Question for you “Massey Ratings” folks

[Puddin Tane]

if yall are bored, and have nothing better to do

Next time yall are looking this list, can ya tell me why Sela is ranked over Lamar? It makes zero sense to me. Look schedules, at who both teams have played…won and LOST to.

fuzzy math ifn ya ask me

[ElCid]

if yall are bored, and have nothing better to do

Next time yall are looking this list, can ya tell me why Sela is ranked over Lamar? It makes zero sense to me. Look schedules, at who both teams have played…won and LOST to.

fuzzy math ifn ya ask me

It all has to do with SOS and the actual scores, not just that a team won or lost. SELA played two FBS and Lamar played Lincoln, whatever they are, so that boosts SELA's SOS. And just to be accurate, it's actually not a ranking, but a rating. Ratings of 5.59 vs 5.54. SELA is 0.05 ahead of Lamar. That's almost indistinguishable. It's not what ranking # a team or it's opponents are (#24, or #4, etc) that matter. It's what their rating is, and the rating of their opponents, that matters. Hope that makes sense.

[clenz]

Computers aren't perfect and this is an exampe of it

I think a big factor is the SOS is 41 for SLU and 77 for Lamar. SOSF is 47 for SLU and 79 for Lamar. So there is a bit of weight being thrown there.

SLU also has a PWR of 47 to Lamars 78. The power doesn't care about W-L and is more a measure of "potential". So metiraclly somehow the computers think SLU has more poential than Lamar, they just aren't meeting it.

Offensive rank is 35 to 84 - which is expected ability to score points and defenesive is 53 to 67 - the expected ability to stop scoring


No "massey rating folks" will say Massey - or any computer - is 100% accurate and treated like a god. It's not. Massey can't take into account things humans can - "the eye test" and flukey one off games.

SLU is also largely being carried by the OOC compared to Lamar.


The reality is that once you get to the 60s or below you're going to see rankings doing weird things when you're a "look at the record" folk. Computers don't really care about they. They are connecting dots and metrics. It's why 3-6 SFA is a head of both, 3-6 Idaho State even higher yet. 3-7 UNA is also in front of Lamar. 2-7 Utah Tech was ahead of Lamar this week.

Once you get that "low" strange things happen based off of metrics that computers pull outside of wins and losses. No human is going to put SLU over Lamar, but seeing that in a computer should give humans a reason to look at Lamar a bit closer and examine their wins and losses before going "They are 6-3 so put them with the 6-3 teams like UNI, NDSU, SIU, Sac State, UND, YSU, UCA, Holy Corss, etc."

[Puddin Tane]

Thanks guys. But why does SOS mean anything if you lose em? Cuz they got beat by a better (supposedly) team? Our only loses are all to pretty good fcs good teams? Idaho, South Dakota (which we actually controlled for most of the first half) and Uiw and their FBS transfer team. With the exception of FBS, ULM, our loses have been to top 10ish teams. We beat hcu , hcu bombed sela. Then we beat sela. Sela stays ahead. Its madnees I tell ya, madness!

So, in a nutshell, it boils down to….they Lost to “better” teams? Wins be damned?

btw, Lincoln appears to be this years Bishop Sycamore. Alot of studs that got kicked out of there previous schools. No stadium. I think the school is a 2 story bldg in the middle of oakland. Somebody cancel? Need a game? Shouldnt be allowed to play. Theyve also played or will play cal- poly, couple of swac teams, kennesaw, ut tech, and so. Utah.

Again, thanks for replying and rest easy knowing that both sfa and sammy SUCK this year. Warms my heart!

barring another frickin portal raid of our linemen, I think Lamar will be very good next year! You heard it hear first!

[ElCid]

Thanks guys. But why does SOS mean anything if you lose em? Cuz they got beat by a better (supposedly) team? Our only loses are all to pretty good fcs good teams? Idaho, South Dakota (which we actually controlled for most of the first half) and Uiw and their FBS transfer team. With the exception of FBS, ULM, our loses have been to top 10ish teams. We beat hcu , hcu bombed sela. Then we beat sela. Sela stays ahead. Its madnees I tell ya, madness!

So, in a nutshell, it boils down to….they Lost to “better” teams? Wins be damned?

btw, Lincoln appears to be this years Bishop Sycamore. Alot of studs that got kicked out of there previous schools. No stadium. I think the school is a 2 story bldg in the middle of oakland. Somebody cancel? Need a game? Shouldnt be allowed to play. Theyve also played or will play cal- poly, couple of swac teams, kennesaw, ut tech, and so. Utah.

Again, thanks for replying and rest easy knowing that both sfa and sammy SUCK this year. Warms my heart!

barring another frickin portal raid of our linemen, I think Lamar will be very good next year! You heard it hear first!

The computer doesn't care how a team looked, first half, second half, at all. It looks at final scores only. If you play a good team and lose by 2, you are rewarded. If you lose by 30, and were suppose to lose by 20, you get dinged. There is a diminishing impact though. So if you lose by 40 instead of 30, it isn't twice as bad. Same goes for wins. If you were suppose to win by 20 to a "bad" team, but win by 2, you are going to get dinged. Throw in the home/away calculations as well and you have to look at each and every game to see specifically how they did to the current predictions. An eye test and perceived good/bad status doesn't cut it. At least when it comes to their rating results. It's why it is kind of easy to beat Massey, or Sagarin, when picking games. At least if you are playing close attention to the teams. It's why I try to look at every box scores of every game to actually see what went on, beyond the actual score. Our brains have better algorithms. We can see flukes (the tip drill interception pick 6 for a winning score as an example), injuries, possible weather impacts, rivalries, etc. I just use them as a data point. There is no doubt they are close for a big picture. And even if their algorithms aren't perfect, or their starting ratings, once the season starts, every input that happens is objective.

[TrooperCoats]

Curious how does Massey give NDSU the 4th best rating? Wouldn't the UxD losses ding them pretty bad (especially the USD loss at the time)? The schedule doesn't look any tougher than anyone else in the Valley, and they only have 1 win over team that is over .500.

[caribbeanhen]

https://masseyratings.com/faq.php

Why do you post three different rating systems?
While the algorithms that produce computer ratings are objective, the choice of the model itself is not. Multiple systems provide the opportunity to compare alternative interprettations of the same data. Although there is general agreement, computer ratings are also quite diverse. The Massey Ratings are my creation, while the Markov and Sauceda models were developed with help from friends of mine.

[ElCid]

Curious how does Massey give NDSU the 4th best rating? Wouldn't the UxD losses ding them pretty bad (especially the USD loss at the time)? The schedule doesn't look any tougher than anyone else in the Valley, and they only have 1 win over team that is over .500.

See above. You gotta look at the predicted to actual scores. In every win they beat the predicted score. Two were decent teams.

[Puddin Tane]

Curious how does Massey give NDSU the 4th best rating? Wouldn't the UxD losses ding them pretty bad (especially the USD loss at the time)? The schedule doesn't look any tougher than anyone else in the Valley, and they only have 1 win over team that is over .500.

i think Mrs Massey does factor in the fargo dome and having relatives in the referee crew

[MR. CHICKEN]

i think Mrs Massey does factor in the fargo dome and having relatives in the referee crew

...AN'...LORD KNOWS.....HOW MANY BIG PLAYS....HAVE BEEN CALLED BACK......ON VISITIN' SQWADS........'CAUSE UH MIS-CONDUCTED SILENT COUNTS............DOODLE-DOO!

[wapiti]

Thanks guys. But why does SOS mean anything if you lose em?

Because if the SOS is weak ass sauce like Florida AM and NC Central then those teams become over ranked and overrated.

[clenz]

Thanks guys. But why does SOS mean anything if you lose em? Cuz they got beat by a better (supposedly) team?
Let's say you are, just hypothetically speaking, someone like Missouri State.

You're 3-6. Likely to be 3-7 after this weekend and 3-8 to finish the season as you have UNI and SDSU left.

