Home > 2012 Season, 2012/2013 Season, College Football, ncaaf, ncaaf trends > An Analysis Of How College Football Teams Have Performed In Their First Year In A New Conference

An Analysis Of How College Football Teams Have Performed In Their First Year In A New Conference

A member of BeyondTheBets Forum asked the following question.

How have teams done historically in their first year in a new conference; especially major conferences? Missouri and TAMU have been two teams with some highly varied opinions on them.

You can find the thread here.

We thought it was an interesting question especially in light of the fact that this coming season has 12 teams either switching conferences or moving up in class.

A list of those 12 teams can be found here:

2012/2013 C-FRESNO STATE WAC MW
2012/2013 C-HAWAII WAC MW
2012/2013 C-MASSACHUSETTS CAA MAC
2012/2013 C-MISSOURI BIG 12 SEC
2012/2013 C-NEVADA WAC MW
2012/2013 C-SOUTH ALABAMA FCS INDEP SUN BELT
2012/2013 C-TCU MW BIG 12
2012/2013 C-TEMPLE MAC BIG EAST
2012/2013 C-TEXAS A&M BIG 12 SEC
2012/2013 C-TX SAN ANTONIO SOUTHLAND WAC
2012/2013 C-TEXAS STATE SOUTHLAND WAC
2012/2013 C-WEST VIRGINIA BIG EAST BIG 12

For our analysis we included teams that had either switched conferences or moved up dating back to the 2004/2005 season.  Overall there were 28 occurrences included in the study as outlined below.

SEASON TEAM FROM TO
2004/2005 C-CONNECTICUT INDEPENDENT BIG EAST
2004/2005 C-MIAMI FLORIDA BIG EAST ACC
2004/2005 C-TROY INDEPENDENT SUN BELT
2004/2005 C-VIRGINIA TECH BIG EAST ACC
2005/2006 C-ARMY USA INDEPENDENT
2005/2006 C-BOSTON COLLEGE BIG EAST ACC
2005/2006 C-CENTRAL FLORIDA MAC USA
2005/2006 C-CINCINNATI USA BIG EAST
2005/2006 C-FLA ATLANTIC D2 SUN BELT
2005/2006 C-FLA INTL D2 SUN BELT
2005/2006 C-IDAHO SUN BELT WAC
2005/2006 C-LOUISVILLE USA BIG EAST
2005/2006 C-MARSHALL MAC USA
2005/2006 C-NEW MEXICO SUN BELT WAC
2005/2006 C-RICE WAC USA
2005/2006 C-SMU WAC USA
2005/2006 C-SOUTH FLORIDA USA BIG EAST
2005/2006 C-TCU USA MW
2005/2006 C-TEMPLE BIG EAST INDEPENDENT
2005/2006 C-TULSA WAC USA
2005/2006 C-UTAH SUN BELT WAC
2005/2006 C-UTEP WAC USA
2007/2008 C-TEMPLE INDEPENDENT MAC
2011/2012 C-BOISE STATE WAC MW
2011/2012 C-BYU MW INDEPENDENT
2011/2012 C-COLORADO BIG 12 PAC 12
2011/2012 C-NEBRASKA BIG 12 BIG 10
2011/2012 C-UTAH MW PAC 12

For the purposes of the analysis we created a baseline for each team that consisted of data both pre and post their move to a new conference.

So for example if a team is showing a positive 10.5% over baseline, we are saying that in that first season the team moved to a new conference they did 10.5% better than they had during the comparative baseline period.

 

Some miscellaneous notes and observations:

  • The data is displayed in terms on Win/Loss by each team, as well as the percentage of Favorites/Dogs/Overs/Unders for each line item.
  • When Baseline data is presented for Favorites, either the team that changed conference or their opponent may have been the Favorite in a particular game.
  • The Baseline Diff  Column shows the difference between the Baseline period and either the Win/Favorite/or Over cover rates.
  • The Overall ML percentage results are somewhat skewed due to a handful of teams having terrible seasons in their first year in a new conference. For example, in 2005/2006 Rice and Temple combined for a dismal 1-21 straight up record.  So while the overall percentages were down more teams did better in their first year in a new conference than did worse against the baseline.  This is true for Conference and Non_Conference games alike.
  • ATS Win/Loss results saw no substantiate difference from the Baseline periods.
  • The only Total of note is the Under in Non-Conference games which was 7.5% more likely than the corresponding Baseline periods.
  • ATS in Conference games Dogs were +5.3% to the Baseline, and overall for 16 of the 28 teams the Dogs fared better in this role.
  • In Non-Conference games ML Favorites were 6.9% better than the Baseline period, and overall for 20 of the 28 team/seasons ML Favorites outperformed their Baseline in Non-Conference games.

In the embedded Excel workbook below, you will find the following worksheets:

  1. TOTAL_SUMMARY – SUMMARY FOR ALL 28 SITUATIONS
  2. DETAIL – DETAIL LEVEL DATA FOR ALL 28 TEAM/SEASONS

On the Excel Web App toolbar of embedded spreadsheet, if you click the right-most button, View Full Size Workbook, the entire workbook will open for viewing in a new window

We hope you find the information an asset to your handicapping and please visit our free site, GreyMatterStats, where we put this information at your fingertips.

If you find something of interest that you would like to share, please feel free to leave a comment or Tweet us @GreyMatterStats

Advertisements
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: