Make me Laugh. Try to explain SOS - Strength of Schedule

[cclxxxvdicere]

Well, this explains a lot ... if you've been banned or banished from the Rivals Main Board, you really have to be a moron. This place, with friendly banter, at least was a place one could come for some meaningful discussion. If it is infected by Rivals tMB rejects, the collective board IQ will drop dramatically. For example, UCFDoucheBag keeps trolling, even when 4Down20 points out that he maintained a web page for years where he published SOS and other stats. Haven't always agreed with him, but he knows his SOS stuff.

He’s not banned at Rivals, he’s just here because it’s dead over there and he needs some attention. You keep giving it to him and he’ll perform the same act, over and over.

 

[JohnstoneC8]

Jesus Christ - thanks for the link to that Rant thread from before the title game. That's some delicious schadenfreude.

Back to topic - c'mon Honors, let's do that Home and Home. That should help our SOS.

 

[LawDawg]

He’s not banned at Rivals, he’s just here because it’s dead over there and he needs some attention. You keep giving it to him and he’ll perform the same act, over and over.

I mean, this is my first post to him, so there's that. Since when has tMB been dead? ... LawDawg puts on his hazmat suit and prepares to wade over to see the dead MB.

 

[cclxxxvdicere]

I mean, this is my first post to him, so there's that. Since when has tMB been dead? ... LawDawg puts on his hazmat suit and prepares to wade over to see the dead MB.

The Rivals refugees here are from the Soundoff board, not tMB. tMB has always been dead to me, I ain’t swimming in that cesspool.

I was using the royal you, if all of you would quit playing with it, it might go away. As long as you give him the attention he so desperately craves, he’ll keep up this act forever.

 

[UCFhonors]

Well, this explains a lot ... if you've been banned or banished from the Rivals Main Board, you really have to be a moron. This place, with friendly banter, at least was a place one could come for some meaningful discussion. If it is infected by Rivals tMB rejects, the collective board IQ will drop dramatically. For example, UCFDoucheBag keeps trolling, even when 4Down20 points out that he maintained a web page for years where he published SOS and other stats. Haven't always agreed with him, but he knows his SOS stuff.

I’m the self proclaimed Rivals 2018 POTY. I’m a big deal.

I wasn’t banished. I came here to show solidarity with my banished UCFriends. While doing just that, I realize that The SportsHoopla is in desperate need of learning the UCFacts.


#UCFacts

 

[UCFhonors]

After 4 days, only 9 posts. And nobody has attempted to explain SOS.

It's a BS stat. Everyone who understands Math knows its a BS stat.

#UCFacts

6 days. Only 1.5 attempts providing a link or something that may attempt to explain SOS.

That makes me laugh.

If SOS is so universally accepted than it should be so simple to explain.

If SOS is so universally accepted than this thread would have only been 2 posts.

SOS is a dumb stat that 93% of cfb fans and 100% of tshirt bandwagoners don’t understand.

#UCFacts

 

[outofyourmind]

6 days. Only 1.5 attempts providing a link or something that may attempt to explain SOS.

It's not the message, it's the messenger.

 

[redseat]

Have no idea what to expect this year. Hope they win more games than last year. I know I've said this before but it's been a long time since I've looked forward to another Browns season. How things have changed since Jackson & Haley were fired.

You should be excited for this season

 

[ellupo]

6 days. Only 1.5 attempts providing a link or something that may attempt to explain SOS.

That makes me laugh.

If SOS is so universally accepted than it should be so simple to explain.

If SOS is so universally accepted than this thread would have only been 2 posts.

SOS is a dumb stat that 93% of cfb fans and 100% of tshirt bandwagoners don’t understand.

#UCFacts

Still no explanation from you little lady.

 

[Bullitt08]

I see a lot of teams in the biggest O lines that are top25 teams. 11 of the 18 are top25 I believe.

I see no top25 teams in the smallest.



Did you get your football mixed up with things your gf tells you?

You might want to change that to bf.

 

[CJH9972]

Can you put this in a format that is readable?

I kind of rushed that post although I don't know what the problem is. Value in poll/committee formats is driven by perception regarding how good teams are. Such perceptions are irrelevant where only facts regarding game results matter in math systems. If, for example, we rank teams by adding their win% and opponents' win percentage, being a better team and playing better competition is ONLY a competitive advantage towards achieving the desired winning percentages. And based on the lopsided difference in outcomes, it is a significant advantage. However, if and when a G5 team and its opponents post percentages equal to a P5 team and its opponents, it gets equal credit. Yet, beauty contest voters are able to pick and choose the facts that mirror their perceptions about things the facts says nothing about which leads to a more lopsided difference in outcomes. G5 teams are not provided a fair opportunity to win or lose based on facts only. College football is all about identifying and validating the best teams. It should be about determining a winner based on which team posts the best results as a matter of fact without regard to any perceptions.

 

[UCFhonors]

I kind of rushed that post although I don't know what the problem is. Value in poll/committee formats is driven by perception regarding how good teams are. Such perceptions are irrelevant where only facts regarding game results matter in math systems. If, for example, we rank teams by adding their win% and opponents' win percentage, being a better team and playing better competition is ONLY a competitive advantage towards achieving the desired winning percentages. And based on the lopsided difference in outcomes, it is a significant advantage. However, if and when a G5 team and its opponents post percentages equal to a P5 team and its opponents, it gets equal credit. Yet, beauty contest voters are able to pick and choose the facts that mirror their perceptions about things the facts says nothing about which leads to a more lopsided difference in outcomes. G5 teams are not provided a fair opportunity to win or lose based on facts only. College football is all about identifying and validating the best teams. It should be about determining a winner based on which team posts the best results as a matter of fact without regard to any perceptions.

Another excellent post.

But I UCFear that it will go over our TB Bamer's head, again. The main issue that people reject UCFacts that are not inline with their preconceived perceptions (*Note the Size Myth mentioned ITT). They will continue to cherry pick stats that support their bias. Or make up "new SOS" like W% + OW% +OOOOOW% / D efficiency ^passing % * bullshit just support their bias bigotry.

We have an uphill battle on trying to get cfb fans to accept that on the field results are what matter. That Champions should be rewarded by winning rather than bias pundits opinions or how much $$$ is brought in.

#UCFacts

 

[LawDawg]

I kind of rushed that post although I don't know what the problem is. Value in poll/committee formats is driven by perception regarding how good teams are. Such perceptions are irrelevant where only facts regarding game results matter in math systems. If, for example, we rank teams by adding their win% and opponents' win percentage, being a better team and playing better competition is ONLY a competitive advantage towards achieving the desired winning percentages. And based on the lopsided difference in outcomes, it is a significant advantage. However, if and when a G5 team and its opponents post percentages equal to a P5 team and its opponents, it gets equal credit. Yet, beauty contest voters are able to pick and choose the facts that mirror their perceptions about things the facts says nothing about which leads to a more lopsided difference in outcomes. G5 teams are not provided a fair opportunity to win or lose based on facts only. College football is all about identifying and validating the best teams. It should be about determining a winner based on which team posts the best results as a matter of fact without regard to any perceptions.

In a perfect world where you are designing college football from scratch, perhaps you are right. But, you aren't designing football from scratch. There is over 100 years of tradition, there are conferences and rivalries, there is a huge amount of money involved, you have bowls and bowl cities with a huge amount of monied and political power, you have a sport that is different in many ways than basketball which means there is no way to have everyone play everyone else, or have a large team playoff format, and more.

No one says that the current system is perfect. But it is better, in my opinion that it was pre-BCS, and certainly better than the BCS. Expanding to 6 or 8 is probably the best you are going to get so that it is decided on the field. And even that will have the elements you don't like choosing who the 6 or 8 are. It just is what it is, and teams have to adjust if they can to do the best they can within it. In the meantime, it's still the best sport there is IMO.

 

[CJH9972]

In a perfect world where you are designing college football from scratch, perhaps you are right. But, you aren't designing football from scratch. There is over 100 years of tradition, there are conferences and rivalries, there is a huge amount of money involved, you have bowls and bowl cities with a huge amount of monied and political power, you have a sport that is different in many ways than basketball which means there is no way to have everyone play everyone else, or have a large team playoff format, and more.

No one says that the current system is perfect. But it is better, in my opinion that it was pre-BCS, and certainly better than the BCS. Expanding to 6 or 8 is probably the best you are going to get so that it is decided on the field. And even that will have the elements you don't like choosing who the 6 or 8 are. It just is what it is, and teams have to adjust if they can to do the best they can within it. In the meantime, it's still the best sport there is IMO.

I'm fine with 4 and especially 8 teams. My issue is voting on placement and advancement. The only reason to oppose adopting actual rules is that doing so threatens the power P5 leagues hold over the sport. Money rules all and so long as P5 teams can get away with operating under a self-fulfilling beauty contest system, they will do it.

 

[LawDawg]

Another excellent post.

But I UCFear that it will go over our Bamer's head, again. The main issue that people reject UCFacts that are not inline with their preconceived perceptions.

We have an uphill battle on trying to get cfb fans to accept that on the field results that matter. That Champions should be rewarded by winning rather than bias pundits opinions or how much $$$ is brought in.

#UCFacts

I am going to assume for a moment you want an honest, serious discussion. No one argues that on field results don't matter. Everyone thinks that on field results matter. It is for that reason that your school has been lauded the past few years.

But, in an imperfect system where you can only have 4, for now, teams playing for the national championship, you have to look beyond the record. Obviously, one has to look at how that record was achieved, and against what talent it was achieve. The SOS formulas are an imperfect attempt at that, which is why they are just part of a larger set of metrics that are considered. You don't need a formula to see that your perfect record 2 years ago was accomplished against far inferior competition. Not your fault, you won every game you could win. But in determining the best 4 teams to play for the championship, where a large field tournament is not possible, one has to weigh the level of talent that each team played, even if it is imperfect.

I am going to ask you a serious question ... do you honestly believe that your team goes undefeated playing an P5 schedule in the P5? With your lack of talented depth, playing tougher teams week in and week out, it's far more likely you lose several games. Hell, Bama, Clemson and other of the best P5 rarely go undefeated because over 12 games against really good teams you lose players and you have to have depth your team simply did not have. Never mind a comparison of the talent level at the top.

So, within the imperfect system we currently have, you simply don't play enough good teams each year to get into the top 4. It really is that simple.

 

[LawDawg]

I'm fine with 4 and especially 8 teams. My issue is voting on placement and advancement. The only reason to oppose adopting actual rules is that doing so threatens the power P5 leagues hold over the sport. Money rules all and so long as P5 teams can get away with operating under a self-fulfilling beauty contest system, they will do it.

I obviously agree with your statement that it is about money and power. Welcome to the world. But, there are serious logistical issues you can't ignore. They've been discussed here ad nauseam, I am sure. But, I believe the current system gets it more right than wrong, and it is a hell of a good time at the end.

 

[UCFhonors]

I am going to ask you a serious question ... do you honestly believe that your team goes undefeated playing an P5 schedule in the P5? With your lack of talented depth, playing tougher teams week in and week out, it's far more likely you lose several games. Hell, Bama, Clemson and other of the best P5 rarely go undefeated because over 12 games against really good teams you lose players and you have to have depth your team simply did not have. Never mind a comparison of the talent level at the top.

After years of going to practices, seeing 4*s get run over by 2*s, I have rejected all recruiting rankings. That is for another thread.

Grouping teams by a group of conference is equally UCFoolish. Saying 2-10 Arakansas is good team simply by association is UCFoolish. Most ESP5N Cartels teams are bad and have no hope of winning anything. That is for another thread.

You have been brainwashed by the ESP5N Cartel. Sadly you are just regurgitating their talking points.

Yes, I know UCF was the best team in the Nation in 2017. Nobody proved on the field to be better than us. Don't like that logic. Have the postseason determine who is the best on the UCField.

#UCFacts

 

[CJH9972]

I obviously agree with your statement that it is about money and power. Welcome to the world. But, there are serious logistical issues you can't ignore. They've been discussed here ad nauseam, I am sure. But, I believe the current system gets it more right than wrong, and it is a hell of a good time at the end.

I'm not sure what logistical issues there are that prevent adopting rules. I'm not suggesting a complete overhaul of college football. That said, I take don't issue with the teams picked by the committee although I don't believe their choices are right or wrong. For example, whether they pick Oklahoma, Georgia, or Ohio State for the fourth spot does not concern me. The problem is no team advances because their results are worth more as a matter of rule. How we get the outcome we get is what matters to me and a committee picking any of those three teams based on flavor of the moment justifications is an awful way to determine playoff teams.

 

[_rolltideroll_]

After years of going to practices, seeing 4*s get run over by 2*s, I have rejected all recruiting rankings. That is for another thread.

Grouping teams by a group of conference is equally UCFoolish. Saying 2-10 Arakansas is good team simply by association is UCFoolish. Most ESP5N Cartels teams are bad and have no hope of winning anything. That is for another thread.

You have been brainwashed by the ESP5N Cartel. Sadly you are just regurgitating their talking points.

Yes, I know UCF was the best team in the Nation in 2017.

#UCFacts

Plus, Alabama is 0-1 vs UCF.

 

[UCFhonors]

But, in an imperfect system where you can only have 4, for now, teams playing for the national championship, you have to look beyond the record. Obviously, one has to look at how that record was achieved, and against what talent it was achieve. The SOS formulas are an imperfect attempt at that, which is why they are just part of a larger set of metrics that are considered. You don't need a formula to see that your perfect record 2 years ago was accomplished against far inferior competition. Not your fault, you won every game you could win. But in determining the best 4 teams to play for the championship, where a large field tournament is not possible, one has to weigh the level of talent that each team played, even if it is imperfect.

Imperfect is a nice way to say Corrupt.

A large field tournament IS possible. The World Cup does it with 211 Teams all in way different quality - more variance than FBS. Way more discrepancy between teams. Also FCS and D3 has legi Playoffs with a large field. Also every State's HS football at every level has legit Playoffs for all division.

We don't have to accept a Corrupt Postseason. This is what UCF is trying to change as the Champions of Change. Do we have your support?

#UCFacts