Pitt's Value in Realignment

[cashisking884]

The year mentioned above Auburn went 9-4, they finished 9th in F+ analytic rankings at the end of year. They were a top 10 power team.

Their regular season losses:

9th ranked UF.
2nd ranked LSU (actual NC winner)
5th ranked UGA.

They beat PAC 12 Champion Oregon to open the season.

In any other conference, 2019 Auburn is probably a playoff team. In the SEC they are a 9 win regular season team.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Arkansas recruits at a 25 to 30 level.

In any other conference that would put them on pretty solid ground. There aren’t many teams in the ACC that consistently recruit at that level.

But in the SEC it means bottom tier talent, so average to bad yearly records.

Yeah, I don't know why people are going by the standings when valuing these programs; that's kind of absurd. If that mattered, Baylor wouldn't still be in the Big 12 (six double digit win seasons out of the last 13). But, as it stands, no one in their right mind would consider Baylor to be a more valuable than, say, Tennessee... which only had one double digit win season in that time.

If Wake Forest goes 11-1 the next five years and Florida goes 1-11 the next five years, those programs still aren't even close to each other.

I don't see anyone suggesting Cincinnati is more valuable than Pitt. Wonder why... they have more wins lately and beat us last time we played! Lol

 

[cashisking884]

Yeah, I don't know why people are going by the standings when valuing these programs; that's kind of absurd. If that mattered, Baylor wouldn't still be in the Big 12 (six double digit win seasons out of the last 13). But, as it stands, no one in their right mind would consider Baylor to be a more valuable than, say, Tennessee... which only had one double digit win season in that time.

If Wake Forest goes 11-1 the next five years and Florida goes 1-11 the next five years, those programs still aren't even close to each other.

I don't see anyone suggesting Cincinnati is more valuable than Pitt. Wonder why... they have more wins lately and beat us last time we played! Lol

Especially when the standings have such wide variance in quality.

The SEC West is superior to the Big 10 West. Anybody pointing to Northwestern’s record under Fitzgerald and saying, “so that means NW was a better program during that time than this middle SEC program” is just being purposely dumb. That middle SEC program would rape the Big 10 West.

 

[TD_6082]

They had a pretty good thing going with Freeze also. They're committed to winning and have some decent resources/support.

They really try.

There's a stigma surrounding the Mississippi schools. They are considered inferior and they don't get much respect in the southeast.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Especially when the standings have such wide variance in quality.

The SEC West is superior to the Big 10 West. Anybody pointing to Northwestern’s record any Fitzgerald and saying, “so that means NW was a better program during that time than this middle SEC program” is just being purposely done. That middle SEC program would rape the Big 10 West.

Yeah, good call - The Big Ten West should be Exhibit A as to why competition matters. Iowa just won ten games while setting the game of football back to the 1800s.

And Purdue has had 8 draft picks the past two years. Guess what? That ain't making me change my mind, either! Purdue still blows.

 

[BTisinDC]

I've saying this for the longest time. Most of the models used by the people who matter are very similar to the one on the original post. Trust me. They look at the entire university when considering membership.

Pitt is looked at much more favorably outside of Pittsburgh than you'll ever know. Recruits outside of Pittsburgh see Pitt in a much different light as well.

And yet we barely squeaked into the ACC.

 

[pittmeister]

And yet we barely squeaked into the ACC.

If you recall, the ACC took Miami and BC for TV market. VT got in because the Governor of VA got involved.

 

[WillyDavis33]

Especially when the standings have such wide variance in quality.

The SEC West is superior to the Big 10 West. Anybody pointing to Northwestern’s record under Fitzgerald and saying, “so that means NW was a better program during that time than this middle SEC program” is just being purposely dumb. That middle SEC program would rape the Big 10 West.

“rape”?

Yeah you must be a Ped stater

 

[Parkview57]

In what universe is that top tier?

That's right....... Universe? They're not even top tier in their own state, maybe even their own county.

 

[NCPitt]

The year mentioned above Auburn went 9-4, they finished 9th in F+ analytic rankings at the end of year. They were a top 10 power team.

Their regular season losses:

9th ranked UF.
2nd ranked LSU (actual NC winner)
5th ranked UGA.

They beat PAC 12 Champion Oregon to open the season.

In any other conference, 2019 Auburn is probably a playoff team. In the SEC they are a 9 win regular season team.

That is now ancient history. Pitt won 10 games much more recently than Auburn.

 

[NCPitt]

Yeah, I don't know why people are going by the standings when valuing these programs; that's kind of absurd. If that mattered, Baylor wouldn't still be in the Big 12 (six double digit win seasons out of the last 13). But, as it stands, no one in their right mind would consider Baylor to be a more valuable than, say, Tennessee... which only had one double digit win season in that time.

If Wake Forest goes 11-1 the next five years and Florida goes 1-11 the next five years, those programs still aren't even close to each other.

I don't see anyone suggesting Cincinnati is more valuable than Pitt. Wonder why... they have more wins lately and beat us last time we played! Lol

Can I remind you and others that the football program was only one element in the valuation. Yet y'all are arguing only about football.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Can I remind you and others that the football program was only one element in the valuation. Yet y'all are arguing only about football.

Not only that, but the numbers this guy comes up with are absolutely absurd.

If you don't believe me, he has the most attractive school in the ACC for realignment (not counting Notre Dame, because they aren't in the ACC in the most important sport) as, of course, not Florida State, not Clemson, but Stanford. No, really, Stanford. Just look. He also says that the fourth most attractive school isn't North Carolina or Miami, it's Cal.

I will now pause here long enough for everyone to stop laughing.

OK, hopefully you are all back with me now. Do we remember the round of realignment that just happened? Well according to this guy, once USC and UCLA left the PAC12, the most attractive school left in the conference was Stanford. And other than Washington, none of the others were even close. And then after Washington, the third most attractive school was Cal. They weren't just way more attractive than Oregon, they were also way more attractive than Utah and Arizona State and Arizona and Colorado.

And yet somehow, it the real, actual realignment that happened, all six of those schools were way more attractive than Stanford and Cal. I mean the Big Ten never gave the two of them a second thought. The Big 12 was way more interested in the four that they got (although that feeling was probably mutual).

When you make up a ranking system like this and the results that you come up with are so far off of what we just saw happen in real life, you probably ought to completely rethink your model before you put it out to the public.

 

[Las Panteras]

Auburn played for a national title since Cam. They were the SEC title game away from the playoffs just a few years ago.

What are you talking about?

Dont bother Cash

This guy is clueless

 

[Las Panteras]

Arkansas has the power of NIL and two of the largest companies in the world in their home state....with thousands of homegrown Arkansas fans working there.

I would not dismiss Arkansas. True the results are not strong, but the financial backers are.

As for Pitt, our new Chancellor will make a solid pitch to her Big 10 pals. It may not be enough to get us in, but it is a poker chip we have that other schools do not.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

Arkansas has the power of NIL and two of the largest companies in the world in their home state....with thousands of homegrown Arkansas fans working there.

I would not dismiss Arkansas. True the results are not strong, but the financial backers are.

As for Pitt, our new Chancellor will make a solid pitch to her Big 10 pals. It may not be enough to get us in, but it is a poker chip we have that other schools do not.

What are they waiting for? They have a sub .500 overall record over the last 12 years.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Not only that, but the numbers this guy comes up with are absolutely absurd.

If you don't believe me, he has the most attractive school in the ACC for realignment (not counting Notre Dame, because they aren't in the ACC in the most important sport) as, of course, not Florida State, not Clemson, but Stanford. No, really, Stanford. Just look. He also says that the fourth most attractive school isn't North Carolina or Miami, it's Cal.

