Jump to content

S&P+ rankings: Overperformance or overcorrection?


Recommended Posts

Posted

 Rankings after week 2:

https://www.espn.com/college-football/insider/story/_/id/41176679/college-football-2024-week-2-sp+-rankings-takeaways

Quote

Well that was interesting. Week 2 of the 2024 college football season didn't give us many earth-shattering results beyond Notre Dame's upset loss to Northern Illinois, but it felt like about half the teams in the top 25 flirted with disaster. Few teams have looked genuinely awesome twice, and we head into Week 3 not knowing what to think about countless teams. Honestly, that's a pretty fun place to be.

SP+ is in the same boat. It trusts about five teams right now, and the distance between No. 1 Georgia and No. 10 Miami is about the same as the distance between Miami and No. 41 West Virginia. There's a huge batch of teams it's still trying to figure out. Below are this week's SP+ rankings. What is SP+? In a single sentence, it's a tempo- and opponent-adjusted measure of college football efficiency. I created the system at Football Outsiders in 2008, and as my experience with both college football and its stats has grown, I have made quite a few tweaks to the system.

SP+ is indeed intended to be predictive and forward-facing. It is not a résumé ranking that gives credit for big wins or particularly brave scheduling -- no good predictive system is. It is simply a measure of the most sustainable and predictable aspects of football. If you're lucky or unimpressive in a win, your rating will probably fall. If you're strong and unlucky in a loss, it will probably rise.

Post-Week 2 SP+ Rankings

Team Rating Offense Defense ST
1. Georgia (2-0) 32.8 44.2 (3) 11.6 (5) 0.2 (13)
2. Ohio St. (2-0) 30.9 37.1 (13) 6.4 (2) 0.2 (3)
3. Alabama (2-0) 30.4 43.8 (5) 13.5 (7) 0.1 (54)
4. Texas (2-0) 29.4 44.3 (2) 14.7 (10) -0.2 (114)
5. Ole Miss (2-0) 28.7 44.9 (1) 16.2 (11) 0.0 (61)
6. Tennessee (2-0) 24.2 40.4 (9) 16.3 (13) 0.1 (34)
7. Missouri (2-0) 24.1 40.4 (8) 16.5 (15) 0.1 (25)
8. Penn St. (2-0) 22.0 35.0 (19) 13.1 (6) 0.1 (50)
9. Oregon (2-0) 21.3 42.2 (7) 20.9 (32) 0.0 (81)
10. Miami (2-0) 19.8 39.9 (11) 20.0 (27) -0.1 (82)
11. Utah (2-0) 18.3 32.7 (34) 14.2 (9) -0.2 (116)
12. USC (2-0) 17.2 43.9 (4) 26.8 (67) 0.1 (41)
13. Michigan (1-1) 16.9 27.7 (67) 10.9 (3) 0.2 (24)
14. Louisville (2-0) 16.9 34.5 (22) 17.6 (17) -0.1 (103)
15. Notre Dame (1-1) 16.7 32.9 (33) 16.3 (12) 0.1 (44)
16. Kansas St. (2-0) 16.2 36.6 (14) 20.5 (30) 0.1 (32)
17. LSU (1-1) 15.7 42.4 (6) 26.7 (66) 0.0 (74)
18. Clemson (1-1) 15.6 34.9 (20) 19.3 (24) 0.0 (59)
19. Oklahoma (2-0) 15.6 32.7 (36) 17.2 (16) 0.1 (52)
20. Texas A&M (1-1) 14.9 34.4 (25) 19.7 (25) 0.2 (4)
21. Oklahoma St. (2-0) 13.7 38.6 (12) 24.9 (51) 0.1 (40)
22. Iowa (1-1) 13.6 19.4 (110) 6.0 (1) 0.1 (33)
23. Auburn (1-1) 13.3 32.2 (38) 19.1 (22) 0.1 (46)
24. Washington (2-0) 13.1 35.0 (18) 22.0 (36) 0.1 (29)
25. UCF (2-0) 12.3 34.5 (23) 22.4 (37) 0.2 (8)

GXCnW7wWUAA8KnP?format=jpg&name=4096x409

         
         
Posted
On 9/9/2024 at 10:13 AM, Magus Ossis said:

Haha yes I like our negative ST rating, and I like both ND and A&M in the top 20. That thing needs more data to have more meaning.

