Apologies that I am a little behind on posting this yearly analysis of how 4 year trailing recruiting averages tend to predict success in the SEC.
Here is the 2016 schedule, updated through last weekend's games.
Note that this gives some valuable insight into this weekend's match-up between the Aggies and the Vols.
First, the two teams have 4 year talent averages that are separated by .75 (that's point seven five). The Aggies have a fractional talent advantage. This game will come down to coaching and home field advantage.
Second, both teams are undefeated in the SEC, having played and beaten one more talented team (also notice how close in talent Auburn and UGA are?). The edge goes to A&M who have played a more stable Auburn (though Malzahn tends to under-perform as the season wears on) than a talented UGA with Smart (who is so far unspectacular). But, and this is significant, UT has beaten two SEC teams with top 15 talent, A&M has only beaten one.
Third, we will both be the second most talented team either team has played. Insofar as P5 OOC games, A&M has the edge, beating a UCLA team that is only slightly less talented than Florida, compared to our win over Va Tech are in the 30 range (to be fair that is the Stanford, Washington range of talent), but still less talented than Kentucky.
Consider that with all of the talk about how unbalanced the divisions in the SEC are, if you average out the four year trailing average of all teams on each team's schedule, you are left with the West playing teams that are as talented as Oklahoma, with the East averaging playing teams as talented as Michigan. I believe that the solution is relatively simple. Swap Missouri and Auburn to keep the geographic delineation proper, and the divisions would be balanced, if not slightly favoring the East.
The two teams that are, to date, under-performing significantly are both in the east, and both of them are under new coaches. Time will tell if these schools tend to plain out, but I believe that firing Richt (like Miles) will be a difficult transition to teams that were very stable in relation to talent. Muschamp is one of the worst coaches I have ever ran these evaluations on, and that includes Derek Dooley. How that guy got another job is a sign of an absolute inability for administrators to truly understand what drives wins and losses.
Bottom line. The numbers say we lose the next two games. If the A&M game was in Neyland, I might be willing to pick a UT win, but talent marginally favors A&M, and home field advantage is definitely in their favor.
The key to our season is to win the remaining games that we *should* win (SCAR, Mizzou, Vandy, Kentucky) and play with "house money" the next two weeks. Let the chips fall where they may and GO VOLS!
Here is the 2016 schedule, updated through last weekend's games.
Note that this gives some valuable insight into this weekend's match-up between the Aggies and the Vols.
First, the two teams have 4 year talent averages that are separated by .75 (that's point seven five). The Aggies have a fractional talent advantage. This game will come down to coaching and home field advantage.
Second, both teams are undefeated in the SEC, having played and beaten one more talented team (also notice how close in talent Auburn and UGA are?). The edge goes to A&M who have played a more stable Auburn (though Malzahn tends to under-perform as the season wears on) than a talented UGA with Smart (who is so far unspectacular). But, and this is significant, UT has beaten two SEC teams with top 15 talent, A&M has only beaten one.
Third, we will both be the second most talented team either team has played. Insofar as P5 OOC games, A&M has the edge, beating a UCLA team that is only slightly less talented than Florida, compared to our win over Va Tech are in the 30 range (to be fair that is the Stanford, Washington range of talent), but still less talented than Kentucky.
Consider that with all of the talk about how unbalanced the divisions in the SEC are, if you average out the four year trailing average of all teams on each team's schedule, you are left with the West playing teams that are as talented as Oklahoma, with the East averaging playing teams as talented as Michigan. I believe that the solution is relatively simple. Swap Missouri and Auburn to keep the geographic delineation proper, and the divisions would be balanced, if not slightly favoring the East.
The two teams that are, to date, under-performing significantly are both in the east, and both of them are under new coaches. Time will tell if these schools tend to plain out, but I believe that firing Richt (like Miles) will be a difficult transition to teams that were very stable in relation to talent. Muschamp is one of the worst coaches I have ever ran these evaluations on, and that includes Derek Dooley. How that guy got another job is a sign of an absolute inability for administrators to truly understand what drives wins and losses.
Bottom line. The numbers say we lose the next two games. If the A&M game was in Neyland, I might be willing to pick a UT win, but talent marginally favors A&M, and home field advantage is definitely in their favor.
The key to our season is to win the remaining games that we *should* win (SCAR, Mizzou, Vandy, Kentucky) and play with "house money" the next two weeks. Let the chips fall where they may and GO VOLS!
Last edited:
