- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Moscona's rant on the playoff committee (with link)
Posted on 12/5/19 at 9:14 am to xiv
Posted on 12/5/19 at 9:14 am to xiv
Cincinnati is not one of the top 25 teams in America. That is just silly. For example, if Cincinnati would have played Texas A&M's schuedle, would they have less than 5 losses? What if they would have played Texas' schedule? Would they have only lost to LSU and Oklahoma, is that what you are trying to convince people to believe?
How do "your rankings" match up with the committee over valuing every single one of OSU's "quality wins? Michigan fell one spot after losing by 4td's at home. Wisconsin is ranked above Florida with a loss to Illinois. Cincinnati dropped one spot after losing by double digits to a conference opponent (not a power 5 opponent).
Scone was right on his rant and you aren't. There isn't a huge difference between OSU and LSU's resumes at this time. However, the committee is trying to make it seem that way. They are wrong. That is weird island for you to die on in this argument.
How do "your rankings" match up with the committee over valuing every single one of OSU's "quality wins? Michigan fell one spot after losing by 4td's at home. Wisconsin is ranked above Florida with a loss to Illinois. Cincinnati dropped one spot after losing by double digits to a conference opponent (not a power 5 opponent).
Scone was right on his rant and you aren't. There isn't a huge difference between OSU and LSU's resumes at this time. However, the committee is trying to make it seem that way. They are wrong. That is weird island for you to die on in this argument.
1
Posted on 12/5/19 at 9:17 am to Metaloctopus
More than two thirds of the 108 rankings in the Massey composite have Cincinnati in the top 25. So basically a win over Cincinnati is a top 25 win because Cincinnati is in the top 25 according to a clear majority of metrics.
This post was edited on 12/5/19 at 9:17 am
Posted on 12/5/19 at 9:20 am to LSUFM
quote:The former. I made my first nerd formula the day before LSU suffered their only 2003 loss.
16 or 14?
Posted on 12/5/19 at 9:20 am to xiv
quote:
Irrelevant. Count what happens, not what we pretend what might happen.
Is that not what the committee is doing when they say “eye test”?
I actually understand Ohio State being #1 this week. Their schedule was backloaded and finally caught up to LSU’s, without having to include Cincinnati, and when the resumes are equal and you want to say you think one team is better than the other then I am fine with that.
I was more upset when the first ranking came out and last week’s when LSU had the better resume but they still out Ohio State ahead because they look like they would beat LSU. Once these rankings come out they should be about what happened on the field.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 9:25 am to LSUFM
quote:What I'm providing isn't a metric. When I show those numbers, I don't rank the teams. I just show you the numbers to provide a comprehensive frame for whatever argument you'd like to make.
You’re using one metric to justify your position.
The fact is that almost all comprehensive metrics favor Ohio State. The reason for this is, more than anything, tOSU's noticeable .065 advantage in ow%. Doesn't seem that big, but the variance in ow% is only about .350, so .065 is a pretty big difference.
quote:I'm the only one here citing the Massey Composite, which features 108 metrics this week.
What you’re ignoring is that there’s clearly more than one metric out there.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 9:31 am to geauxtigers33
quote:95 of 113 rankings in Massey (almost all of them computer rankings) favored Ohio State that week. That number dropped a bit when LSU beat Alabama, but Ohio State has been a solid #1 in the composite since week 5.
I was more upset when the first ranking came out and last week’s when LSU had the better resume but they still out Ohio State ahead because they look like they would beat LSU.
quote:What happened on the field is the biggest reason why tOSU is #1, and there's all kinds of math to prove it.
Once these rankings come out they should be about what happened on the field.
There's some math that puts LSU at #1, but you have to be creative or cherrypick.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 9:38 am to xiv
quote:
More than two thirds of the 108 rankings in the Massey composite have Cincinnati in the top 25. So basically a win over Cincinnati is a top 25 win because Cincinnati is in the top 25 according to a clear majority of metrics.
And what are those metrics? There are no "metrics", it's just rankings inside of rankings, inside of rankings.
All Cincinnati has to prove that it is "better" than Texas is it's record. And I'm not saying Texas deserves to be ranked. But all you have to do is go take another look at what I posted about the records of the teams Cincy has played, and how little they won most of those games by.
Texas lost to LSU by 7. They lost to Oklahoma by 8, they beat Oklahoma State, who the committee still has in their top 25. What metric could possibly decide that Cincinnati is better than Texas? Nothing. They just happen to have a better record, even though their strength of schedule is not remotely the same.
If we're going to use this kind of logic, then why stop there? They have App State and Minnesota ranked. Georgia Southern beat App State, and almost beat Minnesota. LSU beat Georgia Southern by 52. Do we get "transitive property" points for that? No, it's cool for those other teams to struggle with GSU, but when LSU trucks them by 52, it's "go play someone, LSU".
Do you see the hypocrisy?
This post was edited on 12/5/19 at 9:40 am
Posted on 12/5/19 at 9:40 am to xiv
So the Massey composite is the only valid metric? Okay. They use many discredited indexes, like Massey and Kelner in their method. All methods are weighted the same, which should not be the case. Not to mention that I (and I’m sure that most of the playoff committee) haven’t heard of at least 50 of those so called rankings systems. Do they use some mathematical system? Who knows? Who has looked at their validity? Are those all the systems used to rank or just the ones Massey uses?
Maybe it is the best way to determine, but any metric that shows LSU at #7 or #5 is automatically invalid IMO
Maybe it is the best way to determine, but any metric that shows LSU at #7 or #5 is automatically invalid IMO
Posted on 12/5/19 at 9:48 am to Metaloctopus
quote:If you go to the composite, each ranking is accompanied by a link that provides a detailed explanation for the ranking. You can find countless metrics this way, and the vast majority of them place Ohio State at #1.
And what are those metrics? There are no "metrics", it's just rankings inside of rankings, inside of rankings.
quote:School - w% - ow% - oow%
All Cincinnati has to prove that it is "better" than Texas is it's record. And I'm not saying Texas deserves to be ranked. But all you have to do is go take another look at what I posted about the records of the teams Cincy has played, and how little they won most of those games by.
Cincinnati .833 .558 .524
Texas .583 .596 .505
Sorry, man, but the idea that Texas is a better win than Cincinnati is insane. You're not going to win that argument.
quote:No. You are cherrypicking.
Texas lost to LSU by 7. They lost to Oklahoma by 8, they beat Oklahoma State, who the committee still has in their top 25. What metric could possibly decide that Cincinnati is better than Texas? Nothing. They just happen to have a better record, even though their strength of schedule is not remotely the same.
If we're going to use this kind of logic, then why stop there? They have App State and Minnesota ranked. Georgia Southern beat App State, and almost beat Minnesota. LSU beat Georgia Southern by 52. To we get "transitive property" points for that? No, it's cool for those other teams to struggle with GSU, but when LSU trucks them by 52, it's "go play someone, LSU".
Do you see the hypocrisy?
Posted on 12/5/19 at 9:50 am to LSUFM
quote:Either you don't know what the Massey Composite is, or you don't know what a metric is. The Massey Composite is not a metric. It is a composite of (currently) 108 rankings, each of which has its own method and metrics used, and you are free to browse through them if you'd like to know how various rankings are concocted.
So the Massey composite is the only valid metric?
99 of the 108 rank Ohio State at #1, and Ohio State has been #1 according to the composite since week 5.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 9:54 am to GreyBear
quote:
I’m NOT a fan of Moscona, but today he was brutally honest and on point! This system, like all others before it, is a sham and rigged.
He’s right you know !!! What a fiasco they have turned my only enjoyed sport into... bring on Artificial Intelligence to make these decisions !!!
Posted on 12/5/19 at 10:00 am to xiv
quote:
If you go to the composite, each ranking is accompanied by a link that provides a detailed explanation for the ranking. You can find countless metrics this way, and the vast majority of them place Ohio State at #1.
A detailed explanation of how their metrics decided that OSU is better, because their metrics decided that Cincinnati is better than Texas, because their metrics can't differentiate between Texas' schedule and Cincy's schedule. It's circular reasoning. It's not a science, and even if it were, football is not a science.
quote:
School - w% - ow% - oow%
Cincinnati .833 .558 .524
Texas .583 .596 .505
Sorry, man, but the idea that Texas is a better win than Cincinnati is insane. You're not going to win that argument.
What is this? Are you going to explain to me what those numbers even are? Is that how you think this works? "Here's some random numbers, I'll hang up and listen". I spelled out all the 4-8 teams that Cincy barely beat. That not only wins the argument, it blows it away.
quote:
No. You are cherrypicking.
