Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/21/2009
I think in games, where team ratings are so incredibly concrete (unlike real life which is a bit of a toss up...more reliance on W-L and perception), that your opponents team ratings should be the main basis for a ranking system.

Absolutely not. What a team does over the course of a season speaks for itself. If a 750-rated team has a losing record and 150 rpi, then a win against them means less than a win vs. a 700-rated team with 20 wins and a top 20 rpi. Period.

Personally, I think seble is overthinking the process. Its funny that something I FIRST griped about 5.5 years ago is just now finally getting attention.

They've made attempts to make it better before. Personally, there are a lot of areas I'd like to see them focus their time and energy other than this one.

Quote: Originally Posted By professor17 on 12/21/2009




Two concerns off mine, off the top of my head...

First, as someone who has tinkered with team ratings systems for many years, it is a firm belief of mine that any credible team ranking system has to take margin of victory into account. In fact, if I had to choose only one factor to use in a rankings system it would be margin of victory, similar to Sagarin's "Predictor" system. I have compared many different systems, and I believe using margin of victory gives the best indication of how teams should be ranked.

I do see where you're coming from. But nothing that's used for NT selection in real life examines margin of victory. That kind of thing is more necessary in football, where they play 1/3 as many games.

Also, you have to think about its application to HD. For instance, it would inherently favor uptempo teams vs. slowdown teams. That in itself is enough for me to say keep it the heck out of the formula.

Second, like dalter, I'm leery of having Top 25 used as a seeding/selection criteria. Especially if team ratings and/or team prestiges are used in the ranking calculations late in the season.

Right now the Top 25 is hugely waited to the power conferences. This would have to be totally fixed for me to have any degree of comfort with them using the top 25, and even there there are other significant issues.

The reality: In real life, the Top 25 is pure window dressing. It is voted on by assistants and low-level staffers who have but a passing familiarity with the vast majority of teams, and it is used to generate interest in the game. The selection committee does not look at it.

Using the Top 25 here would be a mistake, for many reasons.

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 12/21/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/21/2009

I think in games, where team ratings are so incredibly concrete (unlike real life which is a bit of a toss up...more reliance on W-L and perception), that your opponents team ratings should be the main basis for a ranking system.

Absolutely not. What a team does over the course of a season speaks for itself. If a 750-rated team has a losing record and 150 rpi, then a win against them means less than a win vs. a 700-rated team with 20 wins and a top 20 rpi. Period.

Regardless of wins and RPI, a win over a 750 is much more impressive than a win over a 700, period. If you think otherwise, quite frankly, you're insane. A teams underachievement with a huge rating is simply the coach's fault...the opponent shouldn't pay for that.

Personally, I think seble is overthinking the process. Its funny that something I FIRST griped about 5.5 years ago is just now finally getting attention.

They've made attempts to make it better before. Personally, there are a lot of areas I'd like to see them focus their time and energy other than this one.

I'd have this thing fixed in no time....I have a few different ways you could do it and last year, my college basketball rankings had the best ranking violation percentage of any Massey CBB system. I know what I'm doing...seble's throwing darts at a board.

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 12/21/2009Also, I think it's interesting that you criticize seble for "overthinking" the promise, and then stump for him to complicate it further by trying to implement a method that also includes margin of victory

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/21/2009
You're playing and beating a more talented team....THE RATINGS SAY SO....there's no guesswork here, this isn't real life....the ratings are DIRECTLY REPRESENTATIVE of how good teams are here. Wins and losses are largely based on SOS, thus its easier to cupcake a schedule and win a bunch of games as opposed to a 750 maybe taking on a tougher schedule.

Record and RPI have nothing to do with it, if you don't see how beating a 750 is more impressive than beating a 700, then I can't help you.



if you consider a 750 team with guys with jacked up stamina and durability better than a 700 team with fantastic ratings in the core areas by position then you indeed are blinded by the numbers.