Sorry Boomer [Massey]

[CharlieK]

I dont disagree with this; but a construct like the Massey Composite will still likely be more accurate en globo than any one idividual or organization's opinion.

Since it all originates with subjective rankings and equations, that could never be verified by direct competition, it's either 100% or 0% accurate, depending on how you look at it and what you define accurate as. It's almost certainly not exactly how a tournament of all teams would turn out, so maybe it's 0% accurate. But then again it doesn't claim to be, it's only essentially one dude and his computer's opinion...it 100% accurately reflects that opinion.

Numbers I care about:

1. Record
2. Sunbelt Conference Placing
3. Bowl final score

[STPacronym]

Since it all originates with subjective rankings and equations, that could never be verified by direct competition, it's either 100% or 0% accurate, depending on how you look at it and what you define accurate as. It's almost certainly not exactly how a tournament of all teams would turn out, so maybe it's 0% accurate. But then again it doesn't claim to be, it's only essentially one dude and his computer's opinion...it 100% accurately reflects that opinion.

Numbers I care about:

1. Record
2. Sunbelt Conference Placing
3. Bowl final score

But, think of the number of recruits we can wow with the Massey rankings!

[CharlieK]

But, think of the number of recruits we can wow with the Massey rankings!

Only if they have the correct secondary sexual characteristics.

[CajunVic]

Only if they have the correct secondary sexual characteristics.

They all have these, some don’t master them as quickly as others, some don’t master them at all.

[VObserver]

Since it all originates with subjective rankings and equations, that could never be verified by direct competition, it's either 100% or 0% accurate, depending on how you look at it and what you define accurate as. It's almost certainly not exactly how a tournament of all teams would turn out, so maybe it's 0% accurate. But then again it doesn't claim to be, it's only essentially one dude and his computer's opinion...it 100% accurately reflects that opinion.

Numbers I care about:

1. Record
2. Sunbelt Conference Placing
3. Bowl final score

The Massey composite isnt one dude and his computer. It is 42 dudes or organizations of multiple dudes making independent evaluations. The composite obtains the mean and standard deviation of the ordinal rankings of each team according to all 42 data services, then ranks them from 1-130.

[CajunVic]

The Massey composite isnt one dude and his computer. It is 42 dudes or organizations of multiple dudes making independent evaluations. The composite obtains the mean and standard deviation of the ordinal rankings of each team according to all 42 data services, then ranks them from 1-130.

That’s some fancy words, but makes absolute sense.

[CharlieK]

The Massey composite isnt one dude and his computer. It is 42 dudes or organizations of multiple dudes making independent evaluations. The composite obtains the mean and standard deviation of the ordinal rankings of each team according to all 42 data services, then ranks them from 1-130.

Lighten up, Francis, it was a joke. I know it's more complicated than that.

But since we are talking about it, my point stands. It could be 1 million dudes and their computer and it would still be an amalgamation of OPINIONS. Not a massaging of data based on measuring a measurable thing. If I asked 1 million people their opinion on the best color, would the ranking somehow become a factual indication of "bestness"? Or would it be a ranking of favorite? There is no way to pin accuracy to a subjective ranking like this one, no matter how many subjective opinions you get and add up, divide, or square root.

[CajunVic]

Lighten up, Francis, it was a joke. I know it's more complicated than that.

But since we are talking about it, my point stands. It could be 1 million dudes and their computer and it would still be an amalgamation of OPINIONS. Not a massaging of data based on measuring a measurable thing. If I asked 1 million people their opinion on the best color, would the ranking somehow become a factual indication of "bestness"? Or would it be a ranking of favorite? There is no way to pin accuracy to a subjective ranking, no matter how many subjective opinions you get and add up, divide, or square root.

I don't think they are doing square root.

[CharlieK]

I like when our number gets smaller. I dislike when it gets larger.

I have my doubts that the people ranking these teams have seen very many of the teams below number 30 or outside of the P5 ever actually play.

I want an outright sunbelt championship and a bowl win.

[CajunVic]

I like when our number gets smaller. I dislike when it gets larger.

I have my doubts that the people ranking these teams have seen very many of the teams below number 30 or outside of the P5 ever actually play.

I want an outright sunbelt championship and a bowl win.

Now that is squaring things up and getting to the root.

[Turbine]

I don't think they are doing square root.

Imagine how massey it would get if they did.

[Grantvb]

Lighten up, Francis, it was a joke. I know it's more complicated than that.

But since we are talking about it, my point stands. It could be 1 million dudes and their computer and it would still be an amalgamation of OPINIONS. Not a massaging of data based on measuring a measurable thing. If I asked 1 million people their opinion on the best color, would the ranking somehow become a factual indication of "bestness"? Or would it be a ranking of favorite? There is no way to pin accuracy to a subjective ranking like this one, no matter how many subjective opinions you get and add up, divide, or square root.

With great respect Charlie, isn’t that how the AP and Coaches’ Polls work? Opinion? So Massey is no worse than they, in fact better due to larger sample size....?