ADVERTISEMENT

2023 Top 25 ESPN SP+ Pre-season Projections

chaseball

chaseball

I've posted how many times?
Sep 8, 2007
7,056
2,164
113
Limited to top 25 since these projections are behind ESPN Insider paywall now.

These projections are based on a program's returning production, recruiting classes, and recent results. Click blurred text at bottom of the rankings for further details/specifics regarding the criteria that goes into these projections.

Top 25 SP+ preseason projections as of June 2023:

1. Georgia Bulldogs (29.9)
2. Ohio State Buckeyes (29.6)
3. Michigan Wolverines (29.2)
4. Alabama Crimson Tide (27.9)
5. LSU Tigers (25.2)
6. Tennessee Volunteers (23.9)
7. USC Trojans (23.6)
8. Penn State Nittany Lions (23.5)
9. Texas Longhorns (23.3)
10. Florida State Seminoles (21.6)
11. Oregon Ducks (21.5)
12. Clemson Tigers (21.3)
13. Oklahoma Sooners (19.7)
14. Utah Utes (19.4)
15. Notre Dame Fighting Irish (19.3)
16. Texas A&M Aggies (18.8)
17. Washington Huskies (18.3)
18. Ole Miss Rebels (17.5)
19. Wisconsin Badgers (15.8)
20. TCU Horned Frogs (15.8)
21. Florida Gators (14.8)
22. Kentucky Wildcats (14.5)
23. Kansas State Wildcats (14.3)
24. UCLA Bruins (14.3)
25. Mississippi State Bulldogs (14.1)

Author's explanation of projections:

I base SP+ projections on three primary factors, weighted by their predictiveness:

1. Returning production. The returning production numbers are based on rosters I have updated as much as possible to account for transfers and attrition. The combination of last year's SP+ ratings and adjustments based on returning production make up about half of the projections formula.

2. Recent recruiting. This piece informs us of the caliber of a team's potential replacements (and/or new stars) in the lineup. It is determined by the past few years of recruiting rankings in diminishing order (meaning the most recent class carries the most weight). Beginning this season, I am also incorporating transfers -- both the quality and the volume -- in a different way. After last season's transfer-heavy recruiting shift, I've got a bit more data for how to handle that. This piece makes up about one-third of the projections formula.

3. Recent history. Using a sliver of information from previous seasons (two to four years ago) gives us a good measure of overall program health. It stands to reason that a team that has played well for one year is less likely to duplicate that effort than a team that has been good for years on end (and vice versa), right? This is a minor piece of the puzzle -- only about 15% -- but the projections are better with it than without.

A reminder on SP+: It's a tempo- and opponent-adjusted measure of college football efficiency. It is a predictive measure of the most sustainable and predictable aspects of football, not a résumé ranking, and, along those same lines, these projections aren't intended to be a guess at what the AP Top 25 will look like at the end of the year. These are simply early offseason power rankings based on the information we have been able to gather to date.

Paywalled: https://www.espn.com/college-footba...872/2023-college-football-rankings-every-team
 
Last edited:
chaseball said:
I don't have an ESPN Insider membership so don't know what the rankings are from teams ranked 26-130+ (which is the best part of the data IMO)

Anyway, here's an explanation of how these projections are determined (the criteria that goes into them) from the author Bill Connelly himself:


I base SP+ projections on three primary factors, weighted by their predictiveness:

1. Returning production. The returning production numbers are based on rosters I have updated as much as possible to account for transfers and attrition. The combination of last year's SP+ ratings and adjustments based on returning production make up about half of the projections formula.

2. Recent recruiting. This piece informs us of the caliber of a team's potential replacements (and/or new stars) in the lineup. It is determined by the past few years of recruiting rankings in diminishing order (meaning the most recent class carries the most weight). Beginning this season, I am also incorporating transfers -- both the quality and the volume -- in a different way. After last season's transfer-heavy recruiting shift, I've got a bit more data for how to handle that. This piece makes up about one-third of the projections formula.

