Final Sagarin FWIW

[Gil Dobie]

Kept Idaho and CCU in for reference of a new team coming in and a recent departure.

FINAL College Football 2017 through games of 2018 January 8 Monday - National Championship Game
RATING W L SCHEDL(RANK) VS top 10 | VS top 30 | PREDICTOR | GOLDEN_MEAN | RECENT
HOME ADVANTAGE=[ 2.37] [ 2.37] [ 2.37] [ 2.37]
31 North Dakota State AA = 79.00 14 1 55.47( 134) 0 0 | 0 0 | 77.45 38 | 78.06 34 | 81.86 23
44 James Madison AA = 75.01 14 1 51.63( 151) 0 0 | 0 0 | 73.16 55 | 73.36 51 | 79.00 36
63 South Dakota State AA = 70.40 11 3 58.45( 118) 0 0 | 0 0 | 69.06 67 | 69.57 69 | 72.66 52
78 Northern Iowa AA = 65.81 8 5 59.61( 109) 0 0 | 0 1 | 64.50 88 | 65.36 82 | 67.73 71
80 Weber State AA = 65.76 11 3 55.26( 135) 0 0 | 0 0 | 64.33 91 | 62.60 92 | 69.78 66
82 Western Illinois AA = 65.69 8 4 56.55( 130) 0 0 | 0 0 | 66.62 77 | 64.40 87 | 64.51 83
90 South Dakota AA = 63.10 8 5 56.81( 129) 0 0 | 0 0 | 65.44 83 | 61.77 95 | 59.81 105
94 Youngstown State AA = 62.34 6 5 56.36( 131) 0 0 | 0 0 | 64.34 90 | 62.63 91 | 58.57 112
102 Jacksonville State AA = 60.93 10 2 44.39( 189) 0 0 | 0 0 | 59.89 104 | 61.06 99 | 61.98 95
103 Kennesaw State AA = 60.60 12 2 43.96( 191) 0 0 | 0 0 | 57.93 114 | 58.41 112 | 66.06 76
104 Southern Utah AA = 60.17 9 3 53.51( 143) 0 0 | 0 0 | 58.18 112 | 58.88 110 | 63.78 84
106 Illinois State AA = 59.89 6 5 54.82( 139) 0 0 | 0 0 | 60.42 102 | 59.69 106 | 58.63 111
107 Central Arkansas AA = 59.58 10 2 39.89( 206) 0 0 | 0 1 | 59.13 108 | 58.90 109 | 60.18 100
110 Sam Houston State AA = 59.09 12 2 43.35( 193) 0 0 | 0 0 | 54.94 127 | 59.39 107 | 65.45 79
113 Samford AA = 58.44 8 4 51.40( 154) 0 1 | 0 1 | 57.50 117 | 57.68 116 | 59.91 103
120 Richmond AA = 57.04 6 5 50.77( 157) 0 0 | 0 0 | 56.47 118 | 56.42 125 | 57.80 116
121 Wofford AA = 56.91 10 3 48.03( 173) 0 0 | 0 0 | 53.23 137 | 57.82 115 | 61.89 96
122 Eastern Washington AA = 56.84 7 4 54.86( 138) 0 0 | 0 0 | 55.23 124 | 57.90 114 | 58.25 115
123 Yale AA = 56.77 9 1 39.38( 210) 0 0 | 0 0 | 55.87 122 | 53.60 138 | 59.66 107
124 Stony Brook AA = 56.56 10 3 47.30( 176) 0 0 | 0 0 | 55.16 126 | 54.85 128 | 59.37 108
125 Furman AA = 56.37 8 5 50.45( 159) 0 0 | 0 1 | 56.18 120 | 54.42 131 | 57.32 120
133 Idaho A = 53.74 4 8 58.24( 120) 0 0 | 0 0 | 54.71 130 | 54.26 133 | 51.27 148
134 Montana State AA = 53.61 5 6 53.98( 142) 0 0 | 0 0 | 52.63 144 | 51.85 147 | 55.72 130
136 Montana AA = 53.37 7 4 45.99( 180) 0 1 | 0 1 | 52.96 139 | 53.14 142 | 53.63 135
137 Delaware AA = 53.26 7 4 50.03( 162) 0 0 | 0 1 | 53.86 132 | 53.81 136 | 51.40 145
139 Sacramento State AA = 53.13 7 4 48.38( 172) 0 0 | 0 0 | 52.13 145 | 49.80 153 | 56.24 127
142 Villanova AA = 52.75 5 6 49.28( 164) 0 0 | 0 0 | 53.48 135 | 52.02 146 | 51.45 144
143 NC A&T AA = 52.73 12 0 31.52( 242) 0 0 | 0 0 | 49.96 152 | 50.98 152 | 57.68 118
144 New Hampshire AA = 52.31 9 5 48.72( 170) 0 0 | 0 0 | 49.81 156 | 51.60 150 | 56.18 129
