CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: OrangeAfroMan on November 07, 2021, 05:08:12 PM
-
On h2h:
Yes, it's meaningless, BUT
the new AP poll, looking at the top 10:
UM is at 10, right behind MSU. Behind the team that beat them. Cool.
Ahead of MSU is ND, who is behind their only loss - Cincinnati. Good.
Above them is OSU, who is right behind the team they lost to: Oregon. Great.
So all of the above is true, yet Oregon's only loss isn't to anyone above them....not to anyone in the top 10....not to anyone even ranked.
Voters are idiotic sheeple. Inconsistent. Vapid. Hypocritical.
It's not even about WHEN a team loses, as Oregon's bad loss was 3 weeks after OSU lost to the Ducks.
None of it makes sense.
-
How would you do it?
-
I'd be consistent.
Either h2h is 1/12 of the schedule or it's not.
If it's given more weight, then SOS doesn't matter. h2h is a subset of SOS.
Either when a team loses matters or it doesn't.
Last week, they had OSU above Oregon. Both had 2-possession wins vs teams that didn't garner a vote in the poll. But say they thing Oregon's win vs UW was better than OSU's was vs UNL......so is game control > SOS?
If they hold UW in higher esteem than UNL, that ignores Oregon's much worse loss to Stanford.
I'm not even going to suggest what is right or even that there is a right way, but any consistency would be better than none.
-
so considering what you said what would your ranking be
-
Ah yes
-
so considering what you said what would your ranking be
I predict that Fro'll duck this question.
-
I admit, I just woke up from a nap, but I don't really see what this complaint actually is.
Of course, every ranking is gonna be inconsistent in some way. So, I dunno. Have fun with the complaint.
-
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/p526x296/253602644_4602523463118360_9046067879864658519_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=NumuTsn-zfcAX-6R5Ms&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=4668bf878e0cf20ea95a96032611e523&oe=61AC2B2B)
-
until OAM indicates what his ranking is this whole thread is meaningless
-
Last week, they had OSU above Oregon. Both had 2-possession wins vs teams that didn't garner a vote in the poll. But say they thing Oregon's win vs UW was better than OSU's was vs UNL......so is game control > SOS?
They may have but i haven't seen tOSU ranked ahead of the Ducks recently and they shouldn't be either
-
Nobody that Stanford beat should be ranked. Just rank.
-
Have you ever noticed that OAM is long on complaints but short on solutions
I used to tell the folks that I managed to feel free to come to me with their complaint but to bring a suggested solution along with it
Now all I asked OAM was to post his suggested rankings so that we could get a clear picture of what he considered to be a good ranking
So far nothing
Maybe he ran into the same challenge the committee has which is its hard to satisfy all the criteria at the same time
criteria such as:
Head To Head results
season record
strength of schedule
anyway it will be interesting to see if he ever posts his suggested ranking
-
Don't hold your breath on that.
He just likes to whine and bitch.
-
until OAM indicates what his ranking is this whole thread is meaningless
This and every thread is meaningless when it's made.
-
Boy, you guys are just salivating. Sorry I don't live my life on your timeline.
I don't have time to do it tonight. I'm busy producing a 40-team order and doing lesson plans for the week.
As for complaining and not having solutions...I'll produce all the solutions you want when someone pays me to.
-
Boy, you guys are just salivating. Sorry I don't live my life on your timeline.
I don't have time to do it tonight. I'm busy producing a 40-team order and doing lesson plans for the week.
As for complaining and not having solutions...I'll produce all the solutions you want when someone pays me to.
could we pay you to stop whining about stuff
you give your whining away free but youre not there to follow up with any solutions
just go back to your business on the side we will take care of things here
-
There's no way that anyone actually buys his ridiculous game.
-
There's no way that anyone actually buys his ridiculous game.
Do you get tired of being wrong?
(https://i.imgur.com/fciQXgK.jpg)
-
Last few orders...