3. Recent history. Using a sliver of information from previous seasons (two to four years ago) gives us a good measure of overall program health. It stands to reason that a team that has played well for one year is less likely to duplicate that effort than a team that has been good for years on end (and vice versa), right? This is a minor piece of the puzzle -- only about 15% -- but the projections are better with it than without.

I will update these numbers in May and August, after further transfers and roster changes have come about (and after I've had a bit more time to tinker with handling transfers and other factors). But for now, let's look at what SP+ has to say about the college football landscape.

A reminder on SP+: It's a tempo- and opponent-adjusted measure of college football efficiency. It is a predictive measure of the most sustainable and predictable aspects of football, not a résumé ranking, and, along those same lines, these projections aren't intended to be a guess at what the AP Top 25 will look like at the end of the year. These are simply early offseason power rankings based on the information we have been able to gather to date.


Top 25 SP+ preseason projections as of June 2023:

1. Georgia Bulldogs (29.9)
2. Ohio State Buckeyes (29.6)
3. Michigan Wolverines (29.2)
4. Alabama Crimson Tide (27.9)
5. LSU Tigers (25.2)
6. Tennessee Volunteers (23.9)
7. USC Trojans (23.6)
8. Penn State Nittany Lions (23.5)
9. Texas Longhorns (23.3)
10. Florida State Seminoles (21.6)
11. Oregon Ducks (21.5)
12. Clemson Tigers (21.3)
13. Oklahoma Sooners (19.7)
14. Utah Utes (19.4)
15. Notre Dame Fighting Irish (19.3)
16. Texas A&M Aggies (18.8)
17. Washington Huskies (18.3)
18. Ole Miss Rebels (17.5)
19. Wisconsin Badgers (15.8)
20. TCU Horned Frogs (15.8)
21. Florida Gators (14.8)
22. Kentucky Wildcats (14.5)
23. Kansas State Wildcats (14.3)
24. UCLA Bruins (14.3)
25. Mississippi State Bulldogs (14.1)

(paywalled) https://www.espn.com/college-footba...872/2023-college-football-rankings-every-team (paywalled)
Click to expand...

Reasonable. Ohio State needing to break in a new QB is IMO going to cost them maybe a point. Replacing CJ Stroud may take a little while.
 
I like to look at these SP+ Preseason projections as more or less a snapshot of where your program ranks relative to all other programs based on the best available data on these programs at the moment. This data is also used to determine quality of opponents during the first several weeks of the new season in the F+ ranking system which is now being published here: https://www.bcftoys.com/2022-fplus/

There's no bias here it's all computer generated and you get a good idea of where your program ranks relative to all others based on an accumulation of data that spans the last 2-4 years.
 
Last edited:
NDSMC78 said:
No one can read this. It's behind a paywall.
Click to expand...
I blurred the image behind a spoiler tag. Just click the blurred image and it will reveal the author's criteria for the projections.

The top 25 is at the bottom of the post.
 
It's funny. BK in just his 2nd year at LSU will have a top 5 SP+ projection (he never had an SP+ projection inside the top 10 once at Notre Dame)

This is pretty revealing to how institutionally limited ND has become on the football field

As I've said before, next time Jack Swarbrick comments that the goal at ND is to still win national titles, whoever is present needs to erupt in roaring laughter.
 
Also, another take away from this data:

NDs #15 projection is still being carried heavily by the work BK did here before his departure. There's still a HUGE unknown on whether or not Marcus Freeman can identify, develop, and coach talent at the highest level of collegiate football (like BK did).

It is possible ND sinks even further in these rankings going forward if Marcus Freeman doesn't prove to be the coach that BK was (which is likely given that MF is way less accomplished, experienced, etc.) and the ranking can slip even further going forward if MF continues to decline on the recruiting trail.
 
chaseball said:
Also, another take away from this data:

NDs #15 projection is still being carried heavily by the work BK did here before his departure. There's still a HUGE unknown on whether or not Marcus Freeman can identify, develop, and coach talent at the highest level of collegiate football (like BK did).