145 Northern Arizona AA = 52.19 7 5 51.99( 147) 0 0 | 0 0 | 52.81 142 | 53.77 137 | 49.63 158
146 McNeese State AA = 51.87 9 2 36.72( 220) 0 0 | 0 0 | 49.92 154 | 51.31 151 | 54.79 133
149 Southern Illinois AA = 51.39 4 7 56.99( 128) 0 0 | 0 0 | 53.09 138 | 52.56 145 | 47.22 167
151 Mercer AA = 50.93 5 6 50.21( 161) 0 2 | 0 2 | 51.80 147 | 49.61 154 | 49.77 157
152 UC Davis AA = 50.90 5 6 51.29( 155) 0 0 | 0 0 | 51.16 150 | 49.00 155 | 51.09 149
153 San Diego AA = 50.82 10 3 29.04( 245) 0 0 | 0 0 | 48.37 162 | 48.25 158 | 55.70 131
156 Colgate AA = 49.91 7 4 38.53( 215) 0 0 | 0 0 | 49.94 153 | 47.78 160 | 50.60 154
158 Elon AA = 49.36 8 4 52.48( 146) 0 0 | 0 0 | 47.08 164 | 47.67 162 | 53.41 136
159 Western Carolina AA = 49.23 7 5 46.00( 179) 0 0 | 0 0 | 48.74 161 | 48.62 157 | 49.84 156
160 Austin Peay AA = 49.04 8 4 45.80( 181) 0 0 | 0 1 | 46.90 166 | 44.77 174 | 54.33 134
161 Tennessee-Martin AA = 48.91 6 5 45.09( 184) 0 0 | 0 0 | 49.23 158 | 48.85 156 | 47.86 165
162 Coastal Carolina A = 48.72 3 9 58.96( 114) 0 0 | 0 0 | 48.95 160 | 47.79 159 | 48.38 161
163 Maine AA = 48.17 4 6 50.78( 156) 0 0 | 0 0 | 49.55 157 | 46.70 165 | 46.23 171
164 SE Louisiana AA = 47.73 6 5 41.14( 203) 0 0 | 0 0 | 47.52 163 | 46.39 166 | 48.33 162
165 Princeton AA = 47.48 5 5 39.44( 209) 0 0 | 0 0 | 49.03 159 | 47.64 163 | 44.15 177
166 Albany-NY AA = 47.03 4 7 49.29( 163) 0 0 | 0 0 | 46.92 165 | 46.06 167 | 47.24 166
167 Monmouth-NJ AA = 46.98 9 3 39.58( 208) 0 0 | 0 0 | 44.55 170 | 45.80 168 | 50.89 152
168 Dartmouth AA = 46.26 8 2 37.70( 217) 0 0 | 0 0 | 44.06 173 | 45.68 170 | 49.45 159
169 Nicholls State AA = 46.24 8 4 40.45( 205) 0 0 | 0 0 | 44.93 169 | 45.45 171 | 48.23 163
170 Grambling State AA = 45.91 11 2 31.66( 241) 0 0 | 0 0 | 42.23 179 | 45.77 169 | 50.95 151
171 North Dakota AA = 45.56 3 8 53.24( 145) 0 0 | 0 0 | 45.84 167 | 47.45 164 | 43.31 180
172 Pennsylvania AA = 45.52 6 4 42.17( 197) 0 0 | 0 0 | 43.63 176 | 44.54 176 | 48.49 160
173 The Citadel AA = 45.28 5 6 48.76( 169) 0 1 | 0 1 | 45.30 168 | 47.70 161 | 43.11 182
174 Missouri State AA = 44.93 3 8 59.89( 107) 0 0 | 0 0 | 44.45 171 | 44.15 177 | 45.63 173
175 Towson AA = 43.90 5 6 48.84( 168) 0 0 | 0 0 | 41.30 186 | 42.38 186 | 48.12 164
177 Duquesne AA = 43.73 7 4 35.95( 224) 0 0 | 0 0 | 43.73 175 | 43.99 179 | 43.02 183
178 Charleston Southern AA = 43.63 6 5 44.51( 188) 0 0 | 0 1 | 41.40 185 | 44.73 175 | 45.83 172
180 Chattanooga AA = 43.41 3 8 51.43( 153) 0 0 | 0 1 | 43.94 174 | 43.86 181 | 41.66 188
181 Columbia AA = 43.03 8 2 36.64( 221) 0 0 | 0 0 | 41.09 187 | 41.04 190 | 46.59 168
182 Liberty AA = 42.83 6 5 41.71( 199) 0 0 | 0 0 | 42.17 181 | 41.07 189 | 44.37 176
184 Tennessee State AA = 42.68 6 5 42.38( 194) 0 0 | 0 0 | 41.68 184 | 44.06 178 | 42.87 185
185 Central Connecticut AA = 42.67 8 4 41.10( 204) 0 0 | 0 0 | 40.27 192 | 41.19 187 | 46.59 169
187 Northern Colorado AA = 41.87 3 7 51.88( 149) 0 0 | 0 0 | 42.29 178 | 41.08 188 | 41.10 192
188 SE Missouri State AA = 41.40 3 8 43.90( 192) 0 0 | 0 0 | 42.23 180 | 39.34 195 | 40.69 193
189 Rhode Island AA = 41.28 3 8 50.38( 160) 0 0 | 0 0 | 40.83 191 | 38.78 198 | 42.91 184
190 Eastern Illinois AA = 40.96 6 5 46.06( 178) 0 0 | 0 0 | 39.09 196 | 42.53 184 | 42.32 186
191 Eastern Kentucky AA = 40.77 4 7 45.77( 182) 0 0 | 0 0 | 41.00 189 | 39.65 193 | 40.53 194
192 Harvard AA = 40.73 5 5 39.08( 212) 0 0 | 0 0 | 40.12 193 | 42.51 185 | 40.00 195
193 Bethune-Cookman AA = 40.60 7 4 38.80( 213) 0 0 | 0 1 | 37.55 202 | 39.21 196 | 45.24 175
196 William & Mary AA = 39.39 2 9 51.55( 152) 0 0 | 0 0 | 41.01 188 | 40.31 191 | 35.18 209
197 Idaho State AA = 39.09 4 7 51.94( 148) 0 0 | 0 0 | 39.32 195 | 38.30 200 | 38.63 199
198 Lehigh AA = 38.95 5 7 41.18( 202) 0 0 | 0 0 | 37.05 203 | 39.04 197 | 41.23 191
200 Holy Cross AA = 38.31 4 7 42.33( 195) 0 0 | 0 0 | 38.39 198 | 38.70 199 | 37.35 202
201 Alcorn State AA = 37.52 7 5 33.48( 235) 0 0 | 0 0 | 38.03 199 | 37.12 204 | 36.33 206
202 NC Central AA = 37.37 7 4 33.80( 232) 0 0 | 0 0 | 35.42 207 | 37.87 202 | 39.47 197
203 Saint Francis-Pa. AA = 36.62 5 6 37.91( 216) 0 0 | 0 0 | 37.90 200 | 37.48 203 | 33.08 216
204 Cal Poly-SLO AA = 36.07 1 10 50.54( 158) 0 0 | 0 0 | 37.70 201 | 38.18 201 | 30.72 221
205 Northwestern State AA = 36.04 4 7 45.57( 183) 0 0 | 0 0 | 35.14 208 | 33.97 211 | 38.06 200
206 Southern U. AA = 35.94 7 4 33.12( 238) 0 0 | 0 0 | 33.53 215 | 36.23 205 | 38.74 198
207 East Tennessee State AA = 35.82 4 7 49.13( 166) 0 0 | 0 0 | 35.56 206 | 35.04 209 | 36.16 207
208 Prairie View A&M AA = 35.73 6 5 33.51( 234) 0 0 | 0 0 | 35.59 204 | 33.73 214 | 36.58 205
209 Bryant AA = 35.66 6 5 36.85( 219) 0 0 | 0 0 | 31.78 218 | 33.74 213 | 41.29 190
210 Howard AA = 35.57 7 4 34.46( 228) 0 0 | 0 0 | 34.74 210 | 32.78 217 | 37.85 201
211 Murray State AA = 35.17 3 8 48.54( 171) 0 0 | 0 1 | 35.57 205 | 35.65 207 | 33.59 214
212 Stephen F. Austin AA = 34.65 4 7 44.13( 190) 0 0 | 0 0 | 34.31 213 | 35.86 206 | 33.86 213
213 Cornell AA = 34.00 3 7 44.51( 187) 0 0 | 0 0 | 34.64 212 | 32.43 220 | 33.31 215
214 Wagner AA = 33.45 4 7 41.37( 200) 0 0 | 0 0 | 31.74 219 | 33.11 215 | 35.68 208
215 Abilene Christian AA = 33.42 2 9 46.37( 177) 0 0 | 0 0 | 34.73 211 | 32.82 216 | 30.81 219
216 Fordham AA = 33.14 4 7 41.77( 198) 0 0 | 0 0 | 31.23 220 | 35.63 208 | 33.90 212
217 Portland State AA = 33.04 0 11 51.84( 150) 0 0 | 0 0 | 34.84 209 | 34.11 210 | 28.06 229
218 Tennessee Tech AA = 32.91 1 10 47.35( 175) 0 0 | 0 0 | 33.81 214 | 33.75 212 | 30.12 222
219 Drake AA = 32.58 7 4 29.04( 244) 0 0 | 0 0 | 29.43 223 | 31.10 224 | 37.09 204
220 Sacred Heart AA = 32.52 4 7 35.48( 225) 0 0 | 0 0 | 32.81 216 | 32.43 219 | 31.50 218
221 Presbyterian College AA = 32.42 4 7 44.70( 186) 0 0 | 0 1 | 30.38 222 | 32.05 221 | 35.07 211
