Home General
Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:

- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)

- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans

- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum

- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.

ESPN's FPI....Are you kidding me?!

24

Comments

  • MinnesotaDawgMinnesotaDawg Posts: 552 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @MIghtydawg said:
    That is not what it is saying. It is not ranking the top teams for the season. It is predicting who has the best chance of winning going forward.

    No, that's not right...It's NOT just a prediction of who has the best chance to win going forward. There is actually a different calculation about who has the best chance to win going forward called the "Win Out %" (again, based on it's FPI model). FWIW, Penn State (FPI #3) has the best chance to win out (88.5%), then it's Clemson (FPI #7) with a win-out percentage of 65.7%.

    It actually IS supposed to be a ranking of who the BEST teams are based on theoretical head to head matches. Put another way, the model ranks teams based on how the way it predicts the results of hypothetical games. Example, if asked to predict Georgia (6) v. Washington (4) now, FPI model favors Washington. If asked to predict Clemson (7) v. Georgia (6), FPI model favors Georgia.

  • BamaDawgBamaDawg Posts: 2,527 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Not to belittle anyone else's concerns and I hate to repost an earlier post of mine, but it seems very appropriate here:

    Don't care!

  • Denmen185Denmen185 Posts: 7,548 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @MinnesotaDawg said:

    @MIghtydawg said:
    That is not what it is saying. It is not ranking the top teams for the season. It is predicting who has the best chance of winning going forward.

    No, that's not right...It's NOT just a prediction of who has the best chance to win going forward. There is actually a different calculation about who has the best chance to win going forward called the "Win Out %" (again, based on it's FPI model). FWIW, Penn State (FPI #3) has the best chance to win out (88.5%), then it's Clemson (FPI #7) with a win-out percentage of 65.7%.

    It actually IS supposed to be a ranking of who the BEST teams are based on theoretical head to head matches. Put another way, the model ranks teams based on how the way it predicts the results of hypothetical games. Example, if asked to predict Georgia (6) v. Washington (4) now, FPI model favors Washington. If asked to predict Clemson (7) v. Georgia (6), FPI model favors Georgia.

    Part of the reason for Penn State having a higher win out % is because they are not expected to play in the championship game hence, even though rated behind OSU they have a much higher % of not losing in 3 games than OSU has of losing in 4.

  • MinnesotaDawgMinnesotaDawg Posts: 552 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @Denmen185 said:

    @MinnesotaDawg said:

    @MIghtydawg said:
    That is not what it is saying. It is not ranking the top teams for the season. It is predicting who has the best chance of winning going forward.

    No, that's not right...It's NOT just a prediction of who has the best chance to win going forward. There is actually a different calculation about who has the best chance to win going forward called the "Win Out %" (again, based on it's FPI model). FWIW, Penn State (FPI #3) has the best chance to win out (88.5%), then it's Clemson (FPI #7) with a win-out percentage of 65.7%.

    It actually IS supposed to be a ranking of who the BEST teams are based on theoretical head to head matches. Put another way, the model ranks teams based on how the way it predicts the results of hypothetical games. Example, if asked to predict Georgia (6) v. Washington (4) now, FPI model favors Washington. If asked to predict Clemson (7) v. Georgia (6), FPI model favors Georgia.

    Part of the reason for Penn State having a higher win out % is because they are not expected to play in the championship game hence, even though rated behind OSU they have a much higher % of not losing in 3 games than OSU has of losing in 4.

    Yep, that's right. Win-out % and FPI ranking are a separate thing. If Penn State somehow found it's way back into the Big 10 championship game....it's championship % likelihood (another separate FPI measure) would go way up, while it's win-out % would go way down.

    Georgia and Auburn have (by pretty far) the lowest "win-out %" in their Top 10 most likely because of Alabama being ahead on the schedule--definitely for Auburn, likely for UGA in the SECC.

  • Denmen185Denmen185 Posts: 7,548 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @MinnesotaDawg said:

    @Denmen185 said:

    @MinnesotaDawg said:

    @MIghtydawg said:
    That is not what it is saying. It is not ranking the top teams for the season. It is predicting who has the best chance of winning going forward.

    No, that's not right...It's NOT just a prediction of who has the best chance to win going forward. There is actually a different calculation about who has the best chance to win going forward called the "Win Out %" (again, based on it's FPI model). FWIW, Penn State (FPI #3) has the best chance to win out (88.5%), then it's Clemson (FPI #7) with a win-out percentage of 65.7%.

    It actually IS supposed to be a ranking of who the BEST teams are based on theoretical head to head matches. Put another way, the model ranks teams based on how the way it predicts the results of hypothetical games. Example, if asked to predict Georgia (6) v. Washington (4) now, FPI model favors Washington. If asked to predict Clemson (7) v. Georgia (6), FPI model favors Georgia.

