112: Conference shapes

Which conferences are deep and which conferences are wide?

Prior to the season, Rece Davis described the Big 12 conference as having width, but not depth. His College GameDay counterpart Stanford Steve reiterated that it’s not the deepest league, it’s the widest, before this weekend’s games.

Let's dive into what makes a conference deep or wide using the latest F+ ratings from Brian Fremeau. You can find all these ratings here:
https://byc.evidence.app/college-football/team-ratings/

Deep leagues

Think of the deep end of a pool. The teams in a deep league have ratings that create a steep peak. It’s taller and more narrow.

The SEC is the deepest league using these ratings. The league has 13 of its 16 teams above the 75th percentile and only one team underneath the 50th percentile¹.

One thing that surprises me from the SEC is out of the 21 double-digit favorites that have lost outright this season, six are from the league where it just means more. Four of those six games were league games meaning a conference opponent upset the big favorite too².

A deep league doesn’t mean a good league. For example, eight of the Mountain West’s 12 teams are below the 30th percentile. It’s deep, but not in a good way.

Wide leagues

A wide conference is like the shallow end of a pool, flat and spread out.

While I do think you can make a credible argument that the Big 12 is more wide than deep, there are several other leagues that can make a stronger case.

Miami and Clemson are the buoys in the ACC, but there are 11 teams under the 70th percentile. That’s more than half the league. There is a good chance Miami doesn’t play a ranked team all season. Accomplish Greatness in a wide league.

The Big Ten feels like it should be two separate conferences too. There are eight teams at the 80th percentile or above while there are seven teams under the 70th percentile. The leaders and legends feel like an out of whack seesaw where a Penn State could inexplicably lose to Minnesota, and we wonder why.

Conference USA³ is the widest league and it’s definitely the best example that wide doesn’t mean good. The league doesn’t have a single team above the 50th percentile and it has four teams under the 5th percentile (New Mexico State, Middle Tennessee, UTEP, Kennesaw State).

So is it better if the league is deep or if it's wide?

Why not both?

These mega-conferences make balanced scheduling impossible. It's hard to imagine the playoff committee not making subjective decisions anyhow.

---

You can find conference standings with point differentials here:
https://byc.evidence.app/college-football/by-conference/

A few notable differentials so far:

Best/worst differentials

• +144, Army (5-0 American)

• +101, Clemson (4-0 ACC)

• +86, Tulane (2-0 American)

• -70, UCLA (0-4 Big Ten)

• -74, Tulsa (0-2 American)

• -108, UAB (0-3 American)

Positive differential with a losing record

• +18, Ole Miss (1-2 SEC)

• +4, USC (1-3 Big Ten)

Best differential with no league wins

• -8, Cal (0-3 ACC)

• -19, Kansas (0-3 Big 12)

---

After watching football this weekend, the end of the Carolina football game was a cruel reminder life is so short. Fuck cancer.
Subscribe if you so choose, and thanks for reading this far. Check out the code for the density plot too.

1. Need more cowbell.

2. Alabama (-23) lost to Vanderbilt, Ole Miss (-14.5) lost to Kentucky, Tennessee (-14) lost to Arkansas, Kentucky (-13) lost to Vanderbilt.

3. If you can name every team in the CUSA today, good for you.