• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Official Statistical Analysis Thread

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Differential Yards Per Carry -- Defense

Rank__Team_________________________DYPC
1.....Oregon St...................53.53%__Dam Beavers, always stuffin' the run 'n stuff
2.....Ohio St.....................54.33%__Big Gap between 2 and 3
3.....Southern California.........62.85%
4.....Boston College..............63.23%
5.....Penn St.....................63.48%__Beanie says Hi
6.....Cincinnati..................67.64%
7.....Oklahoma....................69.63%
8.....Texas.......................69.95%
9.....Pittsburgh..................72.99%__WVU had match-up issues
10....LSU.........................73.59%
11....TCU.........................75.52%
12....Virginia Tech...............75.58%
13....West Virginia...............75.68%
14....Auburn......................76.21%
15....Florida.....................76.64%
16....BYU.........................77.57%
17....Iowa........................78.16%
18....Kansas......................78.69%
19....Wyoming.....................78.74%
20....Alabama.....................80.45%
21....UCLA........................80.49%
22....Georgia.....................82.04%
23....Missouri....................82.68%
24....Georgia Tech................83.11%
25....Illinois....................83.12%
26....South Fla...................84.11%
27....Wake Forest.................84.69%
28....UCF.........................84.82%
29....New Mexico..................86.02%
30....Michigan....................86.71%
31....Arizona St..................87.02%
32....Virginia....................87.05%
33....Clemson.....................88.86%
34....Air Force...................89.59%
35....Oregon......................90.09%
36....Tennessee...................90.53%
37....Iowa St.....................90.58%
38....Boise St....................90.84%
39....Indiana.....................90.90%
40....Florida St..................90.99%
41....Kansas St...................91.62%
42....Arizona.....................91.90%
43....Vanderbilt..................92.37%
44....East Caro...................92.44%
45....Mississippi St..............92.65%
46....Miami (Fla.)................92.98%
47....Texas A&M...................93.02%
48....Southern Miss...............93.22%
49....Oklahoma St.................93.38%
50....Utah........................94.62%
51....Arkansas St.................94.75%
52....Texas Tech..................95.88%
53....Houston.....................96.84%
54....North Carolina..............96.87%
55....Purdue......................97.16%
56....Tulane......................97.84%
57....Arkansas....................97.94%
58....Washington St...............98.16%
59....Michigan St.................98.82%
60....Notre Dame..................99.54%
61....California.................100.46%
62....Wisconsin..................101.03%
63....Louisiana Tech.............101.25%
64....Idaho......................101.55%
65....Kentucky...................102.03%
66....Rutgers....................102.10%
67....Kent St....................102.43%
68....Hawaii.....................102.47%
69....Colorado...................102.79%
70....Northwestern...............103.25%
71....Central Mich...............104.35%
72....Baylor.....................104.39%
73....Temple.....................105.33%
74....Maryland...................105.52%
75....Troy.......................105.99%
76....Fla. Atlantic..............107.44%
77....South Carolina.............107.96%
78....Mississippi................108.62%
79....Ball St....................110.97%
80....Miami (Ohio)...............111.56%
81....Tulsa......................111.58%
82....Western Mich...............111.63%
83....La.-Monroe.................112.37%
84....Syracuse...................112.71%
85....Stanford...................112.78%
86....Marshall...................112.85%
87....Bowling Green..............113.41%
88....Buffalo....................113.81%
89....Army.......................114.70%
90....Louisville.................114.80%
91....Duke.......................114.94%
92....Florida Int'l..............115.05%
93....Northern Ill...............115.46%
94....Rice.......................115.73%
95....Middle Tenn. St............116.01%
96....UNLV.......................117.28%
97....Ohio.......................117.29%
98....Akron......................117.70%
99....Colorado St................118.14%
100...Nevada.....................119.07%
101...New Mexico St..............119.65%
102...Nebraska...................121.44%__Black shirts??
103...UTEP.......................122.30%
104...Navy.......................122.48%
105...North Carolina St..........122.76%
106...San Jose St................123.27%
107...North Texas................123.57%
108...Connecticut................124.28%
109...Southern Methodist.........124.56%
110...Fresno St..................126.29%
111...Utah St....................127.21%
112...Toledo.....................131.05%
113...La.-Lafayette..............131.13%
114...Memphis....................131.29%
115...Washington.................132.48%
116...Eastern Mich...............132.65%
117...Minnesota..................134.04%
118...UAB........................142.03%
119...San Diego St...............147.70%
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Differential Yards Per Attempt -- Defense