    Part of the reason for Penn State having a higher win out % is because they are not expected to play in the championship game hence, even though rated behind OSU they have a much higher % of not losing in 3 games than OSU has of losing in 4.

    Yep, that's right. Win-out % and FPI ranking are a separate thing. If Penn State somehow found it's way back into the Big 10 championship game....it's championship % likelihood (another separate FPI measure) would go way up, while it's win-out % would go way down.

    Georgia and Auburn have (by pretty far) the lowest "win-out %" in their Top 10 most likely because of Alabama being ahead on the schedule--definitely for Auburn, likely for UGA in the SECC.

    It's just a mathematical formula. UGA v AU is basically 50/50 so if nothing changes this week in terms of rating, the chances for both teams will change. If AU wins it will go to 15% (from 7.5) as it one less game and UGA will go to 26.4% (13.2) for the same reason. A UGA win means AU will likely go to 30% (unless Bama also losses) as they will not be in another 50/50 game with UGA and UGA will actually be lower than 26.4 (24 or thereabouts) as they will include a 100% chance of facing Bama (25% or thereabouts) rather than a 30% chance of facing Auburn (50% chance).

    Bottom line is all we can say at this point is that FPI says we have a 13.2% chance of finishing 13-0 but what do they really know.

  • FredBearFredBear Posts: 232 ✭✭✭ Junior

    Oh the comments I could make about ESPN. Most of them would get me banned so let's just say I think they are useless to the point of being pathetic.

  • JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,569 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @MinnesotaDawg said:
    I try not to get hung up on irrelevant rankings too much....certainly the AP and Coaches poll have their flaws and biases. But with Georgia's relevancy in the playoff discussion this year, I'm certainly more sensitive to the discussion of rankings this year. That's why I continue to bristle at the reference to ESPN's FPI rankings in this debate. Over the course of last weekend's games (Thurs through Sat.) I saw the side-by-side comparison graphic of the committee's Top 5 with the FPI Top 5 on no less than four different game broadcasts. This wouldn't be so troubling, if the FPI wasn't so bizarre in its rankings...having Georgia at number 5 behind one-loss Ohio State (2) and Penn State (3) last week. Out of curiosity, I just checked out the FPI rankings AFTER this weekend's games...

    1. Alabama
    2. Ohio State (still!?)
    3. Penn State (****??)
    4. Washington (huh?)
    5. Notre Dame
    6. Georgia (down one spot)

    I guess that the FPI is a model, that uses a ton of game simulations based on actual and projected results...but it seems more like the rankings of an old man living in a basement in Youngstown, Ohio. He doesn't actually follow college football, but did read the sports page over the course of a few weeks last December..... Weird.

    The bias seen here for ND, OSU, and PSU is why I believe a one loss Georgia will not make the playoff. We will have to win out to overcome the bias.

  • Denmen185Denmen185 Posts: 7,548 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @JayDog said:

    @MinnesotaDawg said:
    I try not to get hung up on irrelevant rankings too much....certainly the AP and Coaches poll have their flaws and biases. But with Georgia's relevancy in the playoff discussion this year, I'm certainly more sensitive to the discussion of rankings this year. That's why I continue to bristle at the reference to ESPN's FPI rankings in this debate. Over the course of last weekend's games (Thurs through Sat.) I saw the side-by-side comparison graphic of the committee's Top 5 with the FPI Top 5 on no less than four different game broadcasts. This wouldn't be so troubling, if the FPI wasn't so bizarre in its rankings...having Georgia at number 5 behind one-loss Ohio State (2) and Penn State (3) last week. Out of curiosity, I just checked out the FPI rankings AFTER this weekend's games...

    1. Alabama
    2. Ohio State (still!?)
    3. Penn State (****??)
    4. Washington (huh?)
    5. Notre Dame
    6. Georgia (down one spot)

    I guess that the FPI is a model, that uses a ton of game simulations based on actual and projected results...but it seems more like the rankings of an old man living in a basement in Youngstown, Ohio. He doesn't actually follow college football, but did read the sports page over the course of a few weeks last December..... Weird.

    The bias seen here for ND, OSU, and PSU is why I believe a one loss Georgia will not make the playoff. We will have to win out to overcome the bias.

