I don't know about that F+ stuff but I do know Matt Rhule has a track record of rebuilding programs and will do it in Nebraska
OT: Colorado v Nebraska
- Thread starter chaseball
- Start date
I think a lot of people are used to traditional AP Poll ranking where if you win a game your ranking goes up, if you lose a game, your ranking goes down. This is your traditional resume ranking. And people are so used to this traditional ranking system that they benchmark any new data against it as the standard. If you want this type of ranking, FPI (at ESPN) is doing something similar (and better than the traditional way)
F+ is different. It's a predictive measure of the most sustainable and predictive aspects of college football. It's more concerned with how it expects a team to do *going forward* based on the best data available on that team up to this point.
You can look at it as more of a power ranking. A power ranking dives deeper than just the outcome of a game and tries to determine what teams are really good under the hood so to speak and what teams are doing the things well that leads to winning (how well they perform on each non-garbage-time play, each non-garbage-time drive, vs the quality of their opponent, etc.)
There's 133 college football teams of wildly varying degrees of quality. A successful play vs the #5 defense means something different than a successful play vs the #75 defense (as a simplified example)
Wins and Losses matter, final score matter, and one half of the F+ formula takes this into consideration. But the other half of the system is more concerned with your play to play and drive to drive performance vs the quality of your competition on both sides of the ball.
F+ at a super high level can be described as such:
It is a ranking system that neutralizes for quality of opponent and for luck
F+ is different. It's a predictive measure of the most sustainable and predictive aspects of college football. It's more concerned with how it expects a team to do *going forward* based on the best data available on that team up to this point.
You can look at it as more of a power ranking. A power ranking dives deeper than just the outcome of a game and tries to determine what teams are really good under the hood so to speak and what teams are doing the things well that leads to winning (how well they perform on each non-garbage-time play, each non-garbage-time drive, vs the quality of their opponent, etc.)
There's 133 college football teams of wildly varying degrees of quality. A successful play vs the #5 defense means something different than a successful play vs the #75 defense (as a simplified example)
Wins and Losses matter, final score matter, and one half of the F+ formula takes this into consideration. But the other half of the system is more concerned with your play to play and drive to drive performance vs the quality of your competition on both sides of the ball.
F+ at a super high level can be described as such:
It is a ranking system that neutralizes for quality of opponent and for luck
Last edited:
F+ ranking system: https://www.bcftoys.com/2023-fplus (updates are made mid-week so the data is roughly 5-6 days behind and doesn't include this past weekends games yet)
One last comment I want to make about the F+ system:
through the first 4 weeks of the new season, to determine team-quality, the system uses the data from the present season along with SP+ projections (which you can find a post i made about in my post history from late last month). SP+ projections take into account last several years of recruiting rankings, last several years of team performance, and the productivity of the players that are returning from the year prior.
After week 4, the data in the present season becomes more reliable and the system uses only data from the present season (e.g. the results on the field)
through the first 4 weeks of the new season, to determine team-quality, the system uses the data from the present season along with SP+ projections (which you can find a post i made about in my post history from late last month). SP+ projections take into account last several years of recruiting rankings, last several years of team performance, and the productivity of the players that are returning from the year prior.
After week 4, the data in the present season becomes more reliable and the system uses only data from the present season (e.g. the results on the field)
Last edited:
You need an interest in math, a white board, and time to dig into it for yourself just for the top 25.....all which I have
no, it was clear the BS you were trying to spew, and I was quite clear with my perspective. I have watched both teams multiple times. Nebraska is not close to NC State currently. F+ is completely inaccurate
lol i dont know what to tell you my guy, im only calling balls and strikes based on the way I see it, you are welcome to ignore my calls entirely and just do you
What is rebuilding?. Nebraska is 23-47 since 2017 and has nowhere to go but up. That said, Nebraska has zero chance to ever win a Big 10 title.
Agreed. They missed their chance with that weak-a$$ed Big 10 West Division. Im sure playing the gauntlet of Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin and Northwestern will be missed when they have to now include UCLA, USC, Oregon, and the Big 10 East teams on a regular basis.
