Sagarin

[AUsince72 11,084]

44 minutes ago, AUinTLoosa said:

 

 

Very interesting.  However, I see two issues.

First, to be fair, a "straight" line with Oxford, MS/Columbia, SC as it's axis would probably be more accurate.
Otherwise, it's just as arbitrary as what they have now.
(And in doing that...the "North" would SUCK mightily!!! haha!)

Second, this is the SEC.  Outside of Arkansas & Kentucky, NOBODY would want to be called "North" anything.... 

 

[AUld fAUx@ 2,584]

50 minutes ago, AUsince72 said:

Very interesting.  However, I see two issues.

First, to be fair, a "straight" line with Oxford, MS/Columbia, SC as it's axis would probably be more accurate.
Otherwise, it's just as arbitrary as what they have now.
(And in doing that...the "North" would SUCK mightily!!! haha!)

Second, this is the SEC.  Outside of Arkansas & Kentucky, NOBODY would want to be called "North" anything.... 

 

Maybe we could "lighten" up the division names for camouflage.

Could you live with Borealis and Australis Divisions?

[icanthearyou 4,465]

2 hours ago, AUinTLoosa said:

Maybe we could "lighten" up the division names for camouflage.

Could you live with Borealis and Australis Divisions?

Wood you please just post stupid stuff like ever buddy else.  Ever time you post I have to go to the google.  You could at least provide some foot notes or sum thing.

[IronMan70 3,277]

On ‎10‎/‎3‎/‎2016 at 11:32 PM, IronMan70 said:

Yep, let's just swap AU for Mizzou and be done with it. What bama thinks is less important than a rat's patooty.

 

6 hours ago, autigersj said:

That is my answer as well. I would like to see us play UT and UF every year. Only thing to figure out would be the cross division match up.

Bama vs. UT

UF vs. LSU

USC vs. A&M

Kentucky vs. Mississippi State

Ole Miss vs. Vanderbilt

Arkansas vs. Missouri

AU vs UGa

I personally don't care if we play Bama every year. Actually would like us to keep playing LSU myself.. Thought?

I don't care if we play bama every year either, in fact it's become way too toxic. I think a break is in order so maybe play them every other year, at most. My favorite game of the year was always Florida anyway, followed by Tennessee. The permanent cross division rival could be worked out or go to 9 SEC games or just do away with the dang thing. You've got to have an AD that will speak up though and doesn't need 10 surveys to do it.

[autigersj 122]

4 hours ago, AUinTLoosa said:

 

This is interesting.. We could just say scew it and just give them arbitrary names like Hillbillies and redneck divisions.. 

 

OOOO.. I just had an idea, how about to improve parity and fairness, every ten years the SEC just realigns the divisions based on win percentage to not make a one sided divison. So.. say in a ten year stretch, AU and LSU were the two best teams they would be in seperate divisons for the next ten years. I think that would be fun and would change things up along the way.

 

[AUld fAUx@ 2,584]

1 hour ago, icanthearyou said:

Wood you please just post stupid stuff like ever buddy else.  Ever time you post I have to go to the google.  You could at least provide some foot notes or sum thing.

Humble apologies.

I'm effectively "playing hooky," irresponsibly (and inexcusably) taking a day off from what should be a non-stop finishing kick on my CE dissertation. I guess it's hard to change mental gears.

WDE

[icanthearyou 4,465]

3 minutes ago, AUinTLoosa said:

Humble apologies.

I'm effectively "playing hooky," irresponsibly (and inexcusably) taking a day off from what should be a non-stop finishing kick on my CE dissertation. I guess it's hard to change mental gears.

WDE

NO!  All them big words you use is hard four us folks with the displexia.

[AUld fAUx@ 2,584]

7 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

NO!  All them big words you use is hard four us folks with the displexia.

Well done sir. I had to Google that one. Guess where it got me.

I'll try to be better.

[bigbird 60,609]

5 hours ago, AUinTLoosa said:

 

 

That makes the "south" division even more of a buzz saw than the west is now.

[icanthearyou 4,465]

14 minutes ago, AUinTLoosa said:

Humble apologies.

I'm effectively "playing hooky," irresponsibly (and inexcusably) taking a day off from what should be a non-stop finishing kick on my CE dissertation. I guess it's hard to change mental gears.

WDE

In all seriousness, good luck with the dissertation.  We are all very proud of you.  After today, back to work!

[AUld fAUx@ 2,584]

19 minutes ago, bigbird said:

That makes the "south" division even more of a buzz saw than the west is now.

Well, actually reduces avg rating (south would currently be ~4 1/2 below where west is now), and (somewhat) improves balance between divisions) Also would preserve important rivalries, revive a few more, and make for a heck of a bunch of attention (and $) to the SEC game. 

Sort of a pet project of mine, it would also let poor Mizou out of the need to spend like half their annual budget just traveling to away games.

WDE

[AUld fAUx@ 2,584]

30 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

In all seriousness, good luck with the dissertation.  We are all very proud of you.  After today, back to work!

Many Thanks, and WILLCO.

[Rednilla 5,401]

Has anyone else noticed that LSU is ranked ahead of both teams that beat them in the Sagarin rankings? I'm all for Auburn being that high, but it seems a bit suspicious with LSU at #11.

[AURealist 2,185]

11 minutes ago, Rednilla said:

Has anyone else noticed that LSU is ranked ahead of both teams that beat them in the Sagarin rankings? I'm all for Auburn being that high, but it seems a bit suspicious with LSU at #11.