    Assuming that ND wins out which is in doubt they will be #2. Are you saying that they could justify taking OSU who has no good wins and losses to OKL and Iowa over a 1 loss UGA who lost to #1 but beat #2 even if OSU is a conf champ? PSU will have 2 losses and no good wins. I would like to watch the chairman's nose growing on national TV

  • JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,569 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @Denmen185 said:

    @JayDog said:

    @MinnesotaDawg said:
    I try not to get hung up on irrelevant rankings too much....certainly the AP and Coaches poll have their flaws and biases. But with Georgia's relevancy in the playoff discussion this year, I'm certainly more sensitive to the discussion of rankings this year. That's why I continue to bristle at the reference to ESPN's FPI rankings in this debate. Over the course of last weekend's games (Thurs through Sat.) I saw the side-by-side comparison graphic of the committee's Top 5 with the FPI Top 5 on no less than four different game broadcasts. This wouldn't be so troubling, if the FPI wasn't so bizarre in its rankings...having Georgia at number 5 behind one-loss Ohio State (2) and Penn State (3) last week. Out of curiosity, I just checked out the FPI rankings AFTER this weekend's games...

    1. Alabama
    2. Ohio State (still!?)
    3. Penn State (****??)
    4. Washington (huh?)
    5. Notre Dame
    6. Georgia (down one spot)

    I guess that the FPI is a model, that uses a ton of game simulations based on actual and projected results...but it seems more like the rankings of an old man living in a basement in Youngstown, Ohio. He doesn't actually follow college football, but did read the sports page over the course of a few weeks last December..... Weird.

    The bias seen here for ND, OSU, and PSU is why I believe a one loss Georgia will not make the playoff. We will have to win out to overcome the bias.

    Assuming that ND wins out which is in doubt they will be #2. Are you saying that they could justify taking OSU who has no good wins and losses to OKL and Iowa over a 1 loss UGA who lost to #1 but beat #2 even if OSU is a conf champ? PSU will have 2 losses and no good wins. I would like to watch the chairman's nose growing on national TV

    I'm saying I've seen it before with poll voters doing insane things. The buzz for Georgia is weak in the media. The playoff committee does things for competitive and non competitive reasons. Since the media will find a way to justify one of the traditional northern teams being in the playoff, the chairman will not really have to justify anything.

  • KaseyKasey Posts: 29,876 mod

    If Notre Dame and Clemson go without losing again, they are both getting in. If Wisconsin is undefeated and Big 10 champs, they are getting in. It's gonna be interesting, but they have to play these games

  • KaseyKasey Posts: 29,876 mod

    I can’t see Wisconsin going undefeated but if they are undefeated I think they will have earned a way in, but they better hope for chaos just in case

  • amjadawgsamjadawgs Posts: 1,546 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @JayDog said:

    @MinnesotaDawg said:
    I try not to get hung up on irrelevant rankings too much....certainly the AP and Coaches poll have their flaws and biases. But with Georgia's relevancy in the playoff discussion this year, I'm certainly more sensitive to the discussion of rankings this year. That's why I continue to bristle at the reference to ESPN's FPI rankings in this debate. Over the course of last weekend's games (Thurs through Sat.) I saw the side-by-side comparison graphic of the committee's Top 5 with the FPI Top 5 on no less than four different game broadcasts. This wouldn't be so troubling, if the FPI wasn't so bizarre in its rankings...having Georgia at number 5 behind one-loss Ohio State (2) and Penn State (3) last week. Out of curiosity, I just checked out the FPI rankings AFTER this weekend's games...

    1. Alabama
    2. Ohio State (still!?)
    3. Penn State (****??)
    4. Washington (huh?)
    5. Notre Dame
    6. Georgia (down one spot)

    I guess that the FPI is a model, that uses a ton of game simulations based on actual and projected results...but it seems more like the rankings of an old man living in a basement in Youngstown, Ohio. He doesn't actually follow college football, but did read the sports page over the course of a few weeks last December..... Weird.

    The bias seen here for ND, OSU, and PSU is why I believe a one loss Georgia will not make the playoff. We will have to win out to overcome the bias.

    Don’t misunderstand me, I want us to TAKE the spot in the playoffs, but should we lose to AU, UK OR GT, have one loss but still win the SECCG, we are definitely in, jmo. ESPN has invested very heavily in the SEC and don’t think for a minute that ESPN is not a “major” player in this process, whoever wins the SECCG will get in.

  • Denmen185Denmen185 Posts: 7,548 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @Lefty said:

    @Kasey said:
    If Notre Dame and Clemson go without losing again, they are both getting in. If Wisconsin is undefeated and Big 10 champs, they are getting in. It's gonna be interesting, but they have to play these games

    If Notre Dame wins out they will probably be in, the reason I say probably is because they won't go in in in front of the Dawgs if we were to lose to Bama in the SECCG. I don't believe Wisconsin gets in period.

    IF Wisc wins out their best win will be v a 3 (or 4) loss East Champ and 0 wins v top 20. Doubtful it's enough.

  • MinnesotaDawgMinnesotaDawg Posts: 552 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @amjadawgs said:

    @JayDog said:

    @MinnesotaDawg said:
    I try not to get hung up on irrelevant rankings too much....certainly the AP and Coaches poll have their flaws and biases. But with Georgia's relevancy in the playoff discussion this year, I'm certainly more sensitive to the discussion of rankings this year. That's why I continue to bristle at the reference to ESPN's FPI rankings in this debate. Over the course of last weekend's games (Thurs through Sat.) I saw the side-by-side comparison graphic of the committee's Top 5 with the FPI Top 5 on no less than four different game broadcasts. This wouldn't be so troubling, if the FPI wasn't so bizarre in its rankings...having Georgia at number 5 behind one-loss Ohio State (2) and Penn State (3) last week. Out of curiosity, I just checked out the FPI rankings AFTER this weekend's games...

    1. Alabama
    2. Ohio State (still!?)
    3. Penn State (****??)
    4. Washington (huh?)
    5. Notre Dame
    6. Georgia (down one spot)

    I guess that the FPI is a model, that uses a ton of game simulations based on actual and projected results...but it seems more like the rankings of an old man living in a basement in Youngstown, Ohio. He doesn't actually follow college football, but did read the sports page over the course of a few weeks last December..... Weird.

    The bias seen here for ND, OSU, and PSU is why I believe a one loss Georgia will not make the playoff. We will have to win out to overcome the bias.

    Don’t misunderstand me, I want us to TAKE the spot in the playoffs, but should we lose to AU, UK OR GT, have one loss but still win the SECCG, we are definitely in, jmo. ESPN has invested very heavily in the SEC and don’t think for a minute that ESPN is not a “major” player in this process, whoever wins the SECCG will get in.

    Completely agree. We win the SECC, we're in...just a matter of the seed at that point (if we already have one loss). But, if we lose the SECC game, all bets are off. No matter what is being said now, the committee will very much want avoid selecting two teams from the same conference....even if it requires a little finessing. Frankly, all they will need to say is that they put a high premium on conference championships (one of the stated criteria) when comparing similar teams....and UGA's lack of championship put them behind...____ (every other one-loss or undefeated conference champion).

  • Denmen185Denmen185 Posts: 7,548 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @MinnesotaDawg said:

    @amjadawgs said:

    @JayDog said:

    @MinnesotaDawg said:
    I try not to get hung up on irrelevant rankings too much....certainly the AP and Coaches poll have their flaws and biases. But with Georgia's relevancy in the playoff discussion this year, I'm certainly more sensitive to the discussion of rankings this year. That's why I continue to bristle at the reference to ESPN's FPI rankings in this debate. Over the course of last weekend's games (Thurs through Sat.) I saw the side-by-side comparison graphic of the committee's Top 5 with the FPI Top 5 on no less than four different game broadcasts. This wouldn't be so troubling, if the FPI wasn't so bizarre in its rankings...having Georgia at number 5 behind one-loss Ohio State (2) and Penn State (3) last week. Out of curiosity, I just checked out the FPI rankings AFTER this weekend's games...

    1. Alabama
    2. Ohio State (still!?)
    3. Penn State (****??)
    4. Washington (huh?)
    5. Notre Dame
    6. Georgia (down one spot)

    I guess that the FPI is a model, that uses a ton of game simulations based on actual and projected results...but it seems more like the rankings of an old man living in a basement in Youngstown, Ohio. He doesn't actually follow college football, but did read the sports page over the course of a few weeks last December..... Weird.

    The bias seen here for ND, OSU, and PSU is why I believe a one loss Georgia will not make the playoff. We will have to win out to overcome the bias.

    Don’t misunderstand me, I want us to TAKE the spot in the playoffs, but should we lose to AU, UK OR GT, have one loss but still win the SECCG, we are definitely in, jmo. ESPN has invested very heavily in the SEC and don’t think for a minute that ESPN is not a “major” player in this process, whoever wins the SECCG will get in.

    Completely agree. We win the SECC, we're in...just a matter of the seed at that point (if we already have one loss). But, if we lose the SECC game, all bets are off. No matter what is being said now, the committee will very much want avoid selecting two teams from the same conference....even if it requires a little finessing. Frankly, all they will need to say is that they put a high premium on conference championships (one of the stated criteria) when comparing similar teams....and UGA's lack of championship put them behind...____ (every other one-loss or undefeated conference champion).

    I totally agree with the first part and maybe you're right on the second but it IMO would make a farce of the "best 4 teams" after taking OSU over PSU last year. It would say that only these 6 teams need apply and nobody else has a fair shake.

Sign In or Register to comment.