(https://i.imgur.com/3oC84qq.jpg)
-
I might have a decent reason to be too busy to trudge through your avalanche of bullshit.....
(https://i.imgur.com/l1xog2m.jpg)
-
:57: WHY HAVEN'T YOU RESPONDED??? CRICKETS!!! :88:
(https://i.imgur.com/A4hON8G.jpg)
-
It's easy to criticize rankings, obviously, most everyone can do it, but it gets tought to put your own out there, and be criticized for it.
My team is always lower than they should be.
Well, maybe not.
-
As far as an implication that the voters are like sheep in the sense they all do the same thing, I'd bet a small amount that the voting ballots vary considerably. I'd guess each voter uses different criteria and reaches mostly a different ranking, more so further down of course. I know somewhere publishes each individual ranking, or used to.
My own "system" would ask simply who would beat who on a neutral field, which might be closer to how the committee thinks. H2H yields odd results, often as not, if over weighted, in my view. Even a good team can stink it up and lose one they shouldn't, and wouldn't 9 times in 10. UGA could lose to Tenn this Saturday and probably not drop too far. The other top ten teams don't look all that great either, they all have blemishes.
Ranking 2-10 right now is going to generate varied opinions. I don't think of that as sheeplish. I also don't think it matters.
-
If only we had a system that minimized rankings and maximized game results.
-
If only we had a system that minimized rankings and maximized game results.
sounds interesting
why dont you show us your ranking that does that
-
If only we had a system that minimized rankings and maximized game results.
sounds interesting
why dont you show us your ranking that does that
5+1+2
-
5+1+2
thats what I thought
next
-
sounds interesting
why dont you show us your ranking that does that
10 + 2
-
Request to become a mod to delete this nonsense pile of a thread.
-
On h2h:
Yes, it's meaningless, BUT
the new AP poll, looking at the top 10:
UM is at 10, right behind MSU. Behind the team that beat them. Cool.
Ahead of MSU is ND, who is behind their only loss - Cincinnati. Good.
Above them is OSU, who is right behind the team they lost to: Oregon. Great.
So all of the above is true, yet Oregon's only loss isn't to anyone above them....not to anyone in the top 10....not to anyone even ranked.
Voters are idiotic sheeple. Inconsistent. Vapid. Hypocritical.
It's not even about WHEN a team loses, as Oregon's bad loss was 3 weeks after OSU lost to the Ducks.
None of it makes sense.
Ok...
The "AP Poll" isn't an opinion. It doesn't have to be consistent.
There are 63 voters. They all vote individually. And then the AP Poll is just the single output from a combination of 63 disparate inputs.
Which means that if the voters all agree in lockstep, there should be exactly 63 point gaps between each spot in the poll.
Maybe many of those voters think that Oregon and Ohio State are better than ND, MSU, and M. I don't watch that much Oregon, but I can say that *I* think Ohio State is better than those three teams. Oregon has a bad loss, but they also beat Ohio State--nobody else to date has done that. Nobody else to date has stayed within 9 points of OSU, and most of OSU's games haven't even been anywhere near that close.
Points-wise, it appears that the collective "wisdom" of the voters is that both Oregon and OSU are significantly behind OU--there is an 87 point gap between OU and Oregon. And they believe there's a significant gap down to ND, there is a 154 point gap between OSU and ND. Yet there's only a 26-point gap between Oregon and OSU... MUCH smaller than the 63 that you would expect if they all agreed. That could easily be explained by a couple of outlier voters.
Then between ND at 7, and M at 9, there's only a 67 point gap covering those three spots--101 points across 4 spots if you include OkSU at 10th. 4 spots "should" be 252 points between them if the voters all agreed. Heck, three spots should be 189 points and it's only 67 points, four above what you'd expect for a single-spot gap, between three positions on the poll.