Rank__Team_________________________DYPA
1.....Ohio St......................68.17%__It's lonely at the top when #2 is so far below you
2.....Southern California..........77.70%
3.....LSU..........................79.41%__and they snag a lot of picks
4.....Utah.........................80.03%
5.....Virginia Tech................80.22%
6.....South Fla....................81.06%
7.....Troy.........................81.86%
8.....Connecticut..................82.49%
9.....Notre Dame...................83.10%
10....South Carolina...............83.66%
11....Auburn.......................83.99%
12....Kansas.......................84.46%
13....Clemson......................84.61%
14....Michigan.....................85.22%
15....West Virginia................86.07%
16....Missouri.....................86.09%
17....Rutgers......................86.17%
18....TCU..........................87.83%
19....Wake Forest..................87.91%
20....UCLA.........................88.41%
21....North Carolina St............88.80%
22....Pittsburgh...................88.82%
23....Texas Tech...................88.94%
24....Arkansas.....................89.88%
25....Mississippi St...............89.99%
26....Fla. Atlantic................91.31%
27....Purdue.......................91.34%
28....Hawaii.......................91.70%
29....Boise St.....................92.28%
30....Arizona......................92.33%
31....BYU..........................92.59%
32....UCF..........................93.11%
33....Kentucky.....................93.33%
34....Arizona St...................93.35%
35....Oklahoma.....................93.81%
36....California...................93.84%
37....New Mexico...................94.43%
38....Fresno St....................94.60%
39....Boston College...............94.81%
40....Iowa.........................95.02%
41....Miami (Ohio).................95.19%
42....Southern Miss................96.14%
43....Wisconsin....................96.52%
44....Illinois.....................96.91%
45....Colorado.....................96.98%
46....Vanderbilt...................96.99%
47....Georgia......................97.41%
48....Oregon St....................97.81%
49....San Jose St..................98.24%
50....Penn St......................98.36%
51....Virginia.....................98.55%
52....UNLV.........................98.59%
53....Alabama......................98.73%
54....Oregon.......................98.85%
55....Mississippi..................98.92%
56....Temple.......................99.70%
57....Nevada.......................99.93%
58....Texas.......................100.65%
59....Maryland....................100.71%
60....Indiana.....................100.79%
61....Nebraska....................100.89%
62....Cincinnati..................101.12%
63....Florida St..................101.12%
64....Akron.......................101.13%
65....Arkansas St.................101.45%
66....Tennessee...................101.96%
67....Wyoming.....................102.29%
68....Middle Tenn. St.............102.77%
69....Ohio........................103.53%
70....Florida.....................103.68%
71....Western Mich................104.19%
72....Louisiana Tech..............104.72%
73....Buffalo.....................104.93%
74....East Caro...................105.20%
75....Southern Methodist..........105.33%
76....Iowa St.....................106.21%
77....Texas A&M...................106.38%
78....Michigan St.................107.08%
79....Army........................107.13%
80....North Carolina..............107.21%
81....Washington..................107.25%
82....Georgia Tech................108.34%
83....Miami (Fla.)................108.38%
84....Utah St.....................108.89%
85....Washington St...............108.89%
86....Tulsa.......................109.17%
87....Eastern Mich................109.33%
88....Northern Ill................109.61%
89....Air Force...................109.73%
90....Kansas St...................110.52%
91....Baylor......................110.74%
92....Memphis.....................110.94%
93....Marshall....................111.42%
94....La.-Lafayette...............111.98%
95....San Diego St................112.24%
96....Colorado St.................113.22%
97....Houston.....................113.41%
98....Idaho.......................113.49%
99....Syracuse....................113.61%
100...UTEP........................114.03%
101...UAB.........................114.30%
102...Ball St.....................114.45%
103...Florida Int'l...............114.74%
104...Northwestern................115.45%
105...La.-Monroe..................115.70%
106...Oklahoma St.................115.90%
107...Central Mich................116.23%
108...Bowling Green...............116.52%
109...Stanford....................116.98%
110...Duke........................118.04%
111...Toledo......................119.24%
112...Rice........................119.68%
113...North Texas.................120.07%
114...Minnesota...................121.26%
115...New Mexico St...............121.66%
116...Louisville..................122.01%
117...Tulane......................124.77%
118...Kent St.....................125.35%
119...Navy........................130.10%
 
Upvote 0
Differential Yards Per Carry -- Composite

DYPCC is:
DYPC (offense)

*divided by*

DYPC (defense)​

It can be thought of as an alternative to the Differential Rushing Composite (DRC) stat.


