|
Replies: 28
| visibility 1
|
Rock Defender [67]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 167
Joined: 10/16/03
|
Sagarin ratings question
Sep 16, 2013, 2:27 PM
|
|
Looking at the strength of schedule rankings on the sagarin ratings (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sagarin/?fullsite=true) I am pretty curious how that is determined. FSU's schedule is ranked 70 and Clemson is at 109. Just strikes me as odd that there is that big of a difference for same division ACC teams that play ranked SEC rivals. Anyone know how that works?
|
|
|
|
 |
110%er [5977]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6620
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Based on games played not future games.......
Sep 16, 2013, 2:30 PM
|
|
I think its the most worthless poll around right up there with the Harris Poll.......... Don't they have Clemson ranked outside the top 20?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8681]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8888
Joined: 10/19/11
|
Harris Poll doesn't get released until week 8***
Sep 16, 2013, 2:32 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30593]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 28685
Joined: 8/17/05
|
the reason is
Sep 16, 2013, 2:30 PM
|
|
FSU is Back baby!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [60244]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42567
Joined: 11/30/98
|
isn't the SOS through the present week, not the whole year?
Sep 16, 2013, 2:30 PM
|
|
Bama has SOS #1, UGA has SOS #2 right now. ND State has #3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [67]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 167
Joined: 10/16/03
|
Re: isn't the SOS through the present week, not the whole year?
Sep 16, 2013, 2:36 PM
|
|
Yeah, I considered that (and I may not be remembering this right) but I think our SOS improved a few spots since playing SCSU. Also, I guess I wasn't sure that FSU's resume warranted that high of a ranking in that category.
Not saying you're wrong but it's still a head scratcher based on those things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [60244]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42567
Joined: 11/30/98
|
playing road games is a huge SOS booster
Sep 16, 2013, 2:40 PM
|
|
FSU playing at Pitt makes a big difference. We haven't played an away game. Ours will rise this week.
UGA played at Clemson.
Bama has played TWO away games (one was neutral site). That's why they are #1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40951]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42964
Joined: 11/30/98
|
It makes perfect sense that UGA is ranked higher
Sep 16, 2013, 2:51 PM
|
|
because they had to play us on the road. And yes, Sagarin had them ranked higher the week after we beat them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [61]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 82
Joined: 12/12/02
|
Re: isn't the SOS through the present week, not the whole year?
Sep 16, 2013, 3:08 PM
[ in reply to Re: isn't the SOS through the present week, not the whole year? ] |
|
Guys...I had a professor at Clemson that always had the right solution for these problems, he called it "RTDP, Read The #### Problem"
From USATODAY, Sagarin site:
"The SCHEDULE ratings represent what the rating would have to be for a hypothetical team to have a mathematical expectation of winning precisely 50% of their games against the schedule played by the team in question in the games that it has played so far."
So this means that against our current schedule, any living/breathing college team could be 1-1 because SC State is so low in the rankings. Or, more specifically for Clemson's schedule, anyone at or above the ranking of 109 should be able to win 50% of the games we have played.
Our SOS for Sagarin will continue to rise significantly as we play this year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14921]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12314
Joined: 3/28/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
They certainly shouldn't decide it after 3 weeks.***
Sep 16, 2013, 2:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Serious answer: probably because FSU played
Sep 16, 2013, 2:48 PM
[ in reply to How does that mean FSU has a better SOS than us so ] |
|
on the road for a game. And the fact that Pitt and Nevada are a combined 2-1 in their games other than FSU. And the fact that Clemson played SC State, who would rate far lower than any team FSU has played.
Clemson will pass FSU in SOS this week. But it's still WAY too early for computer ratings to mean much of anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14921]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12314
Joined: 3/28/06
|
I guess that makes some sense but at some point,
Sep 16, 2013, 3:11 PM
|
|
don't these formulas become endless cycles that reinforce themselves? It's kind of like the SEC argument that SEC teams are good because they play other SEC teams.
This is why we need a 16-team playoff: no polls, no media, no subjectivity, no circular logic, just on-the-field results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6687]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 9749
Joined: 9/22/11
|
Sagarin is a computer geek who has no common sense.***
Sep 16, 2013, 2:33 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4267]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2664
Joined: 9/24/11
|
I think I put Sagarin in my unsweet tea ***
Sep 16, 2013, 2:34 PM
|
|
#notsure
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [855]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 649
Joined: 1/20/05
|
Sagarin causes cancer in laboratory mice. ***
Sep 16, 2013, 2:52 PM
|
|
nm
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [67]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 167
Joined: 10/16/03
|
Wait, I changed my mind. This is the best answer***
Sep 16, 2013, 2:55 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19352]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 22266
Joined: 4/25/04
|
Re: Sagarin ratings question
Sep 16, 2013, 2:37 PM
|
|
Sagarin ratings are garbage until at a minimum week 6. I am not sure why anyone would look at them until then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [67]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 167
Joined: 10/16/03
|
Re: Re: Sagarin ratings question
Sep 16, 2013, 2:50 PM
|
|
I guess this is the most useful answer. It's useless to worry about all these #s until we can put a 13 in the win column.
But for the first time in a while it is nice to feel like we have a team capable to make us worry about top 2 BCS rankings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24849]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42665
Joined: 7/31/10
|
Posted about this before. Sagarin ASSigns SOS based on
Sep 16, 2013, 2:49 PM
|
|
nothing that I can see. Take Bama as an example. If you rank their schedule by last year's opponents' records, they would have started with the #104 toughest in the country. If you rank them by the opponents' final ranking from last year, they would have started with the #55 toughest in the country. Sagarin magically gave them #35 to start. Whatever his undisclosed algorithms may entail, his input data is flawed from the outset. You can't build anything worth having on a lousy foundation. Clemson has beaten the highest ranked opponent of anyone this year. The AP knows it and the coaches know it. Sagarin's system doesn't reflect it. Something's wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
That's what human polls are for.
Sep 16, 2013, 2:54 PM
|
|
No computer is going to "know" that Clemson beat the highest-ranked team with a loss. A computer knows that a team's opponents are a combined 65-43, and that their opponents' opponents' are a combined 343-385, and that they have a total scoring margin of 5.4 points per game, and that they have played 5 road games and 7 home games. (Just making all those numbers up for illustration.)
What the computers would do is try to remove as much human bias as possible, such as that which would be generated by lots of media attention, for example.
There's certainly a valid viewpoint that either computer polls, human polls, or both are worthless. But you can't expect a computer to take into account things that are numerical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
*aren't numerical***
Sep 16, 2013, 2:55 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24849]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42665
Joined: 7/31/10
|
It was from a Phil Steele preseason article. I would have to
Sep 16, 2013, 3:13 PM
|
|
go back to find the link. Considering the Sagarin claim of "ratings" in their explanation, I still stand by my argument. A computer calculation, whatever the algorithm, is only as good as the input data and I have yet to see an explanation of the original inputs. As to how it works out through the season, it will probably 'adjust out' at some point. It's the starting point that I question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I don't think anything can be read into computer ratings
Sep 16, 2013, 3:18 PM
|
|
Until 2/3 of the way through the season. I think wanting them to be accurate after 1 or 3 weeks is asking too much. The only reason they publish them is to generate page clicks on the websites. They really don't serve any practical purpose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24849]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42665
Joined: 7/31/10
|
Agree, yet they are still considered in the BCS standings,
Sep 16, 2013, 3:22 PM
|
|
albeit later when BCS rankings start. Again, Sagarin is skewed from the start.
Message was edited by: SOLOS®
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I don't think "skewed" is the right word.
Sep 16, 2013, 3:24 PM
|
|
"Statistically insignificant" is what I would call it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6101]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 10117
Joined: 11/1/11
|
Re: Because they have to play us
Sep 16, 2013, 2:51 PM
|
|
and we're badass man.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22985]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16927
Joined: 12/2/00
|
Pretty sure Division II teams get slammed in Sagarin SOS***
Sep 16, 2013, 2:54 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 28
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