That's not a good record. You probably aren't very good. Are you "as bad as your record"? I mean you are what your record is but not all records are equal. What do I mean by that?

Drake is going to finish 8-3, and has the better record, by a large margin. Certainly, they are the better team right?

Well let's look at a few things
SOS MSU 27 Drake 120
Drake lost to an NAIA school - probably the best NAIA school in the country, but NAIA none the less.
Drake then played 2 MVFC schools OOC - they lost both by a combined score of 125-14 and both MVFC teams pulled starters at half, or first possession of the second half.

So wins track everything so you'd rank Drake over MSU and pick Drake to beat MSU? Maybe SDSU beats MSU 70-7 like they did to Drake.

Again, no computer ranking "person" believes computers are the be all end all truth. They are a tool that is able to take a lot data and organize it in ways the human brain can, which then becomes a tool to get added to the computer power and ability to read a box score, injury report, weather forecast, bad officials, etc. that computers can't. Just as humans, no matter what we think, couldn't actually take billions, or trillions, of data points and connected every team in the country - across all levels of play like computers can/do.

Simply going "this team has a bigger number in the W column so they are better" is honestly one of the worst ways you could actually rank teams.

[caribbeanhen]

...AN'...LORD KNOWS.....HOW MANY BIG PLAYS....HAVE BEEN CALLED BACK......ON VISITIN' SQWADS........'CAUSE UH MIS-CONDUCTED SILENT COUNTS............DOODLE-DOO!

It was as sure as a sunrise, calls they got were surreal

[Puddin Tane]

Let's say you are, just hypothetically speaking, someone like Missouri State.

You're 3-6. Likely to be 3-7 after this weekend and 3-8 to finish the season as you have UNI and SDSU left.

That's not a good record. You probably aren't very good. Are you "as bad as your record"? I mean you are what your record is but not all records are equal. What do I mean by that?

Drake is going to finish 8-3, and has the better record, by a large margin. Certainly, they are the better team right?

Well let's look at a few things
SOS MSU 27 Drake 120
Drake lost to an NAIA school - probably the best NAIA school in the country, but NAIA none the less.
Drake then played 2 MVFC schools OOC - they lost both by a combined score of 125-14 and both MVFC teams pulled starters at half, or first possession of the second half.

So wins track everything so you'd rank Drake over MSU and pick Drake to beat MSU? Maybe SDSU beats MSU 70-7 like they did to Drake.

Again, no computer ranking "person" believes computers are the be all end all truth. They are a tool that is able to take a lot data and organize it in ways the human brain can, which then becomes a tool to get added to the computer power and ability to read a box score, injury report, weather forecast, bad officials, etc. that computers can't. Just as humans, no matter what we think, couldn't actually take billions, or trillions, of data points and connected every team in the country - across all levels of play like computers can/do.

Simply going "this team has a bigger number in the W column so they are better" is honestly one of the worst ways you could actually rank teams.

oh sure, of course. You gotta look at the who what and where of it all. I just think theres a whole lot of emphasis placed on massey/sagarin, when a lot of its pretty screwy.

[clenz]

oh sure, of course. You gotta look at the who what and where of it all. I just think theres a whole lot of emphasis placed on massey/sagarin, when a lot of its pretty screwy.
The thing is, Massey, or 99% of the computer models that are widely known, are not screwy at all. You just have to understand what they actually are.

[Redbird 4th & short]

Great question .. Computer rankings attempt to assess "quality" wins and losses, vs "average" wins and losses, vs "bad" wins and losses. And while never perfect, it is the right approach. Home vs away also matters, I think Vegas, et al, assigns 3 to 4 pts of value to playing at home. Though records carry a lot of weight .. you have to consider records, along strength of schedule by opponent, along with margins, along with playing home or away.

So all other things being equal, if the consensus #10 ranked team in FCS beats a #65 ranked team (average) by 3 at home, that "win" should hurt their ranking. On th eother hand if same #10 team, loses to the #1 team by 3 on the road .. that loss should help them or at least reaffirm their #10 ranking. That said, even that is all depending on what other teams did that same week.

