2007 Gridiron Power Index (GPI) Debut Announced, Northern Iowa No. 1 <---CSN

[CSN-info]

2007 Gridiron Power Index (GPI) Debut Announced, Northern Iowa No. 1
College Sporting News

Conference Ranking Detail (http://www.collegesportingnews.com/articles/artfiles/87914_detail1.txt)

The Gridiron Power Index (GPI), the hybrid ranking for FCS and a top indicator of at-large playoff selection debuts for the 2007 season with the University of Northern Iowa in the top spot. The FCS's largest league, the Colonial Athletic Association is the top ranked conference. The CAA has eight of their teams in the top 25; the Gateway Football Conference placed five; the Southern Conference placed four; the Big Sky Conference placed three; the Great West Football Conference placed two; the Ivy League, Patriot League and the Southland Conference placed one each. (Games through 10/1/07)

READ MORE... http://www.collegesportingnews.com/article.asp?articleid=87914

[T-Dog]

No real complaints here. Who'da thought Elon would break the Top 25? (The Citadel I kind of expected) Good for them. Bit surprised we're tied for 4th though as I thought we'd be 5 or 6.

And as much as the BCS screws things up, this is a fun guideline to have to see what teams deserve what ranking in the human polls.

[Eyes of Old Main]

Some strange things, but overall not too bad. Probably a few more weeks before everything shakes out.

[bluehenbillk]

Ah, the release of the annual Garbage (to) Piss In rankings. Every year this atrocity makes it way back on these boards, why doesn't it just move to the smack boards, that's where all the Sports Network stuff goes right? At least I won't have to hear non-sensical retorts this year & get PM's revoked & signatures deleted from it's PR front guy. xnonox xsmiley_wix xnonox

[Dane96]

GPI.....xcoffeex

[citdog]

LET THE ***** STORM BEGIN!

[DetroitFlyer]

I tried to resist, I really did.... I even hit the reply button once and then exited without posting.... But, I just have to....:D

Just for Dane96, because I know how strongly he supports the GPI:

The PFL is ranked far above the NEC so far this season according to the GPI! It sure would be interesting if we applied for that new autobid.... Based on this ranking, it looks like the PFL would get it over the NEC....

OK, fire away, I deserve it! (LOL)!!;)

[danefan]

I tried to resist, I really did.... I even hit the reply button once and then exited without posting.... But, I just have to....:D

Just for Dane96, because I know how strongly he supports the GPI:

The PFL is ranked far above the NEC so far this season according to the GPI! It sure would be interesting if we applied for that new autobid.... Based on this ranking, it looks like the PFL would get it over the NEC....

OK, fire away, I deserve it! (LOL)!!;)


I was waiting for it.xrotatehx

[unigriff]

hey look another poll that has UNI #1...is the TSN pollsters the only ones who haven't caught on yet;)

overall though, it looks pretty good. I guess i overlooked the CAA, 8 ranked teams..yikes...i dont think half could beat the top 3 of the gateway though...IMHO.

[GannonFan]

Oh goody. GPI silliness. xrotatehx I did notice that the wording on the GPI description (at least as I recall it) looks a little different this year. No longer does it call itself "the" top predictor, now it's just "a" top predictor. I'm glad it does as me and my border collie have outperformed the GPI in terms of playoff predictions over the past 5 years. Of course, it's tough to knock the GPI right now, it's like beating a dead animal after last year's disaster by the GPI. Any chance that Pete's Poll will be included in the GPI math to help "fix" the GPI this year???? xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

Oh, somebody has to tell the GPI that Wofford beat Appy St on the field - maybe Wofford shouldn't be 7 spots behind them. xrotatehx

[GannonFan]

overall though, it looks pretty good. I guess i overlooked the CAA, 8 ranked teams..yikes...i dont think half could beat the top 3 of the gateway though...IMHO.

That's an odd comment - the 5th through 8th place teams in the CAA couldn't beat the #1-#3 place teams in the Gateway. Yeah, you're probably right. What does that mean though, it's not like the 5-8th place CAA teams are ranked above the top of the Gateway.

[blur2005]

I can't wait for this to have like eight pages of posts when I get back on later today. Half of them will be the Delaware collective who all seem to have a major problem with the GPI.

I don't mind it; it's just another poll...by using all the polls.

[danefan]

So let me get this straight, the consensus seems to be that polls are pretty much worthless at this point in the season and overall inaccurate at this level because pollsters don't get to see all FCS teams in the country play.

OK, so the GPI just takes all of those inaccurate and worthless polls and combines them to get what? A worthless and innacurrate mathematical compilation? Weird.xcoffeex

[Cap'n Cat]

That's an odd comment - the 5th through 8th place teams in the CAA couldn't beat the #1-#3 place teams in the Gateway. Yeah, you're probably right. What does that mean though, it's not like the 5-8th place CAA teams are ranked above the top of the Gateway.



Our old friend, FCSFAN, is gonna have your ASS, GannyFanny!

:( :( :( :( :( :( xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

[Ronin]

Looks pretty good.

Finally Montana is not in the top 5. I am curious to see how Southern University fairs in the polls and on the field -- not much known about this team.

[GannonFan]

So let me get this straight, the consensus seems to be that polls are pretty much worthless at this point in the season and overall inaccurate at this level because pollsters don't get to see all FCS teams in the country play.

OK, so the GPI just takes all of those inaccurate and worthless polls and combines them to get what? A worthless and innacurrate mathematical compilation? Weird.xcoffeex

Watch out for the Man!!!! Dissent when it comes to the GPI is greatly discouraged on this site!!!! Be afraid, be very afraid!!!! xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Looks pretty good.

