Northern Illinois and Fresno State

[donovan]

For those of you who enjoy math and formula related comparisons...an Oregon site has compared an Oregon vs FSU match up using FEI and S&P methodology...

http://www.addictedtoquack.com/2013/10/ ... fei-and-sp

I didn't do that well in Arithmetic, I was better at lunch, recess and restroom, (the latter is where I have a clinical graduate degree.)

[Spence]

For those of you who enjoy math and formula related comparisons...an Oregon site has compared an Oregon vs FSU match up using FEI and S&P methodology...

http://www.addictedtoquack.com/2013/10/ ... fei-and-sp

I didn't do that well in Arithmetic, I was better at lunch, recess and restroom, (the latter is where I have a clinical graduate degree.)

I didn't either, but I agree with the the analysis. I think Florida State would have an advantage based on their defense - especially their ability to press with DB's - but Oregon has Mariota and he is a game changer, so that is why they play the games.

[Duke1632]

The article makes a good case. What I find most surprising though is the level of objectivity and open-mindedness of the Oregon-centric site since it was nearly unanimous in the comments as well. However, if I were betting on a game, I think I'd go with CCR over S+P or FEI. But then, I avoid gambling, so it's a non-issue.

Personally, I think the top 5 AP/Harris teams are all on the same level, and I wouldn't know how to reliably choose one over the other. I know most only look at the top 3, but either way, my favorite part is that they are all from different conferences. So in a way, it's like a throwback year.

[armchairqb]

I don't doubt that in a potential BCS bowl situation, NIU would be more competitive than last year against the 'Noles.

Their 2013 schedule is not impressive, IMO. Beating UMass 63-19 won't move any team up in the Top 25. They might as well have beaten Chadron State 63-19.

Fresno State might be fairly competitive in a BCS matchup this year. I'm looking forward to finding out.

[Cane from the Bend]

In 2006, Boise State's best victory was over Oregon State who wound up losing 3 conference games in the Pac-12 that year; a good, but not great team. Would you have denied them an opportunity to play in a spotlight game? Keep in mind nobody is saying they should have played for the national title in 2006

Actually; to reinforce their ideology, and sway public opinion toward a playoff (which they finally got), the media did just that, and contrived Boise's case, after they won.

Keep in mind nobody is saying they should have played for the national title in 2006 and nobody ever suggested NIU or Fresno should play for one this year.

Given the metric Duke1632 attributes, should No. Illinois & Fresno St. both finish undefeated, with all Automatic Qualifier conference teams losing at least once; base on comments made, in his parameter, rightly or wrongly, this would be the National Championship game.

.

.

.

[Duke1632]

Given the metric Duke1632 attributes, should No. Illinois & Fresno St. both finish undefeated, with all Automatic Qualifier conference teams losing at least once; base on comments made, in his parameter, rightly or wrongly, this would be the National Championship game.

Such an NCG would not bother me really. In fact, despite the probable money loss in that year, can you imagine the controversy it would create. Probably help the corporations in the long run due to all the outrage and tuning in. HOWEVER, honestly, I'm a bit more agnostic about the issue than that. I'm not saying W/L should be the ONLY factor. Rather, I'm suggesting it should be the most heavily weighted factor, because it is, after all one of the few objective metrics we have, and happens to be the ultimate metric in terms of what people care about. Other stats are good, but having more total yards is no where near as important as getting the win. And SoS (as used today) is also entirely subjective. Today, W/L, instead of being the primary factor, is increasingly vanishing from the rankings entirely. I think the former problem (having two soft scheduled mid-majors in the NCG) is nowhere near as problematic as the later (having NCG predicted in advance within a tiny error margin).

**I've heard numerous media outlets this year go on record and say that a 1-loss SEC team would deserve and/or be selected over an undefeated Ohio St. or Baylor. It is THAT part that concerns me much more than a 1-loss team AQ team getting picked over an undefeated non-AQ team. When objective metrics are thrown out the window in favor of subjective ones, that's a bigger problem.

