New Hampshire DB Jake Kiley Commits to Penn State
Headline »
New Hampshire DB Jake Kiley Commits to Penn State
July 26, 2011 – | No Comment

States like New Hampshire are often overlooked by college recruiters scouring the northeast. With a population of a little over 1.3 million (barely 14.5% of the population of New York City), the talent pool in …

Read the full story »

The Tornado Alley Divide: MWC vs Big East

Submitted by on October 23, 20099 Comments

Forget the North / South divide. It seems the country is torn right down the middle when determining whether the Big East or Mountain West is the better conference. Although the Big East is a watered down version of the middling ACC, it is still clearly the superior conference when compared to the high school version of college football that is the Mountain West conference.

Although we could compare the BCS and poll positions of teams from either conference, it is hard to ignore the validity in claims of bias most mid-major supporters accuse voters of. So putting aside voter driven polls altogether, let’s take a look at the computers and their unbiased judgment of both conferences.

Sagarin numbers for the Big East:

Sagarin Rank Sagarin Rating Strength of Schedule
Cincinnati 8 87.92 71
Pittsburgh 24 79.16 66
South Florida 25 79.16 132
West Virginia 39 76.99 84
Connecticut 52 74.82 81
Rutgers 78 68.76 145
Louisville 94 65.56 41
Syracuse 107 63.50 49

Sagarin numbers for the Mountain West:

Sagarin Rank Sagarin Rating Strength of Schedule
TCU 11 85.40 53
Utah 18 80.79 44
BYU 28 78.59 79
Air Force 61 72.32 107
Colorado State 64 71.13 17
San Diego State 101 64.17 54
Wyoming 110 62.90 96
UNLV 120 61.10 72
New Mexico 162 50.33 64

Average Sagarin numbers for Big East vs Mountain West:

Average Sagarin Rank Average Sagarin Rating Average Strength of Schedule
Big East 53.375 74.48 83.625
Moutain West 75.000 69.64 65.111

Are TCU and Utah better than Cincinnati and Pittsburgh? Maybe, but a conference as a whole, the Mountain West is nowhere close to the Big East.

In fact of the 130 computer rankings available, all 130 rank the Mountain West 8th or occasionally 7th as a conference compared to the Big East averaging in at 4th. In fact, none of the 130 computer based rankings have the Mountain West higher as a conference than the Big East.

So I don’t know what 42% of the nation is smoking, but the Mountain West is clearly not a better conference than the Big East or any BCS conference for that matter.

I do not enjoy defending the Big East as a conference, but to see that there are misinformed people out there who could even possibly consider the Mountain West anything other than a tough high school caliber conference is infuriating and flat out wrong and the numbers clearly back that up.

top related stories
you may also like

  • psudevon

    The Mountain West is definitely stronger at the top. TCU, Utah, and BYU would all be favored in a neutral site game against any team other than Cincinnati from the Big East, but you can't get too much depth in a non-BCS conference. However, a team made up from the best of the non-BCS teams (out west, that is) would immediately become one of the best conferences in the NCAA:
    Boise State
    BYU
    TCU
    Utah
    Fresno State
    Air Force
    Hawaii
    Colorado State
    Nevada

    That's a pretty good conference, top to bottom.

  • tim

    That link about the 130 computer rankings actually shows the Big East as the 3rd best conference, on average… not the 4th.

  • http://quebecpenspinning.com Charlie

    That actually highlights an even bigger gap between the Big East and MWC. Thanks Tim.

  • Bill S.

    This is the first piece of unbiased writing I have seen on this site. You take the data, put it side by side and draw a conclusion based on the information present. The strength of the teams has changed some since mid-October. It would be nice of you to add the Big Ten in here (just for kicks, lol). I already know what it looks like (Devon came up with an experiment and we already went over this subject). I'm sure you would have to squirm your way out what the data says, though.

    Very useful link on the computer rankings, Charlie. I thank you for that.

  • Bill S.

    The Big East was questioned early in the season. I think they represented themselves fine. With the most current numbers, only TCU would be favored in a neutral site game against any Big East team. Pitt and WVU would be favored over BYU and Utah, respectively. I didn't look at the rest, but I'd guess the middle of the Big East would be stronger than the MWC as well.

  • Bill S.

    This is the first piece of unbiased writing I have seen on this site. You take the data, put it side by side and draw a conclusion based on the information present. The strength of the teams has changed some since mid-October. It would be nice of you to add the Big Ten in here (just for kicks, lol). I already know what it looks like (Devon came up with an experiment and we already went over this subject). I'm sure you would have to squirm your way out what the data says, though.

    Very useful link on the computer rankings, Charlie. I thank you for that.

  • Bill S.

    The Big East was questioned early in the season. I think they represented themselves fine. With the most current numbers, only TCU would be favored in a neutral site game against any Big East team. Pitt and WVU would be favored over BYU and Utah, respectively. I didn't look at the rest, but I'd guess the middle of the Big East would be stronger than the MWC as well.

  • nsmr

    Its too bad the Big Least and MWC don't play each other more often.

  • loquist

    Your logic is faulty. In technological circles there is something known as GIGO: garbage in, garbage out. Computers don't make unbiased decisions regarding the strength of teams and conferences. They can only do what their programming tells them to do, and that programming is written by a human. The rankings aren't created ex nihilo by the computer, but are based on certain assumptions within the parameters of the calculation.

    Einstein ended up being wrong on a calculation of the universe because he made a base assumption that the universe was static (not expanding) and he ended up being wrong because his garbage in (static universe assumption) created garbage out (bad calculation derived from incorrect assumption). The computer calculations regarding college football rankings must make similar inferences regarding base assumptions that are assumed by a human programmer.