Finally Montana is not in the top 5. I am curious to see how Southern University fairs in the polls and on the field -- not much known about this team.

Look closer: Montana is #10 xeekx xeekx xeekx

[citdog]

Watch out for the Man!!!! Dissent when it comes to the GPI is greatly discouraged on this site!!!! Be afraid, be very afraid!!!! xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx

ANTI GPI POSTERS=AXIS OF EVIL

[Cap'n Cat]

Watch out for the Man!!!! Dissent when it comes to the GPI is greatly discouraged on this site!!!! Be afraid, be very afraid!!!! xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx


You will be alienated and verbally abused, which, BTW, is contrary to the vaunted Terms Of Service.


:D

[GannonFan]

Our old friend, FCSFAN, is gonna have your ASS, GannyFanny!

:( :( :( :( :( :( xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

I'm not sure I've ever traded posts with FCSFAN before - name doesn't ring a bell. xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

[Cap'n Cat]

I'm not sure I've ever traded posts with FCSFAN before - name doesn't ring a bell. xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx


CSN-info ring one??

[citdog]

CSN-info ring one??

THAT'S JUST A RUMOR.........NOTHING TO SEE HERE.......MOVE ALONG

[GannonFan]

You will be alienated and verbally abused, which, BTW, is contrary to the vaunted Terms Of Service.


:D


Does the Terms of Service apply to everyone??? Now you must be joking!!! Ha ha!!! Good one!!!! xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

[Cap'n Cat]

Does the Terms of Service apply to everyone??? Now you must be joking!!! Ha ha!!! Good one!!!! xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

Always wondered if badgering constituted a violation.


But, I'm not without sin.


xrolleyesx

[citdog]

Always wondered if ROGEering cATFISHCCU constituted a violation.


But, I'm not without sin.


xrolleyesx


FIXED IT

[89Hen]

Ah, the release of the annual Garbage (to) Piss In rankings. Every year this atrocity makes it way back on these boards, why doesn't it just move to the smack boards, that's where all the Sports Network stuff goes right? At least I won't have to hear non-sensical retorts this year & get PM's revoked & signatures deleted from it's PR front guy. xnonox xsmiley_wix xnonox
Who are you kidding? You live for this day. xlolx :p

[Dane96]

So let me get this straight, the consensus seems to be that polls are pretty much worthless at this point in the season and overall inaccurate at this level because pollsters don't get to see all FCS teams in the country play.

OK, so the GPI just takes all of those inaccurate and worthless polls and combines them to get what? A worthless and innacurrate mathematical compilation? Weird.xcoffeex

QB's...are smart!!!

GPI...GPI...GPI...GPI...(clap your hands folks)!

My favorite thing about the GPI: How we seemingly bash the FBS for a non-playoff and the fact that weighted polls are not an accurate indicator...often leaving some out in the cold...brrrrr.

Yet, the GPI, apparently, is a poll, according to its proponents, that somehow distinguishes itself and is ACCURATE.

My question: Forgetting the actual comparison to the end of season results, has Fermat, Newton, Da Vinci, the Atlantians, Egyptians, Free Masons, and other great mathematicians come back from the dead to help configure the GPI so that it is better than all the other ****ty polls that are combined into a weighted computer ranking?

GPI...GPI...GPI!!!!

[Dane96]

CSN-info ring one??


Both FCSFAN and CSN-INFO are NOT...I REPEAT NOT who we think they are... Speaking in this manner violates the xrulesx

Come on Cap'n.

[Drblankstare]

So Dakota ST cracking the top twenty.........hmmmm maybe these polls are worthless xrolleyesx

[OL FU]

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e131/kevncoll/Emoticons/th_1f4e507c.gifhttp://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e131/kevncoll/Emoticons/th_1f4e507c.gifhttp://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e131/kevncoll/Emoticons/th_1f4e507c.gifxnodx

[Dane96]

Buttered...or fat-free?

[appfan2008]

my only complaint is 8 teams from the caa in the top 25...8!!!

that is a little crazy if you ask me

[OL FU]

Buttered...or fat-free?

Movie theatre style, extra butter pleasexthumbsupx

[cowbellnation]

YEAH! SDSU is No. 19, mathematics realize we are better than our record states! xlolx :D xlolx

[Dukie95]

So, I thought the ABC ranking was weird, with Delaware at 2 and Hofstra at 6. So, I clicked on the Atomic poll link at the bottom and the numbers are not the same as listed in the GPI grid. (Hofstra is actually 13, not 6)

So...whether or not you agree with the GPI, there seems to be some data/calculation errors that need to be fixed.

[BDKJMU]

Ah, the release of the annual Garbage (to) Piss In rankings. Every year this atrocity makes it way back on these boards, why doesn't it just move to the smack boards, that's where all the Sports Network stuff goes right? At least I won't have to hear non-sensical retorts this year & get PM's revoked & signatures deleted from it's PR front guy. xnonox xsmiley_wix xnonox

GPI is a FAR better poll overall than the AGS, SN, and Coaches garbage polls, with all their human biases.
Sagarin and GPI are the only polls I pay much attention to.