 

25 minutes ago, MrX said:

IIRC Connelly phases out his preseason ratings over the first month of the season, so definitely some noise there. 

This is it. Teams that were rated too high in preseason, like A&M and Notre Dame will stay too high for about 4 weeks. S&P+ isn’t nearly as accurate until 5-6 weeks in. I also think Connelly struggles to weigh bad opponents, so teams like tOSU and Ole Miss (and Bama week 1) who beat the shit out of god awful teams also get overrated early on. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Also I think his definition of garbage time is too broad. Some stats don’t count when a team is still running a full playbook up big in the third quarter, which suppresses how bad a team is and can mask how good that leading team might be. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

computer rankings always suck early in the year until the preseason assumptions fall off (assuming they even use them). they also struggle with teams that run up the score  (Spurrier at Florida I'm looking at you) and determining thresholds for diminishing returns. 

Massey has his comparison chart that is always fun to look at for the outliers: https://masseyratings.com/ranks?s=cf

Posted

Week 3 Rankings: Ranking CFB's Remaining Unbeatens

https://www.espn.com/college-football/insider/story/_/id/41274883/week-3-recap-ranking-college-football-remaining-unbeatens

Quote

We had laughter, and we had rivalry tears. We had a second-and-59. We had what felt like record-setting levels of chippiness and yellow flags -- FBS teams averaged 59.5 penalty yards per team (most since Week 5 of 2022), with 15 teams topping 100 penalty yards. We nearly had the No. 1 team falling to an unranked opponent. Both Tennessee and South Alabama put us on 100-Point Watch until mercy set in.

A MAC team blew out an SEC team. Texas lost its Heisman-favorite quarterback to minor injury, and his backup looked even better. Indiana (???) looked incredible again (!!!). Week 3 of the college football season had its share of unique moments. And it left us with 43 unbeaten teams. With everyone having had a chance to leave a couple of different impressions, it's time to do what I do: rank all 43. How do you do that? With the eye test? By leaning on metrics? By determining who has the better résumé? By declaring "Ain't played nobody!" and punishing teams arbitrarily?

All of the above, of course! A little bit of everything! Let's get to it.

_end_rule.png251.png&h=60&w=60

1. Texas Longhorns (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: third and first, respectively

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 34th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 23.1%

What they did in Week 3: def. UTSA 56-7

The Longhorns smoked the (admittedly flawed) defending national champions last week, and their backup quarterback would immediately become a Heisman favorite (like the starter) if he became the starter. This is a pretty scary team at the moment.


2633.png&h=60&w=60

2. Tennessee Volunteers (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: sixth and fourth

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 102nd

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 7.4%

What they did in Week 3: def. Kent State 71-0

I always talk about how it's how you play that matters, not who. If you're treating bad opponents like high school teams, that probably means something. And with a combined scoring margin of 191-13 so far, the Vols have treated three opponents, including NC State, like high school teams.


333.png&h=60&w=60

3. Alabama Crimson Tide (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: second and second

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 70th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 10.3%

What they did in Week 3: def. Wisconsin 42-10

The offense is still all-or-nothing (63rd in success rate but eighth in yards per successful play), and that looked like it might backfire a bit in Week 2 against South Florida, but the Crimson Tide have looked the part of a national title contender for about eight of 12 quarters thus far.