Rank___Team____________________DYPCC
1......Ohio St................212.61%
2......Oregon St..............210.97%__Big gap between #2 and #3
3......West Virginia..........202.24%__Bigger gap between #3 and #4
4......Southern California....192.92%
5......Penn St................187.25%
6......Illinois...............183.21%
7......Texas..................176.89%
8......LSU....................172.63%
9......Florida................167.86%
10.....Oklahoma...............163.74%
11.....Air Force..............157.00%
12.....Oregon.................156.49%
13.....Arkansas...............153.59%
14.....Georgia Tech...........151.04%
15.....Boston College.........150.71%
16.....Oklahoma St............145.40%
17.....Kansas.................143.09%
18.....Georgia................140.63%
19.....Cincinnati.............136.96%
20.....South Fla..............135.90%
21.....UCF....................132.22%
22.....Virginia Tech..........131.69%
23.....California.............129.87%
24.....Auburn.................129.60%
25.....Missouri...............128.65%
26.....Clemson................128.01%
27.....BYU....................127.37%
28.....UCLA...................127.17%
29.....Pittsburgh.............124.81%
30.....Texas A&M..............124.56%
31.....TCU....................122.96%
32.....Tennessee..............121.68%
33.....East Caro..............121.64%
34.....Michigan St............115.82%
35.....Alabama................115.62%
36.....Kansas St..............115.27%
37.....Navy...................113.17%
38.....Indiana................112.43%
39.....Wisconsin..............112.37%
40.....Boise St...............112.32%
41.....Michigan...............111.06%
42.....Central Mich...........110.58%
43.....Washington.............109.82%
44.....Utah...................109.48%
45.....Rutgers................109.12%
46.....Purdue.................108.80%
47.....Houston................108.51%
48.....Miami (Fla)............107.12%
49.....Southern Miss..........105.59%
50.....Virginia...............105.37%
51.....Wyoming................104.32%
52.....Tulane.................103.65%
53.....Iowa...................103.12%
54.....Arkansas St............102.02%
55.....Florida St.............101.60%
56.....Kent St.................99.47%
57.....Wake Forest.............98.71%
58.....Troy....................98.61%
59.....Washington St...........98.39%
60.....Arizona St..............97.99%
61.....La.-Lafayette...........96.54%
62.....Vanderbilt..............96.24%
63.....Colorado................95.59%
64.....Kentucky................95.50%
65.....Mississippi.............95.02%
66.....Nevada..................92.20%
67.....Nebraska................91.43%
68.....Maryland................91.25%
69.....New Mexico..............91.24%
70.....Fresno St...............89.28%
71.....Marshall................88.63%
72.....La.-Monroe..............88.57%
73.....Idaho...................88.02%
74.....Northwestern............87.03%
75.....Louisville..............86.78%
76.....Toledo..................86.47%
77.....Minnesota...............86.42%
78.....Iowa St.................86.04%
79.....Tulsa...................84.19%
80.....Louisiana Tech..........84.18%
81.....Mississippi St..........84.01%
82.....UNLV....................82.97%
83.....Ball St.................82.92%
84.....Bowling Green...........82.47%
85.....Connecticut.............81.71%
86.....North Carolina..........81.43%
87.....Baylor..................80.64%
88.....Colorado St.............80.44%
89.....Texas Tech..............79.86%
90.....UTEP....................79.34%
91.....Southern Methodist......79.23%
92.....South Carolina..........78.44%
93.....Miami (Ohio)............77.78%
94.....Arizona.................76.76%
95.....Ohio....................74.59%
96.....Buffalo.................72.79%
97.....Hawaii..................72.51%
98.....Northern Ill............72.29%
99.....Stanford................71.59%
100....Eastern Mich............71.27%
101....Fla. Atlantic...........69.85%
102....Akron...................68.87%
103....Rice....................67.56%
104....Western Mich............66.92%
105....Middle Tenn. St.........65.64%
106....Florida Int'l...........65.62%
107....San Diego St............65.19%
108....North Carolina St.......63.60%
109....North Texas.............62.78%
110....Memphis.................61.34%
111....Utah St.................60.86%
112....Army....................59.92%
113....UAB.....................58.95%
114....Notre Dame..............57.78%
115....New Mexico St...........56.89%
116....Temple..................56.13%
117....San Jose St.............51.55%
118....Duke....................47.86%
119....Syracuse................44.91%
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Differential Yards Per Attempt -- Composite