The same thing shows up in the 2-4 spot. Cincinnati at #2 is 135 points behind Georgia which is unanimous at #1, and then there is a mere 34 point gap down two spots to #4. Again you'd expect an even distribution of 189 spots if voters agreed on which teams were #2-#4. But they don't. They can't agree at all who should be #2, and hence the points gap between #1 and #2 is over double what is "expected", and the points gap between #2 and #4 is only 18% what is "expected".
I'm sure if those 63 voters all got into a room and argued about it (like the committee), they might actually start to align their rankings and you'd see something closer to even 63-point gaps between teams on the rankings. The fact that you DON'T see something even remotely approaching even point gaps between the rankings suggests that it's NOT groupthink and there's significant disparities in the way they assign their ranks.
-
Ok...
The "AP Poll" isn't an opinion. It doesn't have to be consistent.
There are 63 voters. They all vote individually. And then the AP Poll is just the single output from a combination of 63 disparate inputs.
Which means that if the voters all agree in lockstep, there should be exactly 63 point gaps between each spot in the poll.
Maybe many of those voters think that Oregon and Ohio State are better than ND, MSU, and M. I don't watch that much Oregon, but I can say that *I* think Ohio State is better than those three teams. Oregon has a bad loss, but they also beat Ohio State--nobody else to date has done that. Nobody else to date has stayed within 9 points of OSU, and most of OSU's games haven't even been anywhere near that close.
Points-wise, it appears that the collective "wisdom" of the voters is that both Oregon and OSU are significantly behind OU--there is an 87 point gap between OU and Oregon. And they believe there's a significant gap down to ND, there is a 154 point gap between OSU and ND. Yet there's only a 26-point gap between Oregon and OSU... MUCH smaller than the 63 that you would expect if they all agreed. That could easily be explained by a couple of outlier voters.
Then between ND at 7, and M at 9, there's only a 67 point gap covering those three spots--101 points across 4 spots if you include OkSU at 10th. 4 spots "should" be 252 points between them if the voters all agreed. Heck, three spots should be 189 points and it's only 67 points, four above what you'd expect for a single-spot gap, between three positions on the poll.
The same thing shows up in the 2-4 spot. Cincinnati at #2 is 135 points behind Georgia which is unanimous at #1, and then there is a mere 34 point gap down two spots to #4. Again you'd expect an even distribution of 189 spots if voters agreed on which teams were #2-#4. But they don't. They can't agree at all who should be #2, and hence the points gap between #1 and #2 is over double what is "expected", and the points gap between #2 and #4 is only 18% what is "expected".
I'm sure if those 63 voters all got into a room and argued about it (like the committee), they might actually start to align their rankings and you'd see something closer to even 63-point gaps between teams on the rankings. The fact that you DON'T see something even remotely approaching even point gaps between the rankings suggests that it's NOT groupthink and there's significant disparities in the way they assign their ranks.
youre 100% dead on
The purpose of the ranking is to come up with the 4 best teams not to pick teams that might not be as good but have a better track record
granted each teams track record does matter in this but a large part is subjective like strength of schedule
and any head to head that may have occurred
-
The purpose of the ranking is to come up with the 4 best teams not to pick teams that might not be as good but have a better track record
No, the purpose of the AP poll is to generate clicks and discussion. It is a "poll", meaning it's an aggregation of individual opinions and not in itself an opinion.
The purpose of the CFP committee is to come up with the 4 teams for the CFP. The CFP committee, unlike the AP poll, is intended to be a consensus and speak with one voice, and to be "the" controlling opinion in CFP selection.
-
No, the purpose of the AP poll is to generate clicks and discussion. It is a "poll", meaning it's an aggregation of individual opinions and not in itself an opinion.
The purpose of the CFP committee is to come up with the 4 teams for the CFP. The CFP committee, unlike the AP poll, is intended to be a consensus and speak with one voice, and to be "the" controlling opinion in CFP selection.
Which is what Im talking about
nobody pays any attention to the other polls once the CFP was established
-
Which is what Im talking about
nobody pays any attention to the other polls once the CFP was established
Well OAM does, because that was the original premise of this thread.