[DB_Atlantic10]

1 Northern Iowa
2 N Dakota St
3 Massachusetts
4T Appalachian St
4T McNeese St
6 S Illinois
7 Delaware
8 James Madison
9 Youngstown St
10 Montana
11 Wofford
12 Richmond
13 Yale Ivy
14 Hofstra
15 New Hampshire
16 The Citadel
17 Montana St
18 W Illinois GFC
19 S Dakota St
20 Villanova CAA
21 William & Mary
22 E Washington
23 Elon
24 Illinois St
25 Lehigh

[USDFAN_55]

Didn't you see the other thread that was started earlier?

http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30243

[GannonFan]

GPI is a FAR better poll overall than the AGS, SN, and Coaches garbage polls, with all their human biases.
Sagarin and GPI are the only polls I pay much attention to.

Well, those "garbage" polls are part of the GPI - no garbage in, garbage out in this case?? xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx

[DB_Atlantic10]

Ahh, Nope... I started one earlier asking when did it come out with only a sarcastic remark....xrotatehx

[danefan]

GPI is a FAR better poll overall than the AGS, SN, and Coaches garbage polls, with all their human biases.
Sagarin and GPI are the only polls I pay much attention to.

That statement makes no sense. If the human polls are garbage then the GPI is garbage. Its just a compilation of human polls. Is this the "new math" my grandfather is always talking about? xbangx xbangx

[BigApp]

ahh yes...the GPI pops out the box....http://www.abestweb.com/smilies/jackinthebox.gif

[ASUG8]

I don't know how you keep a team like Wofford out of the top 10. They could arguably be top 5.

[DB_Atlantic10]

I don't care what any of you think... I love the GPI....xbowx It's the bell curve of Polls....put all of your BS polls to the left skew and all of the homer polls to the right skew and the rest averages out to just fine with me.....LOL

[BigApp]

keep making posts like that, you'll soon be a mod! xnodx

xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

[CSN-info]

September 20, 2007
The CSN Way: Poll Watching
http://www.collegesportingnews.com/article.asp?articleid=87601
Then there are indexed rankings. The best every year is the Gridiron Power Index (GPI) at College Sporting News, which mixes selected polls and computer rankings together starting every October to synthesize both types for yet another viewpoint.

[danefan]

September 20, 2007
The CSN Way: Poll Watching
http://www.collegesportingnews.com/article.asp?articleid=87601
Then there are indexed rankings. The best every year is the Gridiron Power Index (GPI) at College Sporting News, which mixes selected polls and computer rankings together starting every October to synthesize both types for yet another viewpoint.

I'm confused. CSN-info Did you just quote yourself to try and give credibility to the poll(index) that you created?

Huh?xrotatehx

[CSN-info]

I'm confused. CSN-info Did you just quote yourself to try and give credibility to the poll(index) that you created?
Huh?You are confused. I didn't quote myself, the quote from CSN columnists was to clear that confusion of calling the GPI a poll when it is an index. Also, CSN did not create the GPI, it administrates it. I hope that helps. If not, read the article that was linked.

[danefan]

You are confused. I didn't quote myself, the quote from CSN columnists was to clear that confusion of calling the GPI a poll when it is an index. Also, CSN did not create the GPI, it administrates it. I hope that helps. If not, read the article that was linked.

A couple things:

1) an index of polls can only be accurate if the polls indexed therein are accurate. Which most would argue are not.

2) I did read the article that was linked, when it was originally posted a week and a half ago.

3) Whether or not CSN wrote the code that runs the GPI or not, it administers and publishes it and therefor, vouches for its accuracy.

I myself am trying to get a handle on the GPI. The preliminary conclusion I have come to is that the GPI is a compilation of polls. My opinion of the polls is that they are innacurate because of "human error" and the narrow scope of voters' personal knowledge. Therefore, using basic analytical analysis I have reached the conclusion that the GPI is, like its underlying basis, inaccruate.

This is strictly my personal opinion, although shared by many, and I am willing and for that matter, waiting to be shown otherwise. My opinion is always subject to change and thus should not be relied on for any reason whatsoever.

[blur2005]

my only complaint is 8 teams from the caa in the top 25...8!!!

that is a little crazy if you ask me
Makes perfect sense to me...:D

[JMU2K_DukeDawg]

A couple things:

1) an index of polls can only be accurate if the polls indexed therein are accurate. Which most would argue are not.

2) I did read the article that was linked, when it was originally posted a week and a half ago.

3) Whether or not CSN wrote the code that runs the GPI or not, it administers and publishes it and therefor, vouches for its accuracy.

I myself am trying to get a handle on the GPI. The preliminary conclusion I have come to is that the GPI is a compilation of polls. My opinion of the polls is that they are innacurate because of "human error" and the narrow scope of voters' personal knowledge. Therefore, using basic analytical analysis I have reached the conclusion that the GPI is, like its underlying basis, inaccruate.

This is strictly my personal opinion, although shared by many, and I am willing and for that matter, waiting to be shown otherwise. My opinion is always subject to change and thus should not be relied on for any reason whatsoever.

You sound like a lawyer... xrolleyesx xcoolx :p

I love the GPI as well. Is it perfect? Of course not! It's an index that compiles polls, regardless of how crappy they may be, and gives an estimate of teams relative strength better than a single poll. Have you not heard the phrase, "The truth lies somewhere in between"? That is what the GPI provides. xbowx

[aceinthehole]

The GPI is what it is - nothing more, nothing less.

The GPI is just a statistical indicator providing a representation of the value of the polls and rankings which constitute it.

In other words, it a fancy way of saying "average." xreadx

It has no more, or less, credibilty than the individual polls or rankings used to calculate it.

[james_lawfirm]

A couple things:

1) an index of polls can only be accurate if the polls indexed therein are accurate. Which most would argue are not.