I will now pause here long enough for everyone to stop laughing.

OK, hopefully you are all back with me now. Do we remember the round of realignment that just happened? Well according to this guy, once USC and UCLA left the PAC12, the most attractive school left in the conference was Stanford. And other than Washington, none of the others were even close. And then after Washington, the third most attractive school was Cal. They weren't just way more attractive than Oregon, they were also way more attractive than Utah and Arizona State and Arizona and Colorado.

And yet somehow, it the real, actual realignment that happened, all six of those schools were way more attractive than Stanford and Cal. I mean the Big Ten never gave the two of them a second thought. The Big 12 was way more interested in the four that they got (although that feeling was probably mutual).

When you make up a ranking system like this and the results that you come up with are so far off of what we just saw happen in real life, you probably ought to completely rethink your model before you put it out to the public.

But, just like when Big Game Boomer Sooner will release his rankings of strength and conditioning coaches' wives' hotness - or some similarly ridiculous list that would be almost impossible to quantify - it tells some people what they want to hear, so it'll make its rounds.

 

[Conemaugh]

I've saying this for the longest time. Most of the models used by the people who matter are very similar to the one on the original post. Trust me. They look at the entire university when considering membership.

Pitt is looked at much more favorably outside of Pittsburgh than you'll ever know. Recruits outside of Pittsburgh see Pitt in a much different light as well.

Couldn't agree more after spending the better part of a decade in SEC country (Georgia/ South Carolina).

 

[NCPitt]

Not only that, but the numbers this guy comes up with are absolutely absurd.

If you don't believe me, he has the most attractive school in the ACC for realignment (not counting Notre Dame, because they aren't in the ACC in the most important sport) as, of course, not Florida State, not Clemson, but Stanford. No, really, Stanford. Just look. He also says that the fourth most attractive school isn't North Carolina or Miami, it's Cal.

I will now pause here long enough for everyone to stop laughing.

OK, hopefully you are all back with me now. Do we remember the round of realignment that just happened? Well according to this guy, once USC and UCLA left the PAC12, the most attractive school left in the conference was Stanford. And other than Washington, none of the others were even close. And then after Washington, the third most attractive school was Cal. They weren't just way more attractive than Oregon, they were also way more attractive than Utah and Arizona State and Arizona and Colorado.

And yet somehow, it the real, actual realignment that happened, all six of those schools were way more attractive than Stanford and Cal. I mean the Big Ten never gave the two of them a second thought. The Big 12 was way more interested in the four that they got (although that feeling was probably mutual).

When you make up a ranking system like this and the results that you come up with are so far off of what we just saw happen in real life, you probably ought to completely rethink your model before you put it out to the public.

His opinion is just as valuable as yours. Probably more since he is being discussed. Your disagreement doesn't make him wrong.

 

[cashisking884]

That is now ancient history. Pitt won 10 games much more recently than Auburn.

Ancient history? Bo Nix was the QB of the Auburn team that was a game away from the playoffs. Bo Nix was still playing football last season.

And you’re too hung up on comparing their records. Once again: they don’t play the same schedule.

The 10 win Pitt team finished 19th in F+’s analytic power rankings. The 5-7 Auburn team that year finished 24th. Regular season Losses included:

22nd Penn State
1st UGA
8 Texas A&M
2nd Bama

Their wins included:

11th Ole Miss
16th Arkansas

Their 2021 regular season schedule involved SIX teams the analytics ranked in the Top 25. That’s half the schedule. With 4 being in the Top 11.

For reference, Pitt’s regular season had two:

17th ranked Tenn
18th ranked Clemson

So the highest ranking team on Pitt’s 2021 schedule would have been the 6th best team on 2021 Auburn’s.

That’s my point. You can be a Top 25 program in the SEC and just go 8-4. And that’s in good years. In down years you could be looking at a losing record. Just because of how loaded the SEC is with top tier teams.

