header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages

 (Read 4549 times)

medinabuckeye1

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5610
  • Liked:
I started with 1927 so the first 10-year winning percentage is 1927-1936 and the most recent is 2010-2019.  

First, here are their best 10-year winning percentages:

Note that each school only gets one entry.  Ie, Oklahoma's 0.9245 is for both 1948-1957 and 1949-1958 (the Sooners went 10-1 in both 1948 and 1958 so when you eliminate 1948 and add 1958 nothing changes).  The next best 10-year winning percentage is Oklahoma's from 1947-1956 (0.9095).  Alabama's 0.9071 (2009-2018) is fourth.  Those are the only 10-year winning percentages over 0.900 (three for OU, one for Bama).  

Here they are sorted by their worst 10-year winning percentage:


We have talked before about Ohio State being the "Steady Eddie" as one of the Bama fans called them.  They sure are, Ohio State is pretty mediocre in the "best" category but they are WAY ahead in the "worst" category.  The Buckeye's worst 10-year winning percentage (0.6319 for 1943-1952) is farther ahead of USC than USC is ahead of seventh place Michigan.  

Here I have ranked them by the difference between their best 10-years and their worst 10-years:

medinabuckeye1

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5610
  • Liked:
Re: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages
« Reply #1 on: April 07, 2020, 03:03:38 PM »
Here it is as a chart.  

The way this works:
The first dots at the left are for 1936 which is the 10 years from 1927-1936.  The best for that period was Tennessee at 0.8316 with Alabama just behind at 0.8105.  

The next dots to the right of those are for the next 10-year period, 1928-1937 (ie, 1927 is removed and 1937 is added).  In the second group Alabama passes Tennessee.  For 1928-1937 Alabama is at 0.8474 while Tennessee is behind them at 0.8030.  

Note that nearly all of the "Helmets" are near or above .800 from about 1967-1976 to about 1974-1983.  The exceptions are:

  • Tennessee:  The Volunteers were in that range not long before but then just collapsed as the 1970's wore on.  
  • LSU:  A questionable "helmet".  
  • Clemson:  A questionable "helmet".  
  • The three Florida Schools:  Obviously not helmets yet at least at that time.  

It is pretty hard to follow this with so many on the chart so I'll break it into three charts of five teams for easier visibility.  


medinabuckeye1

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5610
  • Liked:
Re: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages
« Reply #2 on: April 07, 2020, 03:30:10 PM »

These are the five schools that haven't had a 10-year period below .500.  

Ohio State:
As we have discussed previously, the steadiest of the group.  They are rarely the best, only barely getting above 0.8500 in the most recent 10-years (2010-2019) but they are also never really bad either.  Their best is the current 10-year period, 0.8537 from 2010-2019 while their worst was 0.6319 from 1943-1952.  

USC:
USC's peaks are actually lower than even Ohio State's.  That is partially due to vacated wins from the PC era.  Nonetheless, their best 10-year period was 0.8333 from 1972-1981 while their worst was 0.5542 from 1991-2000.  

Oklahoma:
As I noted in the OP, the Sooners have three of the four 10-year periods over .900.  They managed that for 1947-1956 (0.9095), and 1948-1957 and 1949-1958 (both 0.9245).  They were also extremely close for 1950-1959 (0.8952) and 1971-1980 (0.8983).  They do, however, have lower lows than the Buckeyes or Trojans.  They were barely over .500 for the first few cycles (their worst was 0.51112 for 1927-1936), then they sank to barely over 0.600 for the 1960's and to below 0.550 for the 1990's.  

Texas:
The Longhorns have three distinct peaks:  48-53, 66-79, and 2009 (meaning the 10-year cycles then ended).  Aside from those, there is a surprising amount of mediocrity in Texas' history and their current trend is troubling to say the least.  Their best 10-year cycle was 2000-2009 (0.8527) while their worst was 1931-1940 (0.5103).  

Notre Dame:
If you ever wonder why some people question Notre Dame's Helmet status today, look at this chart.  They were great in the 1970's when nearly all the helmets were but since then it has been rough going.  They had a brief peak (0.7934 from 1887-1996) and two prolonged valleys bottoming out at 0.600 from 1978-1987 and barely over .500 for 2007-2016.  Their best 10-year cycle was 0.8763 in the 1940's while their worst was the aforementioned 0.5094 from 2007-2016.  

