Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Say it all here
Forum rules
NOTICE: Please be sure to check the CFP Message Board Rules and Regulations and the Read Me page before posting.
User avatar
CFP Admin
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 9:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby CFP Admin » Wed Aug 06, 2008 1:03 pm

ktffan wrote:
No, it started silly when someone made what's pretty obviously a ridiculous claim:

Ball State does not have a single win against any team at any time outside the MAC...not one...




I like everyone here , and the varied opinions they bring, so don't get me wrong. I've read many of your posts and respect your knoweldge and research.

What I was referring to as 'silly' was the extent to which Ball State was even discussed in this thread. It was brought up to pose a question about the rankings. And I'm sorry, but your validations to prove you were correct barely met minimum standards.

Was THAT worth the argument, or throwing the topic off-track?

I just wouldn't have bothered with the argument to begin with. Or I'd of said:
"well, they did beat Wichita State and Indiana State (and whoever else) when they were classified as 1-A teams. More recently, they beat Navy and UConn. But you're right, billybud, if you mean that they haven't demonstrated they could beat a 'big boy' yet."

That would have brought your knowledge to the table ... prevented further argument, made your point more quickly and easily ... My mistake was honest (as I admitted). I simply didn't examine Howell's data THAT closely but I can defend why that was the case - I was looking for something more glaring than being left to discern the conference affiliations of teams that mostly no longer even exist in 1-A.

billybud
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 10727
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:25 pm

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby billybud » Wed Aug 06, 2008 1:05 pm

Just add that statement re not settling arguments to a playoff scenario as well...you just argue about who did or didn't make the cut..
Last edited by billybud on Wed Aug 06, 2008 1:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“If short hair and good manners won football games, Army and Navy would play for the national championship every year.”

User avatar
CFP Admin
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 9:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby CFP Admin » Wed Aug 06, 2008 1:08 pm

billybud wrote:Just add that statement to a playoff scenario as well...



Yeah -this discussion proves that point even further, doesn't it.

User avatar
Spence
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 20970
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:52 pm
Location: Chillicothe, Ohio (Ohio's First Capital)
Contact:

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby Spence » Wed Aug 06, 2008 1:23 pm

billybud wrote:If LSU had played Hawaii's schedule...how would you know that they had the players to win an NC? You wouldn't. Any more than you knew whether Hawaii had the players (they didn't).

You are in the position of guessing whether a gaudy record against weak teams means anything other than you are a Koi....I guess you could have a real shark in the goldfish pond, but it would be a rare event. Like the rare Manatee that wanders into New York harbor.


Exactly, that is my point. But if they do have the players to win it - which they did - why should they be left out. Don't you have to account for that sort of thing in any ranking. I think you do.

If Florida State won much the same as Ohio State did last year, which the two conferences were fairly similar last year, wouldn't you believe they should play for the title? Even though, no one, not even most Buckeyes thought they were the best team. All the teams with a chance to go and there were at least four, lost. Someone had to go. Last year was a complete mess at the end of the season, I agree. Lots of teams were part of the same mess.

I am a believer that teams should play at least three teams in their "talent" range. The problem is the better teams do not want to play the Boise States of the world they want to play the Kent States. It is an all risk no reward for LSU to play Boise State, therefore unless they are forced to play them under a national scheduling type deal, it will never happen. That wouldn't completely solve the problem, but it would come darn close.
"History doesn't always repeat itself but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain

billybud
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 10727
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:25 pm

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby billybud » Wed Aug 06, 2008 4:11 pm

Exactly, that is my point. But if they do have the players to win it - which they did - why should they be left out. Don't you have to account for that sort of thing in any ranking. I think you do.


You have to have "magical thinking" in your methodology...that is..beating weak teams means that you are BCS bowl or national championship caliber

That is a faulty logic IMHO....You haven't shown that you have the players by beating good teams...you have only shown that you have the players to beat mediocre teams. Please, please, beat a couple teams in the Top 30 before you start talking BCS bowl.
“If short hair and good manners won football games, Army and Navy would play for the national championship every year.”