2) I did read the article that was linked, when it was originally posted a week and a half ago.

3) Whether or not CSN wrote the code that runs the GPI or not, it administers and publishes it and therefor, vouches for its accuracy.

I myself am trying to get a handle on the GPI. The preliminary conclusion I have come to is that the GPI is a compilation of polls. My opinion of the polls is that they are innacurate because of "human error" and the narrow scope of voters' personal knowledge. Therefore, using basic analytical analysis I have reached the conclusion that the GPI is, like its underlying basis, inaccruate.

This is strictly my personal opinion, although shared by many, and I am willing and for that matter, waiting to be shown otherwise. My opinion is always subject to change and thus should not be relied on for any reason whatsoever.

Danefan:

I think the point of the GPI is to address the biases inherent in the various polls that are out there. For example, the AGS poll is made by voters who may know a whole bunch about one team, quite a bit about one conference, a little about some teams and conferences, and virtually nothing about the rest of FCS. I am describing myself here. Obviously, I am biased towards SoCon teams - that's mostly who I see every week. The hope in the AGS poll, statistically speaking, is to get enough voters with biases towards others conferences and teams that overlaps with mine to get a more accurate poll. I am not even sure that "accurate" is the right word. Accurate as to what?, I don't think there is agreement between AGS voters as to what they think they are voting for. Sometimes I vote for a team that I know will do well in the playoffs, sometimes I penalize teams for reasons that others would disagree with, and sometimes I vote for a team that I know will not even make the playoffs but is playing well now.

Other polls bring other biases into the picture. The coaches poll brings biases, the reporters' poll brings biases, etc. That is not to say they are "inaccurate", their just biased - no one can know everything about every FCS team. "Any Given Saturday" being what it is.

What the GPI does (remember it's an INDEX, not a poll - meaning it's a computer calculation, not a vote) is to bring all of these polls into a calculation that might be used to predict something that is inherently immeasurable, until the teams get on the field. In short, it is a "conglomeration" of inherently biased and even "inaccurate" polls. The SUM (GPI) is greater that the PARTS (the polls). By looking at the total picture, the biases in the polls balance out each other. (This is an awful lot like "Statistics" - yuck!)

Thus, the playoff committee is fully justified in relying on the GPI in picking the top 16 teams and the seeds. It works pretty well some years, not so well in others. Last year, no seed lost to an unseeded team & with the exception of UMass (#3) vs. Montana (#2), no higher seed lost to a lower seed.

[JMU2K_DukeDawg]

James_Lawfirm - Along those lines, during JMU's NC Title run when we beat #2 seeded Furman on the road, I clearly felt Furman had the best team in the country. We won by a lot of grit and a little luck. No easy task, but after the 14-13 win I still felt Furman would win that game 6/7 out of 10 times. Now my JMU brethren will likely think I am crazy and blasphemous, but it is true.

We also had 4 CAA teams in the field, 2 made the semifinals in 2004. Our conference was crazy strong that year. This year is shaping up to be a similar year. The first GPI of the season reflects this.

[JmuSkinsfan]

James_Lawfirm - Along those lines, during JMU's NC Title run when we beat #2 seeded Furman on the road, I clearly felt Furman had the best team in the country. We won by a lot of grit and a little luck. No easy task, but after the 14-13 win I still felt Furman would win that game 6/7 out of 10 times. Now my JMU brethren will likely think I am crazy and blasphemous, but it is true.

We also had 4 CAA teams in the field, 2 made the semifinals in 2004. Our conference was crazy strong that year. This year is shaping up to be a similar year. The first GPI of the season reflects this.

I'm pretty sure the general feeling is that there are 6 true contenders in the CAA, as indicated by the coaches poll which has the "big six" ranked in the top 15. Of those 6, only 4 will likely make the playoffs, just because there are only so many at larges to pass around...

1) UMass, 2) JMU, 3) Delaware, 4) U of R...with Hofstra and UNH being the odd men out.

Just by beating up on each other, Villanova and W&M will finish with decent records and maybe even top 30 rankings in the GPI by the end of the year, but their records won't get them in thats for sure.

UMass: 10-1
JMU: 9-2
UD: 9-2
UofR: 8-3
Hofstra: 8-3 / 7-4
UNH: 8-3 / 7-4
W&M: 6-5
Villanova: 6-5..

etc. etc. you get the point

[danefan]

Danefan:

I think the point of the GPI is to address the biases inherent in the various polls that are out there. For example, the AGS poll is made by voters who may know a whole bunch about one team, quite a bit about one conference, a little about some teams and conferences, and virtually nothing about the rest of FCS. I am describing myself here. Obviously, I am biased towards SoCon teams - that's mostly who I see every week. The hope in the AGS poll, statistically speaking, is to get enough voters with biases towards others conferences and teams that overlaps with mine to get a more accurate poll. I am not even sure that "accurate" is the right word. Accurate as to what?, I don't think there is agreement between AGS voters as to what they think they are voting for. Sometimes I vote for a team that I know will do well in the playoffs, sometimes I penalize teams for reasons that others would disagree with, and sometimes I vote for a team that I know will not even make the playoffs but is playing well now.

Other polls bring other biases into the picture. The coaches poll brings biases, the reporters' poll brings biases, etc. That is not to say they are "inaccurate", their just biased - no one can know everything about every FCS team. "Any Given Saturday" being what it is.

What the GPI does (remember it's an INDEX, not a poll - meaning it's a computer calculation, not a vote) is to bring all of these polls into a calculation that might be used to predict something that is inherently immeasurable, until the teams get on the field. In short, it is a "conglomeration" of inherently biased and even "inaccurate" polls. The SUM (GPI) is greater that the PARTS (the polls). By looking at the total picture, the biases in the polls balance out each other. (This is an awful lot like "Statistics" - yuck!)

Thus, the playoff committee is fully justified in relying on the GPI in picking the top 16 teams and the seeds. It works pretty well some years, not so well in others. Last year, no seed lost to an unseeded team & with the exception of UMass (#3) vs. Montana (#2), no higher seed lost to a lower seed.

Good post and I see your point. Basically what you are saying is that the indexing of the polls will hopefully balance out the variations in the human polls. Assuming the polls do actually balance each other out I can see how this system has merit. That assumes the polls are evenly distributed on either side of the "norm" which may or may not be the case.

Thanks for your take on it though. I appreciate it.

[james_lawfirm]

James_Lawfirm - Along those lines, during JMU's NC Title run when we beat #2 seeded Furman on the road, I clearly felt Furman had the best team in the country. We won by a lot of grit and a little luck. No easy task, but after the 14-13 win I still felt Furman would win that game 6/7 out of 10 times. Now my JMU brethren will likely think I am crazy and blasphemous, but it is true.

We also had 4 CAA teams in the field, 2 made the semifinals in 2004. Our conference was crazy strong that year. This year is shaping up to be a similar year. The first GPI of the season reflects this.


DukeDawg: The CAA does look really strong. Two of the SoCon's "big 3" don't look so good - Furman & GaSo. are having a rough time right now. But, they'll get better as the season continues. Elon is a big surprise. The Citadel may have surprised some (but I have had them in my top 20 poll since the preseason.) Ditto to Wofford - they did not beat App by accident. This week's game in Charleston against the Citadel ought to be a classic. From what I gather, the two teams are VERY similar, which should make for a great game. And, my take on App is this: The offense is back on track; the special teams better figure out how to stop long kickoff runs; and IF the D-line gets its act together, we'll be fine. Nothing to stop us from a 3rd title, except our opponents.

[AZGrizFan]

I don't know how you keep a team like Wofford out of the top 10. They could arguably be top 5.

There's about 15 teams that could "arguably" be top 5. ;)

[No_Skill]

To say that the GPI or any poll/ranking system is wrong assumes that there is a correct answer. There is no correct answer. These are all estimations and best guesses. There is no way to correctly predict which team will beat another on any given day 100% of the time.

[AZGrizFan]

Looks pretty good.

Finally Montana is not in the top 5. I am curious to see how Southern University fairs in the polls and on the field -- not much known about this team.

All is right in your little world, eh?

Will you sleep better tonight now? xrolleyesx xrolleyesx xrolleyesx xrolleyesx xrolleyesx xrolleyesx


xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex

[CrazyCat]

I've heard of the Massey and Sagarin rankings but the others look like random rankings with no explanation on how they are calculated. Anyone heard of Laz, Dwiggins, Self, Ashburn, or Keeper?

[danefan]

To say that the GPI or any poll/ranking system is wrong assumes that there is a correct answer. There is no correct answer. These are all estimations and best guesses. There is no way to correctly predict which team will beat another on any given day 100% of the time.

Very true.

[OL FU]

Personally, I think the arguing about the GPI has become a little bit like our arguments on the different conferences. You know whether the CAA is the strongest top to bottom or whether the Big Sky is Montana and everyone else. Whether we believe it or not really doesn't matter. We have all staked our turf and now we debate just to continue the debatexnodx



I still don't know how anyone can have any more of a problem with the GPI than will other polls or rankings. It is what it is. Criticize it or praise it. More than anything it gives us one more football discussion point. xnodx


Now where was Furman I seemed to have over looked usxbawlingx

[BDKJMU]

my only complaint is 8 teams from the caa in the top 25...8!!!

that is a little crazy if you ask me

Its called 19-2 OOC xeekx against other I-AA.

[BDKJMU]

Well, those "garbage" polls are part of the GPI - no garbage in, garbage out in this case?? xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx


But with the computer polls in there it sanitizes some of that garbage. xsmiley_wix

[BDKJMU]

That statement makes no sense. If the human polls are garbage then the GPI is garbage. Its just a compilation of human polls. Is this the "new math" my grandfather is always talking about? xbangx xbangx

No sir, it is 3 human polls plus the sum of 5 computer rankings (removing the max and min number from the 7 used)/8. You have a heavier weighting to the computer rankings, while removing the lowest and highest to lessen any skewing, to more than balance out the human biases of the human polls. xrulesx

[danefan]

No sir, it is 3 human polls plus the sum of 5 computer rankings (removing the max and min number from the 7 used)/8. You have a heavier weighting to the computer rankings, while removing the lowest and highest to lessen any skewing, to more than balance out the human biases of the human polls. xrulesx
I'm sorry, but there is no difference to me between human polls or computer polls. Computer polls are just a persons opinion of what the attributes of a top team should be, codified into an excel spreadsheet. If the creator of the code thinks that strength of schedule is important, then they give such factor a creator formulaic weight. Maybe I'm mistaken, but that's the way I see them. The same analysis is happening with human polls. It just happens inside one's head.

No poll is good. Play it on the field. This discussion can go on and on and on. I think one thing and you think the opposite. You think one thing and I think the opposite.

Believe me I realize that these polls are a necessity in this type of situation, but it doesn't mean I have to like it. Could we just have a playoff system that awards teams based solely on their regular season win/loss record? Besides NCAA sports, what other sport has a committee that picks its playoff contenders? I'm seriously asking. I can't think of any.

[BDKJMU]

James_Lawfirm - Along those lines, during JMU's NC Title run when we beat #2 seeded Furman on the road, I clearly felt Furman had the best team in the country. We won by a lot of grit and a little luck. No easy task, but after the 14-13 win I still felt Furman would win that game 6/7 out of 10 times. Now my JMU brethren will likely think I am crazy and blasphemous, but it is true.

We also had 4 CAA teams in the field, 2 made the semifinals in 2004. Our conference was crazy strong that year. This year is shaping up to be a similar year. The first GPI of the season reflects this.

At Furman 6-7 out of 10 times (over the course of the whole season JMU played as well on the roads as they did at home that year)
On a neutral field 5-6 out of 10 times
At JMU 4-5 out of 10 times

I think Furman was SLIGHTLY better overall, but it was JMU's night and JMU's year.

[BDKJMU]

I'm sorry, but there is no difference to me between human polls or computer polls. Computer polls are just a persons opinion of what the attributes of a top team should be, codified into an excel spreadsheet. If the creator of the code thinks that strength of schedule is important, then they give such factor a creator formulaic weight. Maybe I'm mistaken, but that's the way I see them. The same analysis is happening with human polls. It just happens inside one's head.

No poll is good. Play it on the field. This discussion can go on and on and on. I think one thing and you think the opposite. You think one thing and I think the opposite.

Believe me I realize that these polls are a necessity in this type of situation, but it doesn't mean I have to like it. Could we just have a playoff system that awards teams based solely on their regular season win/loss record? Besides NCAA sports, what other sport has a committee that picks its playoff contenders? I'm seriously asking. I can't think of any.

Unless we had a round robin where each team played about 100 games, you have to have some type of selection comittee. IMHO they should after the 8 AQs for the 8 at large they should look at the next 15 or so highest GPI non IVY & SWAC ranked teams (meaning about every non AQ/Ivy/SWAC team in the top 25+) and then really anaylze each one, overall records,conference, SOS, opponents records, margin of victory, head to head, etc, etc, and try to come up with the best 8 at large. Invariably, they'll get about 7 of those teams right, and maybe avg about 1 every year getting screwed. System is far from perfect, but the best we have. xcoffeex

[james_lawfirm]

Personally, I think the arguing about the GPI has become a little bit like our arguments on the different conferences. ... Whether we believe it or not really doesn't matter. We have all staked our turf and now we debate just to continue the debatexnodx


You mean ... say it ain't so ... you mean we are sounding like a bunch of LAWYERS?????? NNNNOOOOOO!!! AAIIIYHHHHA! xsmiley_wix

Don't anybody tell Dr. Goober on that other thread! :)

[JBB]

Nice top 5. This is a proper ranking for ASU. NDSU could easily be #1. UNI has at least 1 quality win. As students of the game we must get the momentum out of our ranking opinions. We must rank team on how well they are playing now.

[Seawolf97]

You mean ... say it ain't so ... you mean we are sounding like a bunch of LAWYERS?????? NNNNOOOOOO!!! AAIIIYHHHHA! xsmiley_wix

Don't anybody tell Dr. Goober on that other thread! :)



Where is Dr. G ?xreadx

[TonkaBison]

Danefan:

I think the point of the GPI is to address the biases inherent in the various polls that are out there. For example, the AGS poll is made by voters who may know a whole bunch about one team, quite a bit about one conference, a little about some teams and conferences, and virtually nothing about the rest of FCS. I am describing myself here. Obviously, I am biased towards SoCon teams - that's mostly who I see every week. The hope in the AGS poll, statistically speaking, is to get enough voters with biases towards others conferences and teams that overlaps with mine to get a more accurate poll. I am not even sure that "accurate" is the right word. Accurate as to what?, I don't think there is agreement between AGS voters as to what they think they are voting for. Sometimes I vote for a team that I know will do well in the playoffs, sometimes I penalize teams for reasons that others would disagree with, and sometimes I vote for a team that I know will not even make the playoffs but is playing well now.

Other polls bring other biases into the picture. The coaches poll brings biases, the reporters' poll brings biases, etc. That is not to say they are "inaccurate", their just biased - no one can know everything about every FCS team. "Any Given Saturday" being what it is.

What the GPI does (remember it's an INDEX, not a poll - meaning it's a computer calculation, not a vote) is to bring all of these polls into a calculation that might be used to predict something that is inherently immeasurable, until the teams get on the field. In short, it is a "conglomeration" of inherently biased and even "inaccurate" polls. The SUM (GPI) is greater that the PARTS (the polls). By looking at the total picture, the biases in the polls balance out each other. (This is an awful lot like "Statistics" - yuck!)

Thus, the playoff committee is fully justified in relying on the GPI in picking the top 16 teams and the seeds. It works pretty well some years, not so well in others. Last year, no seed lost to an unseeded team & with the exception of UMass (#3) vs. Montana (#2), no higher seed lost to a lower seed.

This is one of the better posts I have read in some time. I know that NDSU was trying very hard to line up a game this year with Appy but I can understand the reasons why that did not happen (sorry Wolverines).

I think the only true solution will be more inter-conference play. NDSU was forced into that due to a small conference (Great West) and a desire to go on the road to see how we match up. The question is from now on will it divide up between the schools West of the Ozarks and those to the East? For myself I want to take on James Madison on a home and home basis. Smashmouth football!!!