 

The Sagarin formula includes a headcoach rating?

 

 

[WDEKC 187]

Currently #10 in Sagarin and ESPN FPI.

[Rednilla 5,401]

57 minutes ago, WDEKC said:

Currently #10 in Sagarin and ESPN FPI.

It does kinda seem to slant toward the SEC, with 5 teams in the top 10 and half the conference in the top 20...

[hutchids 227]

On 10/5/2016 at 5:21 PM, bigbird said:

That makes the "south" division even more of a buzz saw than the west is now.

Literally the only team that isn't year in year out pretty good or better in the south would be MSU. 5 teams have won a major national title and 3 of them did so recently. compare that to the north. 3 teams are usually pretty bad, only two have been national champions and only one in the last 15 years. Bama would win that division 7 out of 10 years or more.

[WDEKC 187]

39 minutes ago, Rednilla said:

It does kinda seem to slant toward the SEC, with 5 teams in the top 10 and half the conference in the top 20...

I don't think any biases are built into computer rankings.

[Rednilla 5,401]

9 minutes ago, WDEKC said:

I don't think any biases are built into computer rankings.

There are lies, there are damned lies, and there are statistics. Running it up against two second tier opponents makes our statistics look a lot better than they really are to this point. It isn't that I don't believe we could be in the top 10 once it's all played out, and both of our losses coming to top 10 foes certainly speaks well for us, but it just seems odd having three 2-loss SEC teams in the top 10. I understand at least some of the reasoning behind it, but there have been so many lesser light opponents early in the season that I suspect the rankings are skewed. Not that the human polls aren't skewed, I just think the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

[WDEKC 187]

9 minutes ago, Rednilla said:

There are lies, there are damned lies, and there are statistics. Running it up against two second tier opponents makes our statistics look a lot better than they really are to this point. It isn't that I don't believe we could be in the top 10 once it's all played out, and both of our losses coming to top 10 foes certainly speaks well for us, but it just seems odd having three 2-loss SEC teams in the top 10. I understand at least some of the reasoning behind it, but there have been so many lesser light opponents early in the season that I suspect the rankings are skewed. Not that the human polls aren't skewed, I just think the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Cherry picking and manipulating stats to fit an agenda is a bit different than an algorithm.

[Rednilla 5,401]

Just now, WDEKC said:

Cherry picking and manipulating stats to fit an agenda are a bit different than an algorithm.

Indeed they are, and the biggest positive thing that this shows, I think, is how much the SEC has done across the board to schedule big time out of conference matchups...but it's just one out of the four non-conference games, and the first half of the season is when most of those games are played. Ergo, the SOS doesn't reflect the statistical pile ups in two of the three OOC games because one of them was against a top rated team.

Understand, it's not that I don't agree at all, because I do think the SEC is the best conference, top to bottom, in college football, and I don't think it's close...but to see three 2-loss teams ranked in the top ten only six weeks into the season just makes me wonder.

[AUloggerhead 2,293]

On 10/5/2016 at 2:51 PM, AUinTLoosa said:

Well, actually reduces avg rating (south would currently be ~4 1/2 below where west is now), and (somewhat) improves balance between divisions) Also would preserve important rivalries, revive a few more, and make for a heck of a bunch of attention (and $) to the SEC game. 

Sort of a pet project of mine, it would also let poor Mizou out of the need to spend like half their annual budget just traveling to away games.

WDE

Instead of realignment, how about the SEC increases the number of conference games from 8 to 9 or even 10?  Keep the same alignment with each team annually playing every other team in their home division, one traditional rival in the other division with 2 or 3 rotationals.  That would insure each team plays all the others on a more frequent basis than they do now.  And it would also mean better games & more competitive "fairness" between the schedules.  

[ellitor 33,141]

2 hours ago, AUloggerhead said:

Instead of realignment, how about the SEC increases the number of conference games from 8 to 9 or even 10?  Keep the same alignment with each team annually playing every other team in their home division, one traditional rival in the other division with 2 or 3 rotationals.  That would insure each team plays all the others on a more frequent basis than they do now.  And it would also mean better games & more competitive "fairness" between the schedules.  

Won't happen. There's no advantage to the SEC to do that. They already are the best conference. All that will do is cost 1 to 3 SEC teams a year trying to get to six wins and a bowl bid. That means lost money for those schools and the SEC Conference as a whole. It's not a lot by no means but the Fancy and Kentucky would like every opportunity to try to get to a bowl game once in a blue moon.

[ellitor 33,141]

As for scheduling and alignment this is by far the best model I have seen. It allows each team to play every other team in the conference no less than every other year. It drops the dumb divisions. Lastly and most importantly it puts the two best teams in the SEC Championship game every year.

[AU64 10,122]

1 hour ago, ellitor said:

As for scheduling and alignment this is by far the best model I have seen. It allows each team to play every other team in the conference no less than every other year. It drops the dumb divisions. Lastly and most importantly it puts the two best teams in the SEC Championship game every year.

Looks a bit complicated to me...but that's first glance.   But.... I guess in the era of super computers you plug all those criteria in and come up with a 10 year schedule or something that would allow everyone to work in their OCC games, balance home and away games, etc, etc. .  

With the push toward better OOC games, looks like developing a schedule as far out as possible is good......will make it easier to find mutually acceptable dates....other than those made for TV games at the start of the season.