Rank__Team____________________DYPAC
1......Ohio St...............161.83%__Big, big drop to #2...
2......Florida...............147.85%
3......Virginia Tech.........141.65%
4......LSU...................138.11%
5......South Fla.............136.08%
6......Oklahoma..............134.71%
7......Hawaii................134.45%
8......Rutgers...............132.86%
9......Arizona St............131.64%
10.....Missouri..............131.33%
11.....South Carolina........131.04%
12.....BYU...................130.84%
13.....West Virginia.........129.13%
14.....Southern California...124.83%
15.....Kansas................123.33%
16.....Nevada................122.50%
17.....Boise St..............122.30%
18.....Texas Tech............122.21%
19.....Tulsa.................122.15%
20.....Connecticut...........121.60%
21.....Wisconsin.............121.38%
22.....Clemson...............120.99%
23.....Arkansas..............120.67%
24.....Boston College........119.00%
25.....Cincinnati............118.85%
26.....Maryland..............118.84%
27.....Arizona...............117.10%
28.....Nebraska..............117.07%
29.....Auburn................114.86%
30.....Michigan..............114.41%
31.....Utah..................113.91%
32.....Kentucky..............113.89%
33.....Fla. Atlantic.........111.86%
34.....Fresno St.............110.82%
35.....Michigan St...........110.66%
36.....UCF...................108.86%
37.....Troy..................108.18%
38.....Georgia...............108.04%
39.....Texas.................107.62%
40.....UCLA..................107.53%
41.....Wake Forest...........106.53%
42.....Oregon................105.51%
43.....Middle Tenn. St.......105.30%
44.....California............105.21%
45.....Penn St...............104.54%
46.....Louisville............103.11%
47.....Oklahoma St...........102.98%
48.....Tennessee.............102.93%
49.....Illinois..............102.59%
50.....Ohio..................102.52%
51.....Florida St............102.42%
52.....Mississippi...........102.28%
53.....Colorado St...........102.18%
54.....TCU...................102.07%
55.....North Carolina........101.42%
56.....Purdue................101.35%
57.....Washington St.........100.29%
58.....New Mexico............100.01%
59.....Navy...................99.23%
60.....North Carolina St......98.86%
61.....Air Force..............98.09%
62.....Southern Miss..........97.35%
63.....Western Mich...........97.01%
64.....Temple.................96.33%
65.....Pittsburgh.............96.20%
66.....Indiana................95.97%
67.....Mississippi St.........94.46%
68.....Ball St................94.22%
69.....Syracuse...............94.20%
70.....San Jose St............93.91%
71.....Colorado...............93.82%
72.....UNLV...................93.15%
73.....Washington.............92.84%
74.....Houston................92.70%
75.....Virginia...............92.06%
76.....Marshall...............91.26%
77.....Georgia Tech...........91.12%
78.....Alabama................91.11%
79.....Notre Dame.............90.72%
80.....Southern Methodist.....90.18%
81.....Miami (Fla.)...........89.90%
82.....Miami (Ohio)...........89.78%
83.....Buffalo................89.60%
84.....Northwestern...........89.03%
85.....San Diego St...........89.02%
86.....Texas A&M..............88.80%
87.....Iowa...................88.78%
88.....East Caro..............88.35%
89.....UTEP...................88.12%
90.....Utah St................87.99%
91.....Arkansas St............86.95%
92.....Memphis................86.94%
93.....Vanderbilt.............86.79%
94.....Kansas St..............85.46%
95.....Bowling Green..........85.07%
96.....Central Mich...........84.52%
97.....Akron..................84.41%
98.....Oregon St..............83.41%
99.....Duke...................82.56%
100....Minnesota..............81.89%
101....Toledo.................81.20%
102....Wyoming................80.26%
103....New Mexico St..........79.88%
104....Stanford...............79.00%
105....Iowa St................77.96%
106....La.-Lafayette..........77.75%
107....North Texas............76.96%
108....Louisiana Tech.........76.83%
109....Northern Ill...........75.95%
110....La.-Monroe.............75.83%
111....Army...................75.59%
112....Rice...................75.28%
113....Tulane.................72.90%
114....Idaho..................72.72%
115....Eastern Mich...........72.32%
116....Kent St................71.02%
117....Baylor.................70.19%
118....UAB....................68.62%
119....Florida Int'l..........66.99%
 
