Honest Team Rankings

[catcher_0_3]

So it seems like we have some reasonable posters here and I was hoping as a group we could come up with more accurate ratings for our own teams. I know there are some super dedicated guys who are doing us the great service of naming the rosters and making sure their information is accurate, however understandably they don't want to edit ratings. I on the other hand don't mind tweaking some ratings so that I have the most accurate rosters possible and was hoping for some input from the guys that know their teams best. So if you don't mind posting what you think your team or a team that you know a great deal about should be rated (Offense, Defense, Overall) I would greatly appreciate it.

I guess we need some standards to go by, I would say a 99 would indicate one of the best units to ever grace the field. A 95+ would indicate one of the best units this year. A 90 plus would indicate a very good unit and would challenge for a top 25 spot in any given year.

http://www.operationsports.com/forum...-e3-build.html


University of Georgia:

Offense 95- The best offense that UGA has had since the days of Stafford, Moreno and AJ Green. They have the most skill talent of about any team in the country, but their Offensive line is still lagging behind a little bit from the dominant units in the country like Alabama, Wisconsin, Tennessee from last year, etc.

Defense 90- The unit on the whole is young and inexperienced, but there is a lot of depth and talent across the board. Likely not a top 15 defense in the country to start the year, but towards the end and beginning of the 2014 season, they should have a very formidable unit.

Overall 93- A bit biased but I would give UGA a 93 overall. I do think they have a top 10 team in the country, but would put them behind teams like Alabama and Oregon and I might could be convinced of others.



(Offense, Defense, Overall)

AAC:
UConn- 74, 80, 76
Marshall- 85-70-77 (85 Starting QB)

ACC:
Georgia Tech- 88, 83, 86

SEC:
UGA- 95, 90, 93
Alabama- -,-,95
Auburn- -, - , 83
Ole Miss- 88, 87, 88

Big 10:
Iowa- 78, 84, 81

Big 12:
West Virginia- 80, 82, 81
Oklahoma- 90, 84, 86

Pac 12:
Colorado- 80, 76, 79
Oregon State- 89-88-89

[zac358]

Georgia shouldn't be rated higher than Louisville. Louisville should be top 10 in terms of overall.

[jccutiger]

The thing to think about If you're editing ratings is what it means to be a 90+ ranked team. The GOAT college football offense/defense/team would be a 99. So I'd say Bama, this year, should be around a 93. I would not have another team ranked in the 90's. What you are saying is that UGA's O is only 4 points below the greatest offense in the history of college football and their D that returns 3-4 starters is in the same category (an A) as the greatest D to ever play the game. You said reasonable but it doesn't appear that you're being reasonable at all. I'm a Clemson fan. If I was trying to be realistic, I'd rank our O as an 87. I'd rank our D as a 78-80. 2K gets it a lot more in this regard than EA. The Dream Team is the only team that's a 99. I believe the Heat are a 93 or so. I don't agree with that either but you get the point.

[War34Eagle]

You'd like to see a nice normal bell curve of team ratings, averaged around a 78 with standard deviation of 5 or so. So 68% of teams would be between 73/83, 27% between 68/73 and 83/88, and 5% between 63/68 and 88/93. Of course there may be a few outliers, but that general setup would work great I think

[ACardAttack]

Quote: Originally Posted by War34Eagle

You'd like to see a nice normal bell curve of team ratings, averaged around a 78 with standard deviation of 5 or so. So 68% of teams would be between 73/83, 27% between 68/73 and 83/88, and 5% between 63/68 and 88/93. Of course there may be a few outliers, but that general setup would work great I think

That would be awesome...it would really put am emphasis on the difference in teams...as it is now a good player can take a team like Indiana and be competitive with a team like Florida

[ActLikeYouCrow]

i dont do the 100 scale because it doesnt seem to be any direct correlation between it and the player ratings.

south carolina
anywhere between 4-6 in the sec on offense (behind uga, ala, a&m).
top 3 sec defense (alabama, florida). lose the entire lb core, but still arguably the best dline in the country and 3 of 4 starters in the secondary return.

[War34Eagle]

Auburn might be one of the most over-ranked teams in the game, and that's coming from a fan. It would be much more realistic to have us around 83 overall or so, with a couple really good players but poor depth. No clue how we're in the 90s

[catcher_0_3]

Quote: Originally Posted by jccutiger

The thing to think about If you're editing ratings is what it means to be a 90+ ranked team. The GOAT college football offense/defense/team would be a 99. So I'd say Bama, this year, should be around a 93. I would not have another team ranked in the 90's. What you are saying is that UGA's O is only 4 points below the greatest offense in the history of college football and their D that returns 3-4 starters is in the same category (an A) as the greatest D to ever play the game. You said reasonable but it doesn't appear that you're being reasonable at all. I'm a Clemson fan. If I was trying to be realistic, I'd rank our O as an 87. I'd rank our D as a 78-80. 2K gets it a lot more in this regard than EA. The Dream Team is the only team that's a 99. I believe the Heat are a 93 or so. I don't agree with that either but you get the point.

Yea, that's basically what I said in my opening statement about having a general consensus of what ratings mean was going to be crucial. If a 99 Offense is the 2005 USC Trojans with Leinart, Bush, Jarrett and co. then yea, in my opinion, Alabama, Georgia, Oregon or the top college offense today is 3-4 points behind them. 3-4 points to me for a unit is 1 or 2 great players. Is that what everybody else thinks, probably not. I guess this thread is teetering on the edge of going in a few different directions, but I would like to try and stay on topic if possible instead of veering off in a discussion of player ratings, how divisions of football should compare to each other, etc. So if yall would like to lay out some definitions that we can all formulate opinions around, I'm all for that as well.

99-95: From one of the top units all time to one of the top units in recent history.

95-90: One of the top units in recent history to one of the top units in a given year.

90-85: One of the top units in a year- to one of the top units in their BCS level conference

85-80: One of the top units in a BCS conference- mid level unit in BCS level conference or high level mid major


Thoughts?