|
Post by tigercpa on Oct 31, 2017 11:54:19 GMT
Sagarin's data. You're too hung up labels... You need to get informed, cpa. Sagarin's system is one of 88 assorted mythical systems in the Massey Rankings composite ( 1.1 %)...with no proof or guarantee that it is any more accurate than any of the others. Its all bull$hit. Anyway, since you sucked me into this moronic rankings crap ( the main problem with big time CF) I did a little research at the Massey Composite. I just compared the 3 FBS OOC opponents of Bama and UCF since most don't rank FCS and FBS together. Here's what the consensus currently says about rankings : BAMA (58.3 average ranked) -----\ FSU - 57th Fresno - 55th Col State - 63rd UCF (53.3 average ranked) ----- FIU - 77th Ga Tech - 32nd Maryland - 51st UCF has a tougher OOC schedule than Alabama. Now, hold on - my research continues with this : 29 of the 88 mythical systems at Massey Composite say that UCF is currently one of the top 5 teams in FBS football ( 33% of the systems say that !!!!!) 7 systems rank UCF #5 3 systems rank UCF # 4 7 systems rank UCF # 3 9 systems rank UCF # 2 3 systems rank UCF #1 ( Roundtable Retro , Mark, and Boyd ISR ) You and most of the posters around here hang you hats on the ranked this, ranked that, bullshit mythical system so that very system is saying UCF can play ! I don't need the mythical system to tell me that..but of course UCF will get no opportunities, even if it wins the rest of its games 50-0. Wait, so your entire argument against bullshit rankings is to support your argument with bullshit rankings?
And, you removed 25% of the OCC schedule? I thought 100% of something will tell you more than any arbitrary part?
I may have been born at night, but it wasn't LAST night...
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Oct 31, 2017 12:08:32 GMT
You need to get informed, cpa. Sagarin's system is one of 88 assorted mythical systems in the Massey Rankings composite ( 1.1 %)...with no proof or guarantee that it is any more accurate than any of the others. Its all bull$hit. Anyway, since you sucked me into this moronic rankings crap ( the main problem with big time CF) I did a little research at the Massey Composite. I just compared the 3 FBS OOC opponents of Bama and UCF since most don't rank FCS and FBS together. Here's what the consensus currently says about rankings : BAMA (58.3 average ranked) -----\ FSU - 57th Fresno - 55th Col State - 63rd UCF (53.3 average ranked) ----- FIU - 77th Ga Tech - 32nd Maryland - 51st UCF has a tougher OOC schedule than Alabama. Now, hold on - my research continues with this : 29 of the 88 mythical systems at Massey Composite say that UCF is currently one of the top 5 teams in FBS football ( 33% of the systems say that !!!!!) 7 systems rank UCF #5 3 systems rank UCF # 4 7 systems rank UCF # 3 9 systems rank UCF # 2 3 systems rank UCF #1 ( Roundtable Retro , Mark, and Boyd ISR ) You and most of the posters around here hang you hats on the ranked this, ranked that, bullshit mythical system so that very system is saying UCF can play ! I don't need the mythical system to tell me that..but of course UCF will get no opportunities, even if it wins the rest of its games 50-0. Wait, so your entire argument against bullshit rankings is to support your argument with bullshit rankings?
And, you removed 25% of the OCC schedule? I thought 100% of something will tell you more than any arbitrary part?
I may have been born at night, but it wasn't LAST night...
Well said
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Oct 31, 2017 12:22:25 GMT
A couple of other points...
Sagarin's predictor is one of the most accurate out there, from 2002-2016, his predictive accuracy in those all-inclusive NCAA tournament games is roughly 75%.
As you have noted and complained, most of these systems start with a pre-season rank. What's the rub, the pre-season polls have incredibly accurate predictive value. Even moreso than later human polls. Bevo has repeatedly stated this - you have to have a view of the upcoming season based on a historical view.
Sagarin also notes that his results are more accurate when including the pre-season rank than when not.
Look at the accuracy of the L10YR bowl games (339 games):
Pre-Bowl coaches poll 55.4% Pre-Bowl AP poll 55.6% Pre-season AP 58.8% Pre-Season Coaches 59.9% Vegas Spread 61.5%
While there is a difference, it's not very large, the range is roughly 10%.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Oct 31, 2017 13:54:39 GMT
I think Georgia will be #1. Bama will be #2 I really have NO IDEA about # 3 & #4, although... I would guess they'll go with Undefeateds: ie Wisconsin and Miami. They KNOW they won't make it to the CFP. But, for now... they are UNBEATEN, and record trumps all....
We're basically IN PLAYOFF MODE now... Many teams out there can't afford to lose another game. I think OK State takes Oklahoma OUT of the picture this week at Bedlam. The Cowboys have a LONG history of messing things up for the Sooners. That's why I like them! I have a feeling Michigan is going to mess things up for Wisconsin. We'll see.
I think the CFP is going to have another VERY tough decision at the end... as, Clemson, Ohio State, and Georgia(or Bama) are all going to roll in with 12-1 seasons.
Notre Dame will be a 11-1, with ONLY a first week, 1-point loss to UGA, and DOMINATING wins since (Contrary to what the by-laws say, I think the committee DOES look at MOV)
Penn State will get left out, cause they'll just be 11-1... with a more recent loss. All Big 12 teams will be out, because ALL with have 2 losses Same with the Pac 12
if that all happens, I would guess (based on the limited experience that we have) that those four 12-1 teams would be IN.
Leaving Notre Dame and Penn State on the outside, looking in. That will cause of ruckus... but, what will the CFP care? TWO SEC teams in the playoffs? ESPN will be thrilled.
That's the most likely thing... however, my considerable GUT tell me: This may be the year when we see some REAL upsets in the CCG's... like, maybe a 1-loss Wisky beating OSU. Or undefeated Miami beating Clemson??? It's been awhile since the CCG's have produced a surprise. I think it's time.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Oct 31, 2017 14:22:58 GMT
Sagarin's data. You're too hung up labels... You need to get informed, cpa. Sagarin's system is one of 88 assorted mythical systems in the Massey Rankings composite ( 1.1 %)...with no proof or guarantee that it is any more accurate than any of the others. Its all bull$hit. Anyway, since you sucked me into this moronic rankings crap ( the main problem with big time CF) I did a little research at the Massey Composite. I just compared the 3 FBS OOC opponents of Bama and UCF since most don't rank FCS and FBS together. Here's what the consensus currently says about rankings : BAMA (58.3 average ranked) -----\ FSU - 57th Fresno - 55th Col State - 63rd UCF (53.3 average ranked) ----- FIU - 77th Ga Tech - 32nd Maryland - 51st UCF has a tougher OOC schedule than Alabama. Now, hold on - my research continues with this : 29 of the 88 mythical systems at Massey Composite say that UCF is currently one of the top 5 teams in FBS football ( 33% of the systems say that !!!!!) 7 systems rank UCF #5 3 systems rank UCF # 4 7 systems rank UCF # 3 9 systems rank UCF # 2 3 systems rank UCF #1 ( Roundtable Retro , Mark, and Boyd ISR ) You and most of the posters around here hang you hats on the ranked this, ranked that, bullshit mythical system so that very system is saying UCF can play ! I don't need the mythical system to tell me that..but of course UCF will get no opportunities, even if it wins the rest of its games 50-0. and UCF also has the highest std. dev. in the top 10, according to Massey. and the range was 26 (1 - 27).
Mark relies heavily on MOV, with SOS being a minor factor. Roundtable uses a score versus average and recency methodology, so if your average win is 10 points and you beat Austin Peay by 50 points, you get credit for 60 points Boyd uses some iterative strength of victory methodology, but heavily relies on MOV.
MOV is fine as a predictive tool, but to evaluate relative strength of performance, it needs help.
Just like the fallacy all 0-0 records should be equal, all 8-0 records are not equal. Why? No thinking CF fan would think that 8-0 Alabama is equal to 8-0 Maine. It simply doesn't work that way.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Oct 31, 2017 17:01:18 GMT
CPA, I bring up bullshit rankings ONLY in response to your 100% reliance on bullshit rankings to try and prove that Bama has a stronger OOC schedule than UCF. 98.9 % of the bullshit rankings out there (collectively) rank UCF's OOC schedule within its own division as tougher than Bama's OOC schedule. In the bullshit ranking/mythical world that's an overwhelming consensus...no way around it. Only a very few systems include FCS teams so Mercer and Maine should be discarded if you are going to consider 100% of the bullshit ranking world...and 100% of something does indeed tell you more ( Sagarin is 1% of the bullshit ranking world)....and how can you anoint that bullshit system as the most accurate ? Have you checked out all the other bullshit systems out there for accuracy...and what non mythical criteria is used to determine accuracy ? Is it W-L results in bowls or something ? The bullshit ranking world says UCF has a tougher NC schedule than Alabama...not me.
Also what's your response to 33% of the bullshit ranking world saying UCF is currently a top 5 team ? There is no real world opportunity to really prove them wrong is there ?
No other team sport on Earth is tied to a bullshit ranking world like big time CF is. Would you agree or disagree with that ?
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Oct 31, 2017 18:22:39 GMT
CPA, I bring up bullshit rankings ONLY in response to your 100% reliance on bullshit rankings to try and prove that Bama has a stronger OOC schedule than UCF. The flaw in your point Hen is, teams don't just play OOC. SOS counts ALL games played. Currently, UCF doesn't get much benefit from the conference they're in. I predict they'll be in a P5 conference within 5 years.... probably less.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Oct 31, 2017 20:26:37 GMT
CPA, I bring up bullshit rankings ONLY in response to your 100% reliance on bullshit rankings to try and prove that Bama has a stronger OOC schedule than UCF. The flaw in your point Hen is, teams don't just play OOC. SOS counts ALL games played. Currently, UCF doesn't get much benefit from the conference they're in. I predict they'll be in a P5 conference within 5 years.... probably less. CPA and I were discussing OOC only
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Oct 31, 2017 20:40:06 GMT
CPA, I bring up bullshit rankings ONLY in response to your 100% reliance on bullshit rankings to try and prove that Bama has a stronger OOC schedule than UCF. 98.9 % of the bullshit rankings out there (collectively) rank UCF's OOC schedule within its own division as tougher than Bama's OOC schedule. In the bullshit ranking/mythical world that's an overwhelming consensus...no way around it. Only a very few systems include FCS teams so Mercer and Maine should be discarded if you are going to consider 100% of the bullshit ranking world...and 100% of something does indeed tell you more ( Sagarin is 1% of the bullshit ranking world)....and how can you anoint that bullshit system as the most accurate ? Have you checked out all the other bullshit systems out there for accuracy...and what non mythical criteria is used to determine accuracy ? Is it W-L results in bowls or something ? The bullshit ranking world says UCF has a tougher NC schedule than Alabama...not me. Also what's your response to 33% of the bullshit ranking world saying UCF is currently a top 5 team ? There is no real world opportunity to really prove them wrong is there ? No other team sport on Earth is tied to a bullshit ranking world like big time CF is. Would you agree or disagree with that ? I didn't rely on it. I eyeballed it and judged that Bama's OOC was harder, and Sagarin agreed. Sagarin's system is one of the best. It's been backtested, constantly. They're not all bullshit. Most are actually backed up with mathematical theorems, proofs and backtesting. And he does rank FBS and FCS together, which is one reason I went to that...he can accurately (yes, it's relative) assess all of those teams mathematically.
How else are you going to compare disparate data?
These others that have UCF #1 all seem to favor margin of victory, which is why the BCS dumped MOV and "quality wins" from their formula, due to the 2004 season.
Basically, they are saying as long as you score a lot of points (regardless of the level of competition) - you're the "best team".
Suppose Bama and UCF were to play this weekend? What do you think the Vegas spread would be?
UCF +20? +30?
