Ratings http://michiganhsfootball.com/topic/7327/t/Ratings.html en-us Copyright 2006, Kickapps feeds@kickapps.com (FeedMaster) webmaster@kickapps.com (WebMaster) Sun, 18 Oct 2009 16:45:31 GMT Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:02:32 GMT Kickapps Feeds 1.0 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss 60 {pics-1.1 "http://www.icra.org/ratingsv02.html" l gen true for "http://kickapps.com" r (nz 1 vz 1 lz 1 oz 1 cz 1 ) "http://www.rsac.org/ratingsv01.html" l gen true for "http://kickapps.com" r (n 0 s 0 v 0 l 0 )) Search Search Domain q http://kickapps.com/search/direct/ <![CDATA[ Re: Ratings ]]> http://michiganhsfootball.com/reply/34976/t/Ratings.html#reply-34976 ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (ss429) http://michiganhsfootball.com/sreply/34976 Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:02:32 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Ratings ]]> http://michiganhsfootball.com/reply/34958/t/Ratings.html#reply-34958
After seeing the 2001 AP poll on John's website, DCC probably deserved to be ranked since there is a 2 loss team on there. Plus it has been shown how bad the AP poll is on here before since they only predict one third or so of the state championships since 1975 or that was someone's figure on here several years ago. I should see how all the ratings turned out in predictiing the state champions to see how many ended up in second, third, fourth, fifth, etc. to see how accurate it truly has been over the years. All I know is that the only time that I calculated out the AOPR on here, it ended up being more accurate than the AP poll was. Some people were saying top 10 teams should be in consideration for state title while I showed that is was in the top 5. ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (Mr NCAA) http://michiganhsfootball.com/sreply/34958 Sun, 18 Oct 2009 22:31:49 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Ratings ]]> http://michiganhsfootball.com/reply/34952/t/Ratings.html#reply-34952
In Drew44's great big example of DCC, 4 out of the 5 playoff teams were within 1 loss of DCC's total of 3 losses. So Drew44 had to make it out to be big thing. A 4 loss playoff team has never beaten an undefeated division 1 team yet and that's a fact. So to have Dearborn Fordson ranked below Grandville is a joke, scores or no scores. Even a website like Calpreps has Dearborn Fordson ranked higher than Grandville currently. So I don't see any logic in putting Grandville ahead of Dearborn Fordson at this point in the season. Sure Dearborn Fordson could lose to Pi Hi this week and that could potentially change the scenario, but Grandville could very well lose as well and end up watching the playoffs at home. ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (Mr NCAA) http://michiganhsfootball.com/sreply/34952 Sun, 18 Oct 2009 19:51:32 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Ratings ]]> http://michiganhsfootball.com/reply/34949/t/Ratings.html#reply-34949 feeds@kickapps.com (Mr NCAA) http://michiganhsfootball.com/sreply/34949 Sun, 18 Oct 2009 18:43:00 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Ratings ]]> http://michiganhsfootball.com/reply/34945/t/Ratings.html#reply-34945
That's why having a team ranked like Grandville vs. a Dearborn Fordson doesn't make any real sense based on the stats that I produced above. ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (Mr NCAA) http://michiganhsfootball.com/sreply/34945 Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:53:34 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Ratings ]]> http://michiganhsfootball.com/reply/34943/t/Ratings.html#reply-34943
EDITED
That was for round one only. ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (Mr NCAA) http://michiganhsfootball.com/sreply/34943 Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:40:59 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Ratings ]]> http://michiganhsfootball.com/reply/34942/t/Ratings.html#reply-34942 ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (ftballer67) http://michiganhsfootball.com/sreply/34942 Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:35:05 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Ratings ]]> http://michiganhsfootball.com/reply/34941/t/Ratings.html#reply-34941 1. beat another 3 loss team in Detroit Cody whoppiedoo
2. beat a 2 loss team in Detroit King whoppiedoo
3. beat a 2 loss Westland John Glenn
4. beat another 2 loss team in Walled Lake Western
5. beat a 1 loss team in Utica Eisenhower

So the path to the state championship wasn't the greatest either despite Drew44's protests.

There were only two undefeated D1 teams that year in Rockford and Battle Creek Central. BCC didn't play that good schedule even if they won 2 playoff games. ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (Mr NCAA) http://michiganhsfootball.com/sreply/34941 Sun, 18 Oct 2009 16:56:41 PST <![CDATA[ Ratings ]]> http://michiganhsfootball.com/topic/7327/t/Ratings.html
62391. Another example of
by Drew44, 10/18/09 15:25 ET
a 3 loss team not being ranked and actually being the best is CC in 2001. They were not ranked in D1, but won the title. There are plenty of examples out there that PROVES just because a team has 3 losses doesn't mean they aren't better than teams with 1 or zero losses. So anybody who disagrees with me based on the number of losses a team has, has no argument!


For every example that you give for a 3 loss team beating an undefeated team, I can give you multiple times as many undefeated teams defeating a 3 loss team. Perhaps I'll do the stats during the week 1 playoffs games since 1999 after the season is over to prove my point. So while it might not be perfect, it works far more often the other way. I still go more by scores than anything else and even those can be deceiving. Plus SOS... ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (Mr NCAA) http://michiganhsfootball.com/topic/7327 Sun, 18 Oct 2009 16:45:31 PST