponents and 2 of the East teams only play 3 home games vs East opponents ? Am I understanding your post correctly ? Interesting. What about the 6th East team ?

[GatorGrad]

3 of the 6 East teams (weaker ones) play 4 home games vs East opponents and 2 of the East teams only play 3 home games vs East opponents ? Am I understanding your post correctly ? Interesting. What about the 6th East team ?

Florida and Georgia play at a neutral site every year (except for 94 and 95 when the Jacksonville Stadium was being renovated for the Jaguars.) So Florida & Georgia play only 3 home SEC games 50% of the time, and 4 SEC home games the other 50% of the time. Basically, they each lose one SEC "home game" every other year. Alabama vs Auburn was also at a neutral site every year as recently as the 90's, but is now home and home. Not sure what exact year they made the switch.

[GatorGrad]

What neutral site did UGA and Auburn play at for so many years???

[Blue Hen]

UGA and Auburn have played 110 times, starting in 1892
UVA and UNC have played 111 times starting in 1892
William & Mary and Richmond have played 116 times starting in 1898


..of course the most played rivalry in all of CF is Lehigh/Lafeyette ( 142 games since 1884)