Posted by Benis on 9/22/2020 6:02:00 PM (view original):
I see your point but you can't just look at this one game in a vacuum. Other teams are playing games too and their results matter. If there is a team that is ranked #15 and beat the #2 team, that's more impressive than beating the #300 team by 50.

It doesn't really work that way in real life, I agree, but maybe it should. Typically in real college bball the pollsters won't drop a team if they win, even if it's against a ****** team. Which is debatable if that makes sense or not.

Another consideration about real life is that the rankings don't update automatically after each game is played. Some teams can play upwards of 3-4 games in a week before the next set of rankings are released IRL.

So last night I left the starters in a few more minutes, and covered a 36 point spread (won by 37) yet dropped another spot in the rankings.

Meanwhile, my conference mate Wake Forest, a stacked team, has played two awful teams as well. They won by 21 (49 point spread) and 8 (22 point spread) and are still the number one team in the country. I'm not saying Wake shouldn't be the #1 team in the country, just that it still makes no sense that my team has dropped 10 spots despite winning by 41 and now 37.

Wake is the #1 team, ratings wise, at 783. (preseason #1, still #1)
My team, Clemson, is the #5 team ratings wise, at 744. (Preaseason #9, currently #18)

Posted by vegaskevin on 9/23/2020 8:31:00 AM (view original):
So last night I left the starters in a few more minutes, and covered a 36 point spread (won by 37) yet dropped another spot in the rankings.

Meanwhile, my conference mate Wake Forest, a stacked team, has played two awful teams as well. They won by 21 (49 point spread) and 8 (22 point spread) and are still the number one team in the country. I'm not saying Wake shouldn't be the #1 team in the country, just that it still makes no sense that my team has dropped 10 spots despite winning by 41 and now 37.

Wake is the #1 team, ratings wise, at 783. (preseason #1, still #1)
My team, Clemson, is the #5 team ratings wise, at 744. (Preaseason #9, currently #18)

The portion of the equation labeled 'talent' more heavily weights top 5 players on the team. I'm not in Naismith but looking at your schedule:

• Vermont has passed you: they have a stronger top 5 (their 842 average vs. your 838) and have beaten 2 better teams than you have.
• UConn has passed you: they have a stronger top 5 (their 846 average vs. your 838) and have beaten 1 better team than you have.
• WF has stayed #1: they have a stronger top 5 (their 889 average vs. your 838) and beaten 2 better teams than you have.

I'm not saying these guys are facing world-beaters but they're beating average enough D1 teams. You've legitimately faced two bad D2 level teams. Once you finish your non-conference, your rankings will more accurately reflect the ranking you deserve so don't stress it this early in the season. Again, rankings hold little importance and you should be more focused on your upcoming projection report positioning as opposed to the T25 rankings.

Posted by upsetcity on 9/23/2020 9:02:00 AM (view original):

Posted by vegaskevin on 9/23/2020 8:31:00 AM (view original):
So last night I left the starters in a few more minutes, and covered a 36 point spread (won by 37) yet dropped another spot in the rankings.

Meanwhile, my conference mate Wake Forest, a stacked team, has played two awful teams as well. They won by 21 (49 point spread) and 8 (22 point spread) and are still the number one team in the country. I'm not saying Wake shouldn't be the #1 team in the country, just that it still makes no sense that my team has dropped 10 spots despite winning by 41 and now 37.

Wake is the #1 team, ratings wise, at 783. (preseason #1, still #1)
My team, Clemson, is the #5 team ratings wise, at 744. (Preaseason #9, currently #18)

The portion of the equation labeled 'talent' more heavily weights top 5 players on the team. I'm not in Naismith but looking at your schedule:

• Vermont has passed you: they have a stronger top 5 (their 842 average vs. your 838) and have beaten 2 better teams than you have.
• UConn has passed you: they have a stronger top 5 (their 846 average vs. your 838) and have beaten 1 better team than you have.
• WF has stayed #1: they have a stronger top 5 (their 889 average vs. your 838) and beaten 2 better teams than you have.

I'm not saying these guys are facing world-beaters but they're beating average enough D1 teams. You've legitimately faced two bad D2 level teams. Once you finish your non-conference, your rankings will more accurately reflect the ranking you deserve so don't stress it this early in the season. Again, rankings hold little importance and you should be more focused on your upcoming projection report positioning as opposed to the T25 rankings.

Do you ever think that defending mediocrity is a worthwhile endeavor?

