Like, yeah Bama lost to a TAMU team that lost to LSU and Miss State, but they beat three top 25 teams and a top 10 team so we can safely say they would beat Texas A&M in a rematch. It's kinda weird, because typically top teams that even go so far as to lose to middling to bad teams have those losses ignored when they beat top teams. Despite how it seems, this is a genuine attempt at making a comprehensive model, and it does have some decent predictions for ranked matchups I’ll post its predictions for ranked matchups later today. The main issue with the model is that most of the “advanced efficiency stats” are things that aren’t inherently opponent-adjusted-things like pass rush winrate and EPA/play- so strength of schedule isn’t properly accounted for. It then simulates a home-, home-, and neutral series between every team and every other team, then ranking teams by overall wins. The model works by utilizing the predictions of a neural network that’s trained on the “advanced efficiency statistics” section of the CollegeFootballDatabase, which has about a 70% accuracy in predicting the correct winner of a game. Also, when I say “this week,” I mean this upcoming week, I should have been more clear lol. Happy to explain the model, more information available in my previous posts. If a team knocks off a #1 and then struggles for several weeks, while the former #1 looks superior more recently, why even play the game then if we're gonna put so little weight on the game that was actually played earlier, and put larger weight on what would happen in a hypothetical rematch that won't likely occur? There would be less benefit to winning tough early games and more punishment for losing them. This recency bias effect just leads to a void where it would be unnecessary to schedule good OOC competition, because those wins mean far less and if you take a loss from one of these, you can only drop 1 more max before being eliminated from CFP discussions. On top of this, some conference schedules are definitely not even, teams can look like world beaters putting 70 on a bad conference team. I don't argue that teams evolve over time, but among those changes, there are other factors besides "getting better" at play.įor example, a team could be wrecked by injuries and don't pass the "eye test" for several weeks because of this, and other teams look better due to the lack of this issue for them. That point just de-incentivizes the need to schedule decent OOC games (typically weeks 1-4). Next Ten: North Carolina 664, Fresno State 600, Toledo 353, Air Force 311, USC 230, Iowa 227, Troy 173, SMU 95, UCLA 94, SDSU 93Ībout The Poll | FAQ | Contribute | Voter Hall of Fame Here are the results for the 2023 Week 11 /r/CFB Poll: Rank Reddit Rules/FAQ Announcements Filter Twitter Social Media Poll/Pick 'Em Team Guide Awards Merchandise Amazon Referrals Select Flair Submit Game Thread
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |