or, at least, if we're trying to be realistic, it shouldnt go down unless a team behind you has a big win or something. the old ranking system was more like the real thing, it just should have been every day.

your rank shouldn't drop after a loss?

When should it drop?

I think he meant after a win. I beat the #10 team in Phelan today and he only dropped to #11 but I only moved up from #37 to #33.

that makes more sense...

In divisions of 324, 276, and 384, one win shouldn't guarantee you your spot. Computer rankings are always up and down regardless of if you win or lose...a win is better obviously, but it doesn't necessarily guarantee you anything as far as rankings go, and let's face it, these are computerized human rankings. Take it from a guy who knows.

I have seen teams drop after an unimpressive win or the team right behind them had a big time win.

there more to look at than just saying i dropped after a loss..how early in the season is it and did u just play a really bad team?

maybe it has to do with schedule's, play tuff teams and i bet u wont drop after a win.

ur scenerio is reasonable, u are not really telling us what part of the season and what other teams right by you did. maybe the teams ahead of you didnt lose either

yeah, i meant loss.

i don't want this ranking system based off a computer ranking. they're based completely off polls in real life, and we should have a system that best replicates the polls, not necessarily determine the best team.

yeah, an unimpressive win gives you the chance to be leapfrogged by a team with a big win. i have no problem with that. so long as the #1 team plays a decently tough schedule, they should stay #1, not bump around from 1 to 5 to 3 to 7 like they would in RPI.

Quote: Originally posted by jetwildcat on 6/10/2010yeah, i meant loss.

i don't want this ranking system based off a computer ranking. they're based completely off polls in real life, and we should have a system that best replicates the polls, not necessarily determine the best team.

yeah, an unimpressive win gives you the chance to be leapfrogged by a team with a big win. i have no problem with that. so long as the #1 team plays a decently tough schedule, they should stay #1, not bump around from 1 to 5 to 3 to 7 like they would in RPI.

ummm ... this game is run by a computer. You tell me how you get human rankings out of it

i dont know what the fuss is about. who cares if the ranking simulates the real life poll system? the real life poll system sucks. you should be able to make a better computer system, in which two very closely ranked teams will switch when one has a decent win and one has a good win. human pollsters are lazy, thats why the polls are the way they are today. i see no argument for replicating that system instead of making a more reasonable and more accurate one.

This is not a complaint, just passing along a situation that illustrates this change in the polls:

D-II Tark, my team enters the polls #23 at 8-4, with a top 20 RPI and top 30 SOS on a 2-game winning streak. After 8 more wins and the ranking fluctuating between 23-25, we fall out of the top 25 to 27, and over the next 3 games--all wins--continue to fall down to 29.

After consecutive win #15, we re-enter the polls at #22, which s where we sit now at 24-4.

Granted, the SOS fell due to a weak conference and that may be the factor driving this, although they did say that the new polls would reflect player strength early in the season and be weighted more toward wins as the season progressed.

I do think the new polling system is better, though it's not hard to beat the old one which often made very little sense.

that sounds somewhat messed up. i haven't really been paying attention to it, im kind of curious now how accurate it is. accurate in how it measures a team's quality though, not how accurate it is to real life.

Actually, I can't complain. I think my Tark team IS probably about the 20th-25th despite all the wins. The polls had me there when we were the only ranked team with 4 losses, and we're still there. I don't think we could beat most top 10 teams very often.

My gut feeling is that it is more accurate by far than the old system.

Quote: Originally Posted By coach_billyg on 6/11/2010i dont know what the fuss is about. who cares if the ranking simulates the real life poll system? the real life poll system sucks. you should be able to make a better computer system, in which two very closely ranked teams will switch when one has a decent win and one has a good win. human pollsters are lazy, thats why the polls are the way they are today. i see no argument for replicating that system instead of making a more reasonable and more accurate one

What he said +1

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.