All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > College Football > 2012 BPI Sports CFB Rankings
10/15/2012 4:51 PM
Well Billingsley's rankings operate/behave like a human poll, which I really enjoy, the whole computerized human poll format...I've tried to put one together myself, but I never saw/came across something I really liked...I always meant to glean one the way that EA Sports did theirs on NCAA Football 2004, but I never got around to finishing it (as much as I probably should).  What I'm doing now is something I'd been wanting to do/try for a couple years now, so it's nice to put it into action...I should probably have them up later 8 or 9 pm et...maybe sooner, not sure.
10/15/2012 9:08 PM
Perhaps tomorrow, looking at a setback, we'll see
10/15/2012 9:49 PM
Posted by gregsimon on 10/15/2012 4:39:00 PM (view original):
I am eagerly awaiting yours.

I am in awe of Sagarin. I don't know how a computer poll can get Bama & Oregon 1-2.
I tried adjusting my formula a million ways and can not get Oregon in the top 5 no matter what.

Billingsley has Oregon at # 3, which is also impressive.

Sagarin doesn't have them at 1 and 2 in his BCS poll.  Oregon is 7th in that one.  In the predictor Oregon is 3rd.  When you take them together then they get to 1 and 2, but in neither of his two rankings are they actually 1 and 2.
10/15/2012 10:22 PM
The overall RATING is a synthesis of the two diametrical opposites, ELO_CHESS and PURE POINTS (PREDICTOR).

"Overall rating" says enough for me.
10/16/2012 6:21 AM
Posted by gregsimon on 10/15/2012 10:22:00 PM (view original):
The overall RATING is a synthesis of the two diametrical opposites, ELO_CHESS and PURE POINTS (PREDICTOR).

"Overall rating" says enough for me.
glad that the English language is lost on you, since the stuff right after that is what is important to this equation.
10/16/2012 6:28 AM
So why is his list ordered by the overall?

The other two have the rankings in parenthesis. Obviously it is the "overall" ranking which is superior to the other two or else he'd use one of those as the main list wouldn't he?

Feel free to ignore it as a legitimate ranking, but don't push your nonsense on me.



10/16/2012 8:46 AM
Posted by gregsimon on 10/16/2012 6:28:00 AM (view original):
So why is his list ordered by the overall?

The other two have the rankings in parenthesis. Obviously it is the "overall" ranking which is superior to the other two or else he'd use one of those as the main list wouldn't he?

Feel free to ignore it as a legitimate ranking, but don't push your nonsense on me.



it is a synthesis of two diametrical opposites.  He tells you that the overall is a combination of two separate ratings determination.  The first of those is the predictor, which he says is the most accurate for determining who will win future games.  The second is the one used by the BCS which only record matters so scoring margin doesn't come into play. 
10/16/2012 9:19 AM

What the hell are you arguing about here moranis?  Yes, we all know that his overall is not what is used by the BCS, but it's still a computer generated ranking (unless somehow combining two computer rankings results in a non-computer ranking) that has Alabama and Oregon 1 and 2, and is the ranking that Sagarin uses to order the teams on his website.

10/16/2012 9:42 AM
Posted by AlCheez on 10/16/2012 9:19:00 AM (view original):

What the hell are you arguing about here moranis?  Yes, we all know that his overall is not what is used by the BCS, but it's still a computer generated ranking (unless somehow combining two computer rankings results in a non-computer ranking) that has Alabama and Oregon 1 and 2, and is the ranking that Sagarin uses to order the teams on his website.

It isn't a formula though, it is a combination of two separate formulas.  So sure it is a computer poll in that both sets of rankings are compiled using computer formulas, but it isn't just one formula used to create one poll.  Thus, greg's point of him being in awe that a computer poll could come up with Bama and Oregon as 1 and 2, is a bit off since it is really two computer polls combined together to make one.  That is all I'm saying.
10/16/2012 9:51 AM (edited)
This is quite possibly one of the dumbest arguments you've ever made, and that boggles the mind.  The fact that it's a combination of two sub-rankings doesn't make it any less of a computer ranking.   You might have a point if he was combining his ranking with someone else's...
10/16/2012 4:09 PM
He plainly states that:

In ELO_CHESSthe score margin is of no consequence.

and:

 the PURE POINTS PREDICTORin which the score margin is the only thing that matters.