Now we're resorting to "their top 5 average!" to defend this rankings program?

Ok, I'll play.
Nothing against Vermont or UConn, but isn't this critique just as valuable:
Vermont has 5 players in the 500s (2 walkons) (Ok, one of them is at 601)
Uconn has 4 players in the 500s, all on scholarship.
Clemson has 1 player in the 500s that is redshirted.

How about 8th highest rated players?
Clemson's is 707. Its 9th is 688.
Vermonts is 601. Its 9th is 565.
UConns is 729. Its 9th is 584.

Ok, lets compare IQs
Clemson has 8 players at A- or better on offense. A 9th is at B+, 10th is B, 11th is B-.
Vermont has 3 players at A- or better on offense. 4th is B+, next 4 are B.
UConn has 5 players at A- or better on offense, 1 at B+, then 2 at B.

Clemson has 9 players at A- or better on Defense, 1 at B-, then one at C.
Vermont has 3 players at A- or better on Defense, 1 at B+, then 3 at b, then 2 at B-.
UConn runs Zone/Press so its not fair to compare straight letter grades, but they are much better than Vermont's.

In other words, both could be said to lack depth.

A team should not drop in the rankings, hell, almost out of the rankings after winning by 41 and 37 points.

When were the last improvements to this game? https://www.whatifsports.com/locker/site_updates.asp?sport=HD&numdays=5864

No, Clemson didn't play any world beaters. Hence the running up of the scores in both games. Clemson showed nothing that would lead anyone to believe its pre-season ranking was underseved.

Now do I believe Clemson is a top 10 team - that is a different argument. But for whatever reason the rankings program believed it was. Now, after winning by 41 and 37 points and saving the starters, the rankings program believes it should be almost out of the rankings.

You are right...the pre-season rankings program needs to be fixed !!

Posted by mullycj on 9/23/2020 12:48:00 PM (view original):
You are right...the pre-season rankings program needs to be fixed !!

That is certainly one valid interpretation. The SIM is just taking its time in correcting things!

Funny thing is I play Vermont in a few games.

Some bulletin board material for them I suppose, even though I never said they were a bad team at all. I'm very happy they're ranked, just don't think Clemson's ranking should have dropped yet, not that Vermont is either better or worse than Clemson.

For what it’s worth, UConn didn’t pass Clemson. We’ve been ahead of Clemson in every poll, starting at #5, moving to #3, then dropping to #8. We failed miserably to cover a 50+ point spread against a bad sim at home (as usual, I handicapped a solid team by forgetting to fill non-conference) but only dropped 5 spots. The system liked UConn better to start - it’s not OVR, it’s basically the weighted evaluation it uses, that we can attempt to approximate through user settings, if we choose - and it still does. The more games that get played, the more those results impact the system’s evaluation.

Posted by vegaskevin on 9/23/2020 11:35:00 AM (view original):

Posted by upsetcity on 9/23/2020 9:02:00 AM (view original):

Posted by vegaskevin on 9/23/2020 8:31:00 AM (view original):
So last night I left the starters in a few more minutes, and covered a 36 point spread (won by 37) yet dropped another spot in the rankings.

Meanwhile, my conference mate Wake Forest, a stacked team, has played two awful teams as well. They won by 21 (49 point spread) and 8 (22 point spread) and are still the number one team in the country. I'm not saying Wake shouldn't be the #1 team in the country, just that it still makes no sense that my team has dropped 10 spots despite winning by 41 and now 37.

Wake is the #1 team, ratings wise, at 783. (preseason #1, still #1)
My team, Clemson, is the #5 team ratings wise, at 744. (Preaseason #9, currently #18)

The portion of the equation labeled 'talent' more heavily weights top 5 players on the team. I'm not in Naismith but looking at your schedule:

• Vermont has passed you: they have a stronger top 5 (their 842 average vs. your 838) and have beaten 2 better teams than you have.
• UConn has passed you: they have a stronger top 5 (their 846 average vs. your 838) and have beaten 1 better team than you have.
• WF has stayed #1: they have a stronger top 5 (their 889 average vs. your 838) and beaten 2 better teams than you have.

I'm not saying these guys are facing world-beaters but they're beating average enough D1 teams. You've legitimately faced two bad D2 level teams. Once you finish your non-conference, your rankings will more accurately reflect the ranking you deserve so don't stress it this early in the season. Again, rankings hold little importance and you should be more focused on your upcoming projection report positioning as opposed to the T25 rankings.

