|
|
Post by bluehen on Nov 28, 2018 3:33:25 GMT
15 of the assorted ranking systems in the Massey composite have UCF currently ranked 5th or better ( #3 in one computer system ). Bevo, buddy, you need to contact those systems and explain how moronic that is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Nov 28, 2018 4:08:38 GMT
15 of the assorted ranking systems in the Massey composite have UCF currently ranked 5th or better ( #3 in one computer system ). Bevo, buddy, you need to contact those systems and explain how moronic that is. Why ? Not that much different from their CFP ranking |
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Nov 28, 2018 12:33:03 GMT
15 of the assorted ranking systems in the Massey composite have UCF currently ranked 5th or better ( #3 in one computer system ). Bevo, buddy, you need to contact those systems and explain how moronic that is. Why ? Not that much different from their CFP ranking Massey has UCF 8th. |
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Nov 28, 2018 13:30:01 GMT
Why ? Not that much different from their CFP ranking Massey has UCF 8th. Massey actually has 'em ranked 9th. Repeat : there are 15 systems within the Massey composite that ranks 'em 5th or higher. The MC 'average' is 8th...common knowledge |
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Nov 28, 2018 13:38:57 GMT
15 of the assorted ranking systems in the Massey composite have UCF currently ranked 5th or better ( #3 in one computer system ). Bevo, buddy, you need to contact those systems and explain how moronic that is. Why ? Not that much different from their CFP ranking You don't see a difference between 3rd and 8th ? |
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Nov 28, 2018 13:54:16 GMT
Massey actually has 'em ranked 9th. Repeat : there are 15 systems within the Massey composite that ranks 'em 5th or higher. The MC 'average' is 8th...common knowledge Fine then, so what’s the problem? |
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Nov 28, 2018 15:01:12 GMT
Why ? Not that much different from their CFP ranking You don't see a difference between 3rd and 8th ? Not particularly... no. Anyway, Massey is inclusive. Overall, they completely agree with UCF’s ranking |
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Nov 28, 2018 15:40:55 GMT
The mean for UCF is 9.09, while the median is 8.0
Perhaps more informative is the std. deviation of 4.37, the 2nd highest of any team in the top 10.
ATC has them 3rd. SO I took a look at their methodology, and it says:
The “According to Computers” rankings are based on algorithms that use game results data of the past 3 seasons.
Not much info other than that.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Nov 29, 2018 3:19:57 GMT
Massey actually has 'em ranked 9th. Repeat : there are 15 systems within the Massey composite that ranks 'em 5th or higher. The MC 'average' is 8th...common knowledge Fine then, so what’s the problem? The problem is the 15 lunatic systems that have UCF ranked 5th or higher. I think Bevo would be the right person to explain that such rankings are absurd to those people, because G5s are a different class of team.... per the topic " This needs correcting" So what's the problem with the thread's topic ?" |
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Nov 29, 2018 7:37:15 GMT
Fine then, so what’s the problem? The problem is the 15 lunatic systems that have UCF ranked 5th or higher. I think Bevo would be the right person to explain that such rankings are absurd to those people, because G5s are a different class of team.... per the topic " This needs correcting" So what's the problem with the thread's topic ?" Thanks to tiger for explaining the difference in our numbers. Looking at composites of this nature are questionable at best since the various data points are created using different rules. That said, I agree with you that some ratings have UCF unreasonably high. Sagarin does a good job. |
|
|
|
Post by doc on Nov 29, 2018 14:38:22 GMT
I looked at Massey and Sagarin yesterday - Ohio State was 4 in both and UCF was way below that.
|
|
|
|
Post by jameshowell on Nov 29, 2018 16:48:14 GMT
Some of those ratings look too heavily to record without putting the record into context of quality of opponents.
|
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Nov 29, 2018 16:51:33 GMT
Some of those ratings look too heavily to record without putting the record into context of quality of opponents. Definitely agree.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Nov 29, 2018 18:09:44 GMT
I guess I'm in charge of making sure EVERY crack pot ranking system in the world doesn't allow ANY G5 team to crack the Top4?
But, I'm the one saying ANY team... G5 or P5 has the capability of getting there.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Nov 29, 2018 20:29:04 GMT
The problem is the 15 lunatic systems that have UCF ranked 5th or higher. I think Bevo would be the right person to explain that such rankings are absurd to those people, because G5s are a different class of team.... per the topic " This needs correcting" So what's the problem with the thread's topic ?" Thanks to tiger for explaining the difference in our numbers. Looking at composites of this nature are questionable at best since the various data points are created using different rules. That said, I agree with you that some ratings have UCF unreasonably high. Sagarin does a good job. Sagarin says ND State, from the FCS Missouri Valley Conference, is the 24th strongest team in all of college football......stronger than 106 P5s. What do you think about that , Hero ? |
|
