NCAA Football Tradition Ranking

[OilerBuck]

All...

I have been putting in some work on a formula that will rank all 117 NCAA D-1 A schools by tradition.

I am developing a formula based only on statistical data. I am trying to eliminate bias in this and encourage discussion during the off-season.

Currently, I don't feel 100% confident in the results and I am asking for help before I post a final version. I have only incorporated the following data into the formula:

1. Wins
2. Losses
3. Winning Pct.
4. Heismans
5. Post 1940 NCAA Championships

I am planning on including:

1. Conference championships
2. All-Americans
3. Other major individual awards (TBD)
4. Stadium capacity?

What I need from you:

1. Suggestions on what category rankings to use. Maybe I've missed some, or maybe I'm using some that I shouldn't. Remember, I am trying to keep this statistical rather than subjective. While my final formula will have things weighted subjectively, I think it will be reasonable.

2. Resources to find the information I am missing. I'm sure some of you know where I can find these stats easily, rather than searching for each individual team.

3. Misc. Discussion on the project. It's just for fun and I'm attaching the Excel file (Zipped) so that you can all mess around with it. Remember that this is a ROUGH DRAFT and I haven't finalized my formula to determine the final rankings yet...It will be tweaked as new data comes in.

Remember, don't get all up-in-arms over this. I'm doing it for fun and thought I'd share it with you all because some people might want to play with it. I don't necessarily agree with all these rankings, but needed more data to make it accurate.

Enjoy.

 

[Zurp]

First, I think if you're only going to include post-1940 championships, you should limit ALL of your data (wins, losses, etc.) to post-1940. I think all data should be kept to the same criteria.

Second, maybe include something for historic, legendary coaches. For instance, teams can get points for having a coach be at a single school for 10+ years, and more points for each subsequent year thereafter. The winning percentage of those coaches should also be included. I don't know your formula, but, as an example, let's say you give the team 1 point for every year over 10 years a coach has been at the school. Then mulitply those points by his winning percentage. I don't remember his winninng percentage (let's say .650), but Cooper would get OSU 3 x .650 points = 1.95. Woody, on the other hand (let's assume a .700 winning percentage) would get OSU another 18 x .700 = 12.6 points.

Third, Bowl Games should probably count. Maybe the team should get a point for appearing in a Bowl Game, and another 1 or 2 points for winning the Bowl Game. "Major" Bowl Games maybe should count double.

Fourth, rivalry games should count for something. But I don't know how to "staticize" this. You can't just count wins vs. teams' rivals, because teams like Notre Dame have as many as 3-4 rivals. And winning percentage shouldn't count much, because, let's say Ohio State wins 40 of 40 games vs. Michigan, but Michigan wins 40 of 40 against Notre Dame. Ohio State is 1.000 vs. rivals, but Michigan, who can't beat Ohio State, is still a decent .500. Someone else might have suggestions.

Fifth, maybe points for Top 20 finishes? More for Top 10 finishes or Top 5 finishes.

You might want to include NFL players. If I were doing this, I would not include NFL players. But that's your call.

Neat idea. I'll be sure to check out your results if you post them.

 

[scarletandgrey]

Very cool idea. Overall I think that your final version will be very interesting and fun to check out.

 

[OilerBuck]

First, I think if you're only going to include post-1940 championships, you should limit ALL of your data (wins, losses, etc.) to post-1940. I think all data should be kept to the same criteria.

I had a couple reasons for going all-time with the overall winning pct and going post-1940 on the championships.

1. I felt that having a team pre-1940 should add something to your teams tradition. I tried to reduce the influence of the total wins to half of the winning percentage influence. I may reduce the influence even further if I notice that teams like FSU and Miami are really getting pounded for it.
2. I had difficulty finding records that only included post 1940 Wins and Losses and didn't want to compile the stats myself.

I will be looking into tweaking it, as I have found better results with lowering total win influence a bit.