User avatar
RazorHawk
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 3627
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Inverness, FL
Contact:

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby RazorHawk » Wed Aug 06, 2008 4:43 pm

I think had LSU played Hawaii's schedule they would have been undefeated and probably would have had an average margin of victory of 40 plus points per game. Hawaii, if I remember correctly had to go to overtime to beat a couple of mediocre teams. With LSU winning by that margin they may have indeed found themselves in the National Championship game, or maybe not.

If there was a playoff, they certainly would have been given a chance to win the Championship. Oh, I forgot, no one wants a playoff.

Oh, and Ball St will be left out. :D
Hawkeye and Razorback fan in Florida

ktffan
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1054
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby ktffan » Wed Aug 06, 2008 4:44 pm

CFP Admin wrote:
ktffan wrote:
No, it started silly when someone made what's pretty obviously a ridiculous claim:

Ball State does not have a single win against any team at any time outside the MAC...not one...






Was THAT worth the argument, or throwing the topic off-track?


Well, yeah. Guess we'll disagree on that.

ktffan
Head Coach
Head Coach
Posts: 1054
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby ktffan » Wed Aug 06, 2008 4:49 pm

CFP Admin wrote:
ktffan wrote:
No, it started silly when someone made what's pretty obviously a ridiculous claim:

Ball State does not have a single win against any team at any time outside the MAC...not one...




I like everyone here , and the varied opinions they bring, so don't get me wrong. I've read many of your posts and respect your knoweldge and research.

What I was referring to as 'silly' was the extent to which Ball State was even discussed in this thread. It was brought up to pose a question about the rankings. And I'm sorry, but your validations to prove you were correct barely met minimum standards.

Was THAT worth the argument, or throwing the topic off-track?

I just wouldn't have bothered with the argument to begin with. Or I'd of said:
"well, they did beat Wichita State and Indiana State (and whoever else) when they were classified as 1-A teams. More recently, they beat Navy and UConn. But you're right, billybud, if you mean that they haven't demonstrated they could beat a 'big boy' yet."

That would have brought your knowledge to the table ... prevented further argument, made your point more quickly and easily ... My mistake was honest (as I admitted). I simply didn't examine Howell's data THAT closely but I can defend why that was the case - I was looking for something more glaring than being left to discern the conference affiliations of teams that mostly no longer even exist in 1-A.


While we're delving into minutia (I like minutia), here's a list of former Missouri Valley teams still in I-A:

Nebraska
Memphis
Tulsa
Houston
Missouri
Iowa State
Oklahoma State
North Texas
Louisville
Kansas
Okahoma
Cincinnati
New Mexico State
Kansas State
Iowa

As many still exist in I-A as do not. :D

billybud
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 10727
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:25 pm

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby billybud » Wed Aug 06, 2008 5:15 pm

Nebraska
Memphis
Tulsa
Houston
Missouri
Iowa State
Oklahoma State
North Texas
Louisville
Kansas
Okahoma
Cincinnati
New Mexico State
Kansas State
Iowa


Huh? Didn't know that. I only follow a little Missouri Valley in baseball because of Wichita State. I know they gave up football.
“If short hair and good manners won football games, Army and Navy would play for the national championship every year.”

User avatar
Spence
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 20970
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:52 pm
Location: Chillicothe, Ohio (Ohio's First Capital)
Contact:

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby Spence » Wed Aug 06, 2008 5:35 pm

billybud wrote:
Exactly, that is my point. But if they do have the players to win it - which they did - why should they be left out. Don't you have to account for that sort of thing in any ranking. I think you do.


You have to have "magical thinking" in your methodology...that is..beating weak teams means that you are BCS bowl or national championship caliber

That is a faulty logic IMHO....You haven't shown that you have the players by beating good teams...you have only shown that you have the players to beat mediocre teams. Please, please, beat a couple teams in the Top 30 before you start talking BCS bowl.



You don't have to have magical thinking. It is possible for a team from a lower level conference to be good enough to win a major conference. Maybe not be consistently strong enough to compete every year, but come to think of it, there are lots of teams from major conferences that are not consistently strong enough every year.

