Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/25/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 12/24/2009
We've danced this exact dance before, but I'll be happy to explain it again, slowly.
YOU ARE TAKING TEAM RATINGS AS THE ABSOLUTE MEASURE OF WHICH TEAM IS BETTER. TEAM RATINGS ARE NOT AN ABSOLUTE MEASURE OF WHICH TEAM IS BETTER, BECAUSE THERE ARE MANY EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FACTORS OUTSIDE OF TEAM RATINGS (NOT TO MENTION SOME PRETTY IMPORTANT FACTORS WITHIN THE RATINGS THEMSELVES.) Team ratings are the overwhelming majorital reason as to why teams win and lose games...player ratings are the MAIN determinant in who wins and who loses, are they not? Yes all those other things matter, but team ratings, begotten from player ratings that are the main determinant in who wins and loses, matter MOST, so if you're going to use any SOLE factor to base SOS on, I LOGICALLY chose the right one....no? Please understand that I would like to tweak the overalls as well, I think this gets lost/forgotten whenever you reply to me...seriously.

Once again, you think that a win over a 620-rated, low iq team w. a mediocre coach is more impressive than a 600-rated, high iq team coached by OR. Ideally, I'd like to factor IQ into an overall team rating. By your logic, you'd rather face a 780 with a worse record than a 690 because they have a worse record...who's logic is more sound or quite simply, who has logic and who doesn't? You've suggested that W-L is more important than overall team rating, so don't start back tracking now.

That is so patently absurd, I can scarcely respond to it. For the 750th time, you've never remotely considered the concept, so this is just a way for you to weasel out of legitimate arguments. You can't hang with me and deep down, you know it.

Attempting to determine team strength using just basic ratings rather than actual performance is ... wait for it ... flawed. We all understand that but you. Well, your performance angle says beating a 690 that's 16-10 is better than beating a 780 that's 9-17...what exactly does that say about you and your concepts? You want to sit and grandstand and stand on a mountain top and ACT like you're infallable, and I'm just picking you apart.

Quote: Originally posted by dalter on 12/25/2009Really, stop embarrassing yourself.

Quote: Originally Posted By antonsirius on 12/25/2009

Quote: Originally posted by dalter on 12/25/2009
Really, stop embarrassing yourself.

He's been doing it for years... why would he stop now


If you have nothing to add (^^^^^^ case in point) get lost.

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 12/25/2009
You have nothing to add, but you're still here. Why would you apply a double standard to anton? I have pending, unanswered, legitimate questions to you that you refuse to answer.

Against my better judgment, I'll take a look at those two posts and see if there's anything new to respond to.

But so we're clear, it's beyond ludicrous to say I piggybacked coachbilly's argument. I've spent the last 30 pages telling you that overall rating was a poor measure of SOS/team quality, and all of the sudden when he agrees with me, I'm piggybacking? That's some pretty incredibly logic right there. To blatantly skip over 2 direct posts at you yet to comment on billyg's "negative" comment to me and just further what he said...if that isn't piggy-backing, what do you call it?

Spot me a +70 overall rating and I'll beat you everyday of the week .

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/25/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 12/25/2009

But so we're clear, it's beyond ludicrous to say I piggybacked coachbilly's argument. I've spent the last 30 pages telling you that overall rating was a poor measure of SOS/team quality, and all of the sudden when he agrees with me, I'm piggybacking? That's some pretty incredibly logic right there. To blatantly skip over 2 direct posts at you yet to comment on billyg's "negative" comment to me and just further what he said...if that isn't piggy-backing, what do you call it?

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 12/25/2009
From the first post, the only thing I think you wanted me to respond to would be the Madden question, and my response is: I don't play Madden (or any video games), I wouldn't have the foggiest idea. I reworked the question to be HD specific....its really a text/video game wide question...not just for one game.

From the second post, your point that I should be responding to is that player ratings are the main determinant for wins and losses. I would respond thusly:

If there is an overwhelming ratings advantage, I would say ratings are definitely the most important component. If two teams are relatively close ratings-wise, then I would say that coaching, iq's, strategy, etc. can generally trump a reasonable gap in ratings. (Or, if two teams have similar ratings, than one team can actually be significantly better due to those and other factors.) This has nothing to do with ratings advantages and degrees of ratings advantages. Players are the main determinant of wins and losses in HD, yes or no?

Next, I didn't say that W-L by itself was more important than overall team rating, or anything close to it. I did say that the combination of W-L and SOS was more indicative of how well a team had actually performed than it's overall team rating, and that's what needs to be measured. I completely agree with you that W-L and SOS delegates how well a team has performed, but at the heart of the issue, it doesn't tell you how good the team is, it tells you how well they play. The overall team rating tells better of how good the team is as opposed to how well they play...right or wrong? I do rankings both ways, so your basing a ranking based off of W-L and SOS I'm in complete agreement with, its just this other different side of the coin that we're "discussing"

Anything else specific that I need to respond to?

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 12/25/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/25/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 12/25/2009

But so we're clear, it's beyond ludicrous to say I piggybacked coachbilly's argument. I've spent the last 30 pages telling you that overall rating was a poor measure of SOS/team quality, and all of the sudden when he agrees with me, I'm piggybacking? That's some pretty incredibly logic right there. To blatantly skip over 2 direct posts at you yet to comment on billyg's "negative" comment to me and just further what he said...if that isn't piggy-backing, what do you call it?

It's the same point I'd already been making for 30 pages. That's the opposite of piggybacking.

Piggybacking would be if I had been saying something different, then coachbilly came in with a new idea that I had never talked about, and I jumped on it.

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 12/25/2009
That's right, you don't know what piggybacking is, apparently. I explained what piggybacking is above. Piggybacking would be if I jumped on his point that I hadn't previously brought up. But you didn't continue with your argument, you went out of your way to address and agree with billyg's assessment in attempt to further gang up on me, because you know you're losing steam here.

Again, there was nothing new in those posts that myself and others hadn't already responded to many times. You seem to enjoy having the exact same exchanges many times over many pages. I do not. There are still unanswered questions...don't act like there aren't.