Started By
Message
re: Kirby Needs a Rest
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:01 pm to djsdawg
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:01 pm to djsdawg
quote:
We are taking about quality of team. Rankings are all about quality of team. Stats can prove quality as well. Both prove you wrong.
They are ranked higher because they were good teams who had some big wins. Uga was UNRANKED beause we struggled all season long.
Ole Miss and Alabama are ranked where they are because you lost to both of them.
Ole Miss otherwise has 3 unranked losses, and the best win would be South Carolina if not for Georgia.
Alabama's different is only 2 unranked losses and a ranked loss, and the best would be South Carolina if not for Georgia.
2015 Georgia had 3 losses, all to ranked teams.
Do you see how this works? The extra strength you are claiming is just because you lost and are ranked #2 while having 2 regular season loses.
Season rankings are not team quality rankings. You need power rankings for that.
If you really want to see the tougher schedules, look at the schedules of teams like Arkansas and Miss St over the past years. No conspiracy against them either.
5
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:04 pm to 3down10
quote:
Ole Miss and Alabama are ranked where they are because you lost to both of them.
1. Ranks prove you wrong:
They were both high quality 9-3 teams.
Uga was not high quality 9-3.
2. Because of that, It’s up to you to provide some stats to prove this wrong.
So far, you have failed to do so.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:08 pm to djsdawg
quote:
Do you think it’s just a coincidence Uga was given 4 of the top 15 ranked sec teams, 3 of them away, by the sec?
Meanwhile, Texas was given something very different from that. You know it too.
Your regular season schedule was not even the toughest in the conference this year.
Oklahoma had the toughest SEC schedule, and Florida's was as tough or tougher than Georgia's.
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 1:08 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:09 pm to djsdawg
quote:
1. Ranks prove you wrong:
They were both high quality 9-3 teams.
Uga was not high quality 9-3.
2. Because of that, It’s up to you to provide some stats to prove this wrong.
So far, you have failed to do so.
I don't care what you believe, everything I'm doing now is a courtesy. It's not going to hurt my feelings if you want to look stupid claiming the SEC was out to get you when you didn't even play the toughest schedule in the conference this year.
If you want to pretend season rankings are power rankings, then there is nothing I can say.
SoS rankings from week 13, which is AFTER Georgia played the conspiracy SEC part of it's schedule.
1. Florida 2.71
3. Oklahoma 2.48
4. Kentucky 2.47
5. Georgia 2.36
3 teams played a tougher schedule than Georgia before you played GT.
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 1:14 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:16 pm to 3down10
quote:
don't care what you believe,
Glad you cleared this up:
1. You don’t care that rankings prove you wrong.
2. You don’t want to post the stats because you know they prove you wrong (but this makes it look like you do care).
quote:
you want to pretend season rankings are power rankings, then there is nothing I can say.
What do you think they are?
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:20 pm to djsdawg
quote:
Glad you cleared this up:
1. You don’t care that rankings prove you wrong.
2. You don’t want to post the stats because you know they prove you wrong (but this makes it look like you do care).
I'm not doing all that work because you ignorantly want to believe your 4th toughest SEC schedule was a conspiracy against you.
I really don't know why I waste any time on you at all. Nobody else is going to read this stupid shite, and you barely even understand the topic and just want to find ways to cry about Georgia.
So good luck guy, I'm out.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:22 pm to 3down10
quote:
1. Florida 2.71 3. Oklahoma 2.48 4. Kentucky 2.47 5. Georgia 2.36
We are talking about sec play, but I don’t know what these numbers represent, so let’s see the link to this.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:37 pm to 3down10
quote:
I'm not doing all that work because you ignorantly want to believe your 4th toughest SEC schedule was a conspiracy against you.
You don’t want to do the work because you know the stats prove you wrong about uga 2015 vs bama/Om 2024.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 2:00 pm to 3down10
nm not butting in.
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 2:03 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 2:13 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
nm not butting in.
His point hinges on hoping everyone ignores their eyes and pretends uga 2015 was a good team.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 3:12 pm to 3down10
quote:
SoS rankings from week 13, which is AFTER Georgia played the conspiracy SEC part of it's schedule.
1. Florida 2.71
3. Oklahoma 2.48
4. Kentucky 2.47
5. Georgia 2.36
3 teams played a tougher schedule than Georgia before you played GT.
Source? Teamrankings.com has had UGA as #1 SOS since week 3
Posted on 12/10/24 at 4:06 pm to Bigdawgb
quote:
Source? Teamrankings.com has had UGA as #1 SOS since week 3
I'm not familiar with their ranks. Do they use an expected loss type format, or averages? If it's averages, I don't really think it's a good metric. If it's not averages, let me know because I'd like to use it more.