Its 11 games a year across 130+ teams .. so nearly 1,500 games outcomes, scores, home/away .. with rankings rightly shifting all over the place from game 1 to 11. So that is why computers like Massey are so helpful. It tries to be objective and there is no way to judge quality wins and losses outside the top 25 subjective polls ... so Massey does this instantaneously once scores are loaded. I don't think anyone says you should go with Massey or Sagarin. But you should consider it when judging quality wins and losses within a reasonable margin of range of outcomes.


edit: admittedly and putting aside statistical bias that can cause clustering of teams from same conferences as you get further into season .. espcially strongest or weakest conferences. So while I fully believe this year there are 6 or 7 MVFC teams worthy of top 25 and playoff consideration. By end of season, Massey might have those 7 MVFC teams in the top 16, which I don't believe ... that is the clustering effect. they havent figured out how to mitigate properly.

[Redbird 4th & short]

Curious how does Massey give NDSU the 4th best rating? Wouldn't the UxD losses ding them pretty bad (especially the USD loss at the time)? The schedule doesn't look any tougher than anyone else in the Valley, and they only have 1 win over team that is over .500.

The preseason ranking by Massey, and something comparable for any computer, is based on prior seasons ... think of it as a program credit. But it weights your prior season results giving more weight to prior year 1 than prior year 2 and 3, etc. Subjective polls sort of do same, though could reflect if they know the #1 team from last year lost 70% of its starts/reps/stats and the #2 team returns 70% of its starts/reps/stats ... if the voters even bothered to look into. But like the SEC, the MVFC tends to get strong preseason rankings of how well we've done in playoffs. Massey knows this just by clicking the button, update. It has all the game outcomes, margins, opposition SOS, home/away .. current season to date, preseason getting less weight every game .. it is a computer doing objective math instantly s it updates scores and records.

So NDSU gets a lot of deserved Massey love for a few reasons .. 8 or 9 Nattys or whatever it is. And making the Natty last year. And playing in the MVFC .. right now it looks like 6+ top 25 teams and possibly 6 bids. I don't know if NDSU is worthy of a top 8 seed or not this year, but would you bet against them come playoff time ? So Massey has all of this objectively baked into their algorithm .. Ken Massey is a statistician who takes this seriously. He could care less about NDSU. So he doesn't do anything to put his thumb on scale THIS season causing NDSU to be ranked so high. But by end of season, he removes the preseason weight entirely .. his notes didn't say exactly when preseason weight is zero.

That said .. if NDSU being ranked 4th came to his attention, he would possibly look into whether he ie given too much weight to preason poll and prior seasons, to far into current season. But he tries not to over-react or react too soon to anything. It may work itself out by game 10 or 11 when we know this season even better.

[caribbeanhen]

some say that by Massey having no way to factor in the eye test is a disadvantage, but just reading what people see on here it's actually an advantage

[Redbird 4th & short]

some say that by Massey having no way to factor in the eye test is a disadvantage, but just reading what people see on here it's actually an advantage
I think the eye test can only be done by a select few. That said, those select few can't reasonably be expected to watch enough games to be truly good at ranking all teams. I think anyone wanting a valid ranking, should welcome assistance from computers .. not decisions, but open minded assistance.

[caribbeanhen]

I think the eye test can only be done by a select few. That said, those select few can't reasonably be expected to watch enough games to be truly good at ranking all teams. I think anyone wanting a valid ranking, should welcome assistance from computers .. not decisions, but open minded assistance.

Agree with you

[TrooperCoats]

One more question which was spurred by the eye-test comment. If Massey only looks at final scores, are they unintentionally promoting garbage-time scores? Thinking back to the NDSU/USD game, the final score looks much closer than the game actually was - which requires some eye-test-edness, right? (NDSU's score wasn't garbage-time, but they probably should have taken the 3 earlier instead of trying for the 8). In hoops KenPom breaks it down by possession, taking pace of play out - does Massey do something like that?

[WileECoyote06]

Because if the SOS is weak ass sauce like Florida AM and NC Central then those teams become over ranked and overrated.

