What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

College Football 2021: Cash is King

Yea, it's amazing that any SEC loss would be a quality loss, just because. Even though many of the SEC OCC games are against DI-AA teams.

The real problem, though, is the playoff performance of the SEC.... Other than OSU and Clemson, it's been the SEC show.
 
bronconick said:
They're going to slag Cincy for an 8 point win on Tuesday while ignoring that Alabama looks like chit with one score wins over teams with losing records
Click to expand...
Oh10 St didn't look too hot yesterday and would have been beaten by a few decent teams playing the way they did on the road. Well, except Michigan.
 
Last edited:
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Again, I disagree. Fact is, a team cannot be both 8th and 68th. One of the "stupid systems" that is being used is wrong, and we shouldn't be using "stupid systems" at all. Also, by your examples you point out exactly why the Massey Composite is flawed...in no world should any ranking that factors in first downs while a mascot is dancing have any weight whatsoever. But maybe that's how Clemson got ranked 8th. ; )
Click to expand...

Massey is like Jack Daniel's Old No. 7. It's blended whiskey. You might have a bad barrel in the bottling batch, but the other 200 barrels should mitigate those effects and give you consistency.

Using just one system is like Jack Daniel's Single Barrel. Whatever's in there is in there.
 
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Again, I disagree. Fact is, a team cannot be both 8th and 68th.
Click to expand...
Of course it can. You got lost on dx's extreme example of mascot dancing, but the point is valid. For example, if I subscribe to the cliche that defense wins championships, then my "objective" numbers-based rating system is going to be biased toward teams with great defensive numbers, even if they're losing all of their games. Someone else's system may be biased in favor of scoring or yardage or yards per play or margins of all those things, or whatever. So yes, it's very possible for teams to have wildly different ratings in different (non-frivolous) rating systems, each of which is built with a good faith intention to identify the best teams. Definitions of "best" just happen to vary. A lot.
 
LynahFan said:
Of course it can. You got lost on dx's extreme example of mascot dancing, but the point is valid. For example, if I subscribe to the cliche that defense wins championships, then my "objective" numbers-based rating system is going to be biased toward teams with great defensive numbers, even if they're losing all of their games. Someone else's system may be biased in favor of scoring or yardage or yards per play or margins of all those things, or whatever. So yes, it's very possible for teams to have wildly different ratings in different (non-frivolous) rating systems, each of which is built with a good faith intention to identify the best teams. Definitions of "best" just happen to vary. A lot.
Click to expand...

For example:
http://rpihockey.net/misc.rank1.shtml

Even the difference between two ranking systems that use the same methodology but differing data. RPI-PWR and KRACH-PWR. Wisconsin varies between the two by 10, which is fairly large in a small field.

Same with RHEAL and HEAL. One is just recursive and the other isn't. Same data, same general methodology, just a different calculation method. Wisky is ranked 10 in one and 28 in the other. Despite being fairly similar.
 
Last edited:
dxmnkd316 said:
For example:
http://rpihockey.net/misc.rank1.shtml

Even the difference between two ranking systems that use the same methodology but differing data. RPI-PWR and KRACH-PWR. Wisconsin varies between the two by 10, which is fairly large in a small field.

Same with RHEAL and HEAL. One is just recursive and the other isn't. Same data, same general methodology, just a different calculation method. Wisky is ranked 10 in one and 28 in the other. Despite being fairly similar.
Click to expand...

Again, I disagree. The same team cannot be both the 8th best team AND the 68th best team. That is the purpose of each individual rating...to figure out the best team. One (or more likely, both) of them is wrong, and we shouldn't consider obviously incorrect data. And to the extent that a rating isn't trying to rank the best team, but some other metric, well then why the hell would you use such a rating.

Also, a difference of 10 (or even 18) when comparing approximately 60 hockey teams is not the same as the difference of 60 when comparing 130 football teams. That being said, to the extent you had a difference in ratings of say 30, would again show that one of the ratings is wrong.
 
Last edited:
I'm an as-shole. I know.

the wave at Iowa is not the best tradition in college football. It's not in the top 25.
 
dxmnkd316 said:
I'm an as-shole. I know.

the wave at Iowa is not the best tradition in college football. It's not in the top 25.
Click to expand...

The wave started at Washington. They are the only people who can do it without seeming like as-sholes.

Edit: oh, god, I just read about the Iowa one. Jesus fuck, you want to help the patients at the children's hospital? SPEND ALL THE MONEY YOU WASTE ON FOOTBALL ON THE HOSPITAL!

Fuck Iowa and fuck the media gargoyles that pitched that sanctimonious garbage.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top