Week 13 FEI is the source I listed. So before the GT game.
After Week 13 SoS rankings.
They don't seem to keep a place where you can look up rankings at certain points, just current/final. So I try to take a snap shot of the weeks and make a thread out of lately. I forgot last week, but this one includes all the GT SEC games.
If I could just do SEC schedules only, Georgia would probably fall further on the list. While Clemson isn't elite, it's a better OOC game that most teams.
GT isn't terrible either, but FSU is. While not SEC games, Georgia had jumped over Kentucky after GT, and I think barely passed Florida, or was barely under them.
Oklahoma was ahead in week 13, and stayed ahead after playing LSU week 14. They are #2 in that list, but is the only one with an SEC game left.
Right now they have you #2 overall after playing GT + Texas, which is good enough to be #1 among SEC teams. Games against good teams are big boosts, as they should be.
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 4:07 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 4:09 pm to 3down10
quote:
Week 13 FEI is the source I listed. So before the GT game.
I know that site has some very good stats, and I bet they prove you wrong about UGA 15 vs Bama OM 24
Posted on 12/10/24 at 4:22 pm to djsdawg
quote:
I know that site has some very good stats, and I bet they prove you wrong about UGA 15 vs Bama OM 24
It's ok. It measures efficiency and can be a little narrow. I don't consider the power rankings to be the best or anything like that, but they aren't bad. It is opponent adjusted, removes garbage time and is well above average compared to others.
SP+ is the best power rankings that I am aware of, but they are behind a paywall now. F+ is what I use for power rankings, it's a combination of FEI and SP+ and it's not behind a paywall.
The FEI SoS metric however is the best I can find. They could be better if it was based on SP+, but it doesn't use averages and that makes it better than any SoS metric based on averages.
It's concept of using expected losses is the best way to express SoS IMO and everyone should adopt it rather than using averages which are extremely flawed.
I mostly wish it gave snapshots of previous weeks instead of current/final only.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 4:27 pm to 3down10
quote:
It measures efficiency and can be a little narrow. I don't consider the power rankings to be the best or anything like that, but they aren't bad. It is opponent adjusted, removes garbage time and is well above average compared to others.
Notice the drastic difference between UGA 2015 vs Bama OM 2014.
Just like the rankings.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 4:34 pm to djsdawg
quote:
I bet they prove you wrong about UGA 15 vs Bama OM 24
frick it, let's find out. Using F+ power rankings on scheduled SEC teams.
2015 Alabama(#1):
6. Ole Miss.
7. Tennessee
13. LSU
14. Miss St
15. Arkansas
24. Georgia
25. Texas A&M.
30. Auburn
2024 Georgia(#6)
2. Texas
5. Ole Miss
7. Alabama
10. Tennessee
24. Florida
35. Auburn
45. Kentucky
78. Miss St
Are you happy now? I'm not doing the other years.
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 4:36 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 4:41 pm to 3down10
quote:
Are you happy now? I'm not doing the other years.
As you can see, 2015 wasn’t close to OM or Bama 24.
Sec gave uga 4 top 10 teams, 3 of them away. Go on thinking that’s just a coincidence. No other contender was given that type slate.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 4:44 pm to djsdawg
quote:
As you can see, 2015 wasn’t close to OM or Bama 24.
Sec gave uga 4 top 10 teams, 3 of them away. Go on thinking that’s just a coincidence. No other contender was given that type slate.
If you are going to start mixing power rankings and season rankings then I don't know what to say. If you want to understand the stats, feel free to ask.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 4:47 pm to 3down10
quote:
you are going to start mixing power rankings and season rankings then I don't know what to say. If you want to understand the stats, feel free to ask.
The eye test, stats and rankings all prove the point about bama and Om 24 being much better than uga 2015.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 4:57 pm to djsdawg
quote:
The eye test, stats and rankings all prove the point about bama and Om 24 being much better than uga 2015.
When you talk about season rankings you are talking a good bit about strength of schedule and wins and losses.
So when you were using top25 rankings, I was pointing out that the big difference in the rankings was that Georgia lost to both Ole Miss and Alabama.
You then started talking about things in term of power rankings. Power rankings are NOT heavily based on wins and losses or SoS, they are based on how well the team performs on the field. Typically the wins and losses and higher power ratings go hand in hand, but they are not directly related.
So I posted the power rankings.
And now here you are wanting to cherry pick between the different things as you see fit.
frick off.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News