Upvote 0
Post #1 Update

As the sub-title indicates, this post is an update to Post #1 of this thread (As promised in Gatorubet's thread on the CFB forum).

In some cases I have shown the numbers from last year [strike](struck out)[/strike] followed by this year's numbers.

To quickly reiterate the method used:

Measure the relative winning percentage for the top teams in the sport for every range of years that starts with any year the sport was played and ends with [strike]2006[/strike] 2007. Refer to post #1 for a more detailed description.

This gives us data for 138 ranges. This is the same number of ranges as last year because this year I threw out the last range. In other words, I did not consider 2007-2007 (the win/loss record for 2007) to be a range. In 2006 I was less careful and included the w/l record ranking for 2006 among the data. The difference is minimal and is very kind to Notre Dame, who ranked 99th in the nation in w/l for 2007.

A reminder on the ground rules before we dig into the numbers again: The top 14 teams in all-time winning percentage (the first range considered) are the only teams considered in the analysis. #15 was Miami U. (Ohio) and Boise State has only been playing I-A football since 1996. They're not in the discussion: we're moving on.


1) Average Ranking over ALL Ranges
  1. Ohio State__________2.75
  2. Michigan____________3.63
  3. Oklahoma____________5.12
  4. Texas_______________5.99
  5. Tennessee___________8.13
  6. Southern Cal________8.30
  7. Nebraska____________8.33
  8. Penn State__________9.67
  9. Florida State______10.54
  10. Notre Dame_________10.64
  11. Georgia____________11.50
  12. Alabama____________12.35
  13. Miami-Florida______13.13
  14. Louisiana State____15.18
Ohio State's lead almost doubled over last year's already sizable margin.

2) Median Ranking over ALL Ranges

  1. Ohio State__________2
  2. Michigan____________3
  3. Oklahoma____________5
  4. Texas_______________6
  5. Notre Dame_________ 7
  6. Alabama____________ 7
  7. Tennessee___________8
  8. Southern Cal________8
  9. Nebraska____________8
  10. Penn State__________9
  11. Florida State______11
  12. Georgia____________12
  13. Miami-Florida______14
  14. Louisiana State____14
Any Questions?

Now for the number that is my personal favorite: What is the LOWEST rank in winning percentage for any of the ranges for each team? In other words, for the range 1983-2007, Ohio State was 7th in winning percentage. That along with the same rank for [strike]4[/strike] 3 other ranges that begin in the 80's (thanks Coop) is the lowest ranking that Ohio State has for any range considered. In order to be fair to the teams that have fallen on hard times recently, I have ignored all rankings for any range starting after 1999 for the purposes of this discussion. (Alabama was still helped most by this expedient, and they're still at the bottom)

3) Lowest Ranking for Any Range
  1. Ohio State_______7
  2. Michigan_________9
  3. Texas___________13
  4. Oklahoma________14
  5. Florida State___15
  6. Tennessee_______16
  7. Southern Cal____16
  8. Georgia_________16
  9. Miami-Florida___17
  10. Nebraska________20
  11. LSU_____________29
  12. Penn State______35
  13. Notre Dame______42
  14. Alabama_________46
That's right, ONLY OSU and TSUN NEVER appear below the top 10 in winning percentage for any date range that ends with the 2007 season (and begins before 2000). If we include the 2000s, this description applies only to Ohio State.


