|
|
Post by lawarrior15 on Apr 13, 2016 6:59:52 GMT -6
Somebody needs to explain to why why anyone would think that this new formula is a good. I agree that there needed to be something to up the importance of district games but other than that, I really liked the current system
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2016 8:00:49 GMT -6
Somebody needs to explain to why why anyone would think that this new formula is a good. I agree that there needed to be something to up the importance of district games but other than that, I really liked the current system Totally agree, I hate the fact that it takes away the play up bonus as well. No reason for small schools to play big boys anymore. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2016 8:01:40 GMT -6
Also seems like it got through the vote without any discussion. Maybe someone will fix it before next year.
|
|
|
|
Post by sportschaser on Apr 13, 2016 9:42:36 GMT -6
2017 power rankings will certainly change the order and significantly (in some cases) compared to the current power ranking system.
I can't quite figure out how it refines and betters the current system to get the best teams on top. It's easy to pick out the best and worst.. ... but it's those ranked 6 through 24 that seem to get lost in numbers who may or may not be better than each other based upon new power rankings.
A focus on 4A as an example....looking at power rankings comparing this year to next year.....
How is Lagrange ranked at #26 this year to #6 next year in ranking with an 8-8 record, 6-0 district and opponents winning % at .528? They appear to be above so many teams that are better on the field than them. 8-8 record against an average schedule. So.... Is is the undefeated district numbers that skew the jump?
#8 Pearl River has an overall better record at 13-5, 6-1 district and opponents winning % at .478 but would be behind Lagrange.
#27 Minden is similar to Lagrange.... 10-9 overall, 4-0 district....opponents win% .483..........but would only be #13 in new rankings. So district winning % didn't jump them as high.
#12 South Terrebonne drops to #27 in 2017 power ranking.....13-6 overall, 4-2 in district with .434 opponents winning %.
It does appear that district winning % will be the major factor in the new ranking system to boost teams significantly.... and that is the new significant factor .... but I'm still not satisfied that it makes me understand better what is going on with the significant difference in teams ranking between the 2016 and 2017 ranking systems.
The current system is skewed based upon wins no matter the quality of who you beat (weak teams / lower classification teams are high value even though weak and lower class).....but this generally takes care of itself in long haul of a season.
As such, Grant and Desoto (while both being fairly strong but not top 10) have proved that winning against a cream puff schedule, skews the power rankings by beating weaker teams. They were both in the top 5 this year for a while. Both of these 4A schools should play for the class B championship with their cream puff wins. But...historically and again this year, that takes care of itself when district play starts, because you are forced to play teams on your level, and opponents wins made up for the quality of your schedule. The new formula does account for opponents win % so that is still in play but not sure it equates what the 2017 formula is doing in that aspect.
All in all... it all shakes out in playoffs...... if you are good you win.....
So..... does the new system fix the old.... or just create a different way to skew a power ranking?
|
|
|
|
Post by sportschaser on Apr 13, 2016 12:43:35 GMT -6
If the 2017 formula is .... "Winning percentage x 3 , plus opponent winning percentage x 9, plus district winning percentage x 9"
That doesn't add up to what is shown for the 2017 formula posted on the power rankings. I ran a few teams and it's showing up lower than the math calculates. Why is it showing up different?
|
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Apr 13, 2016 15:18:27 GMT -6
New formula is Win Pct x 3, plus Dist Win pct x 2, plus Opp Win pct x 9.
|
|
|
|
Post by sportschaser on Apr 13, 2016 15:55:05 GMT -6
Thanks Brad..... interesting formula.
High value for tougher scheduled teams.... appreciated. Still doesn't take into account what classification the opponents play. So a 4A or 5A school can play a good class B or C school and get high value. But the current formula didn't account for that either.... so really no change in that aspect.
All in all.... the District win percentage isn't a huge factor but does make a difference. It plays a part that never was valued. Good addition.
I would think this would need a full season of games to get a good grasp of how the numbers would compare. (Or run an old season) With district schedules still games left to play, there are big district games to come that will affect the district winning percentage.
All in all refer back up to the post.......there are some teams that jump high and some that drop significantly based on the new formula...... not alot but it's going to make a difference for a few teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by chalmetteowl on Apr 13, 2016 19:09:51 GMT -6
New formula is Win Pct x 3, plus Dist Win pct x 2, plus Opp Win pct x 9. when did they change that?? check with the LHSAA |
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Apr 14, 2016 6:26:32 GMT -6
I got that from the Author of the change. Apparently the one on the LHSAA site is incorrect.
|
|