And if you remove GT (which seems fair since they didn't actually play) Bama's OOC ranks 74, while UCF's ranks 115, a full 54% worse. Not even close.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Nov 1, 2017 13:59:42 GMT
If Bama actually played a true road OOC game and went down to Orlando next week to play UCF, the Sagarin system says the Tide would be favored by 13.6 points
16.6 is his neutral site spread I would estimate that Vegas would open at about 14 in that hypothetical game.(neutral site) 20, 30 ??/...not even close.
btw in Sagarin's ACTUAL power index numbers Bama's four OOC opponents average a 67.95 ranking. UCF's 4 OOC opponents currently average a 64.69 ranking. That's a whopping 3.2 points per team difference. Sagarin himself would tell that your "full 54% worse" is baloney, based only on numerical standings of his mythical ranking system.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Nov 1, 2017 14:13:28 GMT
If Bama actually played a true road OOC game and went down to Orlando next week to play UCF, the Sagarin system says the Tide would be favored by 13.6 points 16.6 is his neutral site spread I would estimate that Vegas would open at about 14 in that hypothetical game.(neutral site) 20, 30 ??/...not even close. btw in Sagarin's ACTUAL power index numbers Bama's four OOC opponents average a 67.95 ranking. UCF's 4 OOC opponents currently average a 64.69 ranking. That's a whopping 3.2 points per team difference. Sagarin himself would tell that your "full 54% worse" is baloney, based only on numerical standings of his mythical ranking system. Nope, the math is correct:
FSU 31 Fresno 62 ColoSt 70 Mercer 133
296/4 = 74
FIU 128 MD 63 Maine 155
346/3 = 115
41/74 = 55% worse rating for UCF's OOC schedule
Even if you include GT, it's still 25% worse than Bama's.
367/4 = 92
18/74 = 25%
Given Bama's average MOV of 29 this year, and LSU is +21, I would say Vegas might open the spread at around 23-25 over UCF.
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Nov 1, 2017 14:25:44 GMT
CPA, I bring up bullshit rankings ONLY in response to your 100% reliance on bullshit rankings to try and prove that Bama has a stronger OOC schedule than UCF. 98.9 % of the bullshit rankings out there (collectively) rank UCF's OOC schedule within its own division as tougher than Bama's OOC schedule. In the bullshit ranking/mythical world that's an overwhelming consensus...no way around it. Only a very few systems include FCS teams so Mercer and Maine should be discarded if you are going to consider 100% of the bullshit ranking world...and 100% of something does indeed tell you more ( Sagarin is 1% of the bullshit ranking world)....and how can you anoint that bullshit system as the most accurate ? Have you checked out all the other bullshit systems out there for accuracy...and what non mythical criteria is used to determine accuracy ? Is it W-L results in bowls or something ? The bullshit ranking world says UCF has a tougher NC schedule than Alabama...not me. Also what's your response to 33% of the bullshit ranking world saying UCF is currently a top 5 team ? There is no real world opportunity to really prove them wrong is there ? No other team sport on Earth is tied to a bullshit ranking world like big time CF is. Would you agree or disagree with that ? When you do it is right. when others do it it is wrong. Good grief
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Nov 1, 2017 14:29:55 GMT
The flaw in your point Hen is, teams don't just play OOC. SOS counts ALL games played. Currently, UCF doesn't get much benefit from the conference they're in. I predict they'll be in a P5 conference within 5 years.... probably less. CPA and I were discussing OOC only Why? OOC is only 1/3 of the whole. UCF is REALLY getting penalized for NOT playing GT. Is that game re-scheduled? Or, just canceled? In this CFP system, ANY team that gets a game Cancelled, if probably OUT of CFP consideration.
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Nov 1, 2017 14:45:07 GMT
CPA and I were discussing OOC only Why? OOC is only 1/3 of the whole. UCF is REALLY getting penalized for NOT playing GT. Is that game re-scheduled? Or, just canceled? In this CFP system, ANY team that gets a game Cancelled, if probably OUT of CFP consideration. You have to cherry pick to twist the argument...SOBHBS Canceled
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Nov 2, 2017 14:49:28 GMT
Oh yeah ? well take this, Hero :
IYTPHN !!!!!!!
Debate over !
|
|