Sagarin Predictor rulezzz!

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Doug,

But a playoff system has nothing to do with this. Given that we're using objective and subjective rankings it makes sense to use Sagarin over ELO Chess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. As I said it is up for debate. I am not sure where I stand on the issue myself.

[/ QUOTE ]

How about this. You pick 5 games where you MUST pick the ELO CHESS favorite, and I pick 5 games and use Sagarin predictor. We see who has a better record on the 10 games overall.

[Jack of Arcades]

I really doubt Doug thinks badly of Sagarin, he's just not sure if it should be used for determining who gets to play in the championships.

[DougOzzzz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Doug,

But a playoff system has nothing to do with this. Given that we're using objective and subjective rankings it makes sense to use Sagarin over ELO Chess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. As I said it is up for debate. I am not sure where I stand on the issue myself.

[/ QUOTE ]

How about this. You pick 5 games where you MUST pick the ELO CHESS favorite, and I pick 5 games and use Sagarin predictor. We see who has a better record on the 10 games overall.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you read my edit and my other posts you will see that I make no argument whatsoever that the ELO CHESS rankings are better at predicting future outcomes. In fact, I stated exactly the opposite. Unless you want to give me odds on this bet I will have to turn it down.

[jstnrgrs]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Doug,

But a playoff system has nothing to do with this. Given that we're using objective and subjective rankings it makes sense to use Sagarin over ELO Chess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. As I said it is up for debate. I am not sure where I stand on the issue myself.

[/ QUOTE ]

How about this. You pick 5 games where you MUST pick the ELO CHESS favorite, and I pick 5 games and use Sagarin predictor. We see who has a better record on the 10 games overall.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you really not been paying attention at all. The debate is not which method is a better predictor. The debate is which method should be used to award championships.

[TomCollins]

Not sure how anyone could favor a method other than figuring out who is the best team if it can't be determined on the field.

[Dudd]

How can anyone think that Sagarin's methods are the most accurate predictor out there, yet not want to include them in picking the championship game teams? I mean, I'd want the two teams to be the ones most likely to win out to get there, right? I can see why the BCS dropped them, giving in to media pressure about how teams that run up the score shouldn't be given extra points for this, but the media is primarily made up of morons. Getting the importance of margin of victory yet not wanting to use it makes no sense.

[jstnrgrs]

[ QUOTE ]
Not sure how anyone could favor a method other than figuring out who is the best team if it can't be determined on the field.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since the object of football is to win, that is all that should be considered when awarding championships. The fact that Team A won by 100, and team B won by 1 may indicate that Team A would be more likely to win if these two teams were to play head to head, but it shouldn't give them more claim to a championship. (Both teams met their goal of winning the game).

If you want to use points, then I would recomend setting confenence standings based on net points, not wins and losses. Also there should be no stigma toward running up the score (in fact it should be aplauded).

[lastchance]

As good as Sagarin is (it's better than 95% of the general public) a very good selection committee can do a better job than Sagarin can, because certain games are closer than the score makes out. You shouldn't be given any extra points for keeping your starters on the field after other teams have packed it in.

You know, that'd be an excellent system, IMHO (as long as the committee's decent). Have a bunch of people sit down and decide which teams deserve to get in.

[DougOzzzz]

[ QUOTE ]


You know, that'd be an excellent system, IMHO (as long as the committee's decent). Have a bunch of people sit down and decide which teams deserve to get in.

[/ QUOTE ]

To which I ask - why not solely use the poll rankings to determine the teams in the championship game and only use the computer rankings as a tiebreaker?

I think the article was very good but he is ommiting something very important which is teams who play good teams get worn down and have much more difficulity getting homefield and making the playoffs.Due to this I think that teams with lots of stomps get less tired get better records and have an easier time making the playoffs. Of the 48 teams that made the playoffs during the past four years, only two made the postseason after playing a schedule that was among the 12 toughest in the NFL that season. I think this shows that teams who have easy schedules and have more stomps just have an easier road than teams who have lots of guts.