(12-26-2018 10:37 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 10:17 PM)stever20 Wrote:  my point is simple. in the RPI- a team with the tougher schedule even with a worse record would often times be ahead of another team...

And looking-
SMU's average victory- 254.25 opponents records are 27-54
Illinois average victory- 191.25 opponents records are 19-24

So Illinois wins even if they aren't tier 1/2 are a crazy 63 spots ahead of SMU. That's a pretty big deal....

And like I said earlier. In NET the gap is only 11 spots. In the RPI, the gap is currently 43 spots. So those 2 teams would be a bad argument for you going against the NET, as the NET has them a whole lot closer than the RPI does.

whoa whoa whoa...who do you think you are? Pesik?

Just let Coach P do the heavy lifting dude....

the nerve of some folks

Exactly! These players are human beings trying to do the best they can at the task at hand. I don't think that they think about playing a team ranked 10th in the NET and that they are ranked 50th or 100th. They still are going to play their best to try to win the game. And you know what, they expect to win the game. No athlete ever goes into a game thinking about losing. Their only goal is win and are not interested in moral victories. A loss is always going to be a loss. I know that I'm never happy about a loss, even to a better player or team. Who in their right mind is happy with a loss?

(12-26-2018 11:23 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 10:37 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 10:17 PM)stever20 Wrote:  my point is simple. in the RPI- a team with the tougher schedule even with a worse record would often times be ahead of another team...

And looking-
SMU's average victory- 254.25 opponents records are 27-54
Illinois average victory- 191.25 opponents records are 19-24

So Illinois wins even if they aren't tier 1/2 are a crazy 63 spots ahead of SMU. That's a pretty big deal....

And like I said earlier. In NET the gap is only 11 spots. In the RPI, the gap is currently 43 spots. So those 2 teams would be a bad argument for you going against the NET, as the NET has them a whole lot closer than the RPI does.

whoa whoa whoa...who do you think you are? Pesik?

Just let Coach P do the heavy lifting dude....

the nerve of some folks

Exactly! These players are human beings trying to do the best they can at the task at hand. I don't think that they think about playing a team ranked 10th in the NET and that they are ranked 50th or 100th. They still are going to play their best to try to win the game. And you know what, they expect to win the game. No athlete ever goes into a game thinking about losing. Their only goal is win and are not interested in moral victories. A loss is always going to be a loss. I know that I'm never happy about a loss, even to a better player or team. Who in their right mind is happy with a loss?

what does that have to do with ratings? Sorry but any rating system out there will have a point where SOS can overcome records at some points..... Totally will.

And looked at this..... There are 7 teams in the current RPI top 100 that have 5 losses....
avg rating in RPI for those 7 teams- 69.86
avg rating in NET for those same 7 teams- 88.86

There are only 5 teams in the current NET top 100 with 5 losses. 4 of the same teams as in RPI and then Dayton is in there as well... so for the 8 top 100 teams in either rating system
RPI avg 74.88
NET avg 87.38

So I would argue that the NET is doing what you are wanting it to do.

(12-26-2018 11:42 PM)stever20 Wrote:  what does that have to do with ratings? Sorry but any rating system out there will have a point where SOS can overcome records at some points..... Totally will.

And looked at this..... There are 7 teams in the current RPI top 100 that have 5 losses....
avg rating in RPI for those 7 teams- 69.86
avg rating in NET for those same 7 teams- 88.86

There are only 5 teams in the current NET top 100 with 5 losses. 4 of the same teams as in RPI and then Dayton is in there as well... so for the 8 top 100 teams in either rating system
RPI avg 74.88
NET avg 87.38

So I would argue that the NET is doing what you are wanting it to do.

You're assuming that I agree with either NET or RPI and that's a bad assumption. I used RPI as reference showing how bad both systems are. My complete disagreement is with SOS have too much influence in ratings. A 5 loss team should never be rated above a 2 loss team, unless they actually beat somebody. As I've said dozens of times in this thread, a loss, is a loss, is a loss.

Let's look at a complete football schedule because that's where we basically are right now in basketball schedules. The talk of UCF having a low SOS is bogus because they win all their games. Every loss a team accumulates actually strengthens a teams SOS.

For example, if UCF lost to UC, Cincy's record improves, actually increasing UCF's SOS but it still gives them a loss. I remember looking at the SOS of various teams during the season. Teams that had a horrible record (FSU at the time I looked had only a few wins) but were listed very high on the SOS. Did that make FSU a good team because their SOS was good?

Back to the basketball. Looking at Illinois 4 and 8,and 0 and 7 against tier 1/2 teams, gives them a high SOS, but still leaves them with losses. Had they won just 3 of those tier 1/2/ games, it would give them a much better record but a much worse SOS, since those teams that beat them now would have losses. You could say the same thing about Purdue's 7 and 5 record with the only good win at home against an OK Maryland team. Still 0 and 3 on the road. I thought road games mattered, I guess not.

As a team wins their SOS goes down and as they lose their SOS goes up. The two are related. I'd still rather have the wins than the losses. That's my complaint with SOS and my complaint with these rating systems. Not some artificial position as to where these teams should be rated. A loss is a loss and a win is a win, most important to me!

I think SOS has to be in any college system.... I mean otherwise you'd have teams doing what St John's did this year and not play anyone. What I like about the NET is yes, an undefeated team will be high no matter what- but when they lose that 1st one- look out. Furman was undefeated until about 10 days ago when they lost to a good LSU team on the road. They dropped in the NET 20 spots. Watch and see what happens to St John's if Seton Hall beats them on Saturday.....

Also, you are wrong about SOS. SOS is calculated based on teams records when NOT playing you. So for instance I play SMU today. They are 8-4 right now. If I beat them, 8-4 gets added into my calculations. If I lose to them, 8-4 gets added into my calculations. The result of the game doesn't mean anything towards SOS.

Road games matter- but also neutral site games as well. Purdue has a pretty decent one vs Davidson.

I surmise campus math departments are busy deciphering NET to reveal the best way to game it.

(12-27-2018 10:26 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  I surmise campus math departments are busy deciphering NET to reveal the best way to game it.

oh I definitely think you're right on that.....

Probably think days like Tuesday with only 4 games help them out a lot....

(11-26-2018 02:40 PM)ShockerFever Wrote:  

(11-26-2018 12:12 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(11-26-2018 12:06 PM)stever20 Wrote:  and they are out
Houston 18
Cincy 46
UCF 49
UConn 57
Temple 79
USF 123
Wichita 132
SMU 168
Tulsa 179
Memphis 189
Tulane 200
ECU 242

wichita and memphis fans aren't going to like this

Why? We’re currently 7th, already ahead of expectations.

Memphis on the other hand..

We’re currently not last, already ahead of expectations for next year.

It is still early, but Coach Gregory and USF may have found a perfect match for each other.

Tulsa will be top10 after the start 7-0 aac

(12-27-2018 10:21 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I think SOS has to be in any college system.... I mean otherwise you'd have teams doing what St John's did this year and not play anyone. What I like about the NET is yes, an undefeated team will be high no matter what- but when they lose that 1st one- look out. Furman was undefeated until about 10 days ago when they lost to a good LSU team on the road. They dropped in the NET 20 spots. Watch and see what happens to St John's if Seton Hall beats them on Saturday.....

Also, you are wrong about SOS. SOS is calculated based on teams records when NOT playing you. So for instance I play SMU today. They are 8-4 right now. If I beat them, 8-4 gets added into my calculations. If I lose to them, 8-4 gets added into my calculations. The result of the game doesn't mean anything towards SOS.

Road games matter- but also neutral site games as well. Purdue has a pretty decent one vs Davidson.

Wrong! SOS, is a season total, I know this for a fact. Ten games from now, that 8 and 4 team will not be 8 and 4. It's changes as the season goes along and absolutely each and every game is considered. You calculations are absurd. NUTS! Why in earth would all games not be in the calculations, that's absolutely nuts? I think you are losing credibility after each post.

(12-27-2018 12:03 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 10:21 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I think SOS has to be in any college system.... I mean otherwise you'd have teams doing what St John's did this year and not play anyone. What I like about the NET is yes, an undefeated team will be high no matter what- but when they lose that 1st one- look out. Furman was undefeated until about 10 days ago when they lost to a good LSU team on the road. They dropped in the NET 20 spots. Watch and see what happens to St John's if Seton Hall beats them on Saturday.....

Also, you are wrong about SOS. SOS is calculated based on teams records when NOT playing you. So for instance I play SMU today. They are 8-4 right now. If I beat them, 8-4 gets added into my calculations. If I lose to them, 8-4 gets added into my calculations. The result of the game doesn't mean anything towards SOS.

Road games matter- but also neutral site games as well. Purdue has a pretty decent one vs Davidson.

Wrong! SOS, is a season total, I know this for a fact. Ten games from now, that 8 and 4 team will not be 8 and 4. It's changes as the season goes along and absolutely each and every game is considered. You calculations are absurd. NUTS! Why in earth would all games not be in the calculations, that's absolutely nuts? I think you are losing credibility after each post.

SOS is be a season total, but for Temple- with say Missouri looking at their SOS going into Temple- their game with Temple isn't included. Missouri is viewed for Temple as a 8-2 team. Now, that same Missouri team is viewed for UCF as a 7-3 team. It's how a team is when they aren't playing the team they actually played.

That's how it was done in the RPI, and that's how I'd be fairly certain it's done in the NET.

from old BCS kind of explaining this-
http://www.nationalchamps.net/NCAA/BCS/s...xplain.htm

(12-27-2018 12:13 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 12:03 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 10:21 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I think SOS has to be in any college system.... I mean otherwise you'd have teams doing what St John's did this year and not play anyone. What I like about the NET is yes, an undefeated team will be high no matter what- but when they lose that 1st one- look out. Furman was undefeated until about 10 days ago when they lost to a good LSU team on the road. They dropped in the NET 20 spots. Watch and see what happens to St John's if Seton Hall beats them on Saturday.....

Also, you are wrong about SOS. SOS is calculated based on teams records when NOT playing you. So for instance I play SMU today. They are 8-4 right now. If I beat them, 8-4 gets added into my calculations. If I lose to them, 8-4 gets added into my calculations. The result of the game doesn't mean anything towards SOS.

Road games matter- but also neutral site games as well. Purdue has a pretty decent one vs Davidson.

Wrong! SOS, is a season total, I know this for a fact. Ten games from now, that 8 and 4 team will not be 8 and 4. It's changes as the season goes along and absolutely each and every game is considered. You calculations are absurd. NUTS! Why in earth would all games not be in the calculations, that's absolutely nuts? I think you are losing credibility after each post.

SOS is be a season total, but for Temple- with say Missouri looking at their SOS going into Temple- their game with Temple isn't included. Missouri is viewed for Temple as a 8-2 team. Now, that same Missouri team is viewed for UCF as a 7-3 team. It's how a team is when they aren't playing the team they actually played.

That's how it was done in the RPI, and that's how I'd be fairly certain it's done in the NET.

from old BCS kind of explaining this-
http://www.nationalchamps.net/NCAA/BCS/s...xplain.htm

And you don't find that BCS formula stupid? The example of FSU 1999 opponents actual record was 69 and 55 while the BCS formula changed them to 65 and 44. The opponents did really and truly have 11 more losses than listed.

If they wanted to be fair, all 1-AA (FCS) opponent records should have been eliminated altogether. It really hurt La Tech, who scheduled FCS games to get some home games they couldn't get playing FSU or 'Bama. They don't get wins but get losses. Another reason to hate these stupid systems. That's not a true SOS!

If NET is doing the same thing, than their system is just as flawed.

That was how RPI did it as well..... And conceptually, it makes total sense. How you did against that team is reflected in your win/loss record. What you want SOS for is to see how good your opponents are when they aren't playing you.....

(12-28-2018 12:03 PM)stever20 Wrote:  That was how RPI did it as well..... And conceptually, it makes total sense. How you did against that team is reflected in your win/loss record. What you want SOS for is to see how good your opponents are when they aren't playing you.....

That last line I bolded for you is total BS! No I want to see how good all the opponents I played in all games they played. Anything less than that is not SOS.

You love mixing apples and oranges. Reflecting on your record is NOT SOS. They are different measuring parameters. If your team gives their opponent a loss, that win reflects on your team AND gives your team the benefit of a fake SOS because your opponent's loss is not counted.

This logic reminds me of calling blue red and red blue. Just because NET/RPI/BCS use dumb logic doesn't mean I have to agree or like it.

Logic is not your strong suit is it. I'd love to play you in a game of chess. I use logic to win in chess, not make up things that aren't true, fake SOS.

can you show me ANYWHERE that uses SOS as you describe? Because it's not in any sport that I know of....

I'm beginning to think sfink is a member of that HolyLand.

(12-28-2018 02:22 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  I'm beginning to think sfink is a member of that HolyLand.

I don't think so.....

but anyways... looking at current AAC SOS....
Temple 100
Cincy 109
UCF 144
Houston 209

looking back to last year....
(for Temple, Cincy)- SMU was #107 in OOC SOS last year. They finished with the #60 overall SOS.
(for UCF)-Cincy was #142 in OOC SOS last year. They finished with the #45 overall SOS.
(for Houston)-Houston was #232 in OOC SOS last year. They finished with the #72 overall SOS.

So all 4 top teams should finish in the top 75 in overall SOS, and could be higher. Especially given the league overall is a little bit stronger than it was last year....

(12-28-2018 03:22 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-28-2018 02:22 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  I'm beginning to think sfink is a member of that HolyLand.

I don't think so.....

but anyways... looking at current AAC SOS....
Temple 100
Cincy 109
UCF 144
Houston 209

looking back to last year....
(for Temple, Cincy)- SMU was #107 in OOC SOS last year. They finished with the #60 overall SOS.
(for UCF)-Cincy was #142 in OOC SOS last year. They finished with the #45 overall SOS.
(for Houston)-Houston was #232 in OOC SOS last year. They finished with the #72 overall SOS.

So all 4 top teams should finish in the top 75 in overall SOS, and could be higher. Especially given the league overall is a little bit stronger than it was last year....

I'm not going to check/inquire how everyone is doing it. However if that's the way they're doing it than I disagree with all of them because they are doing it mathematically wrong for reasons I already stated.

(11-26-2018 12:06 PM)stever20 Wrote:  and they are out
Houston 18
Cincy 46
UCF 49
UConn 57
Temple 79
USF 123
Wichita 132
SMU 168
Tulsa 179
Memphis 189
Tulane 200
ECU 242

Updated through 12/29/18:
Houston 4
Cincy 26
UCF 40
Temple 60
Tulsa 90
UConn 96
Memphis 99
USF 103
Wichita 134
SMU 139
ECU 241
Tulane 289

next week
Tulsa 4
Coog High 90

(12-31-2018 08:34 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  next week
Tulsa 4
Coog High 90

Dude!

Tulsa 6
Coog High 100


It was right there and you fupped the duck!