The NC Central who beat #26 Elon on the road by double digits and is still 15 spots behind them? Or the NC Central that beat A&T on the road by 14 points; which is only a point less than the point differential in the (home) game between #7 Delaware and the Aggies? Massey isn't valuing the Eagles based on their in-game performance at all.

Find another axe to grind.

[ElCid]

The NC Central who beat #26 Elon on the road by double digits and is still 15 spots behind them? Or the NC Central that beat A&T on the road by 14 points; which is only a point less than the point differential in the (home) game between #7 Delaware and the Aggies? Massey isn't valuing the Eagles based on their in-game performance at all.

Find another axe to grind.

The biggest thing hurting both is their SOS. The Elon game finally made me take notice and they are definitely worthy of ranking. Being behind Elon in Massey is expected based on the entire SOS, not just one H2H game. I'm still not convinced they rate a top 15 spot though. Their SOS will end up being 97... out of 128. And that includes a P5 game. They may be worthy, but the evidence just isn't sufficient to justify a high ranking. Just like it wasn't for Lafayette who will end up at #73 SOS. At least until they lost last week. Their only previous loss was to Duke. I don't think they cracked the top 20 in any human poll. While evidence is now available, it wasn't until last week.

A&M's SOS will end up at 112. Same deal, only worse. They don't really have an Elon type win. Their best W is a slightly downtrodden Jackson St. At least downtrodden as compared to last year.

[ElCid]

Great question .. Computer rankings attempt to assess "quality" wins and losses, vs "average" wins and losses, vs "bad" wins and losses. And while never perfect, it is the right approach. Home vs away also matters, I think Vegas, et al, assigns 3 to 4 pts of value to playing at home. Though records carry a lot of weight .. you have to consider records, along strength of schedule by opponent, along with margins, along with playing home or away.

So all other things being equal, if the consensus #10 ranked team in FCS beats a #65 ranked team (average) by 3 at home, that "win" should hurt their ranking. On th eother hand if same #10 team, loses to the #1 team by 3 on the road .. that loss should help them or at least reaffirm their #10 ranking. That said, even that is all depending on what other teams did that same week.

Its 11 games a year across 130+ teams .. so nearly 1,500 games outcomes, scores, home/away .. with rankings rightly shifting all over the place from game 1 to 11. So that is why computers like Massey are so helpful. It tries to be objective and there is no way to judge quality wins and losses outside the top 25 subjective polls ... so Massey does this instantaneously once scores are loaded. I don't think anyone says you should go with Massey or Sagarin. But you should consider it when judging quality wins and losses within a reasonable margin of range of outcomes.


edit: admittedly and putting aside statistical bias that can cause clustering of teams from same conferences as you get further into season .. espcially strongest or weakest conferences. So while I fully believe this year there are 6 or 7 MVFC teams worthy of top 25 and playoff consideration. By end of season, Massey might have those 7 MVFC teams in the top 16, which I don't believe ... that is the clustering effect. they havent figured out how to mitigate properly.

The only thing I would add, and it's just a pet peeve of mine, is that merely using the rank order of the computer ratings is not a very good way to compare. I've mentioned it before, but people really need to look at the rating itself.

Example in Massey. SDSU has a rating of 7.89. That is number one obviously. Number 2 is Mont St at 7.14. Let's just say, as an example, that the next 8 teams are all clumped together at 7.15, 7.16, 7.17, etc. to 7.22. The number 11 team is a 5.00. In this case beating the number 10 team is hugely better than beating the number 11 team. By just using the rank order, you miss the bigger picture of the huge gap from #10 to #11. Now I totally understand that this would never happen like this. I exaggerated it for an illustrative reason. But gaps do appear here and there and #20 compared to #10 might be way different a gap than #30 to #20. I know it easier to just use a rank, and it's close, but people who want to justify a good win or bad loss need to look closer at the actually rating and not necessarily just the rank order of those ratings.

Just FYI, The #128 team right now, Dayton, has a rating of 3.93 in comparison to #1. Also, I found in one group of 17 consecutively ranked teams, the rating separation is only 0.15 between the top and bottom of those 17 teams. That ain't much at all. Almost indistinguishable. But it would sound way better to say "we beat the #17 team" than it would to say "we beat the #34 team." But in reality, it ain't crap. I see people listing the rank of teams all the time. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know it is probably close, but not always. Heck, I've done it myself at times. Anyway, just something to consider.

[WileECoyote06]

The biggest thing hurting both is their SOS. The Elon game finally made me take notice and they are definitely worthy of ranking. Being behind Elon in Massey is expected based on the entire SOS, not just one H2H game. I'm still not convinced they rate a top 15 spot though. Their SOS will end up being 97... out of 128. And that includes a P5 game. They may be worthy, but the evidence just isn't sufficient to justify a high ranking. Just like it wasn't for Lafayette who will end up at #73 SOS. At least until they lost last week. Their only previous loss was to Duke. I don't think they cracked the top 20 in any human poll. While evidence is now available, it wasn't until last week.

A&M's SOS will end up at 112. Same deal, only worse. They don't really have an Elon type win. Their best W is a slightly downtrodden Jackson St. At least downtrodden as compared to last year.

I don't have an issue with anyone being critical of NCCU's or FAMU's "ranking". I didn't even comment in the AGS Poll thread about it.

The OP insinuated that NCCU is overrated by Massey and that isn't the case at all. NCCU is #41.

[Redbird 4th & short]

The only thing I would add, and it's just a pet peeve of mine, is that merely using the rank order of the computer ratings is not a very good way to compare. I've mentioned it before, but people really need to look at the rating itself.

Example in Massey. SDSU has a rating of 7.89. That is number one obviously. Number 2 is Mont St at 7.14. Let's just say, as an example, that the next 8 teams are all clumped together at 7.15, 7.16, 7.17, etc. to 7.22. The number 11 team is a 5.00. In this case beating the number 10 team is hugely better than beating the number 11 team. By just using the rank order, you miss the bigger picture of the huge gap from #10 to #11. Now I totally understand that this would never happen like this. I exaggerated it for an illustrative reason. But gaps do appear here and there and #20 compared to #10 might be way different a gap than #30 to #20. I know it easier to just use a rank, and it's close, but people who want to justify a good win or bad loss need to look closer at the actually rating and not necessarily just the rank order of those ratings.

Just FYI, The #128 team right now, Dayton, has a rating of 3.93 in comparison to #1. Also, I found in one group of 17 consecutively ranked teams, the rating separation is only 0.15 between the top and bottom of those 17 teams. That ain't much at all. Almost indistinguishable. But it would sound way better to say "we beat the #17 team" than it would to say "we beat the #34 team." But in reality, it ain't crap. I see people listing the rank of teams all the time. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know it is probably close, but not always. Heck, I've done it myself at times. Anyway, just something to consider.

Agreed .. there are definitely blocks of teams statistically and in reality, where you can see bigger drop offs. But you also mentioned the key to using Massey ... they make it easy to at least apply some discerning judgement regarding quality wins/losses vs weak wins/losses. I just wish more Coaches in the Coaches Poll had staff who put this in front of them when they have to fill out their rankings each week, while they are getting their teams ready for their next game and trying to keep their day jobs !!!!

[clenz]

One more question which was spurred by the eye-test comment. If Massey only looks at final scores, are they unintentionally promoting garbage-time scores? Thinking back to the NDSU/USD game, the final score looks much closer than the game actually was - which requires some eye-test-edness, right? (NDSU's score wasn't garbage-time, but they probably should have taken the 3 earlier instead of trying for the 8). In hoops KenPom breaks it down by possession, taking pace of play out - does Massey do something like that?
I don't know if Massey does but if they don't I'll counter your question with

If Massey doesn't and there is no human eye test to go "This score was really this until this garbage thing happens" is it really any different than a human just going to ESPN clicking the FCS tab and browsing the final scores? Is it any different than the "How they fared" spreadsheet" which just lists final scores for that week and doesn't include the box score and time of each score?

If the person isn't willing to put in the effort to click the box score and analyze it, they are no better than Massey as far as "eye test" goes. Infact, their built in bias against/for certain teams, conferences, expectations, etc. becomes even more skewed for a ranking than a computer going "Here are 10 thousand data points, how do they connect"

[wapiti]

The NC Central who beat #26 Elon on the road by double digits and is still 15 spots behind them? Or the NC Central that beat A&T on the road by 14 points; which is only a point less than the point differential in the (home) game between #7 Delaware and the Aggies? Massey isn't valuing the Eagles based on their in-game performance at all.

Find another axe to grind.

NC Central at 41 and AM at 38 is probably a bit more accurate for these 2 teams. My gripe is more about them being top 25 in the polls. They should not be receiving any votes. I asked about this in the AGS poll thread, but did not get much traction in it. so I posted my gripe here and at least got some traction.

But if the algorithm uses poll results as part of its computation then these 2 teams are also overrated in the Massey.

[ElCid]

NC Central at 41 and AM at 38 is probably a bit more accurate for these 2 teams. My gripe is more about them being top 25 in the polls. They should not be receiving any votes. I asked about this in the AGS poll thread, but did not get much traction in it. so I posted my gripe here and at least got some traction.

But if the algorithm uses poll results as part of its computation then these 2 teams are also overrated in the Massey.

The Massey composite and other composites like the BCS use human polls, but I have never heard of a computer rating system that integrates polls into their algorithms. They might, but I have never heard that.

And I think it is a bit harsh to say that NCCU should not be receiving "any" votes. I think they should. I just think their SOS limits how high they should be. A valid argument can be made for anything from 16 and up. 20 and up should be guaranteed. 10-15?
Probably not. Top 10? No.

[WileECoyote06]

NC Central at 41 and AM at 38 is probably a bit more accurate for these 2 teams. My gripe is more about them being top 25 in the polls. They should not be receiving any votes. I asked about this in the AGS poll thread, but did not get much traction in it. so I posted my gripe here and at least got some traction.

But if the algorithm uses poll results as part of its computation then these 2 teams are also overrated in the Massey.

Few are going to agree with you on them being not being in the Top 25; especially NC Central. Some voters have actually watched some of our games outside of the Morgan State game. And we started in the Top 25. Your argument is flatter than a piece of cellophane.

[caribbeanhen]

NC Central at 41 and AM at 38 is probably a bit more accurate for these 2 teams. My gripe is more about them being top 25 in the polls. They should not be receiving any votes. I asked about this in the AGS poll thread, but did not get much traction in it. so I posted my gripe here and at least got some traction.

But if the algorithm uses poll results as part of its computation then these 2 teams are also overrated in the Massey.

I think you’re being tough on NC Central
They are 3-0 vs The CAA this year and had a relatively easy win over New Hampshire last year. I think they deserve to be ranked.

Florida A&M does not because the SWAC is just bad, NC Central has shown us how bad the SWAC is

[ElCid]

I got a question. Is it me or has Massey got intolerable with ads. I find it barely usable anymore. When I pull up a team it bounces up and down as ads load. It locks my computer up. There are delays. On my phone it is even worse. You try and scroll and you can't avoid the ads. May be time to find another site for historical data. Anyone else having these problems?

[caribbeanhen]

It’s not you El Cid, same issues when using Massey on cell phone. It’s the best and easiest to use site I know of for historical games but yes the adds are making it a big pain

[MSUBobcat]

I got a question. Is it me or has Massey got intolerable with ads. I find it barely usable anymore. When I pull up a team it bounces up and down as ads load. It locks my computer up. There are delays. On my phone it is even worse. You try and scroll and you can't avoid the ads. May be time to find another site for historical data. Anyone else having these problems?

I've cursed the site many times this year. It is almost unusable on a phone, but on a computer I don't have nearly the same issues.

[clenz]

I’ve never seen a single ad for mobile or pc.

Y’all need to learn how to use add ons and technology circa 2012.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk