Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Bias Free Computer vs. Human Rankings


Rockerbraves
 Share

Recommended Posts

Thought it might be interesting to see how the Colley computer ranking stacked up to the final human rankings.

 

If we can all be honest, the biggest differences I see are what you might have expected. The higher profile schools getting more love by the human voters than the unbias computer aka USC, OSU, OK and Texas. :D

 

The bottom line in these comparisons, according to the Colley rankings have

 

agreed in all four years with the media and coaches on the national champion,

most often agreed on the top 5, and

agreed on the top 10 within a place or two,

 

which Colley calls a remarkable success, given the radically different systems of ranking system in question. Since we don't really know the "true" rankings of the teams, we, in fact, are not able to say whether the media polls or my rankings are better, but the fact that the agreement is, in practice, quite good provides reason to believe that neither is totally out to lunch.

 

So, here we have a scheme to rank college football teams that is absolutely free from human influence or opinion, accounts for schedule strength, ignores runaway scores, and yet produces common sense results, which at the end of the season compare favorably with the press poll rankings. What else do you want?

 

Colley's Bias Free Matrix Computer Rankings

 

1. LSU

2. GEORGIA

3. MISSOURI

4. WEST VIRGINIA

5. KANSAS

6. SOUTHERN CAL

7. OHIO STATE

8. VA TECH

9. BOSTON COLLEGE

10. OKLAHOMA

 

AP Top 10

 

1. LSU (60) 12-2 1,620

2. Georgia (3) 11-2 1,515

3. USC (1) 11-2 1,500

4. Missouri 12-2 1,347

5. Ohio State 11-2 1,346

6. West Virginia 11-2 1,342

7. Kansas (1) 12-1 1,303

8. Oklahoma 11-3 1,139

9. Virginia Tech 11-3 1,096

10. Texas 10-3 962

 

http://www.colleyrankings.com/index.html

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think human polls are completely lame. About as lame as computer rankings.

I agree with the 'about' part, and I've been advocating a mixed points system that uses the polls only as a starting point, but that also uses some of the 'fuzzy logic' that voters do in their heads for the whole SOS thing. (My other idea of having only 96 Div1A teams in 8 BCS conferences all with 12 teams and a conf. title game for each, with the 8 conf. winners going into a BCS playoff, got shot down as a pipe dream - too bad. So we still have to have polls and computers...)

 

I'd say the voters are better overall, outside of some potential conference bias - and for crying out loud, all coaches have to vote every week. Knowing that even a playoff system would have to take the top 8 or 16 teams, both the polls and computers would still have to coexist. They just have to do a better job of it.

 

So, the trick is to use an objective framework for these supposedly subjective components as much as possible. To wit, use the points margin but put a cap on it, give more points for winning on the road vs. a ranked team and take away more for losing at home to an unranked team (and vice versa), weight the late season games a bit more than the early ones, somehow account for injuries to key players, bad weather, etc.

 

The more you can take away the appearance of preferential treatment from the voters, and put more of these issues into a formal computer ranking system, the better. And the #9 or #17 teams will be pissed now matter what we come up with, but at least its a framework on which a lot more of us could agree and support with less bitching.

 

Enjoy the off season fellas/gals.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There needs to be some way to rank the teams. I for one have no really big problem with a BCS type of ranking....I would just like to see that ranking turn into a top 8 team playoff. I will feel much better about a NC game if it's teams 9-12 whining that they didn't get a shot than if it's a legit 3-4 ranked team tat gets shut out because of a formula.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How exactly are computer rankings "unbiased". Somebody determined what criteria was to be used by the computer systems and how that criteria was to be applied.

Perhaps that is why they use more than one.

 

IMO the main reason why computer rankings are unbias is because the criteria is set before the competition begins. Let's use Tiger Woods again. If Tiger doesn't perform well in a season he loses his number one ranking even though many would argue he should still be number one based off their own personal opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps that is why they use more than one.

 

IMO the main reason why computer rankings are unbias is because the criteria is set before the competition begins. Let's use Tiger Woods again. If Tiger doesn't perform well in a season he loses his number one ranking even though many would argue he should still be number one based off their own personal opinion.