Second, maybe include something for historic, legendary coaches. For instance, teams can get points for having a coach be at a single school for 10+ years, and more points for each subsequent year thereafter. The winning percentage of those coaches should also be included. I don't know your formula, but, as an example, let's say you give the team 1 point for every year over 10 years a coach has been at the school. Then mulitply those points by his winning percentage. I don't remember his winninng percentage (let's say .650), but Cooper would get OSU 3 x .650 points = 1.95. Woody, on the other hand (let's assume a .700 winning percentage) would get OSU another 18 x .700 = 12.6 points.

I like this. It might be hard to research, but it would add accuracy.

Third, Bowl Games should probably count. Maybe the team should get a point for appearing in a Bowl Game, and another 1 or 2 points for winning the Bowl Game. "Major" Bowl Games maybe should count double.

I can't believe I didn't think of that! That will definately be added at some point.

Fourth, rivalry games should count for something. But I don't know how to "staticize" this. You can't just count wins vs. teams' rivals, because teams like Notre Dame have as many as 3-4 rivals. And winning percentage shouldn't count much, because, let's say Ohio State wins 40 of 40 games vs. Michigan, but Michigan wins 40 of 40 against Notre Dame. Ohio State is 1.000 vs. rivals, but Michigan, who can't beat Ohio State, is still a decent .500. Someone else might have suggestions.

It's worth looking at, although we may be edging towards subjective data at this point. We may have to quantify a rival as two teams that have played at least x many games against each other. To subjectively determine rivals, would throw things into more of an "opinion" area.

Fifth, maybe points for Top 20 finishes? More for Top 10 finishes or Top 5 finishes.
[/QUOTE ]

Absolutely. This will clear up a lot of the problems I have in the 30-80 range of the rankings. The top is shaping up pretty well because National Titles and Heismans, etc...but all the stats have for the middle of the pack teams are wins and pct. It made that part VERY inaccurate.

You might want to include NFL players. If I were doing this, I would not include NFL players. But that's your call.

Neat idea. I'll be sure to check out your results if you post them.

I love playing around with stats, formulas and stuff. Like I said, this was just going to be for myself...but when I ran into trouble finding some data I thought I'd share it with all of you for fun. Amazing what a boring day at work last week will turn into.

Feel free to take that Excel file and play with it. If you get some drastically better results with someone elses formula, I will use it instead. Thanks for the comments.

 

[BuckeyeInTheBoro]

Why 1940? I would personally use 1926...

<TABLE width="90%"><TBODY><TR align=middle><TD>Rank </TD><TD>Team name </TD><TD>Winning

Percentage
</TD><TD>Games

Won
</TD><TD>Games

Lost
</TD><TD>Games

Tied
</TD><TD>Games

Played
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE width="90%"><TBODY><TR align=middle><TD>1 </TD><TD align=left>Ohio State</TD><TD>0.73416 </TD><TD>577 </TD><TD>200 </TD><TD>28 </TD><TD>805 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>2 </TD><TD align=left>Tennessee</TD><TD>0.73237 </TD><TD>617 </TD><TD>215 </TD><TD>33 </TD><TD>865 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>3 </TD><TD align=left>Michigan</TD><TD>0.72426 </TD><TD>580 </TD><TD>214 </TD><TD>22 </TD><TD>816 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>4 </TD><TD align=left>Oklahoma</TD><TD>0.72307 </TD><TD>601 </TD><TD>220 </TD><TD>33 </TD><TD>854 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>5 </TD><TD align=left>Alabama</TD><TD>0.72120 </TD><TD>612 </TD><TD>228 </TD><TD>28 </TD><TD>868 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>6 </TD><TD align=left>Notre Dame</TD><TD>0.72096 </TD><TD>590 </TD><TD>221 </TD><TD>24 </TD><TD>835 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>7 </TD><TD align=left>Nebraska</TD><TD>0.69731 </TD><TD>585 </TD><TD>248 </TD><TD>21 </TD><TD>854 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>8 </TD><TD align=left>Penn State</TD><TD>0.69708 </TD><TD>563 </TD><TD>239 </TD><TD>20 </TD><TD>822 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>9 </TD><TD align=left>Texas</TD><TD>0.69490 </TD><TD>588 </TD><TD>252 </TD><TD>22 </TD><TD>862 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>10 </TD><TD align=left>Southern Cal</TD><TD>0.69257 </TD><TD>586 </TD><TD>249 </TD><TD>40 </TD><TD>875 </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Also, where did you get your numbers? For 1940-2004 I got:

