Just Leaving This Here...
- Thread starter Fryowa
- Start date
InGoodCo
Well-Known Member
Not counting when Iowa beats top 25 teams and knocking them out of the rankings where if those teams had won, they’d count beating us is the dumbest thing I’ve ever read. Not counting Iowa say beating #22 USC to end the season and knocking them out of the final top 25, also, dumbest thing I’ve ever heard of. While I get what the base of this argument is, it’s too rigid and doesn’t account for a whole F ton of common sense
SCHawkeye2
Well-Known Member
The CFP ranking appears to correlate more to the AP & coaches poll.
Last edited:
SCHawkeye2
Well-Known Member
The statistic that Iowa has not beaten a team ranked in the final Top 25 since 2019 is a demonstrable objective fact.
You are entitled to your interpretation of this fact. As am I.
Last edited:
AreWeThereYet
Well-Known Member
Indiana has taken full advantage of a very fortuitous schedule. Not an easy thing to do. Most teams fail to win out with a soft schedule.
They are sitting very nicely right now. Beat Ohio State and they're in the top four. Win all but Ohio State and they are still in the playoff bracket.
Fryowa
Administrator
Sagarin takes SOS into account in an objective, mathematical way that isn't a biased "smell test" done by humans.
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
T
That Iowa is somehow ranked ahead of Iowa State in this system. Talk about smell test issues.....
Yeah. They are doing what we've been trying to do the last 10 plus yrs being in the BIG west. Good for them.
Fryowa
Administrator
The Sagarin ranking system is based on real data, applied equally across all teams, and has been historically proven as the best predictive index of wins/losses, and light years better than the AP and coaches polls.
In other words, this is a whole lot more valid as a ranking system that either of those human popularity contests.
Iowa is objectively better than Iowa State when you take into account ISU's schedule.
Iowa is objectively a better team than a lot of teams in the popularity contests.
AP and coaches polls are worthless and stupid when objectively comparing college football teams.
I get the gist of the post. I get the gist of data. And I don't terribly disagree with it.
I also get the gist of "any given Saturday".
I get the gist of teams evolving.
I also get the idea that Iowa is Iowa State's Super Bowl....or at least the idea that a rivalry game like this changes dynamics.
I get that they only won by 1 point and that Iowa is showing to be a different team than a few weeks ago.
I also get how you can put Iowa around, or even inside the top 20.
But, that's a road win for ISU against Iowa.
As much as I hate to say it, the hardest data out there is that Iowa State is better than Iowa.
I don't believe they are. But that's hard data. Another loss or two for ISU can change that.
I think there's one thing we can all agree on at this point.....all kinds of polls...be they data driven or sampling.....are all misleading and quite often wrong.
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
Respectfully, the computer rankings are only as good as the programming and assumptions that the human creating the software puts into them. Very few of these ranking systems share the entirety of their secret sauce. I think they are useful tools, but I don't find them to be any less infallible than other systems of measuring a team's strength. I actually preferred the old BCS system that took into account the major polls and the major SOS services under various weighting. That was a good way to balance human bias and computer anomaly.
And again, a system that has Iowa ahead of ISU when they came into our house 5 weeks ago and beat us straight up, and then we subsequently got boatraced by OSU and beat by a very average MSU team, is a bit sus, as the kids would say.
And again, a system that has Iowa ahead of ISU when they came into our house 5 weeks ago and beat us straight up, and then we subsequently got boatraced by OSU and beat by a very average MSU team, is a bit sus, as the kids would say.
Objectively, Iowa State went on the road and beat Iowa head-to-head. Jesu...
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
Just because a computer spits something out does not make it objective. Computer programs are created through the subjective whims of its creators. If there were an objective way to create a SOS computer program, then there would be only one such program. There are lots of them, and they all value different things in determining a teams worth in the ranking system based upon what the nerd who created thought was most or least important to consider and what weight should be given.
In order for something to be objectively true, there has to be a common core truth that everyone or nearly everyone agrees upon. As Grady noted, it is objectively true that Iowa State beat Iowa in Kinnick this year. But, whether you, me or a computer believes Iowa is still a better team than Iowa State is a subjective belief.
In order for something to be objectively true, there has to be a common core truth that everyone or nearly everyone agrees upon. As Grady noted, it is objectively true that Iowa State beat Iowa in Kinnick this year. But, whether you, me or a computer believes Iowa is still a better team than Iowa State is a subjective belief.
That was two months ago...with McNamara at QB. The question is who is a better team right now. If they played again this Saturday, you betting on Iowa State?
99topdawg
Well-Known Member
I've always wondered why it is that, for example, the #4 team could lose on the road to the #1 team by a point or maybe a last second FG and drop in the rankings. Shouldn't they move up? That (hypothetical) last second FG hit the upright and went through, which means your team needs to drop in the polls. If it would have hit the upright and missed, you win and move up in the poll. That's the difference between being the 3rd best team in the nation and the 6th best team in the nation.
99topdawg
Well-Known Member
I'm reporting you to the mods. Common sense isn't allowed around here. Great stuff by the way, fellow math nerd.
