I have a new update of the Cygarin Rating using Congrove Power Ratings.
I have annual interest in the Congrove Power Ratings because they are one of the few preseason power ratings that actually use some analysis to project how teams may end up for the season.
They use coaching changes, returning players, returning starters, returning key positions, etc. to speculate on what the current team will be compared to the previous year. However, I consider the Congrove Ratings to hav one major flaw, which I will point out below.
There are two observations regarding the Congrove Ratings I wish to point out......
1. Iowa State is power rated insanely and pathetically low. Lower than they have ever actually performed since the Walden era, and arguably even that.
The reason I see for this is because Congrove does not attempt to rate FCS teams, yet still gives them a power rating when determining spreads and presumably rankings of teams based on playing them. But, the rating they use for these FCS teams appears to be one single power ranking for all.... ridiculously way below any and all FBS teams.
That is, the even the best FCS team is ranked double-digit points below the worst mid-major team you can think of.
To highlight this, Iowa State is ranked a ridiculous 115th with a 54 power rating of all FBS teams, and yet is considered a 20 point favorite over UNI. If a 115th ranked team was a 20 point favorite over UNI, it would interpolate to UNI would be ranked somewhere well below 200th in the nation, as well as a very uncompetitive FCS team. That's just not the case.
When Iowa State played NDSU last year, Iowa State was "favored" by Congrove in a similar fashion, and of course lost. Thus, Iowa State took a massive hit in the Congrove power rankings by losing to a team that allegedly was not a very good FCS team.
How far off is Iowa State's ranking? As one example, Iowa is power ranked 60th by Congrove (which I think is about right)....but Iowa State is ranked 14 points below them.
Why Congrove does this, I have no idea, but it badly skews the power ratings for any and all FBS teams that play FCS teams, especially highly ranked FCS teams. And that's win or lose, since margin of victory is used.
Thus, Iowa State was ridiculously under ranked last year, and that was the baseline for this year.
In my opinion, Iowa State should have been very conservatively ranked in the mid-80's last year, which is where most power rankings have them. And I think that is very conservative. Personally I would have ranked Iowa State in the 60's last year, based on using a diminishing return factor on runaway games against top ranked teams.
Take that for what it is worth.
2. Congrove is suggesting massive parity across the nation, and that includes the Big-12.
Honestly there were some signs of that happening last year, and Congrove is suggesting that the Big-12 is going to continue this year. If that is right, then there is the opportunity for Iowa State's strength of schedule to break out of the top-25, as it has been mired in for the last 25 years.
Despite conventional thinking (around here) the Big-12 has not been a perennial top dominating conference, however it most certainly has been for the last for our five years, exceeding even the SEC when compared properly top to bottom.
Thus......
If Congrove turns out to be right, then the door has cracked open to allow Iowa State to have their shot at a bowl game, by having a strength of schedule on par with the majority of P5 teams.
If this schedule turns out to be true, then Iowa State would need to be a team ranked in about the 55th to 60th range to have a 50% chance at a bowl game. For what it is worth, CPR's teams have been ranked at or above this range in every year except the last two, and his first (which was very close).
In my best Jim Carey voice.....
Cygarin Ratings using Congrove....
http://showcase.netins.net/web/cygarin/CYGARINFOOTBALL.xlsx
I have annual interest in the Congrove Power Ratings because they are one of the few preseason power ratings that actually use some analysis to project how teams may end up for the season.
They use coaching changes, returning players, returning starters, returning key positions, etc. to speculate on what the current team will be compared to the previous year. However, I consider the Congrove Ratings to hav one major flaw, which I will point out below.
There are two observations regarding the Congrove Ratings I wish to point out......
1. Iowa State is power rated insanely and pathetically low. Lower than they have ever actually performed since the Walden era, and arguably even that.
The reason I see for this is because Congrove does not attempt to rate FCS teams, yet still gives them a power rating when determining spreads and presumably rankings of teams based on playing them. But, the rating they use for these FCS teams appears to be one single power ranking for all.... ridiculously way below any and all FBS teams.
That is, the even the best FCS team is ranked double-digit points below the worst mid-major team you can think of.
To highlight this, Iowa State is ranked a ridiculous 115th with a 54 power rating of all FBS teams, and yet is considered a 20 point favorite over UNI. If a 115th ranked team was a 20 point favorite over UNI, it would interpolate to UNI would be ranked somewhere well below 200th in the nation, as well as a very uncompetitive FCS team. That's just not the case.
When Iowa State played NDSU last year, Iowa State was "favored" by Congrove in a similar fashion, and of course lost. Thus, Iowa State took a massive hit in the Congrove power rankings by losing to a team that allegedly was not a very good FCS team.
How far off is Iowa State's ranking? As one example, Iowa is power ranked 60th by Congrove (which I think is about right)....but Iowa State is ranked 14 points below them.
Why Congrove does this, I have no idea, but it badly skews the power ratings for any and all FBS teams that play FCS teams, especially highly ranked FCS teams. And that's win or lose, since margin of victory is used.
Thus, Iowa State was ridiculously under ranked last year, and that was the baseline for this year.
In my opinion, Iowa State should have been very conservatively ranked in the mid-80's last year, which is where most power rankings have them. And I think that is very conservative. Personally I would have ranked Iowa State in the 60's last year, based on using a diminishing return factor on runaway games against top ranked teams.
Take that for what it is worth.
2. Congrove is suggesting massive parity across the nation, and that includes the Big-12.
Honestly there were some signs of that happening last year, and Congrove is suggesting that the Big-12 is going to continue this year. If that is right, then there is the opportunity for Iowa State's strength of schedule to break out of the top-25, as it has been mired in for the last 25 years.
Despite conventional thinking (around here) the Big-12 has not been a perennial top dominating conference, however it most certainly has been for the last for our five years, exceeding even the SEC when compared properly top to bottom.
Thus......
If Congrove turns out to be right, then the door has cracked open to allow Iowa State to have their shot at a bowl game, by having a strength of schedule on par with the majority of P5 teams.
If this schedule turns out to be true, then Iowa State would need to be a team ranked in about the 55th to 60th range to have a 50% chance at a bowl game. For what it is worth, CPR's teams have been ranked at or above this range in every year except the last two, and his first (which was very close).
In my best Jim Carey voice.....
Cygarin Ratings using Congrove....
http://showcase.netins.net/web/cygarin/CYGARINFOOTBALL.xlsx
