Yeah , Acc is at its lowest level in like 15 years. However, Big 12 and SEC are so clearly ahead of the rest of the conferences from computers and eye test. Kansas State the # 10 team in the Big 12 beat Texas Tech who just beat Baylor and Kansas. Our Nebraska is not beating Purdue . Similarly top 10-11 teams in SEC can beat top teams in auburn and Kentucky and LSU.
Really? Michigan is still ranked high because of last year . Shocked Michigan at 32 in Kenpom at 7-7 and Iowa at 19 and Indiana 27 are ridiculous rankings with some of last year factored in. SEC has Auburn, LSU , Kentucky , Alabama , Tennessee , Miss. State, Arkansas . Florida , Vanderbilt , Ole Miss and South Carolina as their top 11 which are much stronger than Purdue, Illinois , Mich State , Wisconsin , Ohio State , Rutgers ,Indiana, Iowa , Minnesota , Penn State and Northwestern / Michigan our top 11/12. . Eye test for sure says SEC way up and Big 10 down and maybe out of conference strength of schedule for SEC schools must be pathetic for computers to have SEC behind BIG 10.
7th ranked schedule is ********. They have literally beaten 1 team with a pulse, San Diego State and Beat Tarleton by 11, UNLV by 12 and Praire View by almost 30 at home. They got pummeled by Arizona , UNC , lost by 10 at home to Minnesota , lost by 14 to UCF and by 8 to us on the road. Their only decent game was a 2 point loss at Seton Hall . How is that the 7th ranked schedule ? Someone is wrong with the computer model and their weighing of inputs
No. Michigan SOS, according to:
Genius, I am saying that the input into the computer is flawed. Can your brain understand that ? No way in hell Michigan has the 7th hardest schedule in the country. Get it.
What do you think the input is? In what way is it flawed? You're just some guy looking at Michigan's schedule and going "hurr durr that's not the 7th hardest schedule OBVIOUSLY". Meanwhile every reasonable computer model comes up with basically the same answer and yet you think you're smarter than all of them.
| Big 12 | 1935.223 |
| Big East | 1830.395 |
| Big 10 | 1826.285 |
| Southeastern | 1814.415 |
| Pac 12 | 1730.719 |
| Atlantic Coast | 1686.318 |
| Mountain West | 1678.611 |
| American Athletic | 1650.455 |
| West Coast | 1633.842 |
| Atlantic 10 | 1562.237 |
| Missouri Val | 1495.481 |
| Conference USA | 1477.154 |
| Southern | 1467.251 |
| Sun Belt | 1433.914 |
| Colonial | 1423.607 |
| Western Athletic | 1415.051 |
| Metro Atlantic | 1386.82 |
| Mid-American | 1384.587 |
| Big West | 1380.419 |
| Ivy League | 1343.499 |
| Summit Lg | 1320.414 |
| Atlantic Sun | 1316.633 |
| Big Sky | 1296.48 |
| OH Valley | 1292.7 |
| Big South | 1249.175 |
| America East | 1220.192 |
| Horizon | 1216.358 |
| Patriot League | 1191.514 |
| Northeast | 1159.949 |
| Southland | 1148.964 |
| Southwestern AC | 1118.252 |
| Mid-Eastern AC | 1111.858 |
Ok. Smart ***. Lay out Michigan’s Schedule so far.
I don't know what to tell you. I will admit that I looked at that schedule and was also surprised it was ranked so high. But you can't RANK SCHEDULES RELATIVE TO EACH OTHER by looking at only one team's schedule. I've literally calculated it myself, using my own rankings. I'm sure you would disagree with my rankings in some places but they are going to be at least in the right ballpark and changing them slightly would not significantly impact the results.