194.png&h=60&w=60

4. Ohio State Buckeyes (2-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: fourth and third

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 126th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 25.7%

What they did in Week 3: bye

The Buckeyes get one more tuneup this week (vs. Marshall) before the schedule starts ramping up. Besides a slow start against Akron (in an eventual 46-point win), it's hard to find much to complain about at the moment. SP+ certainly can't find anything.


61.png&h=60&w=60

5. Georgia Bulldogs (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: fifth and fifth

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 27th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 3.5%

What they did in Week 3: def. Kentucky 13-12

The differences between the top six (or maybe even seven) teams on this list are pretty marginal. So the fact that Georgia has played one dismal game -- and the teams above the Dawgs have not -- makes a difference for now. The defense allows no big plays whatsoever, but I need to see more from this offense. (And I probably will.)


145.png&h=60&w=60

6. Ole Miss Rebels (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: fourth and sixth

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 122nd

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 19.8%

What they did in Week 3: def. Wake Forest 40-6

Only Tennessee has more thoroughly destroyed a (mostly weak) schedule than Lane Kiffin's Rebels have. Against three teams ranked 86th or worse in SP+, they've scored 162 points and allowed just 9. The schedule ramps up pretty quickly after next week, though.


2390.png&h=60&w=60

7. Miami Hurricanes (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: ninth and eighth

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 81st

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 15.3%

What they did in Week 3: def. Ball State 62-0

There are tricky road trips on the horizon -- including visits to three teams on this list (Cal, Louisville and Syracuse) -- but it would be almost impossible for Miami to prove more than it has this year. The Hurricanes' attention span has barely drifted since their opening romp over Florida.


30.png&h=60&w=60

8. USC Trojans (2-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 17th and 12th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 31st

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 0.6%

What they did in Week 3: bye

Over the next month, USC will both visit Michigan and host Penn State. We'll see soon enough if the Trojans deserve a ranking like this, but the defense certainly has shown up so far, and quarterback Miller Moss pilots an awfully exciting passing game.


142.png&h=60&w=60

9. Missouri Tigers (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: seventh and 10th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 112th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 5.0%

What they did in Week 3: def. Boston College 27-21

Who's got the nation's longest winning streak? Not Georgia, Alabama or any other blueblood. Along with Army, it's Eliah Drinkwitz's Tigers, who won their sixth in a row Saturday despite some stutters and broken assignments. Their Week 6 trip to Texas A&M will tell us a lot.


213.png&h=60&w=60

10. Penn State Nittany Lions (2-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 11th and ninth

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 73rd

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 4.3%

What they did in Week 3: bye

The Nittany Lions have left two drastically different impressions thus far, crushing West Virginia and getting taken the distance by Bowling Green. An explosive offense should assure that they're 5-0 when they head to USC in Week 7.


84.png&h=60&w=60

11. Indiana Hoosiers (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 40th and 19th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 118th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 1.8%

What they did in Week 3: def. UCLA 42-13

Only Louisiana-Monroe has overachieved against SP+ projections more than Curt Cignetti's Hoosiers through three games. The combination of ruthlessly efficient offense and opportunistic defense has taken them a long way in a short time. And they're projected favorites in the next three games too!


2483.png&h=60&w=60

12. Oregon Ducks (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: eighth and 11th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 62nd

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 8.6%

What they did in Week 3: def. Oregon State 49-14

That's what we were waiting for, Ducks. Oregon sped past Oregon State in the second half in Corvallis, finally looking like a team interested in living up to its preseason top-five hype. The Ducks should be 5-0 when they welcome Ohio State to Eugene in Week 7.


2306.png&h=60&w=60

13. Kansas State Wildcats (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 14th and 17th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 69th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 8.3%

What they did in Week 3: def. Arizona 31-7

I'm a little worried about the Wildcats' proficiency in both passing (73rd in yards per dropback) and stopping the pass (69th in yards allowed per dropback). But they'll win a lot of games with rushing, physical line play and a terrifying return game.