A few other observations:
  • Ohio State is now #1 for 36 different ranges. Michigan is #1 for 33 different ranges, but they are the first 33 ranges (ranges beginning between 1869 and 1901). Nebraska is #1 for 22 ranges.
  • Because Ohio State is now #1 in the range 1922-2007; Michigan is no longer #1 in any range beginning after 1901 and ending with the current year. They took over a few ranges from Notre Dame or it would have been worse.
  • Michigan is #1 for the first 33 ranges, but not at all after that.
  • Ohio State now appears at #1 in 6 different decades (as opposed to 4). No one else is close.
  • If you measure the amount of time from a teams first appearance at #1 to their last appearance at #1 (based on starting year of the date range), then OSU is way out in front. OSU's first appearance at #1 was in the range [strike]1923-2006[/strike] 1914-2007, and their last was in the range [strike]1996-2006[/strike] 2006-2007. That's a span of (inclusive) 93 years. Michigan's span is [strike]54[/strike] 33 years (albeit uninterrupted). Nebraska's span is [strike]24[/strike] 22 years (also uninterrupted). Oklahoma's span is [strike]14[/strike] 15 years (also uninterrupted). No one else spans more than [strike]9[/strike] 7 years.
  • Ohio State was ranked either #1 or #2 for ranges beginning from [strike]1923[/strike] 1906 to [strike]1963[/strike] 1965 (inclusive). No one else is even close to an accomplishment like that.
  • Ohio State does not appear below #4 in any range starting before [strike]1976[/strike] 1977. Michigan does not appear below #4 in any range starting before 1949. Notre Dame first appears below #4 in the range beginning with [strike]1927[/strike] 1923. Texas' first appearance below #4 was for the range beginning in 1901. Every other team's first appearance below #4 was in the 19th century.
Clearly there are other ways to look at history, tradition and long-term greatness. But when it comes to long term consistency at the highest level, Ohio State is in a class by itself. And the only team in the vicinity is That School Up North.
 
Upvote 0
A complete run-down of who was #1 for which ranges:

1869-2007: TSUN
|||||||||||||||||
1901-2007: TSUN

1902-2007: Ntre ame
||||||||||||||||||||
1913-2007: Ntre ame

1914-2007: The Ohio State University
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1934-2007: The Ohio State University

1935-2007: Oklahoma
|||||||||||||||||||||
1949-2007: Oklahoma

1950-2007: The Ohio State University
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1957-2007: The Ohio State University

1958-2007: Nebraska
||||||||||||||||||||
1979-2007: Nebraska

1980-2007: UofMiami
||||||||||||||||||||
1986-2007: UofMiami

1987-2007: FSU
||||||||||||||||
1991-2007: FSU

1992-2007: The Ohio State University
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1997-2007: The Ohio State University

1998-2007: Boise State University
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2000-2007: Boise State University

2001-2007: BSU, USC & Texas (tied)

2002-2007: USC
||||||||||||||||
2005-2007: USC

2006-2007: The Ohio State University


Number of Ranges at #1
  1. Ohio State______36 ranges
    [*]TSUN____________33 ranges
    [*]Nebraska________22 ranges
    [*]Oklahoma________15 ranges

NOTES:

  • Pick any range at random: There is a slightly better than 50% chance that the #1 team in winning percentage for that range is either Ohio State or TSUN.
  • Oklahoma + Nebraska = 37 (Just one more range than OSU)
  • Next year, OSU will probably lead more ranges than any TWO teams not named TSUN. They're just one short of that this year.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
More Notes:

  • OSU is ranked higher than TSUN for 80 of the ranges.
  • TSUN is ranked higher than OSU for 58 ranges.
  • No other school is ranked higher than OSU for as many ranges:
    • Ntre ame: 45 ranges, none that begin after 1913
    • Nebraska: 32 ranges
    • Everyone else is way behind
  • Georgia, Alabama and Penn State have one thing in common:
    • None of the three are ranked higher than OSU in winning % for ANY range.
  • LSU is not ranked higher than OSU for any range beginning before 2003.
  • USC is not ranked higher than OSU for any range beginning before 2001.
  • Tennessee ranks higher than OSU only during the ranges beginning from 1983-1988, which are the only ranges (except 2004) where OSU is ranked outside of the top-5.
 
