Sagarin

[Ree4]

I agree and disagree. You can produce rankings based on what has already happened, and it is 100% real data. (There are "standings" from game 1 in the pros and in conference play, knowing that they will change a lot over time) Which of course points out the absurdity of polls before Oct 1. One game does not a season make (unless you're ISU).

Even as the season goes "like opponents" are mostly in conference, and we all know the flaws of that A beat B and B beat C so A should beat C. The best "assumptions" I think you can make are tougher schedules and conferences overall. Sagarin does a pretty good job of incorporating that as the season progresses.

ANYWAY. I like Sagarin's data-grounded method. Which is why I wish he'd stick to it, even early in the season. If Mizzou loses to Wyoming and Wyoming is #71 by Sagarin's own method (even after beating Mizzou)...then Mizzou sure as hell isn't worthy of #36.

Oh, I sure as hell prefer a statistical ranking system to the garbage coaches and AP polls, but basing the rankings on some previous year stats at least keeps the rankings somewhat stable as more games are played in the current year. Like a 12 month rolling average. It'd be silly to see one team ranked in the top 10 one week only to lose and drop into the 80's because they laid an egg, and vice-versa. Honestly though, I haven't taken the time to dive deep into their algorithms to determine exactly what they deem important and how important each stat is, not that my opinion really matters on the subject, but I can guarantee that it's better than the shitty ESPN FPI rankings.