The Mad Scientist Top 25 Ranking Debate Topic

colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By a_in_the_b on 12/22/2009
CAn't measure? A win or loss is a binary number, the easiest thing to measure in existance.

\

I was talking about things like coach quality...offense/defense run, those kinds of things. Trust me, I have a system that also incorporates W-L and individual SOS...how else do you think I produce my own CFB and CBB rankings?

In this game, performance isn't the only indicator of strength like in real life...you know exactly how talented each team is because of the ratings. We don't have team/individual ratings in real life and if you claim to, they're subjective whereas in the game they're concrete. I think its a shame to not use what's there.
12/22/2009 5:56 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By a_in_the_b on 12/22/2009
I am sorry COlonels, but YOU are the one coming up with a new system which everyone else disagrees with> YOu have the burden of proof, and the fact that youw ill not fulfill it. . .

I am ready and willing my friend, and quite frankly, I'm the ONLY one. Zhawks said that a 780 could win 0 games and a 690 could lose 0 games...I say that is an incredibly ridiculous, extreme example that is an incredibly weak attempt to prove a point. I'm almost positive that this has never happened and that it never would...if it has, PROVE ME WRONG...zhawks was the one spouting stupid stuff about that topic, not me....don't spin this back on me. And this specific post is about zhawks' rating claims, so don't say I'm getting off topic because I'm not, I'm addressing a ridiculously impossible claim made by a supposed all knowing owner who hates on my ranking prowess because I've won 39% of my games.
12/22/2009 5:59 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/22/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By a_in_the_b on 12/22/2009

I am sorry COlonels, but YOU are the one coming up with a new system which everyone else disagrees with> YOu have the burden of proof, and the fact that youw ill not fulfill it. . .

I am ready and willing my friend, and quite frankly, I'm the ONLY one. Zhawks said that a 780 could win 0 games and a 690 could lose 0 games...I say that is an incredibly ridiculous, extreme example that is an incredibly weak attempt to prove a point. I'm almost positive that this has never happened and that it never would...if it has, PROVE ME WRONG...zhawks was the one spouting stupid stuff about that topic, not me ugh... no, wrong since you have not played at d1 period you have no idea about how it works, therefore you do not know that it is/isn't stupid or unreal.....don't spin this back on me. And this specific post is about zhawks' rating claims, so don't say I'm getting off topic because I'm not, I'm addressing a ridiculously impossible claim made by a supposed all knowing owner who hates on my ranking prowess because I've won 39% of my games. If you had won more games, hell or even have more wins then losses you might be taken seriously, since you clearly have little to no knowledge of this game you really aren't in any position to tell anyone how dumb their claims are, especially when you know very little about this game compared to those that you claim to know more then.
12/22/2009 6:05 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By metsmax on 12/22/2009
there are in the forums a host of threads that have discussed the relative significance of different ratings

there is a very good discussion of the different ratings in the new coaches handbook

it is clear to anyone who has played this game much that total ratings are a weak indicator of current team strength

1. total ratings includes WE, STA and DUR which have no gameplay effects (so long as you have enough depth)

2. total ratings ncludes ratings like LP and PE which affect game play only for certain players

3. other ratings are clearly NOT of equal effect on game play - saying that they all matter and therefore they are equal is simply false logic

4. Hoops IQ is a vital aspect of team strength and of course is not part of the players' numerical ratings

5. different ratings matter to different degrees in different schemes - for example DEF matters more in MTM and ATH matters more in certain other defenses

6. if one had no other data should one guess that a 750 avg team is probably better than a 650 avg team - sure, if one wants to guess

7. might one rely on total ratings as key focus in recruiting - sure, if one wants to lose a lot

8. might one rely on total ratings as basis for team strength in some rankings methodology - sure if one wants to be wrong



Part of my fight here is to campaign for change. I acknowledge that the overall ratings need improvement, but the problem for everyone else here is that no one but me is thinking outside the box. Everyone is thinking inside of the confines of the stupid, worthless, inaccurate overall team ratings and I'm stepping outside and saying let's make this better and let's make the rankings better in the process. My understanding of the game is not on trial here, and I think I know a lot more and play better than a lot of you think I do. I know zhawks likes to bring up my 39% win percentage....I've never coached an HD team in back to back seasons...bet you didn't know that huh? I'm better at the game now, I recruit better, I scrutinize different rankings better, etc. Am I as good as the top dogs here? Absolutely not...many of you are studs in the game, I'll give you that all day every day. Am I the worst player in the game? Nope...I'd say I'm slightly above average...I really want to enjoy the game this time around and really stay at a school that I like (Armstrong Atlantic State) in a conference that I like (Peach Belt) in the world that I prefer (Tarkanian), so as far as the in game stuff goes right now, its great...I'm 6-4 heading into conference competition and I'm having fun with it. This thread has done nothing to ruin my HD fun, I can honestly say that.
12/22/2009 6:07 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/22/2009
I've never coached an HD team in back to back seasons..
So you are a cherry-picker who can't win? Ouch, even diablo can sometimes do that much.
12/22/2009 6:08 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/22/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/22/2009

I've never coached an HD team in back to back seasons...
So you are a cherry-picker who can't win? Ouch, even diablo can sometimes do that much


You don't even know when I played, what teams I took over, etc...do some research eh? I'll be honest and tell you that my 6-22 Philly Bib Season in Tark, I didn't recruit or pay attention to at all...just simply wasn't interested. Things aren't as clear cut as you make them seem.
12/22/2009 6:12 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/22/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/22/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By a_in_the_b on 12/22/2009

I am sorry COlonels, but YOU are the one coming up with a new system which everyone else disagrees with> YOu have the burden of proof, and the fact that youw ill not fulfill it. . .

