Quote: Originally Posted By jfinn19 on 1/03/2010I really just don't understand how you can say winning is key and rank Oregon ahead of an undefeated team that beat them in your football rankings.

Because that game was 1/12th (Oregon) and 1/13th (Boise State) of their schedules. I believe I have/had Oregon's SOS 4th and Boise State's 110th? In a 120 team division/league, that's huge.

Quote: Originally posted by colonels19 on 1/03/2010Ok wiz....I tabbed it using a 1 point margin....that 7-7 team would rank 13th just ahead of Syracuse and behind Wake Forest. http://www.bpisports.com/2009ncaab.htm 

So you don't think the RPI of the team I just mentioned should be 8?

Where is your SOS rankings?

colonels, using margin of victory in HD is folly as well. You could take two identical teams vs. identical competition, one playing uptempo and the other playing slowdown. The uptempo is going to have a larger margin of victory, but it doesn't make them the better team.

Also, losing by a point to an elite team is inherently more impressive than beating a terrible team by a point.

What's the RPI of the 7-7 team now? Assuming the top team won their game when they played?

Team #1 14-0
Team #2 13-1
Team #3 12-2
Team #4 11-3
Team #5 10-4
Team #6 9-5
Team #7 8-6
Team #8 7-7
Team #9 6-8
Team#10 5-9
Team#11 4-10
Team#12 3-11
Team#13 2-12
Team#14 1-13
Team#15 0-14

Quote: Originally Posted By thewizard2 on 1/03/2010

Quote: Originally posted by colonels19 on 1/03/2010 Ok wiz....I tabbed it using a 1 point margin....that 7-7 team would rank 13th just ahead of Syracuse and behind Wake Forest. http://www.bpisports.com/2009ncaab.htm

So you don't think the RPI of the team I just mentioned should be 8

No I don't, because what the other 346 team do matters as well...their rating isn't produced in a 1 team vacuum.

Quote: Originally Posted By jfinn19 on 1/03/2010Where is your SOS rankings?

I don't post them...I just started tabbing them about 2 months ago, but I don't really feel or see a need to post them at the current time.

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 1/03/2010colonels, using margin of victory in HD is folly as well. You could take two identical teams vs. identical competition, one playing uptempo and the other playing slowdown. The uptempo is going to have a larger margin of victory, but it doesn't make them the better team.

It carries very little weight and I think if your system says that all games regardless of scoring margin should be viewed the same (i.e. 1 point games) then you're illogically limiting yourself and the ultimate accuracy of your ranking. Not including point margin IN ANYTHING THAT'S RANKED, is stupid to me...its apart of the story.

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 1/03/2010Also, losing by a point to an elite team is inherently more impressive than beating a terrible team by a point.

No, the win rates higher than the loss. And again, if you think this is a ridiculous concept, I urge you to view my examples on page 1...an undefeated team ranked 136th....a .500 team ranked 13th...all with all wins being rated higher than all losses.

"In my rankings, all wins are rated higher than all losses, if they aren't, then you're inherently suggesting that winning and losing don't matter and/or are secondary when they're actually, as I said, the reason why people play games/compete...TO WIN!"

i'm too lazy to read this whole thread, and probably won't check back in later, but... to say that it means your team is better to have beaten the worst team than to have lost to the best team is insane.

it means nothing to beat the worst team except that you weren't the worst team that day, and it means nothing to lose to the best (except that you weren't the best that day).

If your RPI is 48 at the end of a season, you are probably a pretty good team regardless of your record.

Quote: Originally Posted By thewizard2 on 1/03/2010What's the RPI of the 7-7 team now? Assuming the top team won their game when they played?

Team #1 14-0
Team #2 13-1
Team #3 12-2
Team #4 11-3
Team #5 10-4
Team #6 9-5
Team #7 8-6
Team #8 7-7
Team #9 6-8
Team#10 5-9
Team#11 4-10
Team#12 3-11
Team#13 2-12
Team#14 1-13
Team#15 0-1

You're putting this into a 15 team vacuum when we have hundreds of teams in the various divisions in HD. My ranking isn't an RPI per se, its a stand alone ranking, not an altered version of RPI.

Quote: Originally Posted By wronoj on 1/03/2010"In my rankings, all wins are rated higher than all losses, if they aren't, then you're inherently suggesting that winning and losing don't matter and/or are secondary when they're actually, as I said, the reason why people play games/compete...TO WIN!"

i'm too lazy to read this whole thread, and probably won't check back in later, but... to say that it means your team is better to have beaten the worst team than to have lost to the best team is insane.

it means nothing to beat the worst team except that you weren't the worst team that day, and it means nothing to lose to the best (except that you weren't the best that day).

If your RPI is 48 at the end of a season, you are probably a pretty good team regardless of your record.

Please read my examples on page 1...you'll get a better feel for it. 12-16 and 2-8 against the top 25 isn't a good season, I don't care what RPI says.

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

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 1/03/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 1/03/2010
Also, losing by a point to an elite team is inherently more impressive than beating a terrible team by a point.

No, the win rates higher than the loss. And again, if you think this is a ridiculous concept, I urge you to view my examples on page 1...an undefeated team ranked 136th....a .500 team ranked 13th...all with all wins being rated higher than all losses

All that shows is that the current formula may need some tweaking, which I've agreed with for years.

What I'm saying is that you may want/need to reconsider certain parts of your philosophy, and what I outlined above is one of them.

Think about real life. If one crappy MEAC team beat another really crappy MEAC team by a point, do you think that winning team would have a realistic shot of staying within a point of Kansas? Of course not.

The way you're looking at things, you're saying that a 1-point win over a crappy MEAC team is more impressive than a 1-point loss to Kansas, and that defies all logic and reason.