"In other words, Thanks for playing." - ESPN

[deadudea]

3 minutes ago, JTrue said:

We can go in circles all night. I don't think the computers (or the people who write the programs) give a **** about P5/G5 bias. I don't believe SOS does either. You believe they do based on what you read on Wikipedia and what you don't see "The majority of strength of schedule is taken from RPI, which currently has USF at 17. But the rest of the factors are the unknowns. Meaning, USF is in AAC. AAC not in P5. Therefore +100 strength of schedule score."

Here's Colley's rankings for you to see. No unknown factors. No adjusting for conference strength or division.

https://www.colleyrankings.com/matrate.pdf

 

That's your opinion though. There are no concrete facts of how the end-all strength of schedule is calculated. The Colley Matrix isn't it. I'm not trying to go in circles, but you provided a statement saying you'd explain to me how the strength of schedule works, but you have nothing to back up that claim. Everyone can throw out all of these rankings, and say "well, so-and-so is listed here," but what difference does that make? The polls are still decided by human bias and selection. Each of those humans uses their own strength of schedule, and most, by default, believe that the power 5 == stronger schedule. Those 13 committee voters clearly do not care about these other statistics or rankings.

[JTrue]

2 minutes ago, deadudea said:

That's your opinion though. There are no concrete facts of how the end-all strength of schedule is calculated. The Colley Matrix isn't it. I'm not trying to go in circles, but you provided a statement saying you'd explain to me how the strength of schedule works, but you have nothing to back up that claim. Everyone can throw out all of these rankings, and say "well, so-and-so is listed here," but what difference does that make? The polls are still decided by human bias and selection. Each of those humans uses their own strength of schedule, and most, by default, believe that the power 5 == stronger schedule. Those 13 committee voters clearly do not care about these other statistics or rankings.

Agreed. I stated that I haven't come across a ranking, computer or otherwise, that says we don't have a ****** schedule. I was working off the idea that calculated SOS meant from some sort of printed ranking and not a voter. I 100% agree that the voters are biased. I do not think the computers care.

[Dogma]

1 hour ago, JTrue said:

Agreed. I stated that I haven't come across a ranking, computer or otherwise, that says we don't have a ****** schedule. I was working off the idea that calculated SOS meant from some sort of printed ranking and not a voter. I 100% agree that the voters are biased. I do not think the computers care.

Computers obviously don't care.  

But if the inputs used for the calculations are based on biased information.. then the results will lean toward those biased initial parameters

[JTrue]

1 hour ago, Dogma said:

Computers obviously don't care.  

But if the inputs used for the calculations are based on biased information.. then the results will lean toward those biased initial parameters

Of course. But I just don't see what the motivation of someone like Bradley and Terry (I have never looked at this ranking in my life. I just clicked them for this example.) have to input biased information. Especially when almost every one of these guys publishes their formula.

http://dbaker.50webs.com/method.html

Also, if you read down into their model. They start the year using the previous season's results, which has a ton of bias, but it erodes as more data comes in and all previous season's numbers are removed entirely by the 8th game.

Edited October 16, 2018 by JTrue

[05 Bull]

6 hours ago, Apis Bull said:

This!  A lot of the, "strength of schedule" is based on their own rankings and here's the scenarios:

In the P5 - If team P5A beats ranked team P5B it's because P5A is good

In the G5 - if team G5A beats ranked tean G5B it's because G5B is bad

See Washington and Texas as examples. Horses   

[George_Bullnard_Shaw]

If Arpad Elo was still alive he could fix all of this.

[MikeG]

This seemed obvious to me from the onset. The schools with control of all the money and power do not care -- they set this up specifically to distance themselves from the rest. They never intended to allow G5 teams to have any chance to participate and their playoff committee understands this. Only the P5 qualify. Do not concern yourself with "what if"s -- none of us are ever going to have access to this system.

They will give us some BS explanation of how this system is fair-- even saying that "it's all up to the committee in the end". The do this for one reason-- the same one that they were worried about when it was the BCS -- they do not want to get sued. So the illusion of of access to the playoffs is sold but never happening.

It is the reason why so many schools are scrambling to get included into one of the P5 conferences -- well that and the access to the ridiculously better money available to those conferences. They have a stranglehold on the college football system. We are on the outside, looking in - second class citizens. What is worse is that our school has tasted the "big time" for a brief time in the BCS and the impact is actually worse for those who got left out when the new shuffling occurred. We still have remnants of the big boy football budget but without the same TV money that initially led to that escalation. And the longer we wait to get into a P5, the more we fall behind.

Does that matter to the P5? Hell no. They don't care-- this is a closed club. They need our teams only once in a while to fill out a hole or two in their schedule but some FCS school will work just fine. So we find ourselves also having trouble getting games against P5 that are of any consequence-- or having to give them 2 home games to our 1 for the privilege. Instead of titling it "thanks for playing" they should have went with "Man, you're screwed!"

[TRUTH D. Antagonist]

I heard that segment. I don't think this necessarily applies to ALL G5 teams at all times. It really has to do with strength of schedule & UCF's ranks 127th out of 129 FBS teams.

they have yet to play a ranked team & may not play a ranked team all season.

that doesn't deserve a CFP berth.

for a G5 team to break the playoffs they have to schedule-- & beat-- ranked P5 teams.

UCF made no attempt to schedule elite P5 teams. Pitt & UNC are perpetual middling .500 teams at best.

[GaUSFBull]

16 hours ago, George_Bullnard_Shaw said:

If Arpad Elo was still alive he could fix all of this.

OMG, you're so right ... I totally agree.

[MikeG]

15 minutes ago, TRUTH D. Antagonist said:

I heard that segment. I don't think this necessarily applies to ALL G5 teams at all times. It really has to do with strength of schedule & UCF's ranks 127th out of 129 FBS teams.

they have yet to play a ranked team & may not play a ranked team all season.

that doesn't deserve a CFP berth.

for a G5 team to break the playoffs they have to schedule-- & beat-- ranked P5 teams.

UCF made no attempt to schedule elite P5 teams. Pitt & UNC are perpetual middling .500 teams at best.

You are fooling yourself into believing that the CFP is in any fashion fair or inclusive of G5 teams. They are not.

As for UCF SOS-- it is that low because the tougher teams on their schedule have not been played yet-- it is not stagnant at 127 or whatever-- it goes up after each game most likely  as they play other teams that are valued higher power wise. Regardless-- they are not going anywhere even if the run the table other than a NY6 game - no playoffs. They can then give themselves yet another meaningless National Title if they want at that point.

But I doubt they run the table anyway as they are not quite as good as they were last season. I like our chances against them as well as several other teams on their schedule. And no-- even if we run the table-- we are not getting into the CFP. The whole scheduling situation is just a convenient excuse they use currently. Had UCF played 2 or 3 top ten teams on the their schedule last year, they would stil find some way to exclude them. I suppose I could be wrong on that but we will never know because the P5 are not going to give any of the G5s that type of schedule. They did not set this up to give outsiders a shot at upsetting their little cabal. The public could scream for inclusion and the committee would simply pass them over when the final decision was made.