So it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that when you combine the two you get the most complete and accurate ranking of all which is further evidenced by the fact that he uses IT to order his list, and then coupled with the term "overall ranking" which is apparently not plain enough for Moronic.

Its nothing new from Mr know-it-all over the last decade.
Amazingly it isn't his most ridiculous argument during that time, and even more amazingly he will still claim to be correct, no matter how many different ways you show him he is not.
10/16/2012 8:31 PM
Sorry for the delay...

www.bpisports.com

and lol @moranis

10/22/2012 9:16 PM
10/28/2012 8:15 PM
10/28


001 Notre Dame 8 0
002 Ohio St 9 0
003 Kansas St 8 0
004 Alabama 8 0
005 Florida 7 1
006 Oregon 8 0
007 Oregon St 6 1
008 LSU 7 1
009 Stanford 6 2
010 Louisville 8 0
011 Georgia 7 1
012 Florida St 8 1
013 South Carolina 7 2
014 Clemson 7 1
015 Nebraska 6 2
016 Boise St 7 1
017 Texas Tech 6 2
018 UCLA 6 2
019 Mississippi St 7 1
020 Arizona 5 3
021 Northwestern 7 2
022 Kent St 7 1
023 Toledo 8 1
024 Rutgers 7 1
025 Tulsa 7 1
026 Texas A&M 6 2
027 LA Tech 7 1
028 Penn St 5 3
029 Texas 6 2
030 SJ St 6 2
031 N Illinois 8 1
032 Utah St 7 2
033 Oklahoma 5 2
034 USC 6 2
035 West Virginia 5 2
036 Iowa St 5 3
037 LA Monroe 6 2
038 Ohio 7 1
039 North Carolina 6 3
040 Oklahoma St 5 2
041 Wisconsin 6 3
042 Washington 4 4
043 W Kentucky 6 2
044 Michigan St 5 4
045 Cincinnati 5 2
046 Duke 6 3
047 NC St 5 3
048 Michigan 5 3
049 Fresno St 6 3
050 UCF 6 2
051 Ball St 6 3
052 Navy 5 3
053 Iowa 4 4
054 SD St 6 3
055 TCU 5 3
056 Nevada 6 3
057 Minnesota 5 3
058 Arizona St 5 3
059 BYU 5 4
060 Air Force 5 3
061 Mississippi 5 3
062 MTSU 5 3
063 Bowling Green 6 3
064 Arkansas St 5 3
065 Missouri 4 4
066 Wake Forest 4 3
067 VA Tech 4 4
068 Miami 4 4
069 LA Lafayette 4 3
070 Syracuse 4 4
071 Baylor 3 4
072 Vanderbilt 4 4
073 Houston 4 4
074 Miami (OH) 4 4
075 Maryland 4 4
076 Pittsburgh 4 4
077 Texas SA 5 3
078 East Carolina 5 4
079 SMU 4 4
080 Troy 4 4
081 Utah 3 5
082 Tennessee 3 5
083 California 3 6
084 Temple 3 4
085 Texas St 3 4
086 New Mexico 4 5
087 C Michigan 3 5
088 N Texas 3 5
089 Arkansas 3 5
090 Purdue 3 5
091 Connecticut 3 5
092 Marshall 3 5
093 GA Tech 3 5
094 Indiana 3 5
095 W Michigan 3 6
096 Virginia 2 6
097 Rice 3 6
098 South Florida 2 6
099 Tulane 2 6
100 FAU 2 6
101 Boston College 2 6
102 Auburn 1 7
103 Kentucky 1 8
104 S Alabama 2 6
105 Illinois 2 6
106 Washington St 2 6
107 UTEP 2 7
108 Colorado St 2 6
109 UNLV 1 8
110 Buffalo 1 7
111 Memphis 1 7
112 Kansas 1 7
113 Wyoming 1 7
114 Army 1 7
115 Hawaii 1 6
116 Colorado 1 7
117 FIU 1 8
118 E Michigan 1 7
119 UAB 1 7
120 New Mexico St 1 7
121 Idaho 1 7
122 Akron 1 8
123 Southern Miss 0 8
124 Massachusetts 0 8


10/28/2012 11:13 PM
Did you email Massey, dude?  Just curious, cuz if you think you have a good system, get it in there
of 6
All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > College Football > 2012 BPI Sports CFB Rankings

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.