I am ready and willing my friend, and quite frankly, I'm the ONLY one. Zhawks said that a 780 could win 0 games and a 690 could lose 0 games...I say that is an incredibly ridiculous, extreme example that is an incredibly weak attempt to prove a point. I'm almost positive that this has never happened and that it never would...if it has, PROVE ME WRONG...zhawks was the one spouting stupid stuff about that topic, not me ugh... no, wrong since you have not played at d1 period you have no idea about how it works, therefore you do not know that it is/isn't stupid or unreal.....don't spin this back on me. And this specific post is about zhawks' rating claims, so don't say I'm getting off topic because I'm not, I'm addressing a ridiculously impossible claim made by a supposed all knowing owner who hates on my ranking prowess because I've won 39% of my games. If you had won more games, hell or even have more wins then losses you might be taken seriously, since you clearly have little to no knowledge of this game you really aren't in any position to tell anyone how dumb their claims are, especially when you know very little about this game compared to those that you claim to know more then.

You severely underestimate my intelligence. Find one other person on this site that says/thinks a 780 can win 0 games and a 690 could lose 0...and if its so possible then prove it and show me its happened, you're the one making the ridiculous claims and passing it off as fact because you think you're dealing with some fool that doesn't know any better....wrong again. You are wrong here, all day every day and you know it....own up to it man. Never happened and will never happen unless you tank a 780 just to prove a point.

Arguing with people who NEVER admit when they're wrong when they clearly are (IE this instance) is pointless/worthless. If you keep pitching this bs, there's no more reason to discuss anything with you.
12/22/2009 6:15 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Just because something hasn't happened does not mean it can not.

And four hundredthly using overalls in that since is completely misleading. That 780 team, they have 100 we/st/dur, while the 690 team has 80 sta and 5 we/dur. seems like now you're the one in the hole.
12/22/2009 6:18 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/22/2009

Just because something hasn't happened does not mean it can not. So let's see...we have 10 worlds with about 40 seasons per world....if it hasn't happened in 400 total HD seasons (and you haven't proven that it has) what makes you think it can or ever will happen? Do you see what a boob you look like because you don't think past surface miniutae?

EDIT: it looks like 360-370 seasons, regardless...still ridiculous. My 400 number was WRONG...hey look at that...take a lesson.

And four hundredthly using overalls in that since is completely misleading. That 780 team, they have 100 we/st/dur, while the 690 team has 80 sta and 5 we/dur. seems like now you're the one in the hole. And the extremist is back....if and when it ever happens...come tell daddy....Chances are team compositions aren't going to be even close to that...hell sims don't even recruit that badly.

12/22/2009 6:20 PM
lostmyth2
Posts: 2 (0)
Hall of Famer
191 3 2
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/22/2009
You severely underestimate my intelligence.
Actually, it's more likely he's overestimating your intelligence.
12/22/2009 6:22 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/22/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/22/2009

Just because something hasn't happened does not mean it can not. So let's see...we have 10 worlds with about 40 seasons per world....if it hasn't happened in 400 total HD seasons (and you haven't proven that it has) what makes you think it can or ever will happen? Do you see what a boob you look like because you don't think past surface miniutae?

And four hundredthly using overalls in that since is completely misleading. That 780 team, they have 100 we/st/dur, while the 690 team has 80 sta and 5 we/dur. seems like now you're the one in the hole. And the extremist is back....if and when it ever happens...come tell daddy....Chances are team compositions aren't going to be even close to that...hell sims don't even recruit that badly.

Small sample size.
12/22/2009 6:23 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By lostmyth2 on 12/22/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/22/2009

You severely underestimate my intelligence.

Actually, it's more likely he's overestimating your intelligence.

Do you have something to add or not? You pick the most worthless, non-game related sentence of that post and that's all you got....go back to your kids' table....
12/22/2009 6:24 PM
lostmyth2
Posts: 2 (0)
Hall of Famer
191 3 2
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/22/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By lostmyth2 on 12/22/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/22/2009

You severely underestimate my intelligence.

Actually, it's more likely he's overestimating your intelligence.

Do you have something to add or not? You pick the most worthless, non-game related sentence of that post and that's all you got....go back to your kids' table...
Yes, I do have something to add. I'm here to mock you. Please continue.
12/22/2009 6:25 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Quote: Originally Posted By lostmyth2 on 12/22/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/22/2009

You severely underestimate my intelligence.

Actually, it's more likely he's overestimating your intelligence.

Ya know, now that you mention it lm, I likely am since he can't seem to even come close to understanding anyones approach to identifying the fallacy in his reasoning.
12/22/2009 6:25 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/22/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/22/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/22/2009

Just because something hasn't happened does not mean it can not. So let's see...we have 10 worlds with about 40 seasons per world....if it hasn't happened in 400 total HD seasons (and you haven't proven that it has) what makes you think it can or ever will happen? Do you see what a boob you look like because you don't think past surface miniutae?

And four hundredthly using overalls in that since is completely misleading. That 780 team, they have 100 we/st/dur, while the 690 team has 80 sta and 5 we/dur. seems like now you're the one in the hole. And the extremist is back....if and when it ever happens...come tell daddy....Chances are team compositions aren't going to be even close to that...hell sims don't even recruit that badly.

Small sample size
370 seasons is a small sample size....LMFAO...that's out and out hilarious.....is everyone else reading this too? Yep...351,500 team seasons is an incredibly small sample size. You look ridiculous...you really might want to stop.
12/22/2009 6:26 PM
◂ Prev 1...28|29|30|31|32...75 Next ▸
The Mad Scientist Top 25 Ranking Debate Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.