 

[cashisking884]

When you make up a ranking system like this and the results that you come up with are so far off of what we just saw happen in real life, you probably ought to completely rethink your model before you put it out to the public.

Yep. I cite analytic rankings a lot. I don’t think they are the alpha and omega of a discussion, but they are helpful and provide good context and a framing.

But if F+ or Kenpom or FPI produced rankings so far removed from reality, of what value would they be?

 

[ebonylover40]

Ancient history? Bo Nix was the QB of the Auburn team that was a game away from the playoffs. Bo Nix was still playing football last season.

And you’re too hung up on comparing their records. Once again: they don’t play the same schedule.

The 10 win Pitt team finished 19th in F+’s analytic power rankings. The 5-7 Auburn team that year finished 24th. Regular season Losses included:

22nd Penn State
1st UGA
8 Texas A&M
2nd Bama

Their wins included:

11th Ole Miss
16th Arkansas

Their 2021 regular season schedule involved SIX teams the analytics ranked in the Top 25. That’s half the schedule. With 4 being in the Top 11.

For reference, Pitt’s regular season had two:

17th ranked Tenn
18th ranked Clemson

So the highest ranking team on Pitt’s 2021 schedule would have been the 6th best team on 2021 Auburn’s.

That’s my point. You can be a Top 25 program in the SEC and just go 8-4. And that’s in good years. In down years you could be looking at a losing record. Just because of how loaded the SEC is with top tier teams.

And you know what Cash? If that was Pitt you would crucify them for that. That is the problem with so called Pitt fans, all they do is look for ways to say Pitt doesnt belong. And everytime someone points out Pitt has done somewhat the same, these fans change to another reason. Auburn is not relevant, Bo Nix did no go to the championship and neither did KP and Pitt. But instead of you acknowledging that, you go to who they played.

These fans try way to hard to prove Pitts unworthiness. It feels like you all want it to be so, because if not, then you all have nothing else to brag about.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

And you know what Cash? If that was Pitt you would crucify them for that. That is the problem with so called Pitt fans, all they do is look for ways to say Pitt doesnt belong. And everytime someone points out Pitt has done somewhat the same, these fans change to another reason. Auburn is not relevant, Bo Nix did no go to the championship and neither did KP and Pitt. But instead of you acknowledging that, you go to who they played.

These fans try way too hard to prove Pitts unworthiness. It feels like you all want it to be so, because if not, then you all have nothing else to brag about.

A lot of the people on here aren’t even Pitt fans.

 

[Panthergrowl13]

Anyone who believes Pitt is above Auburn, Ole Miss, Kentucky, and Arkansas needs their head examined.

They come from low population states.

Pennsylvania: 13 million
Alabama: 5 million
Kentucky: 4.5 million
Arkansas: 3.0 million
Mississippi: 2.9 million

This is also factored into the model.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

They come from low population states.

Pennsylvania: 13 million
Alabama: 5 million
Kentucky: 4.5 million
Arkansas: 3.0 million
Mississippi: 2.9 million

This is also factored into the model.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

Then it's a bad model. This isn't 2009.

 

[Panthergrowl13]

Then it's a bad model. This isn't 2009.

So you say.

I say it is a good model.

The numbers are the numbers.

There you go.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

 

[chirurgo]

Anyone who believes Pitt is above Auburn, Ole Miss, Kentucky, and Arkansas needs their head examined.

It’s a matter of perspective. Where we sit as Pitt fans, certainly your statement is valid. But when you dive into his metrics it’s not so black and white.

The institutions reputation is higher than all of those you mentioned. The media market is also higher. The basketball reputation is historically higher and likely will again remain higher than all of them except Kentucky(football compared to Kentucky maybe a wash).

I like the analysis. It’s not perfect because there are flaws in the metrics, namely only using US News as an academic reputation score(which favors Pitt because of research prowess and academic standards).