197.png&h=60&w=60

14. Oklahoma State Cowboys (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 19th and 20th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 63rd

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 1.9%

What they did in Week 3: def. Tulsa 45-10

The Pokes cruised against Tulsa and now have a huge pair of battles: Utah comes to Stillwater on Saturday, then OSU visits Kansas State. Now would be a great time for star back Ollie Gordon II to finally get rolling.


97.png&h=60&w=60

15. Louisville Cardinals (2-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 16th and 13th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 127th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 1.3%

What they did in Week 3: bye

The Cardinals are fifth in both points and points allowed per possession after throttling Austin Peay and Jacksonville State. Their next two games are against Georgia Tech (home) and Notre Dame (away). Safe to say, we're about to learn a lot more about Louisville.


2116.png&h=60&w=60

16. UCF Knights (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 26th and 18th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 71st

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 1.2%

What they did in Week 3: def. TCU 35-34

You never know about your resilience until it's tested, and I would say that outscoring TCU 28-6 over the game's final 25 minutes to erase a 21-point deficit gives you an A+ on that test. I haven't learned to trust the defense yet. I'm trying.


164.png&h=60&w=60

17. Rutgers Scarlet Knights (2-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 41st and 47th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 132nd

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 0.9%

What they did in Week 3: bye

The combination of Howard and Akron has not taught us much about Rutgers. But a lot of previous Scarlet Knights teams wouldn't have beaten the Bison and Zips by a combined 93-24, right? And we already knew that running back Kyle Monangai was awesome, right?


254.png&h=60&w=60

18. Utah Utes (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 13th and 24th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 97th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 5.7%

What they did in Week 3: def. Utah State 38-21

Honestly, this is probably too low, but without injured quarterback Cam Rising, Utah struggled to put away a poor Utah State team, and ... well ... trusting Rising will be healthy in key games is hard at the moment. The defense is fun and aggressive, though.


158.png&h=60&w=60

19. Nebraska Cornhuskers (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 24th and 25th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 115th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 3.2%

What they did in Week 3: def. Northern Iowa 34-3

Projected 42nd in SP+, second-year leap specialist Matt Rhule's Huskers have already leaped to 24th. I don't quite trust Dylan Raiola and the offense yet, but the defense is awesome, and they'll be favored in at least their next three games.


235.png&h=60&w=60

20. Memphis Tigers (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 37th and 49th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 64th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 20.2%

What they did in Week 3: def. Florida State 20-12

They couldn't quite land the knockout blow and watched a 20-3 lead nearly turn into danger, but the Tigers still scored a lovely win in Tallahassee. They're dominating in the big-plays-and-turnovers department, and that could give them an excellent shot at a CFP bid.


201.png&h=60&w=60

21. Oklahoma Sooners (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 15th and 14th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 107th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 2.9%

What they did in Week 3: def. Tulane 34-19

It's looking like Oklahoma might have its best defense in more than a decade. But the offense ranks just 116th in yards per play and 117th in success rate and hasn't played a good defense yet. That's troublesome.


66.png&h=60&w=60

22. Iowa State Cyclones (2-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 33rd and 44th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 44th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 2.1%

What they did in Week 3: bye

The offense has done as little as possible thus far, but the Cyclones were resourceful in coming back to beat Iowa in Iowa City, and they've got a particularly effective "Just make fewer mistakes than your opponent and wait them out" approach going this year.


265.png&h=60&w=60

23. Washington State Cougars (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 48th and 34th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 47th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 6.7%

What they did in Week 3: def. Washington, 24-19

For the second straight year, Wazzu has come firing out of the gates, overachieving against projections and scoring a big, early Big Ten win (Wisconsin last year, Washington this year). The Cougs hope their staying power is better this time around.


25.png&h=60&w=60

24. California Golden Bears (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 42nd and 40th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 50th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 3.0%

What they did in Week 3: def. San Diego State 31-10

After two years of regression, the Cal defense is back! The Golden Bears haven't allowed more than 14 points in a game yet, and with a visit to Florida State up next, they have a chance to go 2-for-2 on cross-country road trips.