CWSooner

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 5257
  • Liked:
Re: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages
« Reply #3 on: April 07, 2020, 03:52:21 PM »
Good stuff, Medina.  Very interesting way of showing something very different from individual season highs and lows.
Play Like a Champion Today

Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 53050
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages
« Reply #4 on: April 07, 2020, 03:54:05 PM »
Some of the stuff on this site is far beyond ANYTHING you can see on ESPiN.

medinabuckeye1

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5610
  • Liked:
Re: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages
« Reply #5 on: April 07, 2020, 04:02:55 PM »

These five schools have each had a 10-year cycle below .500 but only barely and, in Michigan's case, only one.  

Tennessee:
The best 10 years for the Volunteers was 0.8548 from 1937-1946 while their worst were 0.496 for 2008-2017 and 2009-2018.  Their helmet status gets questioned because there is an awful lot of mediocrity in their history.  

Michigan:
The first thing that I want to point out here is that I think Bo Schembechler's achievements in Ann Arbor are often under-appreciated even by a lot of Michigan fans.  IMHO, when Bo took over in 1969 Michigan was well on their way to becoming another Minnesota.  From 1958-1967 the Wolverines were below .500 overall (0.4947, their worst cycle) and they hadn't been elite over a 10-year period in decades.  Schembechler came in, took over, and took them to heights that few programs have ever seen (0.8553 in his first ten years from 1969-1978).  Even Bo himself couldn't quite maintain THAT, but the program stayed close to or above 0.7500 all the way up until the RRod debacle.  

LSU:
As I said above, I just don't think LSU is a helmet.  In entering their records I noticed that their NC seasons just seem like complete out-of-the-wilderness flukes.  They won the NC in 1958 but for the 10-years immediately prior to that (1948-1957) they were sub .500.  That was their worst 10-year cycle (0.4762) but they were also below .500 the year prior to that and again in the 1990's.  Their best ever was 0.8106 from 2003-2012.  I don't think this adds up to the Tigers as a helmet.  I think they are a generally pretty solid team that periodically jumps up and is phenomenal (1958, 2003, 2019) or phenomenally lucky (2007).  

Alabama:
I was surprised in compiling this that for all of their soaring accomplishments at the high end, the Tide have had two significant valleys.  They touched 0.500 in the 1950's (0.500 from 1949-1958) and fell below it not long ago (0.4811 from 1997-2006 and 0.4757 from 1998-2007).  On the opposite side of things, their best (0.9071 from 2009-2018) is one of the four best 10-year cycles ever and they were also had peaks of 0.85+ in the 30's, 60's, and 70's.  

Florida State:
This is the only school on the whole list that started playing football after 1927.  Thus, the question for the Seminoles is how to evaluate their lack of history.  For roughly the last four decades the Seminoles have clearly performed at a "helmet" level but prior to that their history is weak or nonexistent.  Their best 10-year cycle was 0.8911 from 1991-2000 while their worst was 0.4660 from 1952-1961.  

CWSooner

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 5257
  • Liked:
Re: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages
« Reply #6 on: April 07, 2020, 04:18:36 PM »
Quote
Michigan:

The first thing that I want to point out here is that I think Bo Schembechler's achievements in Ann Arbor are often under-appreciated even by a lot of Michigan fans.  IMHO, when Bo took over in 1969 Michigan was well on their way to becoming another Minnesota.  From 1958-1967 the Wolverines were below .500 overall (0.4947, their worst cycle) and they hadn't been elite over a 10-year period in decades.  Schembechler came in, took over, and took them to heights that few programs have ever seen (0.8553 in his first ten years from 1969-1978).  Even Bo himself couldn't quite maintain THAT, but the program stayed close to or above 0.7500 all the way up until the RRod debacle.
And Harbaugh has them on the way up.


So the question is, do they revert to their form of the previous decade, on a path to becoming another (pre-"row the boat") Minnesota or continue to improve and sustain that level of improvement?
Play Like a Champion Today

MrNubbz

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 12285
  • Liked:
Re: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages
« Reply #7 on: April 07, 2020, 04:21:33 PM »
Some of the stuff on this site is far beyond ANYTHING you can see on ESPiN.
Didn't know we were doing the Hotties thread anymore
"The longer I live, the more convinced am I that this planet is used by other planets as a lunatic asylum." - George Bernard Shaw

medinabuckeye1

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5610
  • Liked:
Re: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages
« Reply #8 on: April 07, 2020, 04:30:00 PM »

These five programs have each had at least one 10-year cycle not just below .500 but below 0.4500.  They have had BAD times.  They have also had good times or we wouldn't be talking about them in this thread, of course.  