222 Indiana State AA = 30.96 0 11 58.81( 115) 0 0 | 0 0 | 30.52 221 | 32.50 218 | 30.08 223
223 Gardner-Webb AA = 30.64 1 10 48.85( 167) 0 0 | 0 0 | 32.00 217 | 31.52 222 | 26.76 233
224 Bucknell AA = 29.60 5 6 34.52( 227) 0 0 | 0 0 | 29.19 224 | 31.19 223 | 28.66 228
225 Hampton AA = 29.57 6 5 34.12( 230) 0 0 | 0 0 | 28.32 227 | 29.82 225 | 30.80 220
226 Dayton AA = 28.56 5 6 26.22( 249) 0 0 | 0 0 | 27.73 228 | 28.50 227 | 29.37 225
227 SC State AA = 28.43 3 7 33.22( 237) 0 0 | 0 0 | 29.18 225 | 28.94 226 | 26.14 235
228 Florida A&M AA = 27.70 3 8 34.87( 226) 0 0 | 0 0 | 28.37 226 | 26.36 232 | 26.77 232
229 Alabama State AA = 27.37 5 6 33.28( 236) 0 0 | 0 0 | 25.84 231 | 26.59 230 | 29.53 224
230 Lafayette AA = 27.22 3 8 39.67( 207) 0 0 | 0 0 | 25.56 232 | 27.22 228 | 29.11 227
231 Savannah State AA = 27.13 3 8 36.18( 222) 0 0 | 0 0 | 24.56 235 | 22.60 237 | 32.01 217
232 Norfolk State AA = 26.94 4 7 33.62( 233) 0 0 | 0 0 | 26.10 230 | 26.76 229 | 27.81 230
233 Butler AA = 25.81 6 5 26.42( 247) 0 0 | 0 0 | 25.46 233 | 23.39 234 | 27.13 231
234 Lamar AA = 25.47 2 9 45.03( 185) 0 0 | 0 0 | 25.28 234 | 26.59 231 | 24.49 237
235 Jackson State AA = 24.19 3 8 33.04( 239) 0 0 | 0 1 | 23.09 238 | 21.65 239 | 26.60 234
236 Valparaiso AA = 24.11 6 5 25.83( 250) 0 0 | 0 0 | 21.39 242 | 18.66 247 | 29.29 226
237 Houston Baptist AA = 24.04 1 10 42.28( 196) 0 0 | 0 0 | 26.15 229 | 23.32 235 | 19.38 243
238 Brown AA = 23.82 2 8 41.19( 201) 0 0 | 0 0 | 23.11 237 | 26.12 233 | 22.80 238
239 Campbell AA = 23.55 6 5 20.89( 254) 0 0 | 0 0 | 24.31 236 | 22.76 236 | 22.12 240
240 Incarnate Word AA = 21.96 1 10 47.61( 174) 0 0 | 0 0 | 21.75 239 | 21.17 241 | 22.21 239
241 Robert Morris AA = 21.49 2 9 38.69( 214) 0 0 | 0 0 | 21.50 240 | 21.96 238 | 20.58 241
242 Alabama A&M AA = 21.03 4 7 32.69( 240) 0 0 | 0 0 | 21.36 243 | 20.00 244 | 20.51 242
243 Georgetown AA = 20.46 1 10 36.00( 223) 0 0 | 0 0 | 21.39 241 | 21.38 240 | 17.32 247
244 Jacksonville AA = 20.17 7 4 26.26( 248) 0 0 | 0 0 | 14.71 250 | 20.49 242 | 25.35 236
245 VMI AA = 19.26 0 11 49.24( 165) 0 0 | 0 0 | 18.81 245 | 20.40 243 | 18.67 245
246 Morgan State AA = 18.54 1 10 36.97( 218) 0 0 | 0 0 | 19.00 244 | 18.88 245 | 16.87 248
247 Delaware State AA = 18.35 2 9 39.23( 211) 0 0 | 0 1 | 18.25 246 | 15.93 249 | 19.28 244
248 Texas Southern AA = 17.43 2 9 29.62( 243) 0 0 | 0 0 | 17.21 247 | 16.26 248 | 17.92 246
249 Marist AA = 17.08 4 7 24.85( 252) 0 0 | 0 0 | 16.19 248 | 18.82 246 | 16.76 249
250 Ark.-Pine Bluff AA = 13.10 2 9 33.93( 231) 0 0 | 0 0 | 15.11 249 | 10.50 251 | 9.70 252
251 Morehead State AA = 10.26 4 7 27.20( 246) 0 0 | 0 0 | 8.01 252 | 11.40 250 | 12.08 250
252 Stetson AA = 9.99 2 9 24.51( 253) 0 0 | 0 0 | 9.11 251 | 8.96 252 | 11.33 251
253 Miss. Valley State AA = 5.69 2 9 34.17( 229) 0 0 | 0 0 | 5.30 253 | 5.48 253 | 5.91 253
254 Davidson AA = 3.51 2 9 25.64( 251) 0 0 | 0 0 | 4.94 254 | 1.00 254 | 1.41 254

[katss07]

See this is why noone should give a flying **** about Sagarin ratings. Both teams that SHSU beat are WELL ahead of them. I stopped referring to Sagarin a long ass time ago because of this BS. How the hell are you gonna rank Kennesaw and USeD ahead of Sam?! And then ranking Jacksonville St ahead of SHSU? Thats crap. And WIU only two Weber? Thats crap too. I’ll take Weber over anyone not named NDSU and JMU. They beat Western, in round one! (Nothing against WIU, very strong team). And what the ******* is UNI doing up there. Youngstown????? BS. Richmond over Wofford??? BS. Elon below who is in front of them?? BS. Nicholls behind MONMOUTH?? Bull****!!!

BUT, I guess it doesn’t matter, because the Kats proved their point. We are top 5. Sagarin, I hope your dog ****s your bed tonight you MVFC suck-up.

[Professor Chaos]

See this is why noone should give a flying **** about Sagarin ratings. Both teams that SHSU beat are WELL ahead of them. I stopped referring to Sagarin a long ass time ago because of this BS. How the hell are you gonna rank Kennesaw and USeD ahead of Sam?! And then ranking Jacksonville St ahead of SHSU? Thats crap. And WIU only two Weber? Thats crap too. I’ll take Weber over anyone not named NDSU and JMU. They beat Western, in round one! (Nothing against WIU, very strong team). And what the ******* is UNI doing up there. Youngstown????? BS. Richmond over Wofford??? BS. Elon below who is in front of them?? BS. Nicholls behind MONMOUTH?? Bull****!!!

BUT, I guess it doesn’t matter, because the Kats proved their point. We are top 5. Sagarin, I hope your dog ****s your bed tonight you MVFC suck-up.
Lol, it's just an algorithm man. It just accepts final scores as it's input and it spits out the rankings as it's output. He's not sucking up to anyone. I'd blame it on all the bottom feeders in the SLC because it forces SHSU to beat them by 40+ in some cases in order to outperform the algorithm and therefore force their rating higher. Also, keep in mind that the difference between 5 spots is hardly ever equal throughout the rankings. Look at the purple number, despite being ranked 4 spots lower SHSU is only 1.5 points behind KSU. Sagarin's model gives points for the home field therefore it would favor SHSU in another home matchup with KSU. Say what you want about Sagarin's system but it outperformed over 70% percent of the pickers here at AGS (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/showthread.php?200486-2017-AGS-Playoff-Pick-em-Contest-Final-Standings&p=2600643&viewfull=1#post2600643) in MTFan4Life's playoff pick 'em.

Also I xlolx at the fact that both the MVFC and Big Sky finished ranked better as a conference by Sagarin than the Sun Belt.

[sgt smash]

See this is why noone should give a flying **** about Sagarin ratings. Both teams that SHSU beat are WELL ahead of them. I stopped referring to Sagarin a long ass time ago because of this BS. How the hell are you gonna rank Kennesaw and USeD ahead of Sam?! And then ranking Jacksonville St ahead of SHSU? Thats crap. And WIU only two Weber? Thats crap too. I’ll take Weber over anyone not named NDSU and JMU. They beat Western, in round one! (Nothing against WIU, very strong team). And what the ******* is UNI doing up there. Youngstown????? BS. Richmond over Wofford??? BS. Elon below who is in front of them?? BS. Nicholls behind MONMOUTH?? Bull****!!!

BUT, I guess it doesn’t matter, because the Kats proved their point. We are top 5. Sagarin, I hope your dog ****s your bed tonight you MVFC suck-up.


When the most recent data it has for your team isn’t a trip behind the woodshed by an angry drunk uncle, maybe Sagarin would favor you more. I’m not positive, I am just speculating on why that may be the case. UNI kept games they were supposed to lose respectable. Sagarin isn’t perfect, but it is a useful tool I like to look at.