Do you ever think that defending mediocrity is a worthwhile endeavor?

Now we're resorting to "their top 5 average!" to defend this rankings program?

Ok, I'll play.
Nothing against Vermont or UConn, but isn't this critique just as valuable:
Vermont has 5 players in the 500s (2 walkons) (Ok, one of them is at 601)
Uconn has 4 players in the 500s, all on scholarship.
Clemson has 1 player in the 500s that is redshirted.

How about 8th highest rated players?
Clemson's is 707. Its 9th is 688.
Vermonts is 601. Its 9th is 565.
UConns is 729. Its 9th is 584.

Ok, lets compare IQs
Clemson has 8 players at A- or better on offense. A 9th is at B+, 10th is B, 11th is B-.
Vermont has 3 players at A- or better on offense. 4th is B+, next 4 are B.
UConn has 5 players at A- or better on offense, 1 at B+, then 2 at B.

Clemson has 9 players at A- or better on Defense, 1 at B-, then one at C.
Vermont has 3 players at A- or better on Defense, 1 at B+, then 3 at b, then 2 at B-.
UConn runs Zone/Press so its not fair to compare straight letter grades, but they are much better than Vermont's.

In other words, both could be said to lack depth.

A team should not drop in the rankings, hell, almost out of the rankings after winning by 41 and 37 points.

When were the last improvements to this game? https://www.whatifsports.com/locker/site_updates.asp?sport=HD&numdays=5864

No, Clemson didn't play any world beaters. Hence the running up of the scores in both games. Clemson showed nothing that would lead anyone to believe its pre-season ranking was underseved.

Now do I believe Clemson is a top 10 team - that is a different argument. But for whatever reason the rankings program believed it was. Now, after winning by 41 and 37 points and saving the starters, the rankings program believes it should be almost out of the rankings.

Dude, I'm literally just telling you what WIS has specifically stated to be of importance in their ranking equation. IQ isn't mentioned in their equation, the team's worst players aren't mentioned in their equation.

I'm not going to play football and throw a fit that the ball isn't a sphere. If you don't like the way the game is designed, you can either accept it for what it is or not play. You don't get to decide what holds importance arbitrarily, like when you said 20-win seasons need to be heavily valued in the hiring process while your SOS was 250+, and complain when the game isn't designed to your liking.

Again, it's not a big deal. It'll all get settled over time as you play the rest of your schedule out. GL.

In Europe the Futbol IS a sphere

Posted by mullycj on 9/23/2020 3:14:00 PM (view original):
In Europe the Futbol IS a sphere

This is great!

Posted by shoe3 on 9/23/2020 1:54:00 PM (view original):
For what it’s worth, UConn didn’t pass Clemson. We’ve been ahead of Clemson in every poll, starting at #5, moving to #3, then dropping to #8. We failed miserably to cover a 50+ point spread against a bad sim at home (as usual, I handicapped a solid team by forgetting to fill non-conference) but only dropped 5 spots. The system liked UConn better to start - it’s not OVR, it’s basically the weighted evaluation it uses, that we can attempt to approximate through user settings, if we choose - and it still does. The more games that get played, the more those results impact the system’s evaluation.

Thanks for straightening that up. I had no idea where you started in the rankings.

And I expect to lose to you in game 10!

Clemson now 6-0 and ranked #3.

I'd say the rankings work fine.

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/27/2020 2:18:00 AM (view original):
Clemson now 6-0 and ranked #3.

I'd say the rankings work fine.

And we quickly found out in the next game we're not worthy of being ranked that high!

Now 7-1 and ranked #12.

I hope to not fall out of the 10-25 range, but the ACC is loaded as usual (#1 prestige conference). 8-8 there is an accomplishment many seasons.

Let's say I'm lucky enough to go 10-6 in conference and 8-2 in non-conference. That puts me at 18-8 and probably not ranked, even though I may have gone 5-5 or 6-4 against ranked teams. Meanwhile, a team like Vermont (was but no longer ranked and lost to Clemson) has 16 conference games against SIMS will sneak back into the rankings around the end of the season.

I do applaud Vermont for scheduling some decent teams non-conf though. There isn't always a lot of upside to playing a team like Vermont, their conference SOS you know is going to be horrible and they just might beat you!

Actually, I need to take scheduling lessons from joeykw18 - he manages to get a respectable SOS many seasons despite being in a sim dominated conference.