BobcatAttack.com - For Fans of Ohio University Sports

Welcome Guest!
Create an Account

site search

where to watch

about us

advertise with us

help

BobcatAttack.com Message Board

Ohio Football

Topic: RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Topic: RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Author

Message

JSF
General User

Member Since: 1/29/2005
Location: Houston, TX
Post Count: 6,344

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/23/2014 7:05:22 PM

I was wondering why Oz had such a problem with this, then I went and found where Ohio State ranks on this.

"Loyalty to a hometown or city is fleeting and interchangeable, but college is a stamp of identity."- Kyle Whelliston, One Beautiful Season.

My blog about depression and mental illness: https://bit.ly/3buGXH8

Andrew Ruck
General User

Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 4,700

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/23/2014 11:41:27 PM

JSF wrote:

I was wondering why Oz had such a problem with this, then I went and found where Ohio State ranks on this.

Yup. First thing I thought of.

Andrew Ruck
B.B.A. 2003

The Situation
General User

Member Since: 7/12/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 957

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/24/2014 7:33:45 AM

Yeah Ozcat went out of his way to repudiate my rankings without giving them so much as a trial run. I also suspect butthurt.

(Butthurt: an inappropriately strong negative emotional response from a perceived personal insult.)

Thursday night action:

By the "Predictor" rating, "Golden_Mean" rating, and OVERALL rating Sagarin had Virginia Tech beating Miami last night. (His ELO_Chess rating, a contributor to the overall rating, had Miami 8 spots ahead of Virginia Tech)

What actually happened was a Hurricane 24 pt victory on the road.

And had Ozcat given a closer look at my rankings, he would've seen the U at #18 and Va Tech at #33.

So after only 2 games:

- Sagarin: 1-1
- Me*: 2-0

*The point of my most recent string of posts is to weaken Sagarin's approach by demonstrating simple, clearly defined, measurements that can effectively replace his rankings.

The Situation
General User

Member Since: 7/12/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 957

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/24/2014 1:02:48 PM

I found a minor error in my spread sheet. There was an (unintentional) gap where teams weren't getting credit for wins against teams with winning records who didn't beat teams with winning records.

This only significantly affected a small number of teams in particular by moving them up: WMU (91 to 74 right next to OHIO at 73), Wisconsin (70 to 53), and Ohio State (32 to 17). I've updated the original post accordingly.

The Situation
General User

Member Since: 7/12/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 957

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/25/2014 10:31:07 AM

I went over to the MAC Message board to get some feedback.

Long story short I made some modifications to the rankings. There wasn't a big shakeup, but I described my modifications and the big individual movers in the post below copied from that site. The original post has been updated:

---------------------------------------------------------------
=================================================
MileHighBronco Wrote:
I found it somewhat odd that, for example, a 6 - 1 Michigan State team is ranked not only worse than a 3 - 4 Michigan team but behind a 4 - 3 Toledo team. Central Michigan one spot behind MSU? Ahhh, no. These are just examples I spotted. There are many that just don't seem to make any sense but then I agree with Axe about small sample size of the data.
=================================================

I agree with you guys that there are are teams that currently have a placement that appears to be mis-aligned with the current level of talent that team puts on the field. Another example of this is 3-4 Texas, ranked #91. (Texas has wins over my #110 North Texas, my #87 Kansas, and my #52 Iowa State). Texas has zero (0) WVWTs or wins vs teams with a 0.500 record. Both Iowa State and Kansas were able to earn those accomplishments, Texas has not (yet). But don't look for Texas to sit at the bottom all season.

As far as the numbers go, there's just no way for me to justify Michigan State in the Top 32, let alone Top 16. Their only loss is to Oregon by 19. So what? You know who just lost to Oregon by 19 last night? My #80 Cal.

I made a minor inclusion to the spreadsheet this morning that help teams like Michigan State. Currently teams receive a one time Strong Loss Bonus (SLB) if their only losses are to Top 16 and Top 32 teams by 1 possession (T16 = 1pt; T32 = 0.5pt). I added two additional loss bonuses. Teams who only have losses to Top 16 teams get 0.25 pts. And teams who only have losses to T32 teams get 0.125 pts. Each tier is halved. And teams can only claim one (1) loss bonus total. Therefore teams receive one (1) 1pt, 0.5pt, 0.25pt, 0.125pt, or 0pt loss bonus.

What was affected by this inclusion? The biggest movers were Michigan State up 6, Minnesota up 4, Oregon State up 4. Fifteen (15) other teams received new loss bonuses, on the whole, the majority of teams move 0-1 spots, and no more than 6. The original post has been updated with these changes.