I think the SEC and B1G will look at this and perhaps expand upon in it with additional metrics. It appears to be reasonably open-sourced. They would be foolish not to. As the conferences get bigger and bloated I think they will more carefully analyze schools for membership with a more wholistic approach like this rather than solely media market. Case in point is the B1G taking Rutgers and Maryland which without any data to support I continue to be baffled by how this really added significant revenue or strength to their conference.

 

[OhioPittFan]

What I’m not sure of is there more value in say a Pitt vs Miss St or Auburn to the SEC if the SEC already has Ole Miss and Bama in each of those states. Basically if you cut the duplicated teams in a state - Vandy, Miss St and Auburn and replaced with UNC, Va Tech, and Pitt, is that a more valuable SEC? I kind of feel like Yes.

Or for B1G replace Purdue, NW, and Mich St with UNC, VT and Louisville. Would that not bring more value?

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

It’s a matter of perspective. Where we sit as Pitt fans, certainly your statement is valid. But when you dive into his metrics it’s not so black and white.

The institutions reputation is higher than all of those you mentioned. The media market is also higher. The basketball reputation is historically higher and likely will again remain higher than all of them except Kentucky(football compared to Kentucky maybe a wash).

I like the analysis. It’s not perfect because there are flaws in the metrics, namely only using US News as an academic reputation score(which favors Pitt because of research prowess and academic standards).

I think the SEC and B1G will look at this and perhaps expand upon in it with additional metrics. It appears to be reasonably open-sourced. They would be foolish not to. As the conferences get bigger and bloated I think they will more carefully analyze schools for membership with a more wholistic approach like this rather than solely media market. Case in point is the B1G taking Rutgers and Maryland which without any data to support I continue to be baffled by how this really added significant revenue or strength to their conference.

No, Pitt basketball is not historically stronger than those schools. We had a ten year period that was the exception, not the rule.

When Rutgers was added, every cable subscriber in that market had the Big Ten Network added to their cable package, and I believe the conference received $1 for each of those. Now, we're heading toward a streaming model that will make market size much more irrelevant.

I'm not dogging Pitt; this list just doesn't live in reality. As Joe said above, it has freaking Stanford and Cal ranked above schools that were *actually* given bids to the big two. How does that not just completely powerslam the credibility of this list through the mat?

 

[pittmeister]

Couldn't agree more after spending the better part of a decade in SEC country (Georgia/ South Carolina).

I've lived in Texas, The Carolinas, Tennessee and they all say nothing but positive things about Pitt. The people that have visited Pittsburgh, love it.

 

[pittmeister]

A lot of the people on here aren’t even Pitt fans.

THIS!

 

[WillyDavis33]

THIS!

I used to feel bad that their lives are that bad that they hang on the Pitt site even though they are not Pitt fans, now I just think they are pathetic losers!

 

[Panthergrowl13]

Other positive things about Pitt that MOST schools in the SEC or B1G can't claim:

Major Research University with $1.16 Billion in yearly sponsored Research.
US News Global University Ranking #45.
Endowment: $5.5 Billion

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

 

[pittmeister]

I used to feel bad that their lives are that bad that they hang on the Pitt site even though they are not Pitt fans, now I just think they are pathetic losers!

The negativity is a reflection of what they hear in Pittsburgh from the gym teachers, the media, grads and fans of other schools in the area.

This is why trying to get top local kids to Pitt is almost impossible. They hear it and believe it. Pitt fans start to believe it.

People who have not lived in the area for awhile, go elsewhere and find out that Pitt is thought of in a different light. Look at recruiting. Most of Pitt's better players come from different areas of the country. They are not jaded by the local buffoons.

 

[pittmeister]

Other positive things about Pitt that MOST schools in the SEC or B1G can't claim:

Major Research University with $1.16 Billion in yearly sponsored Research.
US News Global University Ranking #45.
Endowment: $5.5 Billion

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

When membership is considered, those play a part.