Notre Dame should have just joined the Big 10 in the West Division and had the easiest path to a conference championship game every year. But no…gotta have that independence. (Insert sarcasm).
Chase is not explaining the system, just extolling its praises.
F = Fremeau which is a system the namesake invented after the 2002 BC-ND debacle. It invented a concept of 'efficiency' which measures how many yards are wasted, i.e, if you gain 99 yards and then time expires you have the worst efficiency rating.
F+ appears to be an average of Fremeau's efficiency and a different system, I suppose he noticed that his system missed quite a bit.
He has been all over the place, agree
Even as he attempted to explain some nuances, the data that supposedly uses past performance (as he claimed for ND) for one of the data inputs, certainly is wrong about Nebraska, as my summary of the past 6 years showed. And then another data input, the recruiting measurement of the frosh class, is also misleading, since it’s based solely on projection, no performance
A deflated balloon? Dude you had to be drunk on Saturday with the performance you turned in. SMH.
Based on Nebraska’s two fumbles without a defender being within 3 yards, NC State would shut them out.
But you get more Benjamins!. Why OU is headed to the SEC. 9-3 and missing the playoffs ok if the U gets an extra $25 million a year.
Who are your eight blue bloods?
Based on LONG-STANDING W/L-win percentage rankings, the TOP TEN throughout my 75 years have been in no particular order:
Penn State
Notre Dame
Michigan
Ohio State
Tennessee
Alabama
Texas
Oklahoma
Nebraska
USC
Once other teams such as Boise State, FSU, Miami, etc. started knocking on the door, I felt that something had been lost in the NATURAL ORDER OF THINGS.
And that reality itself had been sneakily CHOP-BLOCKED.
Let's see how Sanders finishes. And I say that with no bias either way.
Ara took a 2-7 team and with basically the SAME PLAYERS who were already on the roster or in school as freshmen, such as Nick Eddy, and went 9-1. Ara didn't engage in a wholesale REPLACEMENT EXERCISE. He couldn't. But he got the talent that was already there to perform at a CHAMPIONSHIP LEVEL, minus about a minute and a half in the season's last game.
If Sanders can do the same, given the way the rules now allow for that to happen, GOOD FOR HIM. If not, he'll MELT BACK INTO THE POT a bit.
CU plays USC, right? There's your litmus test, right there. That Zachariah kid returned another one for a TD -- a 75 yd. punt return that was a thing of RARE BEAUTY. USC has blazing SPEED. And I think it's a 17.5 favorite at the moment.
In two weeks, WE SHALL SEE.
Here's the 8 i was referring to: OU, USC, Nebraska, Texas, Alabama, OSU, ND, Michigan
A case can certainly be made for the two on your list but I think they are more a tier 1.5 than tier 1
Yes, you could argue that, no question, but mine was a long-term list based on wins and win percentages which held firm for many years.
Plus, it requires a little more history -- in the case of Tennessee, more distant; in the case of Penn State, relatively more recent.
Tennessee's great coach, Bob Neyland, won 171 games there and compiled an 83% winning percentage. And he did it in the Rockne/Layden years. So, there's ample BLOODLINE, no question.
With PSU, the Paterno years were extremely good, building as they did on the Rip Engle years.
And another measure of greatness is their records against NONE OTHER than ND, the fourth winningest program in history by win percentage. Tennessee is 4 and 4 while Penn State is 9-9-1.
Can't get much closer than that.
1-6 since going 3-0 vs a bunch of creampuffs. Deion's already lost some of the players on that team.
How's that energy at CU now. 1-6 since that 3-0 start vs bottom feeders.
1-6 since that 3-0 start against awful teams. Where's all that energy? We don't even hear about CU or prime on ESPN any more. 😂
Faust, Davie, Willingham, and Weis could have coached that team to 4 wins this year. 😂
I don't have problem with Prime. I have problem with chase and others using the early success of CU to disparage ND's program.
Colorado was screwed today against a scrappy UOFAZ team. With the score tied, the Cats accidentally scored too soon with 1:30 left. The refs somehow said the play was stopped at the 1 which allowed AZ to run out the clock and kick a game winning fg.
Similar threads
