Cybercat, I love statistics when used in the correct context. That is why my company uses Six Sigma as opposed to pure statistics to get a better account of defects. I wont go into what Six Sigma is as most fortune 100 companies are probably using these methods for measurements. The same philosopy holds up in sports statics.
Part of the problem is you are comparing apples and oranges in the above scenerio. The teams you compare of BCS membership and the new teams coming in will become BCS. The primary reason the ACC expanded with Big East teams was to acquire current BCS members to reach 12.
You need some additonal method to better compare the future that just assumming the teams will perform the same in requiting, exposure, etc as they did in the previous conference.
Neither of us can say for sure based on statistics that the 3 teams comming in will perform better than the 3 leaving as members of the Big East.
The other side of this arument, none of us can say for sure they will perform any worse. This is the common thinking that every uses based on current statistics to make a future prediction of how well the BE will perform.
I dont think anyone needs statistics to debate Miami performance over the last few years as this school is very predictable.
After Miami, the new and old teams are dangerous to compare statistics on how well any of them will perform or degrade in the new respective conferences.
Lash, I am well aware of Six Sigma metrics, including defects per million (DPMs). What the future holds, neither of us knows for sure. All we can do is look at the current statistics and model the numbers using our best assumptions to project the future. Using current statistics IMO is a lot better than some of recent subjective statements made on this thread: “Top to bottom the new Big East is better than the old” and “VoTech with Louisville (break even)”. I would be interested in any modeling projections that you could make, especially ones that project that the NBE will be just as strong in the future as in the past. BTW, I hope that you are right.
I disagree that the ACC took the three schools primarily because they were BCS schools. Many other factors including on the field performance, scholastics, geographic location, political pressures, and discontent with their current conference all played a major role. IMO, the ACC chose the best three schools available at the time, under their environmental constraints.