Upvote 0
DaddyBigBucks;899763; said:

Before I get into the OSU relevant stuff, I'd like to use some of the data to defend my own existence. i.e. I'd like to show that Statistics Matter.

One of the most common mantras of the football season is that "Stats Mean Squat" or something to that effect. To be honest, I have to agree with the statement in most of the contexts in which it is uttered. But when it is a blanket condemnation of numbers as being useless, it is wrong. And the data that I have collected about the Tressel Era at Ohio State prove it.

For each of the statistics except Winning Percentage, I used only the teams' Div. IA ranking, not the raw numbers. Using rankings instead of raw numbers waters down the accuracy of the numbers; but I have two very good reasons for using this expedient: 1) It is MUCH easier to do the spreadsheet calculations this way as the same math can be done for every category. This saves me a ton of time. 2) The correlation to winning percentage is very high anyway.


[*]The better the team, the higher the winning percentage.
[*]The better the team, the lower the number that represents their composite ranking.[/LIST]Considering these two facts, then the best possible correlation between Winning Percentage and Composite Ranking in the 18 stats listed above is -1.0. So what do you think the number might be? I was thinking that -0.75 would be about right. I was about wrong.

One point that I'll add to the 93% correlation: The top 7 teams in winning percentage for the past 6 years are all among the top 8 teams in the Composite Stat for the past 6 years.

As you might expect, the two most important stats are Scoring Defense and Scoring Offense, in that order. By combining these two stats; anyone schooled in both mathematics and football (like an OSU Engineering alum) can tell you that you will get a higher correlation than by watering them down with the other 16 numbers. The following number is less surprising than the first:

The fact that the 16 "non-scoring" stats combine to correlate more than 90% to winning absolutely blows my mind. Maybe you have more faith in stats than I do, but to me; this number is a shocker. If you are one of the people who believe that stats are meaningless; you can?t argue with this. ...Well, ok you may be mathematically challenged enough to argue with these results, but these numbers have not been tortured or massaged. This is as raw as numbers get, and they speak loud and clear: Stats Matter!



Category______________Correlation to winning %____OSU?s Rank (2001-2006)
Composite___________________-0.9308_________________________7
Scoring Defense_____________-0.8685_________________________3
Scoring Offense_____________-0.8358________________________41
Pass Efficiency Defense_____-0.8035_________________________7
Rushing Defense_____________-0.8031_________________________5
Total Defense_______________-0.7545_________________________8
Pass Efficiency_____________-0.7509________________________18
Turnover Margin_____________-0.7144________________________41
Total Offense_______________-0.6722________________________68
Net Punting_________________-0.4973_________________________3
Punt Return Defense_________-0.4916________________________15
Rushing Offense_____________-0.4860________________________33
Punt Returns________________-0.4482________________________47
Kickoff Return Defense______-0.3402________________________45
Pass Offense________________-0.3137________________________94
Pass Defense________________-0.2900________________________48
Kickoff Returns_____________-0.2335________________________31
Penalties____________________0.1015________________________20
Penalty Yards________________0.1237________________________17


This one makes perfect sense if you think about it. Teams that win most of their games will often blow other teams out. The other team spends most of the game in a passing mode; therefore putting up yards and driving down the winning teams pass defense numbers. But the winning team knows the pass is coming, hence the pass efficiency defense numbers go up; enough to make it the stat that ranks 3rd in correlation to winning percentage.


Are you as astonished as I am that Rushing Offense is this low in the chart? But Passing Offense is even lower!
Click to expand...

There's a reason why I was a speech major... so I wouldn't have to take another damn math class after college algebra until stats in my Masters program. I had a MEGO (my eyes glaze over) after the first pararaph and a brain cramp after the second. But as I sift through all of this I come to two conclusions: 1. Woody was right. 2. Tressell paid atention.
 
Upvote 0
Of the 14 winningest teams of all time in college football, the following table shows the number of ranges of years (all ending with the current season) for which each team was ranked in the top 5.

To review, the ranges of years considered are:

1869-2007
1870-2007
.
.
.
2006-2007

...so there are 138 ranges. So who was in the top 5 for how many of these ranges?

