Binary Spread Record: Under-Performing

Last week, I discussed a new statistic I dubbed a team’s Binary Spread Record. This simple to calculate measure looks at how many games a team won relative to its expected records based on the betting line. Instead of using a probabilistic look, which is arguably a better choice, I used a quick and easy to calculate measure that only looked at whether or not a team ‘should’ have won their game regardless of if they were favored by two or twenty points. Using this method, I identified a few teams that exceeded their spread record by at least three games in 2017 and were thus a decent bet to see their won total decrease in 2018. This week, I want to look at the opposite. What teams under-performed their Binary Spread Record by at least three games in 2017?

Let’s start by looking at the schedule breakdown of a team that significantly under-performed in 2017: the Miami of Ohio Redhawks.

The Redhawks lost five times as a favorite in 2017! To be fair, several of their losses occurred when they were small favorites (Marshall and Eastern Michigan specifically), but the Redhawks were underdogs in just three games last season. Even with Notre Dame on the schedule, a MAC title and double-digit wins were certainly within reach.

Before we access how teams that similarly under-performed like the Redhawks fared the next season, let’s look at another team that failed to meet expectations in 2017, but does not qualify for this list.

The Florida Gators only missed their binary spread record by two games despite finishing just 4-7. The Gators certainly underachieved, but by the time November rolled around, the betting line had caught up (or down) to them. Vegas knew they were a dumpster fire and reacted accordingly. The Gators were underdogs in their final four games against Power Five competition, and in their lone turn as a favorite after mid-October, they blew out UAB.

I looked at every team from the previous three seasons (2014-2016) that under-perfumed relative to their binary spread record by at least three games. I then looked at how much their win total changed the next season. The results are listed below.

83% of the teams that under-performed their Binary Spread Record improved the following season with the average team improving by more than two whole wins! In addition, only three teams saw a decline in their fortunes the following season.

So which teams are prime candidates for improvement in 2018? As promised, here is a listing of every team from 2017 that under-performed their binary spread record by at least three games. This doesn’t guarantee improvement, but most of the teams on this list will see their win total improve.