Admittedly the AP was not where I thought he was going with a thread title about sheep and voters lol.
-
Well OAM does, because that was the original premise of this thread.
Admittedly the AP was not where I thought he was going with a thread title about sheep and voters lol.
well then I buried the lead
I should have first said the only poll really looked at is the CFP
nobody cares a wit except OAM what in hell the AP poll shows
in retrospect however its of little matter cause he hasnt responded because hes too busy
-
Ok...
The "AP Poll" isn't an opinion. It doesn't have to be consistent.
There are 63 voters. They all vote individually. And then the AP Poll is just the single output from a combination of 63 disparate inputs.
Which means that if the voters all agree in lockstep, there should be exactly 63 point gaps between each spot in the poll.
Maybe many of those voters think that Oregon and Ohio State are better than ND, MSU, and M. I don't watch that much Oregon, but I can say that *I* think Ohio State is better than those three teams. Oregon has a bad loss, but they also beat Ohio State--nobody else to date has done that. Nobody else to date has stayed within 9 points of OSU, and most of OSU's games haven't even been anywhere near that close.
Points-wise, it appears that the collective "wisdom" of the voters is that both Oregon and OSU are significantly behind OU--there is an 87 point gap between OU and Oregon. And they believe there's a significant gap down to ND, there is a 154 point gap between OSU and ND. Yet there's only a 26-point gap between Oregon and OSU... MUCH smaller than the 63 that you would expect if they all agreed. That could easily be explained by a couple of outlier voters.
Then between ND at 7, and M at 9, there's only a 67 point gap covering those three spots--101 points across 4 spots if you include OkSU at 10th. 4 spots "should" be 252 points between them if the voters all agreed. Heck, three spots should be 189 points and it's only 67 points, four above what you'd expect for a single-spot gap, between three positions on the poll.
The same thing shows up in the 2-4 spot. Cincinnati at #2 is 135 points behind Georgia which is unanimous at #1, and then there is a mere 34 point gap down two spots to #4. Again you'd expect an even distribution of 189 spots if voters agreed on which teams were #2-#4. But they don't. They can't agree at all who should be #2, and hence the points gap between #1 and #2 is over double what is "expected", and the points gap between #2 and #4 is only 18% what is "expected".
I'm sure if those 63 voters all got into a room and argued about it (like the committee), they might actually start to align their rankings and you'd see something closer to even 63-point gaps between teams on the rankings. The fact that you DON'T see something even remotely approaching even point gaps between the rankings suggests that it's NOT groupthink and there's significant disparities in the way they assign their ranks.
Everyone knows this.
-
well then I buried the lead
I should have first said the only poll really looked at is the CFP
nobody cares a wit except OAM what in hell the AP poll shows
in retrospect however its of little matter cause he hasnt responded because hes too busy
I keep forgetting that we should only discuss what truly matters. If web forums are anything, they're strictly important topics and discussions. No room for flim-flam fuddy-duddy crap. Can't be wasting precious time with any leisurely discussions, nope.
-
Someone somewhere has opinions that someone else disagrees with and might be a bit inconsistent, in a system where inconsistencies are unavoidable.
Wowza.
-
I keep forgetting that we should only discuss what truly matters. If web forums are anything, they're strictly important topics and discussions. No room for flim-flam fuddy-duddy crap. Can't be wasting precious time with any leisurely discussions, nope.
so where is your suggested ranking?
still working on it?
-
so where is your suggested ranking?
still working on it?
You late for a hot date? Sorry, your artificial "hurry, order now while supplies last" urgency doesn't work on me.
-
this voting is probably more like sheep
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/p526x296/254956026_4605774859459887_4103851478689889350_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=eYRhMLJhWMoAX8IIO-i&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=3b89b4a64a0cb85651dc504a5afffce7&oe=61ADA21A)
-
You late for a hot date? Sorry, your artificial "hurry, order now while supplies last" urgency doesn't work on me.
all hat no cattle