TEAM________________Top 5_______Not Top 5
Ohio State___________131____________7
Michigan_____________121___________17
Oklahoma______________94___________44
Texas_________________60___________78
Notre Dame____________55___________83
Nebraska______________46___________92
Penn State____________42___________96
Tennessee_____________33__________105
Alabama_______________32__________106
Florida State_________21__________117
Miami-Florida_________16__________122
Southern Ca____________7__________131
Louisiana State________4__________134
Georgia________________1__________137
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Great job, DBB. Only one complaint. These statistics place a very heavy emphasis on recent success. For every year you go back, it is accounted for one less time in the statistics. By that measure, you're saying that what happened in 2007 is (off the top of my head) 138 times more important than what happened in 1869, 14 times more important than what happened in 1879, 7 times more important than what happened in 1889. I understand this might be true, but is what happened in 2007 twice as important as 1938 or 50% more important than 1961?

Understandably, to account for all the ranges in total would exponentially complicate the analysis, but it's just something to think about.
 
Upvote 0
mross34;1164380; said:
Great job, DBB. Only one complaint. These statistics place a very heavy emphasis on recent success. For every year you go back, it is accounted for one less time in the statistics. By that measure, you're saying that what happened in 2007 is (off the top of my head) 138 times more important than what happened in 1869, 14 times more important than what happened in 1879, 7 times more important than what happened in 1889. I understand this might be true, but is what happened in 2007 twice as important as 1938 or 50% more important than 1961?

Understandably, to account for all the ranges in total would exponentially complicate the analysis, but it's just something to think about.
Click to expand...

The following post from the first page of the thread was my way of quantifying exactly what you're talking about.

To this I will only add that I agree with the sentiment expressed by the part that I 'bolded'. One of the main reasons that I chose this form of analysis is that it places a premium on RECENT success, without completely discounting the early years of the sport. Only TSUN and ND fans don't think that what happened recently is more relevant than ancient history.

Think about it this way:
Ohio State is tied with Miami for 7 ranges at #1 that started in 1980 or later. BUT, Ohio State is the ONLY team that appears at #1 in ranges beginning both before AND after 1980. All of the other team's that had enough recent success to appear at #1 after 1980 do not appear at #1 at all before 1980. Ohio State appears at #1 in the 'teens, 20s, 30s and 50s (ranges starting from 1914-1934 and 1950-1957). No other school has anything approaching this level of both recent and historical success.
​
DaddyBigBucks;898528; said:
...The thing that I like the most about this analysis is that it puts an emphasis on recent success. Recent years are included in every single range, and are therefore emphasized; in my opinion, rightly so. This is strictly a matter of personal taste though, and is admittedly not based on any objective standard of value. (emphasis added in quote - not in original post)

If, instead of having every range end with the current season, you were to take the history of the sport in one decade slices...

1st Decade
2nd Decade
.
.
.
14th Decade (in progress)

...you end up with a ranking that is essentially the same as the all-time winning percentage ranking (assuming that you filter out the teams that are no longer DI-A).

But this analysis does offer some valuable insights:
  • Ohio State came out on top in the analysis in post #1 in part because our worst decade came in the earliest decade for which we were active, the 3rd Decade of the sport. Every other major power's worst decade was more recent.
  • OSU's rank in that awful decade (1889-1898), which I'm sure we'd all like to forget, was 44th. Only 2 teams were higher ranked in their own worst decade: USC's worst decade was the sport's 5th (1909-1918), in which they were ranked 41st. Notre Dame was ranked 36th in their own worst decade, which was the sport's 10th (1959-1968).
  • Ohio State has never been ranked above #5 for any decade considered (though admittedly if you slice the decades differently, we do come out tied for 2nd in the most recent 10 years). 34 teams have been ranked higher than #5 for the decades considered, including San Jose State.
  • The highest winning percentage was Washinton's 92.5% from 1909 to 1918.
  • Hate him or hate him, there is no arguing what Bo Schembechler did at Michigan. Michigan's own worst decade was 1959-1968, for which they were ranked 50th (only OSU, USC and ND had higher ranked worst decades). Michigan was ranked #1 in the VERY NEXT decade, 1969-1978. Bo took Michigan from their worst decade to one of their best in one step.
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
Wow. Awesome. Do we have such a thing as a "Great Thread Award" here on BP?

If not, then I'd say that this work (of DBBs) should evoke the addage that necessity is the mother of invention [of a GTA].
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top