I understand your thinking that you should prove your way in, but if ten years ago Boise State would have put Nebraska, Florida State, Miami and Washington on their schedule most people would have said "OK that is murderous." !0 years ago it would have been, but if they had played last year you would have had people saying they haven't played a top team. They would have been right, but really. I also understand that many of these teams stay away from big games to go undefeated and make the BCS money. Where did they learn the idea of playing weak OOC schedules then win your conference? The majors have been doing that for years and it happens in all major conferences. It is starting to change some, but most major conference higher tier teams schedule no more then one big OOC game on their schedule. That is the only part of the schedule they can control so don't tell me about the inconference strength.

Razor, If there was an eight team playoff a couple of years ago do you think Oklahoma would have been left out for Boise State? The idea of a playoff solving any sort of controversy just isn't true. It would cause more problems then it would have solutions. Which teams would have been left out to include Boise State? Ohio State, Florida, LSU, Notre Dame, Wake Forest, Louisville, Oklahoma, Michigan, or USC? Wouldn't be better, probably wouldn't be worse. Wouldn't change a thing.
"History doesn't always repeat itself but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain

billybud
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 10727
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:25 pm

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby billybud » Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:21 pm

It is possible for a team from a lower level conference to be good enough to win a major conference. Maybe not be consistently strong enough to compete every year, but come to think of it, there are lots of teams from major conferences that are not consistently strong enough every year.


The data (see KTFfan's original mid major data) doesn't really support the odds of a non BCS school winning the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, or PAC 10. The odds of such a team, if shuffled into a major conference schedule, of winning that conference would be astronomic.

Not to say that over time a team can't grow into such a role...I could see USF competeing for a NC and they were non BCS not that long ago.
“If short hair and good manners won football games, Army and Navy would play for the national championship every year.”

User avatar
Eric
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:51 am

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby Eric » Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:48 pm

billybud wrote:
It is possible for a team from a lower level conference to be good enough to win a major conference. Maybe not be consistently strong enough to compete every year, but come to think of it, there are lots of teams from major conferences that are not consistently strong enough every year.


The data (see KTFfan's original mid major data) doesn't really support the odds of a non BCS school winning the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, or PAC 10. The odds of such a team, if shuffled into a major conference schedule, of winning that conference would be astronomic.

Not to say that over time a team can't grow into such a role...I could see USF competeing for a NC and they were non BCS not that long ago.



Like Cincinnati? :lol:
Running bowl/MSU/OSU record '05-present: 11-32

User avatar
Spence
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 20970
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:52 pm
Location: Chillicothe, Ohio (Ohio's First Capital)
Contact:

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby Spence » Wed Aug 06, 2008 7:10 pm

billybud wrote:
It is possible for a team from a lower level conference to be good enough to win a major conference. Maybe not be consistently strong enough to compete every year, but come to think of it, there are lots of teams from major conferences that are not consistently strong enough every year.


The data (see KTFfan's original mid major data) doesn't really support the odds of a non BCS school winning the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, or PAC 10. The odds of such a team, if shuffled into a major conference schedule, of winning that conference would be astronomic.

Not to say that over time a team can't grow into such a role...I could see USF competeing for a NC and they were non BCS not that long ago.


I never once said that the odds weren't long, just that it is possible and should not be dismissed.
"History doesn't always repeat itself but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain

billybud
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 10727
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:25 pm

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby billybud » Wed Aug 06, 2008 7:12 pm

Eric....out of all the BCS teams, how many are truly capable of winning a national championship? Maybe 10% to 15% of them?

Teams go up and down and around and the makeup of that small group will change some....Sure, the Bearcats might win one but not in the next five years, I don't think.
“If short hair and good manners won football games, Army and Navy would play for the national championship every year.”

billybud
Athletic Director
Athletic Director
Posts: 10727
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:25 pm

Re: Don't Understand Congrove's Algorithmns

Postby billybud » Wed Aug 06, 2008 7:15 pm

I never once said that the odds weren't long, just that it is possible and should not be dismissed


I would dismiss those with very high odds in favor of those with much shorter odds...give me a 9-3 team that plays six end ranked teams over an undefeated team that plays one team in the top 30...
“If short hair and good manners won football games, Army and Navy would play for the national championship every year.”


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 70 guests