2439.png&h=60&w=60

25. UNLV Rebels (3-0)

SP+ and FPI rankings: 61st and 50th

SP+ strength of schedule to date: 55th

Odds of reaching 12-0, per SP+: 2.2%

What they did in Week 3: def. Kansas 23-20

The Rebels' win over Kansas on Friday night was wild and statistically unlikely (we'll get to that below). But aside from Boise State, Kansas might have been the best team on UNLV's schedule. This is a CFP contender until proven otherwise.

 

  • 8 months later...
Posted

Bill Connelly: 2025 college football SP+ rankings for every FBS team

Quote

In 93 days, it all starts again. From Week 0's Irish Farmageddon (Iowa State vs. Kansas State in Dublin) in mid-August to the national title game in late January, the 2025 college football season looms. And with transfer portal movement finally slowing down -- including spring moves, FBS teams have averaged more than 19 transfers this offseason, up more than 40% from last season -- we can finally take a semi-confident look at what's in store this fall. That means updating our numbers. Below are updated SP+ projections for the coming season. A quick reminder: Preseason projections are based on three factors.

1. Returning production. The returning production numbers are based on rosters I have updated as much as humanly possible to account for transfers and attrition. The combination of last year's SP+ ratings and adjustments based on returning production makes up about two-thirds of the projections formula.

2. Recent recruiting. This piece informs us of the caliber of a team's potential replacements (and/or new stars) in the lineup. It is determined by the past few years of recruiting rankings in diminishing order (meaning the most recent class carries the most weight). This is also impacted by the recruiting rankings of incoming transfers, an acknowledgment that the art of roster management is now heavily dictated by the transfer portal.

3. Recent history. Using a sliver of information from the previous four seasons or so gives us a good measure of overall program health.

(One other reminder: SP+ is a tempo- and opponent-adjusted measure of college football efficiency. It is a predictive measure of the most sustainable and predictable aspects of football, not a résumé ranking, and along those lines, these projections aren't intended to be a guess at what the AP Top 25 will look like at the end of the season. These are simply early offseason power rankings based on the information we have been able to gather.)

Here are the updated rankings:

Post-Spring SP+ Rankings

TEAM SP+       OFF.     DEF.      ST      AVG.W      SOS RK
1. Ohio St. 29.5 39.6 (7) 10.1 (2) 0.3 (11) 10.3 21
2. Alabama 27.9 40.4 (5) 12.6 (5) 0.2 (20) 9.8 11
3. Penn St. 27.7 40.6 (3) 12.9 (6) 0.1 (58) 10.4 29
4. Georgia 26.9 39.0 (8) 12.1 (4) 0.6 (1) 9.8 13
5. Texas 26.4 35.4 (17) 9.0 (1) -0.5 (135)      9.6 12
6. Notre Dame 24.9 38.3 (10) 13.4 (8) -0.2 (106) 10.5 44
7. Oregon 24.7 40.5 (4) 15.8 (11) 0.5 (3) 10.1 32
8. Clemson 23.3 39.9 (6) 16.7 (12) -0.3 (133) 10.0 34
9. LSU 22.1 40.7 (2) 18.6 (23) 0.1 (48) 8.5 9
10. Michigan 21.5 31.8 (32) 10.3 (3) 0.2 (22) 9.8 38
11. Ole Miss 19.8 34.6 (20)     14.8 (9) 0.3 (7) 8.9 23
12. Miami 18.8 43.2 (1) 24.4 (44) 0.2 (19) 9.2 36
13. Tennessee 18.4 31.4 (34) 13.0 (7) 0.2 (21) 8.8 24
14. Florida 17.3 35.4 (16) 18.2 (21) 0.3 (8) 7.0 2
15. Texas A&M      17.2 34.9 (18) 17.7 (18) 0.2 (24) 7.7 10
16. Oklahoma 16.5 33.3 (25) 16.7 (13) 0.2 (31) 6.9 1
17. S. Carolina 16.1 33.3 (24) 17.2 (15) 0.1 (50) 7.2 7
18. Kansas St. 15.6 35.7 (14) 20.0 (26) 0.2 (26) 9.0 57
19. Illinois 14.3 32.3 (28) 18.0 (20) 0.2 (30) 8.7 40
20. SMU 13.1 37.2 (11) 24.2 (42)       0.1 (40) 8.4 45
21. Missouri 12.5 30.7 (41) 18.3 (22) -0.1 (96) 7.7 25
22. Arizona St. 12.2 32.6 (26) 20.4 (27) -0.6 (136) 8.4 61
23. Indiana 12.2 32.1 (30) 19.9 (25) 0.2 (29) 8.1 31
24. Louisville 12.1 36.7 (12) 24.5 (45) -0.1 (97) 8.3 43
25. Auburn 11.8 29.4 (48) 17.7 (19) -0.1 (83) 6.9 15
  • 2 months later...
Posted