[Spence]

I guess it depends on who the won loss SEC team is. I think you would have to take a hard look at their schedule too and determine if they should go. Both Ohio State and Baylor's schedule strength isn't very good. Wisconsin is the only strong team on Ohio State's schedule. To date, the best team Baylor has played is K-State. Baylor's schedule starts getting better in a few weeks. I think Texas, Oklahoma, and Okla. State are teams all on par with each other. Not great teams right now, but as good as Wisconsin for sure. If Baylor can roll all three of those teams then I would consider them a contender and certainally would pick them over a one loss SEC team with that resume. I'm not sure Ohio State has a path. I think Michigan State has one of the best defenses in the country, if Ohio State can turn them on their ear in the B-10 championship (not just beat them), then I would consider them too, but I believe that is the only chance for Ohio State. So If two or three of the top five lose then I think Baylor and Ohio State have a shot to be considered. I don't think that will happen. I really don't think Ohio State or Baylor will finish undefeated, though.

[Duke1632]

I guess it depends on who the won loss SEC team is. I think you would have to take a hard look at their schedule too and determine if they should go. Both Ohio State and Baylor's schedule strength isn't very good. Wisconsin is the only strong team on Ohio State's schedule. To date, the best team Baylor has played is K-State. Baylor's schedule starts getting better in a few weeks. I think Texas, Oklahoma, and Okla. State are teams all on par with each other. Not great teams right now, but as good as Wisconsin for sure. If Baylor can roll all three of those teams then I would consider them a contender and certainally would pick them over a one loss SEC team with that resume. I'm not sure Ohio State has a path. I think Michigan State has one of the best defenses in the country, if Ohio State can turn them on their ear in the B-10 championship (not just beat them), then I would consider them too, but I believe that is the only chance for Ohio State. So If two or three of the top five lose then I think Baylor and Ohio State have a shot to be considered. I don't think that will happen. I really don't think Ohio State or Baylor will finish undefeated, though.

I don't have any objection to your personal view of things--that Ohio State and Baylor have weaker SoS than, say Bama or FSU, but the underlying thesis is that it is SUBJECTIVE. RE: not a good metric to use, thus if it has weight, it should be small weight. There are 12 opponents on each schedule, so to cherry pick a few of them does not seem to be too germane, but that's what most people do. Personally, I think playing many decent teams is a tougher schedule than playing 1 or 2 very good teams and several terrible teams, but that's just my subjective opinion. Bama and FSU might have 1 or 2 stronger opponents than OSU and Baylor, but that appears to be more than averaged out when you look at the other 10 opponents. Again, that's just my opinion, but it appears to be supported by CCR, which minimizes subjective metrics quit well.

It is funny though...I like Ohio state, but I'm not exactly a fan. And here I am debating with a confirmed fan, in a drama where each of us would be expected to be on the other side.

[donovan]

It is all subjective.

[Spence]

The fan in me still likes to believe we would win every game against everybody, but you have to be realistic about the chances. Yes, at the end of the day all my views are subjective and based on the "looks test". I have watched Alabama, Florida State, Oregon, Ohio State, and Baylor play. I like to record games and watch them back. I can slow mo and rewind to watch the Dline, then linebackers, then backfield (when possible - you can't always see the whole backfield) I watch offense lots the same way. Offensive line play, backs, and receivers (again when possible) Just based on that, my subjective view is Florida State has the team to compete with both Alabama and Oregon. Bama would be tougher for them. I think they would beat Oregon. I don't think Florida State's schedule is all that. I think Clemson was over rated and Miami is a year or two away. Doesn't matter, they are good. I think Alabama has a better chance beating Florida State than they do Oregon. Bama would slow Oregon down for sure, but I don't think they will shut down Mariota. Bama's D is getting better, though, and if they can contain Mariota they could shut Oregon down. I don't think Ohio State or Baylor, in their current incarnation, can beat any of the top three. Ohio State has athletes on both sides, but defensively they can be exposed and Bama, Florida State, and Oregon all have the tools to expose the defense. I think Oregon would score on almost every possession. I haven't seen Baylor play enough to have a detailed opinion, but I will have one if they keep winning.