I then made a slightly more significant inclusion to my model. Previously I awarded Incremental Point Fraction Bonuses (IPFB) for indirect achievements (wins against team with winning records that also had wins against teams with winning records). Before this morning I only awarded the IPFBs for wins against winning teams. Now I award the same IFPB whether or not the team you beat has a winning record. (IFPBs are explained in more detail in the Bobcat Attack thread).

What was affected by this inclusion? There were 68 occurrences of this new IFPB. But not a big overall rankings shake up. Big individual risers were Oklahoma State up 16. Notre Dame up 11. Cal up 17. Minnesota up 17. Michigan State up 10 more (16 total from the first described modification). The average spot change was ~4.

Long story short, people can complain all they want about Michigan State or Texas OPPA++ rankings, but in reality, those teams quite literally haven't accomplished anything significant enough to warrant Top 32. I have no idea how Jerry Rig Jeff concludes Michigan State is #11. It seems to defy all numerical evidence. But I don't doubt that they can prove themselves to be a Top 32 OPPA++ team in a couple weeks.

If I went into OPPA to duct tape Michigan State to the Top 32 now, the integrity of my system would be compromised.

After the described modifications, Michigan State is now ahead of Michigan, Toledo, and Central Michigan (the conflicts MileHigh mentioned). Emotionally I agreed with MileHigh before the modifications, but now the numbers justify that.

Any other potential mis-alignments? (You've found two so far MileHigh)

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/25/2014 7:29:32 PM

Or, you could watch our actual games and get some factual information impressions.

oh--sorry for my invalid opinion.

whomonickersaftersomejerseyshoreknucklehead?

Where's the band?!
WHERE"S THE BAND?!

DesignspiritUSA.com
The Pets On The Go Collection of pet gear travel bags
The Holiday Tote Bigg Bagg Collection--over-sized, reversible, extra pockets; now love carrying packages as much as you love shopping!

The Situation
General User

Member Since: 7/12/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 957

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/26/2014 11:30:50 AM

Monroe Slavin wrote:

Or, you could watch our actual games and get some factual information impressions.

oh--sorry for my invalid opinion.

whomonickersaftersomejerseyshoreknucklehead?

My OPPA++ rankings correctly picked the winner of 36 of 46 FBS match-ups (78%) this week. Sagarin correctly picked 37 of 46 FBS match-ups (80%) this week. Seventy-four percent of our picks this week matched.

The statistical advantage of using Sagarin's overall ratings instead of my OPPA++ rankings this week to predict win/loss was +0.7%.

The results speak for themselves.

Last Edited: 10/26/2014 11:32:40 AM by The Situation

The Optimist
General User

Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: CLE
Post Count: 5,552

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/26/2014 12:12:50 PM

The Situation wrote:

Monroe Slavin wrote:

Or, you could watch our actual games and get some factual information impressions.

oh--sorry for my invalid opinion.

whomonickersaftersomejerseyshoreknucklehead?

That is a very impressive record.

I feel comfortable assuming a fair amount of the detractors on this board do not have the necessary math skills to even began to comprehend what you are doing. A win/loss record like the one you just posted might not shut them up, but it will certainly prove they have no clue what they are talking about.

I've seen crazier things happen.

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/26/2014 1:10:07 PM

One week sample.

Key result: Ohio at WMU. Not concerned, in my invalid opinion, about the rest. What's this all say about making us better?

The Situation
General User

Member Since: 7/12/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 957

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/26/2014 1:24:21 PM

Monroe Slavin wrote:

One week sample.

Key result: Ohio at WMU. Not concerned, in my invalid opinion, about the rest. What's this all say about making us better?

Isn't a conference championship game only a one week sample?

I've got 10 years of data. OPPA++ Rankings are no fluke when it comes to matching Sagarin effectiveness. I have no easy way to disseminate this information.

Also, I published the comparision results of week 7 in this very thread days ago.

P.S.

I continue to contend predicting games isn't a fruitful exercise because of point spreads. Betting win-loss won't get you very far in life. Win-loss bets burden the bettor with a significant (unproportional) amount of risk in order to earn substantial gains.

However I was 2 for 2 this week on the strong spread mis-matches I identified.

Last Edited: 10/26/2014 1:32:32 PM by The Situation

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/26/2014 1:38:19 PM

What you are doing here is fine. It's just of little interest to me. Fair enough; I'll leave it be and hope you enjoy it and hope you prove accurate.

Think about it, though and I think that you'll find a conference championship game to be more than a one week sample.

The Situation
General User

Member Since: 7/12/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 957

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/26/2014 1:49:27 PM

Monroe Slavin wrote:

Think about it, though and I think that you'll find a conference championship game to be more than a one week sample.

Think about? I just told you I have 10 years of data.

From the most literal sense of the phrase to the historical data:

- A CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIP GAME IS A ONE (1) WEEK SAMPLE. ENGLISH MOTHER F#�$�?, DO YOU SPEAK IT?!

I wouldn't have picked BG last year to win the MACC, and never did Sagarin.

Other big upsets in recent memory include Miami over NIU 2010 and Buffalo over Ball State 2008.

To this very day, Turner Gill only has two (2) wins all time against teams with winning records. One (1) of those two (2) wins was a MAC Championship Game.

The Situation
General User

Member Since: 7/12/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 957

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/26/2014 2:08:31 PM

The Optimist wrote:

Thank you for the compliment Optimist.

JSF
General User

Member Since: 1/29/2005
Location: Houston, TX
Post Count: 6,344

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/26/2014 3:39:43 PM

The Situation wrote:

I've got 10 years of data. OPPA++ Rankings are no fluke when it comes to matching Sagarin effectiveness. I have no easy way to disseminate this information.

Google Docs? You can upload spreadsheets to it and share publicly (assuming you did this on a spreadsheet).

The Situation
General User

Member Since: 7/12/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 957

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/26/2014 10:33:23 PM

JSF wrote:

The Situation wrote:

I've got 10 years of data. OPPA++ Rankings are no fluke when it comes to matching Sagarin effectiveness. I have no easy way to disseminate this information.

Google Docs? You can upload spreadsheets to it and share publicly (assuming you did this on a spreadsheet).

I appreciate the proposed solution. My emphasis though is on the word "easy". And I don't see an easy way to convey my conclusions without handing over the inner workings of a model I created from scratch. I do not feel compelled to do that (even with a password).

I've discussed very openly precisely what affects a team's OPPA++ ranking.

I believe I've demonstrated an advanced understanding of this topic. For the remaining doubters of my simple alternative to Jerry Rig Jeff I will leave you with this:

"Occam's razor (also written as Ockham's razor and in Latin lex parsimoniae) is a problem-solving principle devised by William of Ockham (c. 1287�1347). It states that among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Other, more complicated solutions may ultimately prove correct, but�in the absence of certainty�the fewer assumptions that are made, the better.

....

For each accepted explanation of a phenomenon, there is always an infinite number of possible and more complex alternatives, because one can always burden failing explanations with ad hoc hypothesis to prevent them from being falsified; therefore, simpler theories are preferable to more complex ones because they are better testable and falsifiable.[1][10][11]"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

Paul Graham
General User

Member Since: 1/18/2005
Location: The Plains, OH
Post Count: 1,424

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/27/2014 5:29:47 PM

I'd like some visibility into how the score maps to the point system. Seems like the score is a ratio but that's not described in your initial post.

Also, if this is just for fun, you should consider open sourcing it. It will only serve to improve your rankings.

Last Edited: 10/27/2014 5:40:36 PM by Paul Graham

The Situation
General User

Member Since: 7/12/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 957

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings (UPDATED RE-RANK)

Posted: 10/27/2014 6:20:08 PM

Paul Graham wrote:

I'd like some visibility into how the score maps to the point system. Seems like the score is a ratio but that's not described in your initial post.

Objective point scores for teams currently range from 0pts (SMU) to 10.77pts (Mississippi State). OPPA stands for Objective Points Per Attempt. So what you're seeing is the raw score divided by the number of attempts. (10.77/7 = 1.539)

The most points you can earn from a win is 2 (1pt plus the max IPFB of 1pt). So far LSU has the only 2pt victory for beating then #2 (and still #2 Ole Miss). This is a relative award. Theoretically more than one team can earn the max 2 pt victory. The max score is given to the team with a win over the team with the most wins vs winning teams to lose. A win against a team that only has 1 WVWT would be worth 1.2 pts currently (and will lose value as the season progresses because other teams push the max pt limit further).

I will see if I can put together some sort of visual on pt scoring in the coming weeks.

Paul Graham wrote:

Also, if this is just for fun, you should consider open sourcing it. It will only serve to improve your rankings.

I've genuinely enjoyed this process so far. We'll see how the message board discussion evolves. But don't expect to see a file dump on here any time soon.

Ozcat
General User

Member Since: 1/4/2005
Location: Gahanna, OH
Post Count: 818

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings

Posted: 10/29/2014 3:02:28 PM

GoCats105 wrote:

I only bring this up because some people (not you) feel like the SEC gets a leg up on other conferences simply based on reputation and notoriety. Well, there's a reason for that reputation: it's because the SEC is the best conference in college football, and it's really not that close.

This explains why their top 3 teams last year all lost their bowl games... But hey, A&M squeaked by Duke and Mississippi State beat Rice, so SEC! SEC!

JSF wrote:

I was wondering why Oz had such a problem with this, then I went and found where Ohio State ranks on this.

Actually, the initial rankings lost me with Arizona at 3. And fwiw, I'd put OSU right around 15 for now. I'd prefer it all together if rankings didn't exist until no earlier than Halloween.

The Situation
General User

Member Since: 7/12/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 957

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings

Posted: 10/29/2014 3:54:10 PM

Ozcat wrote:

Actually, the initial rankings lost me with Arizona at 3.

Really?! Arizona at #3 lost you?

Was it Arizona's October 2 victory at Oregon by 7 points that lost your trust? Or was it Arizona's one loss that exposed them? (lost by 2 to my then #8 USC; game included an Arizona failed 2 pt conversion)

If anything Michigan State in anyone's Top 10 throw's me for a loop. Michigan State is 6-0 against teams with losing records and 1-1 against teams with winning records. I guess Arizona would've been better off beating Nebraska than Oregon (who Michigan State lost to).

P.S.

OPPA++ has Arizona at #10 this week. For my own enjoyment I would like to know where you think the other plot flaws are.

Last Edited: 10/29/2014 3:57:22 PM by The Situation

GoCats105
General User

Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 6,922

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings

Posted: 10/29/2014 4:04:07 PM

Oz,

Not sure who you're referring to in your three losses. Auburn lost to an SEC-like team in FSU and Alabama simply didn't want to play the Sugar Bowl against Oklahoma. They lost to Auburn and pretty much didn't feel like playing, similar to the year they lost to Utah in the Sugar Bowl. That's just my opinion, but it's shared by many who watch college football.

I'm assuming your 3rd team is UGA? They didn't even make the SEC Championship, but let's pretend first they even were your 3rd team. They went 8-4 and were ravaged by injury (including a record-setting starting QB), so I wasn't surprised they lost to Nebraska.

The other three teams that were better, Mizzou, LSU and South Carolina, all won their bowl games.

Do you not think SEC is the best conference in college football? I'm just curious.

Last Edited: 10/29/2014 4:05:07 PM by GoCats105

cc-cat
General User

Member Since: 4/5/2006
Location: matthews, NC
Post Count: 3,822

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings

Posted: 10/29/2014 4:10:05 PM

Situation,

Having grown up in penn state country, I was shocked at where you had them placed in your initial rankings. I thought they would be blown out by OSU - shoulda paid attention to your numbers.

The Situation
General User

Member Since: 7/12/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 957

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings

Posted: 10/29/2014 4:12:05 PM

GoCats105 wrote:

Do you not think SEC is the best conference in college football? I'm just curious.

I had to Google it, but the SEC was 7-3 in bowl games last year. Maybe Oz got confused and thought the Big Ten's 2-5 record was 5-2.

The Situation
General User

Member Since: 7/12/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 957

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings

Posted: 10/29/2014 4:21:59 PM

cc cat/borna wrote:

I got a mouth full from the cubicle farm and the doors last Friday about that.

There's probably over a 90% chance Penn State already has 2 WVWTs that will hold through the season (placing them top half FBS). If Akron proves they can cobble together a few more wins Penn State will have a third. They're favored (in my book) to pick up a potential 4th WVWT against Maryland. That would place Penn State firmly in the Top 30 end of year.

GoCats105
General User

Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 6,922

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings

Posted: 10/29/2014 4:23:34 PM

cc cat/borna wrote:

They actually aren't that bad this year except one thing: their offensive line is terrible. If they had anything that resembled any kind of push, the running game would improve and Hackenberg would be even better than he already is.

cc-cat
General User

Member Since: 4/5/2006
Location: matthews, NC
Post Count: 3,822

Status: Offline

RE: My Mid-Season College Football Rankings

Posted: 10/29/2014 4:33:43 PM

The Situation wrote:

GoCats105 wrote:

Do you not think SEC is the best conference in college football? I'm just curious.

I had to Google it, but the SEC was 7-3 in bowl games last year. Maybe Oz got confused and thought the Big Ten's 2-5 record was 5-2.

SEC was 7-3 and two of those wins were against SEC teams. Two of the losses....1 to the national champion and 1 to the eventual #6 team (Oklahoma). Third loss Ga to Neb with Murray watching from sidelines.

Of note:
The Big Ten is 6-15 on or after Jan. 1 the last four seasons, including a 4-9 mark against the SEC.

The Big Ten finished with a 4-10 record in the Rose Bowl in the BCS era.

The Big Ten is 5-21 against Top 10 nonconference teams since 2006.

The Big Ten gets the respect it deserves - which is little and none.

Now the Pac may be a different story -- 6-3 last year.

Last Edited: 10/29/2014 4:38:25 PM by cc-cat

Showing Replies:	26 - 50 of 58 Posts
Jump to Page:	< Previous 1 \| 2 \| 3 Next >

View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics

There are 163 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com

163 Guests
0 Registered Users

There are no other users looking at this page.