 

:D

 

The fact that criteria is set before the games start in no way makes the criteria unbiased.

 

If you believe that criteria is unbiased then you would believe that a ranking system based on the following criteria established BEFORE the season would result in an unbiased ranking?

 

1. Teams will more passing yardage than rushing yardage are better teams. The computer will award MORE points to teams with higher passing yards.

2. Teams with bigger coaching staffs are better teams because they are better coached. The computer will award MORE points to teams that have more coaches.

3. Teams with the highest paid head coach are better teams because their coaches are more valuable. The teams with the higher paid HC will be awarded MORE points by the computer.

4. Teams that play in harsher conditions and win are better teams. The computer will award MORE points to teams that win in bad weather conditions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D

 

The fact that criteria is set before the games start in no way makes the criteria unbiased.

 

If you believe that criteria is unbiased then you would believe that a ranking system based on the following criteria established BEFORE the season would result in an unbiased ranking?

 

1. Teams will more passing yardage than rushing yardage are better teams. The computer will award MORE points to teams with higher passing yards.

2. Teams with bigger coaching staffs are better teams because they are better coached. The computer will award MORE points to teams that have more coaches.

3. Teams with the highest paid head coach are better teams because their coaches are more valuable. The teams with the higher paid HC will be awarded MORE points by the computer.

4. Teams that play in harsher conditions and win are better teams. The computer will award MORE points to teams that win in bad weather conditions.

As long as everyone agrees with the criteria going into the competition then it would be considered unbias, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D

 

The fact that criteria is set before the games start in no way makes the criteria unbiased.

 

If you believe that criteria is unbiased then you would believe that a ranking system based on the following criteria established BEFORE the season would result in an unbiased ranking?

 

1. Teams will more passing yardage than rushing yardage are better teams. The computer will award MORE points to teams with higher passing yards.

2. Teams with bigger coaching staffs are better teams because they are better coached. The computer will award MORE points to teams that have more coaches.

3. Teams with the highest paid head coach are better teams because their coaches are more valuable. The teams with the higher paid HC will be awarded MORE points by the computer.

4. Teams that play in harsher conditions and win are better teams. The computer will award MORE points to teams that win in bad weather conditions.

 

WHAT????????, Swing and a miss............

 

Bias: a partiality that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation

 

The fact that a group of humans came up with the criteria doesn't alone make it bias. I don't have an intimate knowledge of the formulas used in any of the 6 computer rankings, but would assume "someone in the know" gave them the thumbs up.

 

I think the system works pretty well, but I would weight the computer ranking higher. 8/16 team playoffs would be bring in a lot of cash, but splitting the pie would be a big issue to overcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D

 

The fact that criteria is set before the games start in no way makes the criteria unbiased.

 

If you believe that criteria is unbiased then you would believe that a ranking system based on the following criteria established BEFORE the season would result in an unbiased ranking?

 

1. Teams will more passing yardage than rushing yardage are better teams. The computer will award MORE points to teams with higher passing yards.

2. Teams with bigger coaching staffs are better teams because they are better coached. The computer will award MORE points to teams that have more coaches.

3. Teams with the highest paid head coach are better teams because their coaches are more valuable. The teams with the higher paid HC will be awarded MORE points by the computer.

4. Teams that play in harsher conditions and win are better teams. The computer will award MORE points to teams that win in bad weather conditions.

 

 

 

0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000

 

:D:D:wacko:

:D;):headbang:yawn::bio:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WHAT????????, Swing and a miss............

 

Bias: a partiality that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation

 

The fact that a group of humans came up with the criteria doesn't alone make it bias. I don't have an intimate knowledge of the formulas used in any of the 6 computer rankings, but would assume "someone in the know" gave them the thumbs up.

 

I think the system works pretty well, but I would weight the computer ranking higher. 8/16 team playoffs would be bring in a lot of cash, but splitting the pie would be a big issue to overcome.

 

Yes ... that is my point ... the simple fact that there is an established set of criteria does not make that criteria unbiased. The bias of the people setting up the criteria is often reflected in the criteria itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information