Miami Ranked #27

[CaneDog66]

ESPN Power Index is an embarrassment and should be removed. Basing the index on preseason assumptions that everyone knows are historically wrong most of the time tells you all you need to know about the validity of the rankings.

It’s done to justify the lofty rankings the $EC and B10 get to start the race before the season begins.

 

[Empirical Cane]

What are our thoughts on the ranking of the offense? Number 4, do we feel that is fair?

Fool's gold until at least after Louie Louie.

but need eye balls and click bait right?

 

[NJshoreCane]

What are our thoughts on the ranking of the offense? Number 4, do we feel that is fair?

Ask in November.

 

[Glow]

Before the “it’s predictive, you just don’t understand metrics” crowd jumps in, I’m very aware.

But at some point we need to stop giving credence to predictive metrics that say a team like Alabama is 11 points better on a neutral field than Miami.

One mistake people make is treating these models seriously before week 6 or 7, all of them admit they don't have enough enough data points before midseason and so their formulas are juiced with past results, which is bad but still better for gambling than the unbiased rankings that tell you stuff like Kansas is top 5 in week 2.

 

[bacane]

In SP+.

Remember, this is an unbiased review of the performance data of each sector of the game, that’s it.

Dan Lanning’s Oregon Ducks are number 1. Our defense is holding us back in this regard, ranking 62nd.

The SP+ is not suggesting that we are not a better team than those above us, just that we are not as efficient or “successful” as some others. I think we’d agree this rating aligns with what we’ve seen on the field through two games.

View attachment 334817

This stuff is goofy & irrelevant,

 

[GirthQuake]

That’s great can Si+ do the analytics of notre dame getting their **** pushed in from the A gap.

 

[JHallCanes]

Has anyone ever seen Rok and Inday in the same room?

 

[Groz73Cane]

If I said what I felt you would ban me.

It’s like I’ve always told you,.. just tell the truth, don’t lie to me Son.

 

[Glow]

This stuff is goofy & irrelevant,

It's not irrelevant the playoff committee looks at this stuff which is why the ACC people made a big deal when FPI dropped some ACC teams down without games being played.

 

[Novacane32000]

One mistake people make is treating these models seriously before week 6 or 7, all of them admit they don't have enough enough data points before midseason and so their formulas are juiced with past results, which is bad but still better for gambling than the unbiased rankings that tell you stuff like Kansas is top 5 in week 2.

Then they should start posting them after week 6 or 7

 

[Glow]

Then they should start posting them after week 6 or 7

They could but then they would lose a month and a half of clicks, engagement, and people complaining about the rankings.

 

[Phydeaux]

In SP+.

Remember, this is an unbiased review of the performance data of each sector of the game, that’s it.

Dan Lanning’s Oregon Ducks are number 1. Our defense is holding us back in this regard, ranking 62nd.

The SP+ is not suggesting that we are not a better team than those above us, just that we are not as efficient or “successful” as some others. I think we’d agree this rating aligns with what we’ve seen on the field through two games.

View attachment 334817

11 sec teams there.
Preseason polls are poison

 

[BS85]

"I think we’d agree this rating aligns with what we’ve seen on the field through two games."

CIS response:

 

[AtrainCane]

In SP+.

Remember, this is an unbiased review of the performance data of each sector of the game, that’s it.

Dan Lanning’s Oregon Ducks are number 1. Our defense is holding us back in this regard, ranking 62nd.

The SP+ is not suggesting that we are not a better team than those above us, just that we are not as efficient or “successful” as some others. I think we’d agree this rating aligns with what we’ve seen on the field through two games.

View attachment 334817

 

[AtrainCane]

 

[TwentySix]

One mistake people make is treating these models seriously before week 6 or 7, all of them admit they don't have enough enough data points before midseason and so their formulas are juiced with past results, which is bad but still better for gambling than the unbiased rankings that tell you stuff like Kansas is top 5 in week 2.

I mean I agree with you but people do treat them seriously and it sets narratives in a sport that is almost entirely determined subjectively.

 

[ajkreider]

USF beating 2 ranked teams - one by 27 points and the other was on the road against the #24 team - is somehow not on this list.

The Gates must have been very efficient at losing

 

[bacane]

It's not irrelevant the playoff committee looks at this stuff which is why the ACC people made a big deal when FPI dropped some ACC teams down without games being played.

Completely irrelevant after two weeks.

 

[Brad_Wellson]

Before the “it’s predictive, you just don’t understand metrics” crowd jumps in, I’m very aware.

But you don't seem to be.

These posts are hilarious. Guys pretending to know just so they can whine and prove that they don't know.

 

[Brad_Wellson]

USF beating 2 ranked teams - one by 27 points and the other was on the road against the #24 team - is somehow not on this list.

The Gates must have been very efficient at losing

Because if you actually watched the games, or looked at the metrics, neither were that impressive.

USF is a good G5 team. They may be the highest ranked G5 champion. But they're not nearly as good as their 2-0 record, just looking at results, would indicate.