It is possible ND sinks even further in these rankings going forward if Marcus Freeman doesn't prove to be the coach that BK was (which is likely given that MF is way less accomplished, experienced, etc.) and the ranking can slip even further going forward if MF continues to decline on the recruiting trail.
Click to expand...
We finished 9-2 last year, and beat #4 Clemson, 35-14. Not bad for a first season IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chaseball
mbd11 said:
We finished 9-2 last year, and beat #4 Clemson, 35-14. Not bad for a first season IMO.
Click to expand...
Not bad for a first season but the program as constructed was more a continuation of the last regime. We're going to see what kind of coach MF is in the next 1-2 years.

EDIT: ND finished 22nd in F+ last year (which is well below their base line of 13th or so during the BK era)

ND is playing a lot of bad teams right now in the ACC and their core rivals have been down (with an exception of USC last year). It's hard to compare/contrast teams based on W-L record for this reason, which is why F+ is the better tool to gauge season-performance.

All this to say, last year was a disappointment especially given that it was more or less a continuation of BKs program. But it was year 1 and a 1st year head coach so we gotta give the situation some leash and see how it plays out over the next couple years.
 
Last edited:
chaseball said:
It's funny. BK in just his 2nd year at LSU will have a top 5 SP+ projection (he never had an SP+ projection inside the top 10 once at Notre Dame)

This is pretty revealing to how institutionally limited ND has become on the football field

As I've said before, next time Jack Swarbrick comments that the goal at ND is to still win national titles, whoever is present needs to erupt in roaring laughter.
Click to expand...
That’s not fair to Jack.

Jack doesn’t control admissions and LSU’s academic requirements provide them with a broader and deeper talent pool.

I don’t want to speak for my fellow alums, but I think that their overwhelming consensus is for Notre Dame to retain its lofty academic standards !

None of us want Notre Dame to become just another football school with run of the mill academic standards !
 
  • Like
Reactions: BGI User 756 and NDinNJ
mbd11 said:
We finished 9-2 last year, and beat #4 Clemson, 35-14. Not bad for a first season IMO.
Click to expand...
When you lose to Stanford and Marshall at home in the same season, don't draw positives.
 
Be nice if nobody was ranked until after the 3rd game. CFB has so many factors around QB's and coaches.

No way OSU is 2 with a first time QB starter. Texas is well, Texas yearly. FSU lost 3 games in the ACC, cant see them this high and OK? They lost 7 games last year.
 
ftnfan62 said:
Be nice if nobody was ranked until after the 3rd game. CFB has so many factors around QB's and coaches.

No way OSU is 2 with a first time QB starter. Texas is well, Texas yearly. FSU lost 3 games in the ACC, cant see them this high and OK? They lost 7 games last year.
Click to expand...
Nobody is ranked. It's simply clickbait.
 
chaseball said:
Not bad for a first season but the program as constructed was more a continuation of the last regime. We're going to see what kind of coach MF is in the next 1-2 years.

EDIT: ND finished 22nd in F+ last year (which is well below their base line of 13th or so during the BK era)

ND is playing a lot of bad teams right now in the ACC and their core rivals have been down (with an exception of USC last year). It's hard to compare/contrast teams based on W-L record for this reason, which is why F+ is the better tool to gauge season-performance.

All this to say, last year was a disappointment especially given that it was more or less a continuation of BKs program. But it was year 1 and a 1st year head coach so we gotta give the situation some leash and see how it plays out over the next couple years.
Click to expand...
BK's also the one who left behind a QB room consisting of Buchner, Pyne and Angeli.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ftnfan62 and BGI User 756
chaseball said:
Limited to top 25 since these projections are behind ESPN Insider paywall now.

These projections are based on a program's returning production, recruiting classes, and recent results. Click blurred text at bottom of the rankings for further details/specifics regarding the criteria that goes into these projections.

