How Big a “Pretender” is Florida State?
How Big a “Pretender” is Florida State?
The Florida State Seminoles are providing quite a conundrum for the championship tournament selection committee. On one hand, a team that went undefeated in a Power 5 conference should obviously be included in the Final Four if they win this week’s ACC Championship game over Georgia Tech. It would be unprecedented to rank a team like that out of the championship contending mix. On the other hand, their schedule has been so weak by past Power 5 standards… with a high number of unimpressive nailbiter victories…that “reasonable minds” could make a very good case that FSU isn’t even a top 10 team.
For example, Jeff Sagarin’s computer ratings at USA Today only have Florida State ranked #17. And, that isn’t out of line with how some Vegas oddsmakers have publicly ranked the Seminoles. There are respected analysts who wouldn’t even have FSU in a “Sweet 16” tournament let alone a four-team invitational!
Here’s a quick review of who Florida State has played, and what those scoreboard results would translate to in neutral field equivalents.
Versus Opponents in Sagarin’s Top 30
Beat #22 Florida at home 24-19 (only +2 on a neutral field)
Beat #25 Clemson at home 23-17 in OT without Jameis Winston (special circumstance)
Beat #29 Louisville on the road 42-31 (that’s +14 better on a neutral field)
The Seminoles haven’t played anyone in Sagarin’s Top 20…and have only played three games against the Top 35. The win at Louisville was consistent with what a championship caliber team would do. It’s tough to evaluate the Clemson game, because neither Oregon nor Alabama had to play a team as good as Clemson without their starting quarterbacks. This past Saturday’s win over Florida was extremely sloppy. Alabama crushed that same Gators squad. Mixed bag. (Note that Georgia Tech is currently #18 with Sagarin.)
Versus Teams Rated #35 to #65 in Sagarin
Beat #36 Notre Dame at home 31-27 (+1 on a neutral field)
Beat #40 Miami of Florida on the road 30-26 (+7 on a neutral field)
Beat #43 Boston College at home 20-17 (even on a neutral field)
Beat #51 Virginia at home 34-20 (+11 on a neutral field)
Beat #58 NC State on the road 56-41 (+18 on a neutral field)
Beat #64 Oklahoma State on a neutral field 37-31
This is where it gets ugly in championship terms, even in a clean sweep of victories. FSU had to scramble to barely beat Notre Dame and Miami, who have posted poor results since then. They had to sweat bullets to dodge Boston College. It would be insane to invite Notre Dame, Miami, and Boston College to the Final Four. Florida State was barely distinguishable from that trio. That six-pointer against Oklahoma State was the season opener, and a clear red flag that the Seminoles had dropped several notches from last year’s championship level. Florida State has a lot of very talented athletes. Those athletes made it very clear in this hunk that they’re not performing in a way that would “earn” a shot to repeat.
Versus Teams Rated #90 and Above in Sagarin
Beat #97 Syracuse on the road 38-20 (+21 on a neutral field)
Beat #127 Wake Forest at home 43-3 (+37 on a neutral field)
Beat #166 Citadel at home 37-12 (+22 on a neutral field as a 58-point favorite!)
Even that hunk of results is unimpressive. FSU scored 21 points below the pointspread against the Citadel.
Sagarin’s methodology has Florida State playing the #49 toughest schedule this year. Let’s allow some margin for error and say it’s somewhere between 40-60. Against that slate, the weakest faced by anyone except Baylor currently in the Final Four discussion…
Florida State ranks #29 in yards-per-play offense at 6.3
Florida State ranks #38 in yards-per-play defense at 5.2
Florida State ranks #94 in turnover differential at -4.
There is virtually NO “on-field” or “on-paper” evidence that Florida State belongs in the championship discussion. They have consistently played at a level that’s well below the other powers. Frankly, they’ve been amazingly consistent in that regard! Just as unimpressive in the last month as they were in the first month.
Maybe Georgia Tech will end the conundrum with a win Saturday Night in Charlotte. Or, maybe we’ll find out that FSU is one of those teams that plays to the level of its competition…and they just haven’t faced any top competition this year. FSU is a pretender until they’re not. The talent is certainly there to win big games. Could being an underdog finally get their juices flowing? If the Seminoles beat Georgia Tech, they’ll be an underdog to either Alabama or Oregon.
Some misleading scores from last Saturday…
(Note, I’ll only mention games involving teams who will be playing again this coming weekend or in the postseason. The score of Wyoming/New Mexico was misleading, but both teams finished 4-8! They won’t be on your handicapping radar for nine months.)
- Wisconsin was more dominant over Minnesota than on-the-fly scoreboard watching or the final score of 34-24 made it sound. Wisconsin won total yardage 448-272, yards per play 7.0 to 4.4, and long distance scoring 31-7 (points on drives of 60 yards or more). The Gophers had first quarter TD drives of 13 and 40 yards to jump to a relatively cheap 14-3 lead. Wisconsin heads into its Big 10 Championship meeting with Ohio State in better form than last week’s scoreboard was suggesting.
