2007: Pythagorean Wins Revisited

If you have read my writings for any considerable amount of time, you are probably familiar with the concept of Pythagorean Wins. If not, though, click here for a quick refresher on the concept.

After I ran the Pythagorean Projections for the 2006 season, five teams stood out. Florida, Kentucky, and Auburn were all overachievers, and thus we should have expected a decline in performance, and Vanderbilt and South Carolina where underachievers, thus we should have expected an increase in their performance. So, given those projections, let's review and see how those teams really performed in 2007 given to what was expected from their 2006 Pythagorean Projections.

Florida: The Gators won the SEC and national championship in 2006 after going 12-1, and 7-1 in conference play, but did so despite having only 5.55 Pythagorean Wins in conference play. Coming into the 2007 season, the big question mark was Tim Tebow and the Florida defense that returned only two starters. Despite Tebow winning the Heisman and having one of the greatest years in the history of college football, Florida could not come near replicating its successes of 2006. They fell to 9-3 overall, 5-3 in conference play, and finished third in the SEC East.

Auburn: The Tigers went 11-2 in 2006, and finished second in the SEC West (6-2), despite only having 4.92 Pythagorean Wins. They won every close game they played in, and the two losses came as blowouts. A decline in performance should have been rationally expected, and I went on record saying that they would experience their worst season since 2003. No surprise, that is exactly what happened, as Auburn fell to 8-4 and 5-3 in SEC play.

Kentucky: The Wildcats were a relatively big overachiever in 2006, going 4-4 in conference play despite only having 2.9 Pythagorean Wins. In 2007 they returned Andre Woodson and a host of other key skill position players, but they actually fell to 3-5 in conference play. The overall record (8-5) will be the same if they beat a Florida State team down 34 players in the Music City Bowl, but the fact that they are possibly going to remain at the same level on the overall record is a testament mainly to the collapse of Louisville and Florida State. Despite returning the best Kentucky quarterback since the days of Bear Bryant, the Wildcats couldn't improve, nor could they meet the standards they set a year ago. The only positive difference between this year and last is that they somehow, someway, beat LSU. Aside from that single game, all signs point to a decline.

Vanderbilt: The 'Dores were very much in the SEC cellar in 2006, but nevertheless was an underachiever at 1-7 with 2.02 Pythagorean Wins. Improvement was to be expected, and it came, albeit only slightly. Vanderbilt improved to 5-7, 2-6 in the SEC, and came this close to making their first bowl game in over twenty years.

South Carolina: The Gamecocks were the only team to have bucked their prediction of an improvement in performance in 2007. South Carolina only went 3-5 in SEC play in 2006, but had 4.37 Pythagorean Wins. Improvement was to be expected, and it was seemingly coming after a hot start, but nevertheless they collapsed late. Granted their conference record didn't regress, they were 3-5 in both years, but their overall record fell from 8-5 to 6-6. That said, however, South Carolina arguably fits right in. The teams that buck their prediction generally have a lot of things fall right into place, or have a lot of things go wrong, and South Carolina was certainly an example of the latter. Their head coach is arguably well past his prime, they had an incredibly tough schedule (according to the Sagarin Ratings, the eighth toughest schedule in the country and the toughest in the SEC), turnover at the quarterback position, and several key injuries on defense.

So, all told, with one notable exception, Pythagorean Projections pretty much pegged things again in 2007.

I'll have some more stuff coming on Pythagorean Wins in the next couple of days.

X
Log In Sign Up

forgot?
Log In Sign Up

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior users will need to choose a permanent username, along with a new password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

I already have a Vox Media account!

Verify Vox Media account

Please login to your Vox Media account. This account will be linked to your previously existing Eater account.

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior MT authors will need to choose a new username and password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

Join Roll 'Bama Roll

You must be a member of Roll 'Bama Roll to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Roll 'Bama Roll. You should read them.

Join Roll 'Bama Roll

You must be a member of Roll 'Bama Roll to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Roll 'Bama Roll. You should read them.

Spinner.vc97ec6e

Authenticating

Great!

Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.

tracking_pixel_9341_tracker