collegefbfan8898's Objective Poll

Say it all here
Forum rules
NOTICE: Please be sure to check the CFP Message Board Rules and Regulations and the Read Me page before posting.
User avatar
Spence
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 20243
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:52 pm
Location: Chillicothe, Ohio (Ohio's First Capital)
Contact:

Re: collegefbfan8898's Objective Poll

Postby Spence » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:18 am

Your poll seems reasonable. I wouldn't have BC ranked above Missouri and I think West Virginia should be lots higher then #11, but who is to say that I know anything?
"History doesn't always repeat itself but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain

User avatar
donovan
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 8634
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 6:41 am
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: collegefbfan8898's Objective Poll

Postby donovan » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:24 am

Seems as good as others I have seen.....like everyone..mine will be different ..but mine has zero basis in science....
Statistics are the Morphine of College Football

User avatar
Derek
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 5768
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:04 am
Location: Brooks, GA
Contact:

Re: collegefbfan8898's Objective Poll

Postby Derek » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:40 am

Looks good overall.

Can you explain some of your formula, or is that akin to Coke sharing their formula? 8)
They’re either going to run the ball here or their going to pass it.

The fewer rules a coach has, the fewer rules there are for players to break.

See, well ya see, the thing is, he should have caught that ball. But the ball is bigger than his hands.

- John Madden

User avatar
donovan
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 8634
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 6:41 am
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: collegefbfan8898's Objective Poll

Postby donovan » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:42 am

Not sure why you rank Boise State so high..their SOS is not that hot...and Hawaii is undefeated......I think if there is anything it is the mid majors that seemingly do not follow a pattern.
Statistics are the Morphine of College Football

User avatar
Derek
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 5768
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:04 am
Location: Brooks, GA
Contact:

Re: collegefbfan8898's Objective Poll

Postby Derek » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:47 am

I like your SOS percentage, 85 is a LOT more than the BCS computers use. Though it hurt my team by two spots, I can still agree with it.
They’re either going to run the ball here or their going to pass it.

The fewer rules a coach has, the fewer rules there are for players to break.

See, well ya see, the thing is, he should have caught that ball. But the ball is bigger than his hands.

- John Madden

User avatar
Spence
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 20243
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:52 pm
Location: Chillicothe, Ohio (Ohio's First Capital)
Contact:

Re: collegefbfan8898's Objective Poll

Postby Spence » Mon Nov 05, 2007 8:12 am

We won't bash your formula. I think SOS should be a big factor. My point about West Virginia is about something a computer can't see. They pass the look test with me. Meaning, like Oregon, they are going to get their offensive numbers against most anyone. They also have a good defense. The biggest difference I see between a team like Oregon and West Virginia is that West Virginia doesn't have the vertical attack that Oregon has, but the good Nebraska teams never had a good vertical attack either and they did pretty well with the same basic offense. West Virginia's is just a little more spread out.
"History doesn't always repeat itself but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain

User avatar
donovan
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 8634
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 6:41 am
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: collegefbfan8898's Objective Poll

Postby donovan » Mon Nov 05, 2007 9:01 am

If I were to have input in a formula...would...I think..making this up as I write...because...do not even like national rankings....

1. Not use winning percentage....all teams do not play the same number of games....some play against lower division schools...and when you play only 12 13 games.....one game makes a big percentage difference.

2. Would give about 80% to a win...

3. Would give a higher win factor to those conferences that are..major..BCS whatever that silliness is..and a smaller percentage to those conference of a less god.

4. Would have some overriding exceptions. Until a loss, all teams with no losses would be ranked above teams with a loss.....if you are not willing to do this...then be honest for once and kick them out of the Division...which of course is what is wrong with this systems anyway...you let conferences in that are not eligible for the prize..
Statistics are the Morphine of College Football

User avatar
donovan
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 8634
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 6:41 am
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: collegefbfan8898's Objective Poll

Postby donovan » Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:02 am

collegefbfan8898 wrote:I am not so sure of this. The actual winning percentage is not that much difference. A few decimal places. All teams that are undefeated ahead of teams with losses. So, the Missouri loss to Oklahoma looks worse than Hawaii being undefeated when Hawaii's opponents are a combined 9 wins and 30+ losses. I doubt it.


Computer models are generally reflective of what the programmer is trying to accomplish. Very few can keep out their bias...regardless of the subject matter. Not necessarily a bad thing...just always something to be cognizant of in the anaylization of the model.

1. A few decimal places are very significant when that can separate the top team from the next in line. If there is any redeeming value in a computer is its infinitesimal accuracy; so to be cavalier about a few places is not acceptable.

2. If you allow teams to play a different amount of games and or play teams in a lower division and count them in the total...not sure what you are comparing.

3. Absolutely I personally believe a win should count more than a computer game. I think it is disingenuous of NCAA football that they allow teams in a division where the chances of winning the big prize can not happen. It is deceitful and a sham. I think that conferences that are non "BCS" conferences are without fortitude for buying into this system.

4. Everyone seems to laud those computer ranking systems that would not compromise their values to join the BCS...I certainly do...and yet..we continue to buy into a system that you know is rigged, tainted and deceptive.

5. Your efforts to improve on accuracy is laudable...I just do not agree that your premise would satisfy my belief that the teams are ranked equitably. (Please note....because of the Division I make up...I do not think any system can do that..)
Statistics are the Morphine of College Football

User avatar
donovan
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 8634
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 6:41 am
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: collegefbfan8898's Objective Poll

Postby donovan » Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:54 pm

...you point out the question that never gets answered....should poll reflect what might happen or what has happened.....I always vote with the past.........the rest is just pollsters justifying their pre season picks.
Statistics are the Morphine of College Football

User avatar
Spence
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 20243
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:52 pm
Location: Chillicothe, Ohio (Ohio's First Capital)
Contact:

Re: collegefbfan8898's Objective Poll

Postby Spence » Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:28 pm

fluiddude wrote:Not to be critical of this poll, but rather an observation about all polls this year...is that it's not hard to pick out the top 10, only the hierarchy within it. However 10-25 is a whole different matter, and I have yet to see any poll that has both feet in reality. Is there any doubt that USC (#26 in your poll) wouldn't beat about half of the teams ranked above them? What would USC do to #6 Boston College? A rout, I think. What's the difference between Ohio State and Kansas? Neither have beaten anyone of consequence so it comes down to tOSU's great tradition vs Kansas's "tradition" as a doormat. Hawaii?, they went to overtime against an atrocious San Jose St. team. I'm usually not much of a fan of polls in general but I feel sorry for the pollsters this year, screwy as things are in college football.


If you talk to the people ranking and voting, the reason Ohio State is undefeated #1 and Kansas is being held back it is purely SOS. Ohio State SOS being 63 (sagarin) and Kansas SOS being 107 (sagarin). I personally beleve that at team that doesn't finish with an SOS above 60 shouldn't be eligible for the championship game. I know people say you can't control how good teams will be scheduling years in advance and you surely can't control the conference being bad. That is true, but with 120 teams in 1A you have to have a cutoff in how low a teams SOS can be and them still make the title game. LSU plays the toughest schedule of the top six teams at #12 and Oregon is #13 . Clearly even with a loss those teams have proven themselves. Both are helped in SOS by strong conference play. Even if a team plays in a weak conference they have options in SOS. They control their own OOC schedules and even though those teams are scheduled in advance they could use history to predict what teams would be fairly strong. In years where they try but fail, they are just out of luck that year. It happens and sometimes you just can't control those things. Teams that want to play for a championship should at least have a schedule in the top half of all teams in SOS. That much can be pretty well controlled.
"History doesn't always repeat itself but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests