tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post6868783153496092528..comments2023-10-14T05:50:09.559-04:00Comments on Saurian Sagacity: The Official Blog for Inquisitive Florida Gators Fans: Preseason PollHenry Louis Gomezhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03167391252653145914noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-23905162420923079852008-08-21T13:12:00.000-04:002008-08-21T13:12:00.000-04:00Yeah, that's pretty interesting. Not a whole lot o...Yeah, that's pretty interesting. Not a whole lot of difference, but thanks for running it.<BR/><BR/>Seems like the hardest thing to put into stats is teams that are steadily improving (or getting worse).<BR/><BR/>I guess we shall see what happens this season.Jamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07831794019607815076noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-25423131656500416122008-08-21T11:22:00.000-04:002008-08-21T11:22:00.000-04:00Using James' formula we get -1 Southern Cal2 LSU3 ...Using James' formula we get -<BR/><BR/>1 Southern Cal<BR/>2 LSU<BR/>3 Ohio State<BR/>4 Georgia<BR/>5 Texas<BR/>6 Oklahoma<BR/>7 Florida<BR/>8 Michigan<BR/>9 Tennessee<BR/>10 Auburn<BR/>11 Clemson<BR/>12 Penn State<BR/>13 Florida State<BR/>14 Virginia Tech<BR/>15 Kansas<BR/>16 Missouri<BR/>17 Alabama<BR/>18 Arizona State<BR/>19 Oregon<BR/>20 Boston College<BR/>21 West Virginia<BR/>22 California<BRMergzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13815816581678431340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-89043369972463144952008-08-21T11:16:00.000-04:002008-08-21T11:16:00.000-04:00James -The data on the "stars" came from Rivals. I...James -<BR/><BR/>The data on the "stars" came from Rivals. It is an average of the talent for the past 4 years.<BR/><BR/>I'm curious as to what (s)*(1+p) might show, so I'll run it and seeMergzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13815816581678431340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-60432161806393016672008-08-20T23:18:00.000-04:002008-08-20T23:18:00.000-04:00True, it probably places undue emphasis on last ye...True, it probably places undue emphasis on last year's win percentage. I was thinking maybe<BR/>(s)*(1+p), where s is the number of stars and p is the win percentage. But I suppose that is getting a little unnecessarily complicated for a ballot that will just be disregarded after the first week.<BR/><BR/>Out of curiosity, where was the data for this culled from?Jamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07831794019607815076noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-3383274553395477402008-08-20T17:20:00.000-04:002008-08-20T17:20:00.000-04:00There's certainly nothing about that suggestion th...There's certainly nothing about that suggestion that makes it less valid. But it's still arbitrary. Any combination will be by necessity. I'll reiterate that last year Mergz only looked at recruiting. And he was somewhat pleased that some of the picks ended up being pretty good. The idea here was to tweak it a little. To penalize teams that did poorly with good talent and reward teams that Henry Louis Gomezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03167391252653145914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-46386462209180030352008-08-20T17:10:00.000-04:002008-08-20T17:10:00.000-04:00Would it not make sense to multiply winning percen...Would it not make sense to multiply winning percentage by average stars, rather than adding?<BR/><BR/>It's clearly a multiplicative relationship by nature anyway, not an additive one. Average "star rating" tells how potentially good a team is; the winning percentage tells how successful the coaching staff was at bringing out that potential.<BR/><BR/>It's clearly not going to be perfect (nor will Jamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07831794019607815076noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-60658765864842283822008-08-19T09:29:00.000-04:002008-08-19T09:29:00.000-04:00Did you mean "slightly different ... tack" instead...Did you mean "slightly different ... tack" instead of "tact"?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-65541764942145452312008-08-18T15:42:00.000-04:002008-08-18T15:42:00.000-04:00FIrst of all (I'm trying really hard to stay civil...FIrst of all (I'm trying really hard to stay civil) sir, I just showed you an example in which the the recruiting number is only worth twice as much as the win %. It works in reverse too. If you have a 3 star team with a .500 record then the recruiting component is worth SIX times the win % from the previous year, not the FIVE that you state. It's variable whether you want to believe it or Henry Louis Gomezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03167391252653145914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-75046771073693581462008-08-18T10:07:00.000-04:002008-08-18T10:07:00.000-04:00OMG, did you get your math education from F$U???St...OMG, did you get your math education from F$U???<BR/><BR/>Star rating gets you from 1-5 points.<BR/>Win percentage gets you from 0-1 point.<BR/><BR/>Even if you recruit from the nearest homeless shelter (you and I are both 1-star recruits according to Rivals), you get as many points (in this system) as you do for a PERFECT season. Since your POTENTIAL gain from stars is 5 times as much as from Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-90659452078668512312008-08-16T11:40:00.000-04:002008-08-16T11:40:00.000-04:00Additionally, I essentially throw this poll out af...Additionally, I essentially throw this poll out after the first game is played.Mergzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13815816581678431340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-33202803683474609862008-08-16T11:36:00.000-04:002008-08-16T11:36:00.000-04:00What Henry said.What Henry said.Mergzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13815816581678431340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-89712170199393326492008-08-15T21:32:00.000-04:002008-08-15T21:32:00.000-04:00First of all any weighting of the two values would...First of all any weighting of the two values would be arbitrary, so that's kind of a non-issue. Secondly the recruiting element would only be worth 5 times the win % if it was 5 and the win % was 1.000 or some other combination. In the case of a 1-star school with a .5000 winning percentage the recruiting element would count as twice as important not five times as you assert. So it's variableHenry Louis Gomezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03167391252653145914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-34453845889551487492008-08-15T17:06:00.000-04:002008-08-15T17:06:00.000-04:00Just because recruits are based on the 1-5 star ra...Just because recruits are based on the 1-5 star rating, your formula says that recruiting is 5 times more important than getting W's (is this the z0oOo0k formula?)<BR/><BR/>What if recruiting services gave players from 1 to 10 stars? Would you still simply add up both components? Tres arbitrary, no?<BR/><BR/>In your formula, a team that pulled in all 4-star recruits and lost EVERY game last year Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-8560086189625952942008-08-15T15:18:00.000-04:002008-08-15T15:18:00.000-04:00Yeah, I should have pointed out Michigan too. Atte...Yeah, I should have pointed out Michigan too. Attempting to adjust to a new offense is going to be tough.<BR/><BR/>In the end I wanted to create something relatively objective, as any attempt to be subjective at this point is pure folly. In fact, as you point out, preseason polls are themselves folly.Mergzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13815816581678431340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35816861.post-73937110128151772522008-08-15T15:08:00.000-04:002008-08-15T15:08:00.000-04:00Never mind FSU 10th. Michigan 8th?I just don't ge...Never mind FSU 10th. Michigan 8th?<BR/><BR/>I just don't get the point to preseason polls.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com