Cherrypicking what? I gave you a rundown of the best teams Texas has played, and how they fared. Before that, I have already given the rundown of pretty much EVERYONE Cincy has played, and they were abysmal against almost all of them. They have no top 25 wins. Texas has 1.
Where's the cherrypicking? That's like someone telling me that A&M dominated LSU on Saturday, and me saying "What? There were 57 points scored in that game, and LSU had 50 of them!". And the other person replying "oh, you're just cherrypicking".
This post was edited on 12/5/19 at 10:02 am
Posted on 12/5/19 at 10:04 am to xiv
Yes, and they use quality wins to determine the rankings. One of the services has Wisconsin as #2 and Michigan and Notre Dame as 6 & 7. Kinda skews the findings, dontcha think?
One has Memphis as #4.
Cincy is rated as high as #5 in a poll! About half of the put Cincy as #13. If you think Cincy is the #5 or even #13 team in the nation, then you don’t know much.
Clearly, the rankings of those teams in their polls effects the overall rankings because Ohio State beat them. So, until you’ve looked at each one independent of Massey, you don’t get the real picture.
Those rankings would be entirely different had almost all of those ridiculous rankings been thrown in the trash, or at least represented an accurate measure of the teams Ohio State and LSU played.
One has Memphis as #4.
Cincy is rated as high as #5 in a poll! About half of the put Cincy as #13. If you think Cincy is the #5 or even #13 team in the nation, then you don’t know much.
Clearly, the rankings of those teams in their polls effects the overall rankings because Ohio State beat them. So, until you’ve looked at each one independent of Massey, you don’t get the real picture.
Those rankings would be entirely different had almost all of those ridiculous rankings been thrown in the trash, or at least represented an accurate measure of the teams Ohio State and LSU played.
This post was edited on 12/5/19 at 10:14 am
Posted on 12/5/19 at 10:07 am to Metaloctopus
quote:Literally every computer ranking does exactly this.
their metrics can't differentiate between Texas' schedule and Cincy's schedule.
quote:
What is this? Are you going to explain to me what those numbers even are? Is that how you think this works? "Here's some random numbers, I'll hang up and listen". I spelled out all the 4-8 teams that Cincy barely beat. That not only wins the argument, it blows it away.
winning percentage, opponents’ winning percentage, and opponents’ opponents’ winning percentage. quote:Games. You’re talking about some of them. I’m talking about all of them.
Cherrypicking what?
Posted on 12/5/19 at 10:11 am to LSUFM
quote:Some do. Most don’t even identify “quality wins.”
Yes, and they use quality wins to determine the rankings.
quote:1 out of 108 skews the findings?
One of the services has Wisconsin as #2 and Michigan and Notre Dame as 6 & 7. Kinda skews the findings, dontcha think?
One has Memphis as #4.
Feel free to calculate what the rankings would be if that system were excluded and share the results. quote:Feel free to cite comprehensive data supporting your position here.
Cincy is rated as high as #5 in a poll! About half of the put Cincy as #13. If you think Cincy is the #5 or even #13 team in the nation, then you don’t know much.
quote:I have.
So, until you’ve looked at each one independent of Massey,
quote:You can eliminate the 89 rankings of your choice from the Massey Composite, and tOSU will still be #1.
Those rankings would be entirely different had almost all of those ridiculous rankings been thrown in the trash, or at least represented an accurate measure of the teams Ohio State and LSU played.
This post was edited on 12/5/19 at 10:24 am
Posted on 12/5/19 at 10:43 am to Nix to Twillie
He’s absolutely right. Wisky at 8 is an absolute joke PERIOD
Posted on 12/5/19 at 10:44 am to xiv
Very well, here you go:
I’m not saying that a system or even multiple systems should be excluded. I’m saying that if those teams rankings weren’t artificially inflated, then the results might be different, thus leading to different results in the top teams.
No, not 1 out of 108. I gave a small sample of far too many to put here. For those who want to peruse for themselves, here’s the link
LINK
Jeez! That’s a lot, but: #15 Mark, #13 Ken Stromness, #10 GB Eldridge, #13 CSL, #13 MJS, #15 Golden, #5 Rhamey, #14 Knight, #13 Loudsound, #9 Adam Wilson, #13 Welch, #13 Jelly Juke, #13 Vern, #13 Colley, #13 Boyd ISR, #11 Wolfe, #14 Phelan Power, #14 Wobus, #15 Wilson, #14 ABC, #14 Krach, #13 Anderson, #15 Hatch - and that doesn’t include anything rankin in the teens above 15.