[Retro]

http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff312/rosintonrebel/McNeese-Cowbell-3xx.jpg?t=1191383739

[TonkaBison]

http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff312/rosintonrebel/McNeese-Cowbell-3xx.jpg?t=1191383739


Sure you want it you have to get past Rhett Bhomar first? xeyebrowx

[Retro]

Sure you want it you have to get past Rhett Bhomar first? xeyebrowx

Bomar has to get past Mcneese you mean! It will be the toughest defense he faces this season. A lot tougher than yours at NDSU!

[TonkaBison]

Bomar has to get past Mcneese you mean! It will be the toughest defense he faces this season. A lot tougher than yours at NDSU!

We aren't known for our defense this year but we can score within 27 seconds with Steve Walker at QB. Get ready for a shootout!!!

[JMUFortier]

This is one of the better posts I have read in some time. I know that NDSU was trying very hard to line up a game this year with Appy but I can understand the reasons why that did not happen (sorry Wolverines).

I think the only true solution will be more inter-conference play. NDSU was forced into that due to a small conference (Great West) and a desire to go on the road to see how we match up. The question is from now on will it divide up between the schools West of the Ozarks and those to the East? For myself I want to take on James Madison on a home and home basis. Smashmouth football!!!

I wouldn't mind welcoming NDSU to the Valley (and of course the return). It would be one wail of a game for everyone. Traveling between Fargo and Harrisonburg would be a challenge though. From our end, I don't know if our athletics people can stomach it though. Our team rarely wanders west of the Appalachians (I can only count a handful of times, being Morehead State in the 80's, Marshall during some playoff in the 90's, Troy in 99, USF in 2000, Chatty in 2004 and Youngstown in 2006) and I don't think has ever wandered west of Alabama, nevermind the Mississippi.

[BDKJMU]

I wouldn't mind welcoming NDSU to the Valley (and of course the return). It would be one wail of a game for everyone. Traveling between Fargo and Harrisonburg would be a challenge though. From our end, I don't know if our athletics people can stomach it though. Our team rarely wanders west of the Appalachians (I can only count a handful of times, being Morehead State in the 80's, Marshall during some playoff in the 90's, Troy in 99, USF in 2000, Chatty in 2004 and Youngstown in 2006) and I don't think has ever wandered west of Alabama, nevermind the Mississippi.

Marshall was 94' quarterfinals
Troy was 99' 1st round
Chatty & YSU NC game and 1st round, so none of those were voluntarily scheduled.
USF isn't west of the Appalachians.
You're right about JMU not scheduleing games west of Appalachians though.

Your're right

[OL FU]

You mean ... say it ain't so ... you mean we are sounding like a bunch of LAWYERS?????? NNNNOOOOOO!!! AAIIIYHHHHA! xsmiley_wix

Don't anybody tell Dr. Goober on that other thread! :)

Lawyers get paid to argue, we do it for the heck of it. On the other hand, I was always told when deciding a career to do what you enjoy. xnodx You lawyers must be hard to live withxlolx

[james_lawfirm]

Lawyers get paid to argue, we do it for the heck of it. On the other hand, I was always told when deciding a career to do what you enjoy. xnodx You lawyers must be hard to live withxlolx

OL FU:

I disagree that lawyers only argue when they are paid for it. I know for an absolute fact that lawyers will argue just for the sake of arguing, regardless of whether they get paid for it or not! E.g., we do it for the heck of it too!

[THE HERD]

I don't care what any of you think... I love the GPI....xbowx It's the bell curve of Polls....put all of your BS polls to the left skew and all of the homer polls to the right skew and the rest averages out to just fine with me.....LOL

Totally agree with you. As far as polls go I believe it to be the most accurate, but it is still a poll, which means it really doesn't mean much. It at least takes into account facts and is not just based on some peoples opinions. It is the only poll that I give any merit to at all........bottom line is that it has to be decided on the field, polls are more just for us fans.

[Seahawks Fan]

I tried to resist, I really did.... I even hit the reply button once and then exited without posting.... But, I just have to....:D

Just for Dane96, because I know how strongly he supports the GPI:

The PFL is ranked far above the NEC so far this season according to the GPI! It sure would be interesting if we applied for that new autobid.... Based on this ranking, it looks like the PFL would get it over the NEC....

OK, fire away, I deserve it! (LOL)!!;)


So why don't you apply then? xwhistlex xwhistlex

[Dane96]

I love the logic of many who defend the GPI. People, it is VERY SIMPLE:

Human Polls- Subjective
Computer Polls- Subjective- The computer rankings are based on, like Danefan said, the subjectivity of what the originating parameters are-- These are supplied by PEOPLE who, by human spirit, are subjective. The person making the parameters will always be dogged by subjectivity. There is NO PLACEBO here.

ALL INDEXES AND POLLS ARE SUBJECTIVE-- Period.

To say one INDEX (The GPI) is the best because it is OBJECTIVE...is faulty logic-- You can't combine multiple items of subjectivity in order to create objectivity.

This is 101 Philosophy and Logical/Analytical thinking.

[JMU2K_DukeDawg]

This is one of the better posts I have read in some time. I know that NDSU was trying very hard to line up a game this year with Appy but I can understand the reasons why that did not happen (sorry Wolverines).

I think the only true solution will be more inter-conference play. NDSU was forced into that due to a small conference (Great West) and a desire to go on the road to see how we match up. The question is from now on will it divide up between the schools West of the Ozarks and those to the East? For myself I want to take on James Madison on a home and home basis. Smashmouth football!!!

I agree on playing each other TonkaBison. I have a good friend here in DC that went to NDSU. Sadly, it is I that keep him up to date on how things are going in Fargo! xeekx xlolx I have told him if the Bison ever come to Bridgeforth, I am buying him a ticket and getting him to Harrisonburg to have a fun-filled day of tailgating and smack talking!

Given our schedules, it would have to wait until about 2010 or so I think. We have App St. next year at home, that's enough OOC SOS right there! But considering we've done a Home and Home with ASU, nothing is impossible. Unfortunately at this level, flying comes at a high premium. You'd have to pay us as if you were a I-A team. I don't see it happening. Too many teams around VA, both I-A and I-AA. See you in the playoffs next year though! xthumbsupx

[JMU2K_DukeDawg]

Dane - You are right, it's not objective; however, it is more quantitative as an index as opposed to one purely qualitative poll. I do believe that the truth is closer to the middle of a lot of subjective opinions. The GPI gives us that middle ground.

There is no perfect computer, human or otherwise that can give us raw 1-25 rankings. There's simply no basis. But you have to decide who plays in the playoffs one way or another. And the fact that no poll is objective is the exact reason we have playoffs - prove it on the field!

[OL FU]

OL FU:

I disagree that lawyers only argue when they are paid for it. I know for an absolute fact that lawyers will argue just for the sake of arguing, regardless of whether they get paid for it or not! E.g., we do it for the heck of it too!

Well I tried to cover that with the do what you love statement. I remember one time in a three o'clock AM negotiating session when our attorney said, "Well I could argue both sides of this issue"xeyebrowx Aside from stating the obvious I have never been sure what his point actually wasxsmiley_wix

[McNeese75]

We aren't known for our defense this year but we can score within 27 seconds with Steve Walker at QB. Get ready for a shootout!!!

Bomar will not score as many points against the Cowboys as he did against the Bison. The McNeese offense (even considering the current injury situation) is capable of scoring quickly and often so the key in this game will be if the Kat defense can stop the Pokes xnodx

[danefan]

"Well I could argue both sides of this issue"xeyebrowx

Man, my wife loves when I pull that line out.

And by the way I can argue both sides of just about any issue.xcoffeex

[GannonFan]

Dane - You are right, it's not objective; however, it is more quantitative as an index as opposed to one purely qualitative poll. I do believe that the truth is closer to the middle of a lot of subjective opinions. The GPI gives us that middle ground.

There is no perfect computer, human or otherwise that can give us raw 1-25 rankings. There's simply no basis. But you have to decide who plays in the playoffs one way or another. And the fact that no poll is objective is the exact reason we have playoffs - prove it on the field!

Who says anyone uses the GPI as the means of determining who's in the playoffs or not? Maybe I missed it last year but I don't recall highly ranked in the GPI San Diego making the playoffs. And I'm sure YSU fans in 2005 will be able to detail how from out of nowhere, lowly ranked in the GPI Lafayette squeaked into the playoffs ahead of the better GPI resume YSU team. This is the creep I've always hated about the GPI - it grows and grows every year. First year it was just a fun little thing to see how all the polls averaged out. Then it was billed as a "predictor" of who would be in the playoffs. Then it got high and mighty and called itself "the top" predictor of who's in the playoffs, then it started ranking the individual conferences, you have threads like this where people truly believe that garbage in somehow equals pristine results out, some people now believe this is the tool the committee uses to select playoff teams, and some people think it's a great tool for picking who will even win in the playoffs. Why even play the games, let the GPI decide and maybe we can be like the BCS after all!! xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx

It's a compilation of various polls and rankings, and every poll and ranking in it has it's own flaws. Whether it "balances" out all the separate biases is in doubt - who's to say what is "balanced" anyway? At the end of the day, thankfully, it's just what it is, an index. Thankfully, the selection committee (who shockingly all by themselves can come up with 25-30 teams would could make the playoffs - it isn't all that difficult and you don't need the GPI to do that) can look at each team themselves and make pretty decent decisions about who is in and who is not in the playoffs. No need for Roy Kramer and his mathematical compilation. xpeacex

[AZGrizFan]

Well I tried to cover that with the do what you love statement. I remember one time in a three o'clock AM negotiating session when our attorney said, "Well I could argue both sides of this issue"xeyebrowx Aside from stating the obvious I have never been sure what his point actually wasxsmiley_wix

I could argue ANYTHING for $300 an hour.... even at 3 a.m.!!! xnodx xnodx xnodx

[terrierbob]

This is getting too much like work.

[jashburn]

So, I thought the ABC ranking was weird, with Delaware at 2 and Hofstra at 6. So, I clicked on the Atomic poll link at the bottom and the numbers are not the same as listed in the GPI grid. (Hofstra is actually 13, not 6)

So...whether or not you agree with the GPI, there seems to be some data/calculation errors that need to be fixed.

Was Delaware too high or too low?

Concerning the Atomic Football rankings, we do two kinds of rankings. One (ABC on Ken Massey's Ranking Comparison) is based upon only wins and losses. Thus, it can be a little erratic early in October. The GPI used to use our "hybrid" ranking (ASH), which is a combination of a win-loss rating and a score-based rating. Score-based rankings are the most accurate predictors of future performance, but they do have a down-side as a "merit-based" ranking, allowing teams to make up for losses by running up scores in other games.

I seemed to recall that the GPI did not update their footnote on us. I'll check into it.

Jim Ashburn
Atomic Football