- Michigan State wasn’t nearly as sharp as its 34-10 win over Penn State makes it sound. The Spartans only won yardage 298-233. They had a kickoff return touchdown, and then TD drives of 18 and 20 yards. It was an ugly grinder with a lot of cheap points rather than an offensive showcase. Only 4.4 yards-per-play for Sparty. State will likely be playing in a high profile bowl against an SEC team.
- Memphis makes the list again in their 41-10 win over Connecticut. They sure are efficient vs. lousy teams. Memphis only won yardage 372-269, and yards-per-play 4.4 to 4.3. Amidst the scoring onslaught were TD drives of 39, 40, and 49 yards. UCONN had 10 penalties for 115 yards compared to just four penalties for 40 yards for the Tigers. Memphis could be a great live dog in a bowl, but might be an overpriced favorite vs. a decent opponent.
- Louisville was more dominant over Kentucky than the 44-40 final score made it seem. Louisville won total yardage 472-327, yards-per-play 6.4 to 4.7, and long distance scoring 28-10. Turnovers made it interesting, as Louisville lost that category 4-2. Big underdog Kentucky returned an interception and a fumble for touchdowns. Kentucky made it to 40 points with low yardage and a 3 of 16 mark on third downs! Louisville, at 9-3, could be a nice sleeper pick in their bowl game.
Enjoy Championship Week. See you again next Wednesday.
- Previous The Saturday Edge 2014 College Football Podcast – Week 15: Championship Week
- Next Premium Handicapping Contests – Week # 15
7 thoughts on “How Big a “Pretender” is Florida State?”
Leave a Reply
MAXIMIZE YOUR EDGE
Normally love your work, but using Sagarin’s ratings for your article invalidates the whole thing. He currently has Ole Miss 2, Georgia 6, Ohio St 13, Arkansas 14…etc. I don’t know many in the analytical community who “respect” his current ratings, and I’m pretty disappointed that you apparently do (unless you are simply using them to further your narrative). Try Football Outsiders’ S&P or F/+ if you want objective ratings worth the paper they are printed on.
Furthermore, it seems like we (the analytical community) have lost sight of the fact that you “play to win the game.” Someone (FO again?) has a “Degree of Difficulty” rating, that calculates how impressive each team’s RECORD is vs. its schedule. FSU & Bama are 1/2 there (I can’t remember this week’s order). It seems pretty clear at this point that FSU is only doing the minimum to win. If FSU wins its next 3 games on late FGs, does it still get the Title? Or is winning literally not enough?
Unfortunately Bob, it doesn’t invalidate it. It has been noted multiple places that some of the stats that the committee are provided are the Sagarin numbers.
I have the exact same top 4 teams as he does. Exact. I also have FSU sitting at 15th.
What’s more important? The best 4 teams, or the teams that “deserve” it?
As of now, wins are important, but FSU is not “playing” like one of the best 4 teams in the nation. Heck, they aren’t playing like one of the best 10. I don’t think that Jeff is invalidated because he sited actual ranks of how they are performing on the field. They aren’t top 25 in a lot of important categories statistically.
How would FSU finish with Bama’s schedule? Who knows.
They win this weekend, and all of this is null.
Whether the committee has been given Sagarin is literally meaningless.
When you say you have the “exact same top 4 he does”, who is “he”? Sagarin or Fogle? And either way, how does that validate either of them? No offense, but I don’t know you from Adam, so neither do I know or inherently trust your analytical methods.
>>”What’s more important? The best 4 teams, or the teams that “deserve” it?”<>”I don’t think that Jeff is invalidated because he sited actual ranks of how they are performing on the field.”<>”They win this weekend, and all of this is null.”<<
I couldn't disagree more. This first year of the playoff system is setting a precedent that will likely influence all future years. Personally one of the things I have always like about college football is how important every game is. I don't want the NCAA equivalent of the 9-7 New York Giants winning the National Championship. I'm not saying that is happening here, but we could be heading that way if we expand to 8 teams and we keep undervaluing wins and overvaluing nonsense like "game control." Get this: I think Auburn may be one of the most talented 8 teams in the country this year. But I do NOT want them winning the national championship. I don't think they deserve it. Just a personal philosophy. It isn't just about who is the most talented (possibly aka "best"); it's about who has the best season.
For the record, I keep my own independent rankings, based mainly on adjusted YPP. And get this: I have FSU outside the top 4. As a result, I have also projected them with a loss 4 different weeks now. And I've been wrong every time. They are clearly overperforming their projections by winning every single game. If you believe that is by "chance" or "luck", you don't understand statistics. This is clearly the epitome of a team that is a) lacking motivation the year after winning a title; b) is taking every other team's best shot; and c) is able to do just enough to win. Which kills any stat-based analysis of them. But it's still all about winning.
Some other stats site has calculated that FSU had a 1-in-10,000 chance of going undefeated up to this point based on how this year played out (can't find the link now, I will post it if I do find it). That is the saddest thing I have ever heard. If you actually believe that you have witnessed a once-in-10-millenia occurrence, you don't understand statistics. The problem is that assumes no correlation (aka "tendency") for close wins, which is my entire point. That FSU team is clearly doing just enough to win; unless you actually believe that what they just accomplished is a 10,000-to-1 shot. (Please don't believe that.)
Found the article:
“There was only approximately a 1-in-10,000 chance that Florida State should still be undefeated considering the team’s tendency to trail so many opponents, Prediction Machine found.”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/acc/2014/12/03/college-football-insde-the-game-florida-state-comebacks/19784887/
I used to love Predict Machine. That number is beyond ludicrous.
Just realized the site ate my comments to your statements 1) “What’s more important? The best 4 teams, or the teams that “deserve” it?” and 2) “I don’t think that Jeff is invalidated because he sited actual ranks of how they are performing on the field.”, and only included my comment to your 3) “They win this weekend, and all of this is null.”, which is what I was saying I disagreed with.
In a nutshell, I think whether we want the “best” 4 teams or the “most-deserving” 4 teams is a great question. What’s your answer? I feel like you are implying there is an objectively correct answer, and again I couldn’t disagree more. I’m not even sure there is a consensus. But I will tell you that, as a college football fan of several decades, the goal of college football has been to crown the team that had the best SEASON. NOT the best team.
And regarding your comment that Jeff isn’t invalidated because he sited actual ranks of how they are performing on the field, I disagree that he cited any ranks of how FSU performed on the field. He cited Sagarin’s overall ranking of FSU, but other than that all he cited was FSU’s MOV vs. Sagarin’s rankings of FSU opponents. As explained more below, Sagarin is an outlier when it comes to how it ranks FSU’s opponents.
Thanks for the feedback though, I enjoy the discussion. (No sarcasm there, enjoy it even if we disagree.)
Bob,
Agree with Saber regarding the impact Sagarin’s rankings could be having on the committee. And, I know from experience that his numbers are well-respected within the betting community. I think everyone can probably find something to disagree with regarding any particular set of rankings (I mentioned recently that I think Sagarin had Oklahoma overrated for example). But, whichever set of rankings you choose…the theme of today’s article isn’t going to change. You could just as easily have plugged in F+ numbers from Football Outsiders. Miami-BC-ND-Virginia-Florida have an average rank of 33.4 with F+, 38.4 with Sagarin. That doesn’t change any conclusions. FSU is struggling to barely get past teams who are well off the pace using F+ as well. FSU dropped a spot in F+ (down to #8) last week after beating Florida.
Regarding playing to win the game, I don’t think analytics has forgotten that. Analytics is trying to figure out who the best teams are and that’s a significant part of the equation. Within the subset of teams who have stellar records, you have to dig deeper to get the most accurate reads.
Thanks for the reply, Jeff. Again, to be clear, I like your work, otherwise I wouldn’t have wasted my time or yours by posting.
I disagree there is no significant difference b/w Sagarin and FO’s F+ ranking of FSU opponents, at least as you used those rankings for your article. With Sagarin, you are able to say “The Seminoles haven’t played anyone in Sagarin’s Top 20…and have only played three games against the Top 35.” With F+, FSU played 2 top 20 and 5 top 35 (7 top 40).
F+ ranks FSU 8, so by citing those rankings as superior, it doesn’t (significantly) invalidate your position. But I happen to think F+ probably undervalues FSU too, by undervaluing wins. As I mentioned above, I keep my own independent rankings, based mainly on adjusted YPP. I have no spot in my system for Ws vs. Ls (I’m not an outlier in that regard). And get this: I have FSU outside the top 4. As a result, I have also projected them with a loss 4 different weeks now. And I’ve been wrong every time. They are clearly overperforming their projections by winning every single game. If anyone believes that is by “chance” or “luck”, then I would argue that person doesn’t understand statistics. FSU is clearly the epitome of a team that is a) lacking motivation the year after winning a title; b) is taking every other team’s best shot; and c) is able to do just enough to win. Which kills any stat-based analysis of them. But it’s still all about winning.
Not sure if you are familiar with Paul Bessire’s work at Prediction Machine, but he has stated the following:
“There was only approximately a 1-in-10,000 chance that Florida State should still be undefeated considering the team’s tendency to trail so many opponents, Prediction Machine found.”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/acc/2014/12/03/college-football-insde-the-game-florida-state-comebacks/19784887/
I used to love Prediction Machine. That number is beyond ludicrous. To see them cite it is one of the saddest things I have ever seen. Again, if anyone actually believes that they have just witnessed a once-in-10-millenia occurrence, they just don’t understand statistics. The problem is that number assumes no correlation (aka “tendency”) for close wins, which is my entire point. That FSU team is clearly doing just enough to win, unless you actually believe that what they just accomplished is a 10,000-to-1 shot. (Please don’t believe that.) By assuming independence in these close victories (which most modern statistical models do implicitly, by not including a credit for winning vs. losing – I don’t want to get into the statistical theory here, so hopefully that is somewhat apparent), you get an undervalued team (at least so much as “likelihood of winning” is the value we are seeking – although maybe that’s the whole problem here???), and insane statistics like “1-in-10,000.”
Again, thanks for your time, enjoy your work.