So, that’s at least 23 polls out of 108, not counting the others mentioned. See above for how that effects Ohio State’s rankings.
You may have looked, but you haven’t understood what the implications of those numbers are on other teams.
The implications are that they skew the rankings at the top. The same goes for teams that they played that are ranked too low. All of those ranked too low or too high skew the numbers for all others. This is why, in the past, only two to four polls or methods were used.
Like I said, the ones I mentioned are just a small sample of many problems with almost all of those numbers
quote:
Feel free to calculate what the rankings would be if that system was excluded
I’m not saying that a system or even multiple systems should be excluded. I’m saying that if those teams rankings weren’t artificially inflated, then the results might be different, thus leading to different results in the top teams.
quote:
1 out of 108?
No, not 1 out of 108. I gave a small sample of far too many to put here. For those who want to peruse for themselves, here’s the link
LINK
quote:
Feel free to cite comprehensive data
Jeez! That’s a lot, but: #15 Mark, #13 Ken Stromness, #10 GB Eldridge, #13 CSL, #13 MJS, #15 Golden, #5 Rhamey, #14 Knight, #13 Loudsound, #9 Adam Wilson, #13 Welch, #13 Jelly Juke, #13 Vern, #13 Colley, #13 Boyd ISR, #11 Wolfe, #14 Phelan Power, #14 Wobus, #15 Wilson, #14 ABC, #14 Krach, #13 Anderson, #15 Hatch - and that doesn’t include anything rankin in the teens above 15.
So, that’s at least 23 polls out of 108, not counting the others mentioned. See above for how that effects Ohio State’s rankings.
quote:
I have
You may have looked, but you haven’t understood what the implications of those numbers are on other teams.
The implications are that they skew the rankings at the top. The same goes for teams that they played that are ranked too low. All of those ranked too low or too high skew the numbers for all others. This is why, in the past, only two to four polls or methods were used.
Like I said, the ones I mentioned are just a small sample of many problems with almost all of those numbers
This post was edited on 12/5/19 at 10:58 am
Posted on 12/5/19 at 10:48 am to ThePistol
I’ve tried explaining it to him, but he either doesn’t get it or is doesn’t want to.
Posted on 12/5/19 at 11:00 am to LSUFM
quote:No such thing is occurring.
I’m saying that if those teams rankings weren’t artificially inflated
quote:Not what I mean. I mean feel free to cite comprehensive data supporting your opinion that ranking Cincinnati at #13 is insane (or whatever word you used to describe it). The fact that 23 math nerds do it hurts that argument.
Jeez! That’s a lot, but: #15 Mark, #13 Ken Stromness, #10 GB Eldridge, #13 CSL, #13 MJS, #15 Golden, #5 Rhamey, #14 Knight, #13 Loudsound, #9 Adam Wilson, #13 Welch, #13 Jelly Juke, #13 Vern, #13 Colley, #13 Boyd ISR, #11 Wolfe, #14 Phelan Power, #14 Wobus, #15 Wilson, #14 ABC, #14 Krach, #13 Anderson, #15 Hatch - and that doesn’t include anything rankin in the teens above 15.
So, that’s at least 23 polls out of 108, not counting the others mentioned. See above for how that effects Ohio State’s rankings.
quote:
You may have looked, but you haven’t understood what the implications of those numbers are on other teams.
Slow down. If you pick the 20 systems that rank Cincinnati the lowest, tOSU is still #1. 
Posted on 12/5/19 at 12:13 pm to xiv
quote:
I made my first nerd formula the day before LSU suffered their only 2003 loss.
I appreciate your honesty. Makes sense now - maybe its time to stop drinking that nerd formula you have been making...
Btw, you may be a genius, but your also a contrarian, an attention-seeker, and you over estimate your intelligence. Many geniuses are specific in their knowledge subsets, but struggle when it comes to general logic, people skills, ect.
You are clearly lacking in some areas where(or should that be where as. Silly me, youre the genius, and with your over-inflated sense of self-worth, Im sure youll correct me) you are advanced in others. Your ultimate truth is that you arent better than anyone. Perhaps switch that nerd formula out for some humble pie, hopefully before someone fist feeds it to you irl...
This post was edited on 12/5/19 at 12:18 pm
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News