Top 25 SP+ preseason projections as of June 2023:

1. Georgia Bulldogs (29.9)
2. Ohio State Buckeyes (29.6)
3. Michigan Wolverines (29.2)
4. Alabama Crimson Tide (27.9)
5. LSU Tigers (25.2)
6. Tennessee Volunteers (23.9)
7. USC Trojans (23.6)
8. Penn State Nittany Lions (23.5)
9. Texas Longhorns (23.3)
10. Florida State Seminoles (21.6)
11. Oregon Ducks (21.5)
12. Clemson Tigers (21.3)
13. Oklahoma Sooners (19.7)
14. Utah Utes (19.4)
15. Notre Dame Fighting Irish (19.3)
16. Texas A&M Aggies (18.8)
17. Washington Huskies (18.3)
18. Ole Miss Rebels (17.5)
19. Wisconsin Badgers (15.8)
20. TCU Horned Frogs (15.8)
21. Florida Gators (14.8)
22. Kentucky Wildcats (14.5)
23. Kansas State Wildcats (14.3)
24. UCLA Bruins (14.3)
25. Mississippi State Bulldogs (14.1)

Author's explanation of projections:

I base SP+ projections on three primary factors, weighted by their predictiveness:

1. Returning production. The returning production numbers are based on rosters I have updated as much as possible to account for transfers and attrition. The combination of last year's SP+ ratings and adjustments based on returning production make up about half of the projections formula.

2. Recent recruiting. This piece informs us of the caliber of a team's potential replacements (and/or new stars) in the lineup. It is determined by the past few years of recruiting rankings in diminishing order (meaning the most recent class carries the most weight). Beginning this season, I am also incorporating transfers -- both the quality and the volume -- in a different way. After last season's transfer-heavy recruiting shift, I've got a bit more data for how to handle that. This piece makes up about one-third of the projections formula.

3. Recent history. Using a sliver of information from previous seasons (two to four years ago) gives us a good measure of overall program health. It stands to reason that a team that has played well for one year is less likely to duplicate that effort than a team that has been good for years on end (and vice versa), right? This is a minor piece of the puzzle -- only about 15% -- but the projections are better with it than without.

A reminder on SP+: It's a tempo- and opponent-adjusted measure of college football efficiency. It is a predictive measure of the most sustainable and predictable aspects of football, not a résumé ranking, and, along those same lines, these projections aren't intended to be a guess at what the AP Top 25 will look like at the end of the year. These are simply early offseason power rankings based on the information we have been able to gather to date.

Paywalled: https://www.espn.com/college-footba...872/2023-college-football-rankings-every-team
Click to expand...
The same place that had Bama and OSU playing in the NC last year

Oops
 
  • Like
Reactions: ftnfan62
chaseball said:
It's funny. BK in just his 2nd year at LSU will have a top 5 SP+ projection (he never had an SP+ projection inside the top 10 once at Notre Dame)

This is pretty revealing to how institutionally limited ND has become on the football field

As I've said before, next time Jack Swarbrick comments that the goal at ND is to still win national titles, whoever is present needs to erupt in roaring laughter.
Click to expand...
that is every teams goal, realistic or not; stop gripping
 
chaseball said:
Also, another take away from this data:

NDs #15 projection is still being carried heavily by the work BK did here before his departure. There's still a HUGE unknown on whether or not Marcus Freeman can identify, develop, and coach talent at the highest level of collegiate football (like BK did).

It is possible ND sinks even further in these rankings going forward if Marcus Freeman doesn't prove to be the coach that BK was (which is likely given that MF is way less accomplished, experienced, etc.) and the ranking can slip even further going forward if MF continues to decline on the recruiting trail.
Click to expand...
We’ll the data was inaccurate then because ND finished in the Top 10 under BK (albeit playing terrible schedules and getting waxed in big games. Same number of Top 5 wins as MF).

Where’s the data with OU being ahead of ND coming off a 6-6 dumpster fire season?

It’s a safe projection, ND has the talent to beat anybody on the schedule but unknowns remain after meltdowns last season. USC has a game changer in CW (will need a Beliechek game plan), OH St new QB could be our road to a win, How much will Clemson improve under Cade?
 
sjb75 said:
The transfer portal is your friend.
Click to expand...
Yes, and Freeman learned from his Year 1 mistake, and brought in a transfer QB this year, when he realized we needed to improve there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back