Football fortunes come and go. All the members in the SEC aren't going to win 10 games and a major bowl game every year. The current members of a conference want to know what else do you bring to the table? It's part of the package.

The ACC and Big 12 may merge and Pitt might become part of it. But don't count them out from getting a better situation.

 

[ChiefJusticeMarshall]

Not only that, but the numbers this guy comes up with are absolutely absurd.

If you don't believe me, he has the most attractive school in the ACC for realignment (not counting Notre Dame, because they aren't in the ACC in the most important sport) as, of course, not Florida State, not Clemson, but Stanford. No, really, Stanford. Just look. He also says that the fourth most attractive school isn't North Carolina or Miami, it's Cal.

I will now pause here long enough for everyone to stop laughing.

OK, hopefully you are all back with me now. Do we remember the round of realignment that just happened? Well according to this guy, once USC and UCLA left the PAC12, the most attractive school left in the conference was Stanford. And other than Washington, none of the others were even close. And then after Washington, the third most attractive school was Cal. They weren't just way more attractive than Oregon, they were also way more attractive than Utah and Arizona State and Arizona and Colorado.

And yet somehow, it the real, actual realignment that happened, all six of those schools were way more attractive than Stanford and Cal. I mean the Big Ten never gave the two of them a second thought. The Big 12 was way more interested in the four that they got (although that feeling was probably mutual).

When you make up a ranking system like this and the results that you come up with are so far off of what we just saw happen in real life, you probably ought to completely rethink your model before you put it out to the public.

That was my point above.

 

[CrazyPaco]

Other positive things about Pitt that MOST schools in the SEC or B1G can't claim:

Major Research University with $1.16 Billion in yearly sponsored Research.
US News Global University Ranking #45.
Endowment: $5.5 Billion

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

Academic rankings and stats are something to be proud of as Pitt alumni, but at the end of the day, it is about the athletic money a school can bring to a conference. Good academic metrics may be easier to get Big 10 conference presidents to vote on a school the ADs want to add, but that is about it, and you have to be brought up for a vote first. Such stats aren't going to get you brought up for a vote with athletic conference because they have zero effect on the bottom line. If they did, Stanford would be in the B10 right now.

The only things fans can do to make a difference is attend football, bring friends to football, and give money to either or both the athletic department or Alliance 412.

 

[CrazyPaco]

When membership is considered, those play a part.

Football fortunes come and go. All the members in the SEC aren't going to win 10 games and a major bowl game every year. The current members of a conference want to know what else do you bring to the table? It's part of the package.

The ACC and Big 12 may merge and Pitt might become part of it. But don't count them out from getting a better situation.

And what does Pitt's research expenditures bring to "the package" for the SEC?

Is ESPN going to start broadcasting journal clubs?

 

[Panthergrowl13]

And what does Pitt's research expenditures bring to "the package" for the SEC?

Is ESPN going to start broadcasting journal clubs?

Paco

On another thread (UNC Bot chair) I commented on Pitt and the SEC without bringing up Research Expenditures.

Not saying Pitt or SEC would come together but they would "fit".

HAIL TO PITT!!!!!

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Your disagreement doesn't make him wrong.

It's not my disagreement that makes him wrong. It's the fact that the conclusions that he has come to are completely different than we just saw play out in real life.

If you have choice between believing a model that someone came up with on their own or what has actually happened in real life, pick real life every time.

 

[pittmeister]

And what does Pitt's research expenditures bring to "the package" for the SEC?

Is ESPN going to start broadcasting journal clubs?

The people running these academic institutions are snobs. They want to associate with schools and members that fit their little slice of heaven. If that was the only criteria, schools like WVU & Louisville would have been chosen before Syracuse and Pitt for the ACC.

The old fossils have the last say as to what schools can be included. When a list of schools come out from any other source other than a sports media type, Pitt is included.