| Opponent | Home/Away | Opponent Ranking | Opponent Rating | Home/Away Adjustment | Adjusted Opponent Rating |
| Buffalo | Home | 145 | 0.39 | -2.8 | -2.41 |
| Prairie View | Neutral | 311 | -14.29 | 0 | -14.29 |
| Seton Hall | Home | 31 | 15.14 | -2.8 | 12.34 |
| UNLV | Away | 110 | 4.26 | 2.8 | 7.06 |
| Arizona | Neutral | 3 | 24.84 | 0 | 24.84 |
| Tarleton St | Home | 187 | -2.89 | -2.8 | -5.69 |
| North Carolina | Away | 43 | 13.51 | 2.8 | 16.31 |
| San Diego St | Home | 38 | 14.16 | -2.8 | 11.36 |
| Nebraska | Away | 180 | -2.36 | 2.8 | 0.44 |
| Minnesota | Home | 56 | 10.72 | -2.8 | 7.92 |
| Southern Utah | Home | 151 | -0.09 | -2.8 | -2.89 |
| UCF | Away | 84 | 7.36 | 2.8 | 10.16 |
| Rutgers | Away | 104 | 4.68 | 2.8 | 7.48 |
| Illinois | Away | 20 | 17.30 | 2.8 | 20.10 |
| Average | 6.62 |
Because they have the 32nd highest adjusted efficiency margin. It's literally a mathematical formula, not voodoo magic or Mr. Pomeroy staring at the teams trying to figure out which one is #31 and which one is #33. It's just math.
Yes.
For the same reason that 2+2=4. You just do the math. You are trying to out-logic a mathematical formula and it is why you fail.
No. You're just a guy saying things. Trying to analyze a massive dataset with your brain is the domain of idiots.
You said all computer models. Well you have done your own and arrive at 81 not 32 as Kenpom you say doesn’t measure wins and losses or by how much you win or lose. What computer model does? If none take that into account , then you have validated my point the computer model is flawed. The thickness of your brain cannot see how the models are flawed is even more troubling. You have been trying to justify why a ****** 7-7 Michigan team with not 1 quality win and tons of bad blowout or double digit losses is justified being ranked so high and I am telling you the computer models are flawed and you have confirmed it. Why the f—- have you tried so hard to be so snarky when all you had to say was the computers have them rated high but those models do not take everything into account that someone with 2 eyes could see ? You are one big Richard. !!!
What the **** is wrong with you? I'm snarky? Every post you make is snarky and you don't even understand what you are replying to.
I put SHU as a home game in my chart so not sure why you mentioned that one. You are correct, they were not on the road last night. However, the point still stands as the Torvik prediction was Michigan -7.8.
Fluoxetine,
I agree with you. I really should try to be more polite to people but unfortunately I get frustrated as I've had similar arguments before. The issue, and the thing that frustrates me, is that it's very clear that he does not understand how these things work and he has just looked at Michigan's schedule and decided that it could not possibly be the 7th toughest schedule which is really obviously not a valid way to go about it.
That's fine, but it doesn't make efficiency ratings wrong or invalid, it just means that you are interested in measuring a different thing.
I'm not sure I agree. Or at least, I'm not sure I agree from a predictive sense. I think something like Kenpom is superior from a predictive perspective and that the results of close games etc are mostly (not 100%, but mostly) noise.
Agreed, but I think that's different than them being wrong or invalid.
Thanks for the invite to comment, Loyal!
For the most part your estimates of their ability would be equal, but you would have a lot more uncertainty about that estimate for the first team than you would for the 2nd.
If you can articulate your model clearly here (and it relies on scores only, as I do not have a good source of other data) I might (emphasis on might) code it up.
Actually, my day job, until Jan 31, is being Dean of the College of Education at the University of Otago in the South Island of New Zealand (I'm guessing that isn't what you were expecting!). I'm a Professor here and have for years specialized in research methods and quantitative measurement models. Bizarrely enough, I also do a lot of work on the psychology of aesthetics (how people look at art). You can get my latest book on Amazon (shameless plug): Scoundrels, Cads, and Other Great Artists. It's a lot of fun to read -- about the bad boys in art and the great art they made. My PhD is in Measurement, Evaluation, and Statistical Analysis (U of Chicago '77).
@fluoxetine @SkilletHead2
You have the SAS and Statistics book with Ron Cody? We had to go to 17 publishers to get that published the first time, and then it went through five editions. By far the most profitable book I've ever written!
You may find my brother’s book of interest - https://www.psupress.org/books/titles/978-0-271-06501-4.html
Thanks for pointing this book out! Even though it's Penn State University Press, I'll check it out!
I know, thankfully he didn’t attend there, just used their publishing house!
Wow! I own have read several of his SAS books! Did not know this about my fellow poster! Thank you for mentioning...