Bill Connelly: 2025 SEC college football projections, preview

Quote

Last we saw the SEC on the gridiron, it was underachieving dramatically. Well, sort of. SEC teams went 8-7 in bowl/playoff season, falling short against the spread by only 1.6 points per game (which is to say that the spreads were pretty accurate on average). But they underachieved by more than that against Big Ten teams, and for the second straight season -- gasp! -- an SEC team failed to win the national title. The league still comfortably had the best average SP+ rating in the nation thanks primarily to the small number of genuinely bad teams, but it certainly didn't finish the 2024 season in a great mood.

With the Big Ten's Penn State and Ohio State, Notre Dame, and the ACC's Clemson all looking at potential top-5 hype, there's a decent chance that the SEC's title-free run reaches three years. But try to hold back your sympathy tears -- the league still has at least three of the most talented teams in the nation and the largest selection of upper-middle-class teams with dreams of 10-2 records and playoff at-large bids. In Arch Manning, LaNorris Sellers, DJ Lagway, Marcel Reed and maybe Austin Simmons, it has the most fascinating set of young quarterbacks in the sport. It has the most under-pressure Alabama head coach in a generation. It has Diego Damn Pavia. And if last year is any indication, it might have a few more shocking, playoff-turning upsets too. This league never lacks for talent, grievance or storylines. I don't see why that would change in 2025. Let's preview the SEC!

***

Of the five teams that finished in the SP+ top 10 last season, four rank 81st or worse in returning production, but the fifth, Bama, ranks in the top 30. That is by far the cleanest, easiest way to explain why the Crimson Tide start out on top here. Of course, it's looking as if Texas is likely to start out No. 1 in the preseason polls, but because there's no "Arch Manning is about to take The Leap" factor in these projections, the Horns are merely top-5.

Nationally, there are eight teams projected within a touchdown of the No. 1 ranking in SP+, and the SEC has only three of them. (The Big Ten also has three, while Clemson and Notre Dame are also involved.) That indeed means the SEC doesn't exactly have overwhelming odds of producing a national champion. But as I told SEC fans when the league was winning titles nearly every season, that's not the greatest measure of league strength. Alabama winning six titles with the best coach of all time didn't exactly say much about how good Mississippi State or South Carolina was, right? But while the SEC has let its title grip slip, the simple fact that it has 10 of the projected top 17 teams (and 12 of the top 25) drops some pretty clear hints regarding which conference has the best overall depth.