[Daytripper]

Besides the top two, it's hot garbage.

[katss07]

When the most recent data it has for your team isn’t a trip behind the woodshed by an angry drunk uncle, maybe Sagarin would favor you more. I’m not positive, I am just speculating on why that may be the case. UNI kept games they were supposed to lose respectable. Sagarin isn’t perfect, but it is a useful tool I like to look at.
But it clearly doesn’t matter if you get blown out to this dude. All the qualification you need is
1. Be in the MVFC
2. Have more than 4 wins
SDSU was blown out by JMU, yet the didnt get penalized. And becuase we lost to NDSU in the final four somehow translates to being ranked lower than UNI? Doesn’t make sense.

[Noryan34]

Lol, it's just an algorithm man. It just accepts final scores as it's input and it spits out the rankings as it's output. He's not sucking up to anyone. I'd blame it on all the bottom feeders in the SLC because it forces SHSU to beat them by 40+ in some cases in order to outperform the algorithm and therefore force their rating higher. Also, keep in mind that the difference between 5 spots is hardly ever equal throughout the rankings. Look at the purple number, despite being ranked 4 spots lower SHSU is only 1.5 points behind KSU. Sagarin's model gives points for the home field therefore it would favor SHSU in another home matchup with KSU. Say what you want about Sagarin's system but it outperformed over 70% percent of the pickers here at AGS (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/showthread.php?200486-2017-AGS-Playoff-Pick-em-Contest-Final-Standings&p=2600643&viewfull=1#post2600643) in MTFan4Life's playoff pick 'em.

Also I xlolx at the fact that both the MVFC and Big Sky finished ranked better as a conference by Sagarin than the Sun Belt.

Just using the last rankings SHSU went 4-8 against sagarin spread. How do you expect to move up in a computer system when your record against the spread is 33%

[TennBison]

Just using the last rankings SHSU went 4-8 against sagarin spread. How do you expect to move up in a computer system when your record against the spread is 33%
Dilly Dilly x2

[Noryan34]

Dilly Dilly x2

I missed a couple games. They actually went 5-9. Better but not much. 35.7%

[cx500d]

But it clearly doesn’t matter if you get blown out to this dude. All the qualification you need is...

becuase (sic) we lost to NDSU in the final four somehow translates to being ranked lower than UNI? Doesn’t make sense.

Not far off. I had UNI one spot lower.

[thebootfitter]

See this is why noone should give a flying **** about Sagarin ratings. Both teams that SHSU beat are WELL ahead of them. I stopped referring to Sagarin a long ass time ago because of this BS. How the hell are you gonna rank Kennesaw and USeD ahead of Sam?! And then ranking Jacksonville St ahead of SHSU? Thats crap. And WIU only two Weber? Thats crap too. I’ll take Weber over anyone not named NDSU and JMU. They beat Western, in round one! (Nothing against WIU, very strong team). And what the ******* is UNI doing up there. Youngstown????? BS. Richmond over Wofford??? BS. Elon below who is in front of them?? BS. Nicholls behind MONMOUTH?? Bull****!!!

BUT, I guess it doesn’t matter, because the Kats proved their point. We are top 5. Sagarin, I hope your dog ****s your bed tonight you MVFC suck-up.

Dude (lady?)... These are "ratings," not "rankings." You appear to be using the two words interchangeably. They are not interchangeable.

Learn what they are, what they represent, and how to interpret them before spouting off. There is actually a fair bit of value contained in these ratings if you balance them with some human judgment.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[Go Green]

How can Princeton be 165 and Columbia 181?

http://www.ncaa.com/standings/football/fcs/ivy-league

[katss07]

Dude (lady?)... These are "ratings," not "rankings." You appear to be using the two words interchangeably. They are not interchangeable.

Learn what they are, what they represent, and how to interpret them before spouting off. There is actually a fair bit of value contained in these ratings if you balance them with some human judgment.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Well, I’m sorry Lady (dude?), but these ratings suck.

[thebootfitter]

Well, I’m sorry Lady (dude?), but these ratings suck.That's a fair opinion to hold if you try to make them mean something they are not. But the formula is relatively simple in principle (even if the specifics of it are complex). And once you understand the basics, you'll see that they don't "suck" at all.

They simply use actual scores from actual games between actual teams to develop a rating that is the statistical "best fit" based on those past results. When this rating is applied to future games, it is generally about 75-80% accurate in predicting W/L outcomes. With that level of accuracy, it's not really valid to say it "sucks."

