You might consider putting in -5 for a David Bailiff coached team.

(09-16-2016 04:20 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(09-16-2016 10:57 AM)banker Wrote:  I am working on a ranking system (objective) for G5 programs and am developing a scoring system. Here's the rough start, but I would like some input.

Versus FCS
Home Win 1
Home Loss -3
Neutral Win 1.5
Neutral Loss -2
Away Win 2
Away Loss -1

Versus Unranked G5
Home Win 2
Home Loss -2
Neutral Win 2.5
Neutral Loss -1.5
Away Win 3
Away Loss -1

Versus Unranked P5
Home Win 3
Home Loss -1.5
Neutral Win 4
Neutral Loss -1.0
Away Win 5
Away Loss -0.5

Versus Ranked Team
Home Win 5
Home Loss 0
Neutral Win 6
Neutral Loss 0
Away Win 7
Away Loss 0

Couple issues right off the bat.
1. Points for playing 1-AA. They are irrelevant. The only time it's bad is when you lose. So you shouldn't get rewarded for playing or winning vs a 1-AA.

2. You're falling into the Roy Kramer / BCS mode by automatically giving a "POWER" 5 school credit over a NON "power" 5 based on your points. That's nonsense.

3. You rankings as a whole make Roy Kramer & Co. laugh at you, me, and everyone else they have been laughing at since day 1.

http://www.espn.com/blog/statsinfo/post/...ed-lightly

You argue in #1 that labeling, not the actual quality of the opponent, should be considered (awarding points for a win over Miami(OH) but not NDSU?), and then argue in #2 that labeling shouldn't matter, it should be about the quality of the opponent. Personally, beating the University of Richmond this year is a helluva lot more impressive than beating UVA.

call johnny 5, He can tell U about imput.

I'm working on something right now.... In the loo...