• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

P5 Bias

Paramus

Paramus

Travel Squad
5 Year Member
In the 1960's, very few thought the AFL teams had a chance against the NFL teams. Everyone thought the NFL teams were too big and powerful for the flashy, innovative AFL teams. The NFL teams had all the 4 and 5 star CF players while the AFL had to work with what was left (just like P5 versus G5 today).

But then the Jets beat the Colts and the Chiefs beat the Vikings (super bowls 3 & 4). The unfounded perception (bias) against the AFL teams was put to rest and the two leagues merged.

Is there a similar bias between the P5 and the G5? There appears to be.

Check this out...

Wins vs. College Football Playoff Top 25:

-UCF: 1 (beat #22 Memphis 40-13)
-Wisconsin: 1 (beat #25 northwestern 33-24)

Wins vs. teams with winning records:

-UCF: 4 (FIU, Memphis, Navy, SMU)
-Wisconsin: 2 (FAU, Northwestern)

Games vs. common opponent:

-UCF 38-10 at Maryland
-Wisconsin 38-13 vs. Maryland at Camp Randall.

(Maryland's 3rd string QB, Bortenschlager, played in both games)

College Football Poll rank:

-UCF #18
-Wisconsin #8


friday.gif
 
Last edited:

Preseason top 25 poll

Wisc. 13
UCF NA

Seems to me they are both moving up at the same rate, though UCF may actually be moving up faster and farther. So I don't see a bias there.
 
Hard to make an analysis just comparing 1 team from each group. I’d increase your sample size and compare again.
 



not being picky, but don't remember star ratings in the 1960's
 
inthedeed said:
not being picky, but don't remember star ratings in the 1960's
Click to expand...

And there have NEVER been star ratings for College Football (CF) players...only HS football players get those. Therefore you should have understood that I was using 4 & 5 star CF players to the NFL as a metaphor to mean that "the very best" CF players went to the NFL in the 60's, and not to the AFL.

attachment.php
 
Last edited:
The difference between P5 and G5 is resources. That’s pretty much it. Tradition is also a factor for many, but if things were reshuffled tomorrow, some G5 would get moved up and some P5 would move down if one was basing on tradition alone.
 




Nehunter88 said:
Preseason top 25 poll

Wisc. 13
UCF NA

Seems to me they are both moving up at the same rate, though UCF may actually be moving up faster and farther. So I don't see a bias there.
Click to expand...


You don't get it. The college football poll (CFP) does not have any pre-season ranking that teams move up or down like the AP and coaches polls. The CFP does not have any pre-conceived notion about who will be the best teams at the beginning of each season.

The CFP does not start ranking teams until they have played 7 to 9 games and built a resume....and the CFP's job is to find the best 4 teams based on those resumes.

UCF's resume is as good or better than Wisconsin's and yet they are ranked 10 spots lower. It can't be because UCF started lower in the CFP pre-season poll because the CFP doesn't have one.

The only reason I can think of is P5 bias. Can you think of a better reason?

Do you think Wisconsin is better than UCF? If so, what would you base it on? Membership in the Big 10? Because the beat Nebraska?
 
Last edited:
Both Wisconsin and UCF have their biggest tests ahead of them. UCF appears to be a pretty good team this season. That being said, going through a P5 schedule unscathed will always carry more weight than going through a pack of mid majors with a P5 school or two thrown in. It’s why Scott Frost will be coaching elsewhere next season.
 
There is always going to be some bias in favor of P5 schools. They are seen as having faced stronger competition. I would argue that strength of schedule is a flawed stat. According to this site, UCF is ranked 118 for SOS while UW is 92. The resume SP+ is even more telling, Alabama is 14.1, ND is 9.0, Georgia is 8.1, PSU is 8.0 and UCF is 5.8. It is difficult to argue that UCF should be in the CFP.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-fo...otball-strength-of-schedule-rankings-2017-sos
 
I hope UCF wins out and gets to play in a major bowl against a top P5 team.....
 



BigRedAvenger said:
Both Wisconsin and UCF have their biggest tests ahead of them. UCF appears to be a pretty good team this season. That being said, going through a P5 schedule unscathed will always carry more weight than going through a pack of mid majors with a P5 school or two thrown in. It’s why Scott Frost will be coaching elsewhere next season.
Click to expand...


Perfect example of P5 bias. You think all FBS teams have to play P5 teams to prove themselves.

You can't prove that Wisconsin has played a tougher schedule than UCF. Playing UCF's schedule, Wisconsin might have losses to Memphis and Navy.
 
Last edited:
BHELHusker said:
There is always going to be some bias in favor of P5 schools. They are seen as having faced stronger competition. I would argue that strength of schedule is a flawed stat. According to this site, UCF is ranked 118 for SOS while UW is 92. The resume SP+ is even more telling, Alabama is 14.1, ND is 9.0, Georgia is 8.1, PSU is 8.0 and UCF is 5.8. It is difficult to argue that UCF should be in the CFP.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-fo...otball-strength-of-schedule-rankings-2017-sos
Click to expand...

Ouch they have NU at 72. We’re not even in the top half anymore.
 

Paramus said:
Perfect example of P5 bias. You think all FBS teams have to play P5 teams to prove themselves.

You can't prove that Wisconsin has played a tougher schedule than UCF. Playing UCF's schedule, Wisconsin might have losses to Memphis and Navy.
Click to expand...

That’s just life. Playing a typical P5 schedule will result in a higher SOS
than playing a G5 schedule. It’s not bias, it’s just fact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top