It’s a method; not one I agree with as it’s inherently flawed when including subjective ratings when it comes to recruiting, but it’s something to look at in the offseason.
To come up with preliminary projections, I create projected ratings based on each factor. Here’s how the process currently works:
Recruiting is easy. I simply create a projected rating based on these two-year recruiting rankings. The recruiting-based projection makes up 25 percent of the overall S&P+ projection.
For returning production, I apply projected changes (based on each team’s returning offensive and defensive production, which are on different scales) to last year’s S&P+ averages. The projection based on returning production accounts for 56 percent.
For recent history, I’ve gotten a little weird. I found that the previous year’s S&P+ ratings were carrying a little too much weight in the projections, so what you see below is a projection based solely off of seasons two to five years ago. Recent history now carries less weight in the overall formulas, only 19 percent. It basically acts as a slight supplement to the two factors above.
Nonconference highlights for the top G5 contenders. Only Boise & Houston do not play FCS schools. I think this gives us an advantage with the committee.
I would rank the strongest schedules:
Colo St
Boise St
San Diego St
Houston
App St
Toledo, USF, Memphis and Temple play an FCS school, and only one P5 equivalent – most of which had losing records last year. Easy peasy.
Boise’s schedule is definitely strong, but manageable. They do have a tough road conference schedule as they have to visit Colo St, SDSU, and Utah State.
Colorado State has to go to Alabama as well in non conference. They also have Wyoming and Utah State on the road. Luckily, both they and Boise are in the same division so only one would be able to emerge to the championship game.
Toledo worries me as they could pull a Western Michigan with as weak as the MAC is. Still, a 1 or even 2 loss AAC team should overcome an undefeated MAC team.
Bottom line, the MW has moved ahead of the AAC as the highest ranked G5 conference. This could be a real problem for UH next year as we seek to get into another NY6 bowl.
Well, that’s your right. But look for Boise to come out ranked higher than any AAC team to start the season. That puts us in a hole we have to crawl out of. If Boise runs the table with their schedule I think that gives them the lead among G5 teams. UH cannot afford a miss.
Our schedule might be a help but we better not take Tech in particular for granted. In recruiting rankings at least they come out ahead of UH almost every year. Their big advantage should be in having a much bigger O-line. But so did OU and that worked out OK. Guess we’ll just have to play the game to find out.
My comment stems from the fact that Navy was in the argument to pass an undefeated CMU to get the spot in the NY6 last year if they could beat Temple and Army. Boise isn’t the Boise of before with Chris Peterson. They were a juggernaut when he was coach. They are vulnerable. I would be surprised to see them go undefeated anymore except for on the one off great year.
The AAC from a public and media perspective is considered the elite of the G5. I don’t buy all this P6 crap that Aresco is pushing. I have no doubt we improve our TV revenue the next round, and there will be a gap between us and the rest of the G5, but we will still be nowhere near the P5 - soon to be P4 (goodbye LilXII) - in revenue.