Football is a game with many variables, so we wouldn't expect any rating system to be perfect. Results always fall somewhere within the deviations predicted by the variance in actual results. For context, the statistical standard deviation of results using the Sagarin ratings is generally around 14 points. That means that if two teams met on a neutral field with equal ratings, a win or loss by 14 points would still be within one standard deviation. And statistically, we generally expect roughly 2/3 of observations to fall within one standard deviation of the calculated means.

So even if a team that is a 28 point underdog according to Sagarin ends up winning, it's not valid to say that the ratings "suck." It just means that this happened to be an observation that was more than 2 standard deviations from the mean -- which is expected to happen a couple times out of a hundred.

If future predictions based on Sagarin ratings was less than 50%, or even under 60%, I think I'd listen to arguments suggesting that it "sucks." (And poor Jeff would probably be out of work.) But just because it makes implications you don't like, it is not valid to say that it "sucks."

(The lady comment wasn't a dis, BTW. Just a nod to some recent conversation where Ursus indicated there were plenty of female posters on here. Didn't want to presume either way.)

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[katss07]

That's a fair opinion to hold if you try to make them mean something they are not. But the formula is relatively simple in principle (even if the specifics of it are complex). And once you understand the basics, you'll see that they don't "suck" at all.

They simply use actual scores from actual games between actual teams to develop a rating that is the statistical "best fit" based on those past results. When this rating is applied to future games, it is generally about 75-80% accurate in predicting W/L outcomes. With that level of accuracy, it's not really valid to say it "sucks."

Football is a game with many variables, so we wouldn't expect any rating system to be perfect. Results always fall somewhere within the deviations predicted by the variance in actual results. For context, the statistical standard deviation of results using the Sagarin ratings is generally around 14 points. That means that if two teams met on a neutral field with equal ratings, a win or loss by 14 points would still be within one standard deviation. And statistically, we generally expect roughly 2/3 of observations to fall within one standard deviation of the calculated means.

So even if a team that is a 28 point underdog according to Sagarin ends up winning, it's not valid to say that the ratings "suck." It just means that this happened to be an observation that was more than 2 standard deviations from the mean -- which is expected to happen a couple times out of a hundred.

If future predictions based on Sagarin ratings was less than 50%, or even under 60%, I think I'd listen to arguments suggesting that it "sucks." (And poor Jeff would probably be out of work.) But just because it makes implications you don't like, it is not valid to say that it "sucks."

(The lady comment wasn't a dis, BTW. Just a nod to some recent conversation where Ursus indicated there were plenty of female posters on here. Didn't want to presume either way.)

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
I have formed an opinion over the past few years. Sagarin is an okay predictor, but I think looking at the AGS poll and polls on Game Threads are better. Just my personal opinion. I favor the “eye test” over some computer. The ratings are decent predictors like I stated earlier, but I think the game polls are better. I might go back and compair the polls to the Sagarin prediction.

In my rant (I typed that all using the “Must protect SHSU football!” reaction), I was simply looking at the ratings. Is that fair? Maybe not. I get that Home Field would push SHSU up a bit, but if we are looking at this as a ranking (that’s basically what it is, a cpu ranking), then it puts Sam behind a majority of teams they shouldn’t be behind, such as Kennesaw, Jax St and USD. The Kats are a top 8 team at least. And that is why I find these rankings or ratings BS. Just my opinion.

Again, that was just my initial reaction. I haven’t seen those conversations with ursus. I apologize if I offended anyone.

[thebootfitter]

I have formed an opinion over the past few years. Sagarin is an okay predictor, but I think looking at the AGS poll and polls on Game Threads are better. Just my personal opinion. I favor the “eye test” over some computer. The ratings are decent predictors like I stated earlier, but I think the game polls are better. I might go back and compair the polls to the Sagarin prediction.

In my rant (I typed that all using the “Must protect SHSU football!” reaction), I was simply looking at the ratings. Is that fair? Maybe not. I get that Home Field would push SHSU up a bit, but if we are looking at this as a ranking (that’s basically what it is, a cpu ranking), then it puts Sam behind a majority of teams they shouldn’t be behind, such as Kennesaw, Jax St and USD. The Kats are a top 8 team at least. And that is why I find these rankings or ratings BS. Just my opinion.

Again, that was just my initial reaction. I haven’t seen those conversations with ursus. I apologize if I offended anyone.I suspect that you'd find some of Sam Houston's "undervalue" by Sagarin comes from the level of competition and whatever statistical limits he places upon margin of victory. So even if SHSU blows out weak competition, they don't necessarily get the bull benefit of doing so. If the Southland was overall a stronger conference (as shown by their overall performance against out of conference competition), I think it would help SHSU's Sagarin rating.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[ElCid]

They simply use actual scores from actual games between actual teams to develop a rating that is the statistical "best fit" based on those past results. When this rating is applied to future games, it is generally about 75-80% accurate in predicting W/L outcomes. With that level of accuracy, it's not really valid to say it "sucks."