<TABLE width="90%"><TBODY><TR align=middle><TD>1 </TD><TD align=left><A href="http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/fetch-team.pl?team=Oklahoma">Oklahoma</TD><TD>0.74725 </TD><TD>536 </TD><TD>176 </TD><TD>16 </TD><TD>728 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>2 </TD><TD align=left><A href="http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/fetch-team.pl?team=Ohio_State">Ohio State</TD><TD>0.73772 </TD><TD>500 </TD><TD>171 </TD><TD>21 </TD><TD>692 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>3 </TD><TD align=left><A href="http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/fetch-team.pl?team=Michigan">Michigan</TD><TD>0.73429 </TD><TD>506 </TD><TD>178 </TD><TD>16 </TD><TD>700 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>4 </TD><TD align=left><A href="http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/fetch-team.pl?team=Penn_State">Penn State</TD><TD>0.73050 </TD><TD>509 </TD><TD>184 </TD><TD>12 </TD><TD>705 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>5 </TD><TD align=left><A href="http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/fetch-team.pl?team=Texas">Texas</TD><TD>0.71948 </TD><TD>518 </TD><TD>198 </TD><TD>13 </TD><TD>729 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>6 </TD><TD align=left><A href="http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/fetch-team.pl?team=Notre_Dame">Notre Dame</TD><TD>0.71146 </TD><TD>494 </TD><TD>195 </TD><TD>18 </TD><TD>707 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>7 </TD><TD align=left><A href="http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/fetch-team.pl?team=Tennessee">Tennessee</TD><TD>0.71143 </TD><TD>504 </TD><TD>197 </TD><TD>25 </TD><TD>726 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>8 </TD><TD align=left><A href="http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/fetch-team.pl?team=Alabama">Alabama</TD><TD>0.70408 </TD><TD>507 </TD><TD>207 </TD><TD>21 </TD><TD>735 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>9 </TD><TD align=left><A href="http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/fetch-team.pl?team=Nebraska">Nebraska</TD><TD>0.69110 </TD><TD>500 </TD><TD>221 </TD><TD>9 </TD><TD>730 </TD></TR><TR align=middle><TD>10 </TD><TD align=left><A href="http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/fetch-team.pl?team=Southern_Cal">Southern Cal</TD><TD>0.67882 </TD><TD>479 </TD><TD>219 </TD><TD>29 </TD><TD>727 </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

From http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/calc-wp.pl?start=1940&end=2004&rpct=30&min=5&se=on&by=Win+Pct

 

[High Lonesome]

I think you are off to a great start but one thing that jumps out at me is south florida being ahead of SMU. I know that they have not been good since the 80's(when they cheated like no other) but that is a very proud tradition rich school. To tell you the truth if you just made a min. games requirment that would clear it up. South Florida doesn't even have 100 wins all time. Just not an old enough school to be that close to top 50 all time. Other than that great job

 

[methomps]

Maybe you could do a sliding scale for wins and championships. That is, championships from long ago would not carry as much weight as recent championships.

If you don't already have these sources:

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com will help with a lot of the coaching and wins stuff
http://www.soonerstats.com has AP rankings for every week and every year

 

[Folanator]

"4. Stadium capacity?"

It might be more tue to have the % of tickets sold or % of games sold out rather than just the number of seats. Minny or Syracuse has the dome, but I would not put them in the top of that catagory just because of the number of seats.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

"4. Stadium capacity?"

It might be more tue to have the % of tickets sold or % of games sold out rather than just the number of seats. Minny or Syracuse has the dome, but I would not put them in the top of that catagory just because of the number of seats.

Fols has a good point. I'd give credit for both capacity and attendance pct., much like coaching points being based on both win pct and longevity. Maybe something along the line of:

Using 100% of 100,000 as a baseline for 1 point:

Ohio State: 104% x 101,500 = 105,560/100,000 = 1.06 points (rounded up from 1.0556 points).
Central Puke U: 94% x 65,000 = 61,100/100,000 = 0.61 points (rounded down from 0.611 points).

 

[jlb1705]

My criticism would be that the 1940 cutoff date is not the best choice. Most sports historians consider the modern era of college football to have began during the Red Grange era, and I think that that is the best cutoff point. Any measure of tradition that does not include the most important college football player of all-time is probably incomplete. Even then though... what about people like Walter Camp? Even if the early days of college football shouldn't count as heavily as modern era achievements, how do you justify not giving any weight to early championships? In the end, that's a part of tradition too.

http://www.collegefootballnews.com/Top_100_Players/Top_100_Players_1_Red_Grange.htm

 

[FadeproofBuck]

"4. Stadium capacity?"

It might be more tue to have the % of tickets sold or % of games sold out rather than just the number of seats. Minny or Syracuse has the dome, but I would not put them in the top of that catagory just because of the number of seats.

I agree, Miami for instance has a capacity of near 75,000 at the Orange Bowl, but unless Florida or Florida State are in town, you'll never see that stadium over 2/3rds' filled up.

Also, Autzen Stadium is only a 40,000 seat stadium, but is widely credited with being one of the loudest stadiums in the country. I would take sell-outs and stadium atmosphere into consideration moreso than just stadium capacity.

 

[MightbeaBuck]

8.) percentage of games sold out.

9.) Bowl crowds - for example The Golden Homers have the best travel fans - or at least they did up until they fired Holtz..., TOSU fans are in the top five.

10.) Traditions most likely to be known by a non-sports fan. Script Ohio for example.

11.) Traditions known by most fans from other schools. - for the Bucks, it may include knowing what TBDBITL means. For the Cornholers it would be Linebacker U.; USC would be Tailback U.; Penn St. would be Linebacker U.; Florida State would be Free Shoes U. 'course maybe they wouldn't like that...

12.) knowing the "Rivals" Most of us know the traditional rival of USC, or Texas, or Chokelahoma, or Michigan. But when you start down into the lower 50 on the tradition scale, who knows? (or cares?)

This stuff all needs weighted. If this is based on tradition, then win-loss shouldn't weigh as heavy. There are Ivy League schools with lots of tradition, but they ain't D-1. The Ivy leaguers would beat out 20 or 30 of the D-1 schools if win-loss weren't held against their traditions.

 

[BB73]

As far as a starting point, I would suggest either 1925 or 1936. College football was first hyped by the national media on October 18, 1924, when ND played Army in New York City. (Grantland Rice's "October sky" line and the 4 Horsemen). So the 1925 season can be considered a starting point where a large number of fans cared at the start of the season.

College football got another publicity boost in 1935 with the first Heisman trophy being awarded. But I'm suggesting 1936 since the AP poll started then. I have a thread on this board where I awarded every team points based on their finish in the AP poll each year since 1936. I'll find that for you if you want to review it. I also used the coaches poll once it started around 1950, by giving each team credit for their higher placed finish in either poll each year.

 

[Fungo Squiggly]

How about something involving the age of the stadium? Age doesn't always coincide with greatness, but most stadiums that have been around awhile, i.e. the Horseshoe, add to the tradition of the football program.

 

[kinch]

Maybe you could do a sliding scale for wins and championships. That is, championships from long ago would not carry as much weight as recent championships.

Well, that is what I came here to say too. Any cutoff date will cause some to freak out and call your ratings biased. A sliding scale will prevent that (and will prove easier to edit later).

I also like the attendance idea - very important. I'd love to see this when it is done. Great idea.

If you do use a sliding scale, of course, you may have to apply it to everything (attendance, win %, whatever).