Penn State:
The Nittany Lions' worst 10-year cycle was early, 0.4458 from 1928-1937 while their best was 0.8534 from 1968-1977.  To me, they are a helmet with an occasional downturn.  

Clemson:
As I stated previously, I just don't think of Clemson as a Helmet.  They have clearly been Helmet-like of late, but their overall history is just nowhere near the blue-bloods.  Their best 10-year cycle is the current one, 0.8357 from 2010-2019 and poised to get MUCH better when 2020 replaces 2010's pedestrian 6-7.  Their worst was 0.4159 from 1967-1976.  

Florida:
Since Steve Spurrier came back to campus as HC after previously winning the Heisman Trophy as a QB there, the Gators have been unquestionably performing at a Helmet level.  The reason that some people question their helmet status is that outside of those three decades they clearly were NOT a helmet.  Their best 10-year cycle was 0.82 in Spurrier's first 10 years from 1990-1999 and their worst was 0.3876 from 1937-1946.  

Miami, FL:
Much like the other two Florida Schools, the Hurricanes have performed at a "helmet-like" level for for many years (about 40) but prior to that they clearly were NOT a helmet.  Their best 10-year cycle was 0.8917 from 1985-1994 while their worst was 0.3738 from 1968-1977.  

Nebraska:
The Cornhuskers are one of the most interesting teams of the whole group.  In Devaney's first ten years they hit 0.8333 (1962-1971) then held at about that level all they way into the early 2000's.  That run is arguably the best ever.  The reason that their helmet status gets questioned is that basically everything else on this chart is mediocre.  Their best 10-year cycle was 0.8810 from 1992-2001, one of the best ever.  Their worst was an abysmal 0.3370 from 1942-1951, that is the worst 10-year cycle on this entire chart.  

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14299
  • Liked:
Re: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages
« Reply #9 on: April 07, 2020, 05:59:24 PM »
Yeah, looking at these, I immediately thought "HC hires."  This would be useful for an AD with a long-term eye.  Say you're UM's AD and the masses are dumping on your HC.  Look at this chart.  Do you get rid of him?  Hell no!  
Sure, he's OSU's bitch, but he's got you on an up-tick.  You ride it.
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

Brutus Buckeye

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10004
  • Liked:
Re: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages
« Reply #10 on: April 07, 2020, 07:05:48 PM »
How would it look if we were to eliminate asterisks (include all vacated wins)?
1919, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42, 44
WWH: 1952, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75
1979, 81, 82, 84, 87, 94, 98
2001, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

rolltidefan

  • Global Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 1847
  • Liked:
Re: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages
« Reply #11 on: April 07, 2020, 08:25:40 PM »
Interesting data. Pretty sure I was the steady eddy commenter from when we did a similar chart but using rankings. Osu was always among the best but rarely THE best (is that where The osu comes from?:)) while virtually everyone else had dips. Not surprised to see similar results here. 

As for bama, ears witworth and the mikes in early 00s really are the terrible periods. Maybe coincidentally they both immediately preceded arguably the 2 best coaches ever taking the bama job. 

Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 53050
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages
« Reply #12 on: April 08, 2020, 07:45:56 AM »
Clemson will be interesting after Dabo departs (which could be a while).  Do they migrate back to mediocrity or maintain a lofty standing?  Obviously it depends.

They don't have the inherent recruiting power of some programs.  It depends pretty much on their track record.  (They are not the major program in a state rich with talent like OSU and UGA.)  Like Auburn, the are proximate to such a state.


rolltidefan

  • Global Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 1847
  • Liked:
Re: The Helmets (and near helmets) rolling 10-year winning percentages
« Reply #13 on: April 08, 2020, 12:03:55 PM »
judging by virtually every other schools history after losing a good/great coach, they'll drop back to the pack at least for a while.

i could maybe see them being like lsu post saban. had some really high peaks, but also some low lows. but i think lsu did better than most do after losing a coach of that caliber. but that's probably the ceiling for clemson post dabo. and not just because it's clemson, i think that's likely the ceiling for bama post saban as well. bama might luck up and get dabo and continue the run, but in my estimation it's unlikely and not a guarantee even if they get him.

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.