2025 projections

TEAM        SP+      OFF. DEF. ST AVG.W    SOS RK
2. Alabama 27.9 40.4 (5) 12.6 (5) 0.2 (20) 9.8    11
4. Georgia   26.9 39.0 (8) 12.1 (4) 0.6 (1) 9.8    13
5. Texas 26.4  35.4 (17) 9.0 (1) -0.5 (135)      9.6       12
9. LSU 22.1 40.7 (2) 18.6 (23) 0.1 (48) 8.5    9
11. Ole Miss 19.8 34.6 (20) 14.8 (9) 0.3 (7) 8.9    23
13. Tennessee 18.4  31.4 (34) 13.0 (7) 0.2 (21) 8.8    24
14. Florida 17.3 35.4 (16) 18.2 (21) 0.3 (8) 7.0    2
15. Texas A&M             17.2  34.9 (18) 17.7 (18) 0.2 (24) 7.7     10
16. Oklahoma 16.5 33.3 (25) 16.7 (13) 0.2 (31) 6.9    1
17. S. Carolina 16.1 33.3 (24) 17.2 (15) 0.1 (50) 7.2    7
21. Missouri 12.5 30.7 (41) 18.3 (22) -0.1 (96) 7.7    25
25. Auburn 11.8 29.4 (48)           17.7 (19) -0.1 (83) 6.9    15
38. Arkansas 7.0 31.0 (38) 24.0 (40)      0.2 (35) 5.1    3
43. Kentucky 4.7 25.8 (79) 21.0 (31) 0.3 (14) 4.7    8
55. Vanderbilt 1.7 27.3 (63) 25.7 (50) 0.3 (9) 4.7    5
71. Miss. St. -1.4 27.5 (60) 28.9 (72) 0.2 (27) 3.8    6
Quote

251.png&h=60&w=60 Texas Longhorns

Head coach: Steve Sarkisian (fifth year, 37-17 overall)

2025 projection: Fifth in SP+, 9.6 average wins (6.3 in the SEC)

Reading the tea leaves and sussing out the conventional wisdom, it sure seems like Texas is going to be the No. 1 team in the preseason polls. And I get it. There really is a chance that Arch Manning is as good as we've been assuming he'd become for years, and if he is, then nothing else matters all that much.

The Longhorns have only a couple of last year's key receivers returning -- DeAndre Moore Jr. and sophomore Ryan Wingo -- and while both battled ups and downs in 2024, their upside is obvious. So is that of big-time freshmen like Kaliq Lockett and Jaime Ffrench. Manning will have a strong set of running backs at his disposal, with leading rusher Quintrevion Wisner returning and sophomore CJ Baxter, a key player in 2023, back from injury. And while the line is replacing four starters, including incredible left tackle Kelvin Banks Jr., Manning's athleticism and Manning-esque smarts would make their jobs easier up front. The defense has holes to fill up front, but it's going to be good no matter what, and if Manning is dominating, the Horns will have more margin for error on that side.

As I asked in my Ifs List, however, what if Manning is merely very good? What if he flashes epic upside -- like he did against UTSA, completing passes of 75, 51 and 36 yards and ripping off a 67-yard touchdown run in less than 30 snaps -- but also gets fooled at times, like he did against Louisiana-Monroe (and in cameos against Georgia and Florida)? What if he needs an unproven receiving corps to bail him out and an unproven offensive line to protect him more?

What if, against a tougher schedule than last season, the offense gets held in the 17-point range a couple of times and the defense has to make more stops than usual? The back eight will certainly do its job, thanks to the best linebacking corps in the country -- Anthony Hill Jr. (15.5 TFLs last year) is otherworldly, as are edge rushers Trey Moore and Colin Simmons -- and a secondary featuring corner Malik Muhammad, safety Michael Taaffe and nickel Jaylon Guilbeau. But what about a defensive line that lost five of last year's top six and is double-dipping turnover like Georgia's front seven? Can senior Ethan Burke and a load of incoming transfer tackles, including the mammoth Travis Shaw (North Carolina) and Cole Brevard (Purdue), get the push required? And if the injury bug bites more than it did last year, when the Horns ranked fourth in lineup stability, will that wreck what already appears to be tenuous depth in some areas?

