colonels19,

I think you have the right kind of idea about your computer rankings. I like how you compare your rankings to other computers rather than to humans. You don't want your rankings to EVER just echo what humans can/will already tell you. Because then, what's really the point of it? 

For instance: Humans would want USC ranked ahead of La. Tech. The reasoning behind it wouldn't be based on data that has happened, but on what they believe WOULD happen if those two teams faced each other. I believe that, thus far into the season, your computer's rankings are correct when it comes to La. Tech being ranked above USC.

My suggestion would be that, no matter what adjustments you ever make to the system, try to preserve the right kind of "quirks" in the system. Let data reign over human analysis. Human thoughts are why we have human polls & an ability to abide strictly by data is why the BCS uses some computer rankings in it's system. 

Posted by cydrych on 10/1/2012 11:58:00 PM (view original):
gregsimon: Your system was perhaps developed in or around Palo Alto, CA perhaps?  That is a lot of love to give to a team who has lost every away game they have played so far and only beat one ranked team (by a single TD).

Posted by AlCheez on 10/2/2012 6:49:00 AM (view original):
Yes, I'm sure that the reason that the Massey composite rankings have USC at 18 and La Tech at 34 is because the only way to rank USC over La Tech is by speculating about what would happen...

Not a knock at your rankings colonels, any computer system is bound to have some quirks - but seriously tripleh...

Ok.. What criteria do you use to justify Massey's Composite Rankings? Does USC have a better record so far? No. Has USC played a significantly tougher schedule up to this point? No. Did USC lose their only big game thus far? Yes. So, what makes USC 18th & La. Tech 34th? Only the notion from the start that USC is better. That is all.

How do I know this? Because if you go back to the preseason on Massey's Composite Rankings, they had USC 5th & Louisiana Tech 50th. That's the only reason USC is so far ahead or ahead at-all. The only thing holding USC up is the notion from the start that they are better, not what has HAPPENED thus far.

In that way, colonels19's rankings are a step above the rest, clearly. Data > notions. Yes, seriously.

Posted by tripleh595 on 10/2/2012 4:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by AlCheez on 10/2/2012 6:49:00 AM (view original):
Yes, I'm sure that the reason that the Massey composite rankings have USC at 18 and La Tech at 34 is because the only way to rank USC over La Tech is by speculating about what would happen...

Not a knock at your rankings colonels, any computer system is bound to have some quirks - but seriously tripleh...

Ok.. What criteria do you use to justify Massey's Composite Rankings? Does USC have a better record so far? No. Has USC played a significantly tougher schedule up to this point? No. Did USC lose their only big game thus far? Yes. So, what makes USC 18th & La. Tech 34th? Only the notion from the start that USC is better. That is all.

How do I know this? Because if you go back to the preseason on Massey's Composite Rankings, they had USC 5th & Louisiana Tech 50th. That's the only reason USC is so far ahead or ahead at-all. The only thing holding USC up is the notion from the start that they are better, not what has HAPPENED thus far.

In that way, colonels19's rankings are a step above the rest, clearly. Data > notions. Yes, seriously.

Ok, I'll bite.. USC must've beaten somebody of note themselves.. Let me see: Cal? Nope.. Cal has only beaten Southern Utah. Syracuse? You mean the team that only beat Stony Brook & struggled through most of that game? Ok, so Hawaii is the thing that puts them over the top? 

C'mon guys. I know you want to pick on me, but do a better job than this.

Posted by tripleh595 on 10/2/2012 4:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by AlCheez on 10/2/2012 6:49:00 AM (view original):
Yes, I'm sure that the reason that the Massey composite rankings have USC at 18 and La Tech at 34 is because the only way to rank USC over La Tech is by speculating about what would happen...

Not a knock at your rankings colonels, any computer system is bound to have some quirks - but seriously tripleh...

Ok.. What criteria do you use to justify Massey's Composite Rankings? Does USC have a better record so far? No. Has USC played a significantly tougher schedule up to this point? No. Did USC lose their only big game thus far? Yes. So, what makes USC 18th & La. Tech 34th? Only the notion from the start that USC is better. That is all.

How do I know this? Because if you go back to the preseason on Massey's Composite Rankings, they had USC 5th & Louisiana Tech 50th. That's the only reason USC is so far ahead or ahead at-all. The only thing holding USC up is the notion from the start that they are better, not what has HAPPENED thus far.

In that way, colonels19's rankings are a step above the rest, clearly. Data > notions. Yes, seriously.

Beyond that, why are we comparing USC and La Tech to begin with?  You always come in and argue tangential points that no one has made.   No one really said "OMG, La Tech is ahead of USC, that's terrible!"   They are 7th.  Sure, maybe there's an argument to be made that La Tech ahead of USC based solely on the data is valid.  How about them being ahead of WVU, Oregon, Ohio State, etc?