DKW 86 7,431 Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Sagarin is on Drugs.... RATING (RANK) VS top 10|VStop30|ELO-CHESS| PRED. 1 Southern Cal 99.09 76.18(13) 2 0 | 4 0 | 97.79 3 |99.82 1 2 Oklahoma 96.73 74.55(31) 1 0 | 5 0 | 101.05 1 |93.36 3 3 Utah 92.51 70.16(66) 0 0 | 1 0 | 92.17 5 |92.15 5 4 Auburn 92.42 69.63(73) 0 0 | 4 0 | 99.45 2 |87.95 9 5 Louisville 91.58 68.36(82) 1 1 | 1 1 | 89.67 6 |93.11 4 6 Texas 89.26 75.36(20) 0 1 | 5 1 | 95.21 4 |84.98 12 They show us as 0 wins versus Top Ten?????????? BS!!! BUT!!!! They also show the ELO-Chess, the BCS standard, that number one and number two are.....OU and Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn85 432 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Screwed up!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn85 432 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Last time I checked Georgia was i n the top 10 polls now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,039 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 When Auburn played them, LSU, TENNESSEE & GEORGIA were all in the top 10! They fell out because AUBURN beat them like red headed step children! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUTaxMan 0 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 All that needs to be said about the Sagarin ratings: Miami is ahead of VaTech, and VaTech has a better winning % and beat them in Miami, winning the ACC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUTaxMan 0 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Oh yeah, Bama is now 60, behind FOUR 1-AA teams. Funny. I still think they could probably take Harvard. Also, an 8-4 Texas Tech team is ahead of the following teams which would beat them to a pulp: Tennessee (10-3), Florida State (9-3), Michigan (9-3), and Ohio State (8-4). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tigrinum Major Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I sent the following e-mail to Sagarin earlier in the process. Needless to say, I received no response. " Mr. Sagarin: First of all, let me say that I am an Auburn fan and that I have spent more time than I would like to admit trying to understand the various computer rankings used for the BCS and such. I am not angry at you personally, but I disagree with the system currently in place. I don't think that your computer system is biased and I have no personal vendetta against you. I do however, think that it might be flawed. When I say flawed, I am not saying that it isn't accurate in many instances. But by the following two situations, I would like your honest opinion as to why your rankings are structured the way they are. That being said, I have two questions for you and if you will answer them, maybe I will understand the computer rankings a little better. 1) Baylor and Texas A&M - I am using rough numbers from memory on your rankings, but Texas A&M was about an 84 and Baylor was about a 67. If they played on a neutral field, A&M should win by 17. In reality, Baylor beat A&M. Does this prove that the computer system is uncapable of measuring such things as motivation, heart, intangibles, bad bounces of a funny shaped football and other non statistical categories and are therefore inaccurate? Or do the computer predictor ratings only mean that on any given day, anything is possible, but on 99 times out of 100 A&M would beat Baylor by a point total around 17? 2) Do you really believe that Harvard would beat any of the following teams on a neutral field - West Virginia, Georgia Tech, Boston College, NC State, South Carolina, Pitt, Navy, Troy, Syracuse, Nebraska, or Michigan State? Your predictor numbers indicate this. If your answer is no, then the computer rankings are bogus. If your answer is yes, then I would also like to know what color the sun is on the planet that you are from. In all seriousness, can you answer the questions above and try to get me some logical explanation for these situations without getting into a lot of algorithms and other mathematical things that I probably wouldn't understand anyway?" As I stated above, I got no response to this e-mail. I figure he never read it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prowler 1 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I sent the following e-mail to Sagarin earlier in the process. Needless to say, I received no response." Mr. Sagarin: First of all, let me say that I am an Auburn fan and that I have spent more time than I would like to admit trying to understand the various computer rankings used for the BCS and such. I am not angry at you personally, but I disagree with the system currently in place. I don't think that your computer system is biased and I have no personal vendetta against you. I do however, think that it might be flawed. When I say flawed, I am not saying that it isn't accurate in many instances. But by the following two situations, I would like your honest opinion as to why your rankings are structured the way they are. That being said, I have two questions for you and if you will answer them, maybe I will understand the computer rankings a little better. 1) Baylor and Texas A&M - I am using rough numbers from memory on your rankings, but Texas A&M was about an 84 and Baylor was about a 67. If they played on a neutral field, A&M should win by 17. In reality, Baylor beat A&M. Does this prove that the computer system is uncapable of measuring such things as motivation, heart, intangibles, bad bounces of a funny shaped football and other non statistical categories and are therefore inaccurate? Or do the computer predictor ratings only mean that on any given day, anything is possible, but on 99 times out of 100 A&M would beat Baylor by a point total around 17? 2) Do you really believe that Harvard would beat any of the following teams on a neutral field - West Virginia, Georgia Tech, Boston College, NC State, South Carolina, Pitt, Navy, Troy, Syracuse, Nebraska, or Michigan State? Your predictor numbers indicate this. If your answer is no, then the computer rankings are bogus. If your answer is yes, then I would also like to know what color the sun is on the planet that you are from. In all seriousness, can you answer the questions above and try to get me some logical explanation for these situations without getting into a lot of algorithms and other mathematical things that I probably wouldn't understand anyway?" As I stated above, I got no response to this e-mail. I figure he never read it... 136020[/snapback] You could've just said, "You're a Bloomin Idiot". It would've saved you some time, because he'll just reply saying, "Maine beat MSU, in the Mighty SEC".....That's not biased is it. See, this is my point, People like him that've been paid to Help out USC and Oklahomer, go to the extreme by putting Harvard above all the teams that would've BEAT THE EVER LOVING CRAP OUT OF 'em....Hell I'm suprised he did manipulate his computer into thinking that Praieview A&M is better than all the teams that Auburn beat......The reason why USC and Oklahomer is in the bcs Championship Game is because of the Heismen Matchup and all the All-Americans on the teams as well as the individual trophies won.....It's all about the Ratings (ie Money) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.