I have a lot more questions about Texas than I do the typical (expected) No. 1 team, but it could turn out that the answers match the hype. Steve Sarkisian has slowly built quite the juggernaut, and Manning is a Manning. Regardless, we barely have to wait another month to start getting answers. Having Texas at Ohio State in Week 1 absolutely rules.

TEAM CONF.W      CONF. TITLE%         11+ WINS%        6+ WINS%
Alabama 6.0 16.1% 30.0% 100.0%
Georgia 5.9 15.6% 28.7% 100.0%
Texas 6.3 13.6% 22.9% 99.9%
LSU 5.2 9.6% 7.0% 98.6%
Ole Miss 5.1 7.4% 10.9% 99.3%
Tennessee 5.0 6.0% 7.7% 99.3%
Florida 3.9 5.7% 0.7% 85.7%
Oklahoma 3.5 5.4% 0.6% 84.1%
S. Carolina 4.1 5.4% 0.7% 87.7%
Texas A&M         4.5 5.4% 1.9% 94.4%
Missouri 4.0 3.5% 1.9% 93.1%
Auburn 3.6 2.9% 0.4% 83.6%
Arkansas 2.5 1.4% 0.0% 38.0%
Kentucky 1.9 1.2% 0.0% 27.7%
Vanderbilt 1.6 0.6% 0.0% 25.0%
Miss. St. 1.0 0.4% 0.0% 6.7%

 

 

 

 

             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
31 minutes ago, Ricky Butler said:

I doubt we'll have the #1 defense, but I bet our offense is better than last year. I think the improvement will come from explosive pass plays and QB scrambles moving the chains.

I'll wager our WR YAC improves dramatically too. Give both of those passing improvements it's not brilliant to predict substantial improvements in YPC for our RBs as well. 

Posted
16 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

I'll wager our WR YAC improves dramatically too. Give both of those passing improvements it's not brilliant to predict substantial improvements in YPC for our RBs as well. 

If the OL is close to lsat year's version, the improved threat of QB runs and scrambles should raise the RB perormance nicely. Just adding QB keep to RPOs will spring the RB a few times a game, and we've seen Arch turn upfield, draw defenders and then pitch it.

If the passing game improves, the running game improves, and the kicking game improves, we're going to be hard to beat.

On the other hand, if we had some bread, we could have ham sammiches if we had any ham.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

If the OL is close to lsat year's version, the improved threat of QB runs and scrambles should raise the RB perormance nicely. Just adding QB keep to RPOs will spring the RB a few times a game, and we've seen Arch turn upfield, draw defenders and then pitch it.

If the passing game improves, the running game improves, and the kicking game improves, we're going to be hard to beat.

On the other hand, if we had some bread, we could have ham sammiches if we had any ham.

Yeah all of those items, yours and mine, enhance one another. A consistent long ball QB who can run really does alter the dynamics of an offense dramatically. Of course, high completetion rates and low turnover ratios are critical too.

I hate when I go to make an omelet and find I neglected to buy ham. I personally prefer a ham, green pepper, mushroom and swiss omelet to a ham sammich. Not that I hate ham sammichs, I just have no bread. 

Edited by BurntEyes
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Yeah all of those items, yours and mine, enhance one another. A consistent long ball QB who can run really does alter the dynamics of an offense dramatically. Of course, high completetion rates and low turnover ratios are critical too.

I hate when I go to make an omelet and find I neglected to buy ham. I personally prefer a ham, green pepper, mushroom and swiss omelet to a ham sammich. Not that I hate ham sammichs, I just have no bread. 

I kinda like a ham'n'cheese grilled sammich with onions in the midle, on sourdough, with sides of two eggs up and hash browns. Carafe of pressed Jamaica Blue Mountain. Wouldn't mind a big glass of fresh-squeezed Valley OJ to start, long's we dreamin'.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...