I coach my daughter in softball and help her train for basketball and soccer. I am a bigger fan of hers than I am of Ohio State, but if I can't try to be constructive about her strengths and weaknesses, I can't help her. Of course I have been trying to get a golf club in her hand since she was 3 and she won't have anything to do with working on her gold game.

[donovan]

Subjective is not inherently bad or good. In most cases it is how humans operate, and it has been pretty successful. I do not feel like regurgitating the subjective models passed off as objective in the sports world. Fact is, there are no objective models. Zero, zip. That is why the game is played because the outcome is in question. We are not building bridges or constructing rocket ships, we are trying to objectify our data so our subjective beliefs will be validated. Some make a living doing this. Not the casinos, but those that do the wagering. And how does that work for them. Look at the Las Vegas city scape.

[Spence]

I agree. The only objective model is playing a game and determining a winner on the field of play. Of course then we subjectively break it down and tell you why the winning team really didn't win.

[Duke1632]

Humans certainly favor inductive reasoning over deductive reasoning, and as you say, it works pretty well--in fact, it's usually the only type of reasoning available to them for most choices in life, but that does not change the fact that inductive reasoning is a disaster for some things, like logical proofs and the Scientific Method, etc.

But what I'm getting at is that subjective metrics are not very good because other subjective metrics that actually conflict would be valid for the same reasons. For example, if I paraphrase Spence, or at least the common narrative, Bama and FSU have a tougher SoS because the top two teams on their schedule are estimated to be stronger than the top two teams on OSU or Baylor's schedule. Suppose I use some very similar constraints (e.g., cherry picking two teams from a list of 12) to make the opposite conclusion. I see that the weakest two teams on Bama and FSU's schedule are much weaker than the bottom two on the schedules of OSU and Baylor. Therefore, I conclude OSU and Baylor have the toughest schedule. I used essentially the same parameters, but isolated different choices, and arrived at an opposite conclusion.

That said, SoS could be used in an objective way. For example, W/L is objective (in some ways), so SoS based on the W/L record of the opponents or some valid function thereof would be objective. CCR aggregates the power ranking of all opponents, so it's different still.

It is also interesting to note that W/L is only objective for certain things. After all, the best team in the country can still lose on a given Saturday, and if that happened due to malign fate it does not change the fact that they are the best (assuming you somehow knew that a priori). If you value most "being the best" then W/L might be irrelevant as would be SoS. On the other hand, if you think the trophy should go to the team that scored more points on that given day (even if it's an upset), then W/L is objective and trumps ALL other considerations.

Personally, I think the trophy should go to the team that wins, even if they are not as good as the team that loses. Therefore, it is antithetical to me to suggest a 1-loss Bama or FSU should be selected over an unbeaten OSU or Baylor.

[donovan]

I do not disagree. In the words of some Yankee, years ago, Wm Marcy, "to the victor goes the spoils." Have you ever noticed, since half time shows on television have been replaced with half time reports, much to the demise of our civilization, you listen to twenty minutes of facts, statistics, charts, graphs, compilations that support the theory of spontaneous generation and then the closing comments are, "yes, but on any given Saturday or Sunday..."

So here is the question, and it is not hypothetical. (We have this discussion yearly but it is always good to revisit.)

It is the begin of the season. No games have been played. The preseason polls come out and they have listed a Strength of Schedule. What "objective" criteria is used for the initial SOS?

[warrriorsfan808]

Spence wrote:
I agree that it is impossible to know for sure, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't try. But I would rather have the old bowl system of exhibition games. If we have to have a playoff, then I think it should be a tournament of champions and take the winner of every conference regardless of strength. I think that would at least be fair. If you want to be the best, win your conference and prove it. That wouldn't guarantee the two best teams, but at least the way you got to the tournament could be fair and what you do from there is up to you.


warrior'sfan808: Last year I worked out an idea I believe I sent it to Donovan, it was an idea for a TOURNAMENT OF CHAMPIONS format, maybe it's time to look at it again.