The bad news is that Georgia finished the 2016 season ranked 68th in Bill Connelly’s S&P+ rankings.
The good news is that you can make an argument that Georgia over-performed its S&P+ ranking of 68th.
Filed under Georgia Football, Stats Geek!
So we were the biggest pygmy in the village or we sucked better than the rest.
‘Sucked better’? Uhhh, oh never mind. Kinda cute actually.
Er, that means the team is worse than it’s record. ‘Overperforming’ doesn’t really make sense, since the whole point of S&P+ is that it measures performance. The words the author were looking for were ‘Luckiest’ and ‘Unluckiest’ teams. Georgia sure didn’t feel lucky this year, but they were lucky to be 8-5.
Came here to say the same thing. The advanced stats are meant to be the truer indication of team quality than wins.
Then again, it could just mean that the stats are inadequate for reflecting the strengths (or weaknesses) of last year’s team or the variation in team performance from game to game; I’d need to refresh myself on the formulas.
Our team had a lot of variation in level of play, so I’m inclined to take it more optimistically that our ceiling is higher than our average performance would have indicated.
Subscribe in a reader