Everything you have said in your above posts are spot on. But just for the record, I tracked all games in Massey and Sagarin this year and the precise numbers picking winners are as follows:

Massey - 77.84%
Sagarin - 76.19%




I favor the “eye test” over some computer.

That is fine except too many folks wear odd colored glasses when they do this. Me as well. I always like to look at the computers to ensure my glasses aren't tinted too much. I like the eye test as well because the computer doesn't know if that one game was played in a rain or wind storm, or if freak deflection allowed a team to get a game winning pick and score, or any other number of factors which might explain a bad loss game. But on average, the computers are an objective measure which will ensure that a teams strength, or weakness, are properly evaluated. That along with SOS are valuable data points when I make my poll.

[thebootfitter]

Everything you have said in your above posts are spot on. But just for the record, I tracked all games in Massey and Sagarin this year and the precise numbers picking winners are as follows:

Massey - 77.84%
Sagarin - 76.19%

Sounds about right. At some points in some years, I've seen one or the other fall below 75%. I think the highest I recall seeing either one was around 78 or 79% -- consistent with what you show for Massey this year.

I don't track them religiously like I used to. It got to be a little more effort to consistently keep up with recording them than I cared to do. Thanks for sharing!

P.S. I'd be curious to hear about your process for capturing and tracking the ratings each week. I wanted to get to a point where I could set up an automated process to pull them from the respective websites for me and populate a database or spreadsheet, but lacked the immediate knowledge and didn't have the time to figure it out. Copying and pasting manually each week was a hassle when I would rather be skiing on the wknd and work got busy during the week.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[thebootfitter]

I have formed an opinion over the past few years. Sagarin is an okay predictor, but I think looking at the AGS poll and polls on Game Threads are better. Just my personal opinion. I favor the “eye test” over some computer. The ratings are decent predictors like I stated earlier, but I think the game polls are better. I might go back and compair the polls to the Sagarin prediction.
Interestingly, a fair chunk of voters in the AGS poll use Sagarin and/or Massey as a data point to help form their opinion of which teams are better. So whether you like it or not, you are indirectly buying into the idea of computer ratings based on your comments above.


Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[Noryan34]

Does he publish any of the statistical numbers like sd you talked about or error margins. I would think it be pretty easy to calculate standard error for each team in turn given a representation of how close to each rating each team could actually be

[ElCid]

P.S. I'd be curious to hear about your process for capturing and tracking the ratings each week. I wanted to get to a point where I could set up an automated process to pull them from the respective websites for me and populate a database or spreadsheet, but lacked the immediate knowledge and didn't have the time to figure it out. Copying and pasting manually each week was a hassle when I would rather be skiing on the wknd and work got busy during the week.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Sent you a PM.

[ElCid]

Does he publish any of the statistical numbers like sd you talked about or error margins. I would think it be pretty easy to calculate standard error for each team in turn given a representation of how close to each rating each team could actually be

Never seen it. I will say that some teams are eerily close to the predictions each week and others are not. Some teams just match the algorithm very well and others do not. WHy is anyone''s guess. Each rating system (Sagarin and Massey) update each week obviously so they supposedly get more accurate, but as I said, it is interesting to see which teams are usually close and which are usually off. I look at each and every game, every single week and I see patterns evolve when it comes to this, but I don't have a hard and fast record of each team's deviation. Lots of work to do that. At least to set it up.

[Noryan34]

Never seen it. I will say that some teams are eerily close to the predictions each week and others are not. Some teams just match the algorithm very well and others do not. WHy is anyone''s guess. Each rating system (Sagarin and Massey) update each week obviously so they supposedly get more accurate, but as I said, it is interesting to see which teams are usually close and which are usually off. I look at each and every game, every single week and I see patterns evolve when it comes to this, but I don't have a hard and fast record of each team's deviation. Lots of work to do that. At least to set it up.

Without the algorythym he uses and the actual weighting it would be hard to calculate each teams deviation. But it would be easy for him. He could call it a confidence factor or whatever. Write a bit of code and he’s done.

[ElCid]

Without the algorythym he uses and the actual weighting it would be hard to calculate each teams deviation. But it would be easy for him. He could call it a confidence factor or whatever. Write a bit of code and he’s done.

Ok, but I was thinking a simple deviation from their predicted point spread for any given team. Anyone could do that.

[Noryan34]

Ok, but I was thinking a simple deviation from their predicted point spread for any given team. Anyone could do that.

That would be fairly easy if you had historical data (his rankings each week) throughout the year. Where it gets murky is the week to week weighting of results. But ya your right one could gather some reasonable data from each week to week performance and run some simple analysis.