ESPN The Mag ranks top 10 teams in BCS era for on & off field performance
As part of their annual Franchise Issue, ESPN The Magazine examined three major categories of FBS success (on field success, off-field success, and traditions of success) over the past 14 years to determine which program has emerged as the ultimate BCS champion.
What's that? You say the BCS can't really name college football's best team? Well, duh. With a playoff finally on the horizon, The Mag turned to people smarter than we are to examine the last 14 years and determine which program really has emerged as No. 1 in the BCS era. Using our Ultimate Standings as a guide, Jeff Phillips, principal at the Parthenon Group and a recent MIT Sloan MBA grad, along with Tyler Williams, an MIT Ph.D. candidate in economics, created three major categories of FBS success, then split them into nine factors (see below). For each, they used data since 1998 (unless noted) to rank every team against its 119 FBS competitors, then weighted those results with emphasis on title track and player success, the categories that most reflect an established winning program. [Ed.'s note: We also gave a nod to pre-BCS titles, nearly 3,500 SportsNation voters helped shape stadium edge and NCAA violations got a subjective grade. And if your team didn't make the top 10, you'll just have to check out The Mag.] We can hear the critics now: Playoff!
You'll need an Insider account to read the full article, but I can tell you that U-M checks in at #9, Ohio State #2 ("Tattoogate cost the Buckeyes the top spot"), while Oklahoma took the top spot.
Other programs of interest: Notre Dame #14, Michigan State #27
September 11th, 2012 at 9:31 AM ^
thirteen teams above ND is kind of surprising.
September 11th, 2012 at 9:42 AM ^
For you, me, the rest of the MgoBoard, the country, the world, and the rest of the known universe it is surprising.
For the MSM no.
September 11th, 2012 at 9:43 AM ^
Fluff to sell mags and get links to the website.
I can create nearly an idential list without looking at theirs by taking the top 4 teams of each BCS conference.
September 11th, 2012 at 9:45 AM ^
Academics at 42 is an absolute joke.
OSU is also ranked higher in the same category. What the shit?
September 11th, 2012 at 9:48 AM ^
It seems that Academics, which comprises 10% of the overall ranking, is based on the US News and World Report ranking in 2012 and the Academic Progress Rate in 2010-11.
September 11th, 2012 at 10:12 AM ^
Aaaaaaand my reading skills need work.
September 11th, 2012 at 9:48 AM ^
it's very possible APR numbers and whatever else were calculated and it was left at that. I doubt they're going to use a purely academic metric for each school (which, honestly, doesn't make a whole lot of sense for football).
September 11th, 2012 at 9:54 AM ^
I'm actually quite surprised academics are even considered. Judging by the lack of investigation at UNC and talk of possible investigations at Cal Tech, the NCAA obviously doesn't factor academics one bit.
~Herm
September 11th, 2012 at 10:11 AM ^
September 11th, 2012 at 12:27 PM ^
September 11th, 2012 at 10:30 AM ^
ND should be at the bottom. utah has more BCS wins than they do.
September 11th, 2012 at 12:27 PM ^
September 11th, 2012 at 11:00 AM ^
would've thought USC would be a clear #1. maybe that's just because of the emotional damage those rose bowl trips caused.
September 12th, 2012 at 5:37 AM ^
and I think it's cool that whichever group of voters that came up with its final list did take into account how many of their championships and high place finishes were accomplished and obviously deducted a certain amount for, using the common word, cheating. OSU should have likewise been hit hard in this context.
I don't know if voters of this nature, because Broadcast Stations definitely don't consider it - use actual sudent/athlete performance and school's track record in promoting degrees as a consideration. I mean AUB getting the number one JUCO offensive and defensive player both in the same year, winning a BCS NC and then both leaving without having completed their jr year should not earn any pts imo. On the other hand, if we're talking merely about recruiting the hell out of players, winning lots of football games and finishes most weeks at no. 1 in the polls and removing and scholastic considerations, simply let the SEC have the damn list and be pround of it.
September 11th, 2012 at 12:23 PM ^
Not to harp on the academics but??? Alabama, OSU, Georgia, Florida, Alabama over Michigan and USC is perplexing.