Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
***Official Marshall Got Screwed Explanation/Vent Thread***
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
EagleX Offline
Wake me when the suck is over
*

Posts: 14,790
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 706
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: Happy Hour
Post: #361
RE: ***Official Marshall Got Screwed Explanation/Vent Thread***
ugh. we've been transported to smack. hey, gdunn! I didn't even say "fingerbang"!
12-05-2013 12:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
FIUFan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,498
Joined: Aug 2009
Reputation: 96
I Root For: FIU
Location: Coral Gables, FL
Post: #362
RE: ***Official Marshall Got Screwed Explanation/Vent Thread***
(12-05-2013 12:12 PM)EagleX Wrote:  I would direct your apparently overtaxed powers of concentration to the explanation of the never-before-used section of the tiebreaker on the conference web site. I'm not going to post it again; I'm not your web tutor.
the problem is that the expectations were wrong. what people thought was the tie breaker, and thus what they expected it to be, was not, in fact, what it turned out to be.
. . . and that's when the wailing started.
the definition of disappointment is, "the disparity between expectations and results". but that does not mean that the expectations were correct.

There you go; rational thought. I now clearly understand your point of view.

It appears to me that the arguement Marshall is making is that the conference changed the rules (or interpreted them differently) after the game on Saturday.

And from what I've seen from the conference, they have more back-tracked and skirted the issue, rather than come out and made a definative statement regarding the matter. Which shows to me a lack of confidence in their decision and that they feel they are not standing on high ground here.

Finally, to me, there are so few interesting topics to discuss sometimes, that when we do get one, it's fun to knock it around. It appeared to me, that since I didn't agree with you, that I was fair game for ridicule. So be it, but it is a waste of an interesting topic.

p.s. I guess the words step and off, when combined, gets you sent directly to jail.
12-05-2013 12:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Cnelson203 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,371
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 136
I Root For: Marshall; WVU
Location: Tampa
Post: #363
RE: ***Official Marshall Got Screwed Explanation/Vent Thread***
Hey moderators....don't take so long to move this kind of stuff to SMACK next time. A day's worth of angst I understand, but jeez....
12-05-2013 04:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BeliefBlazer Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,806
Joined: Jun 2004
Reputation: 295
I Root For: UAB
Location: Portal, GA

DonatorsDonators
Post: #364
RE: ***Official Marshall Got Screwed Explanation/Vent Thread***
(12-05-2013 04:04 PM)Cnelson203 Wrote:  Hey moderators....don't take so long to move this kind of stuff to SMACK next time. A day's worth of angst I understand, but jeez....

If you move too soon though people just start another thread in its place 03-wink
(This post was last modified: 12-05-2013 04:05 PM by BeliefBlazer.)
12-05-2013 04:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EagleX Offline
Wake me when the suck is over
*

Posts: 14,790
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 706
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: Happy Hour
Post: #365
RE: ***Official Marshall Got Screwed Explanation/Vent Thread***
fingerbang
12-05-2013 04:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fiftysix Fortytwo Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 904
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 3
I Root For: Buckets
Location:
Post: #366
RE: ***Official Marshall Got Screwed Explanation/Vent Thread***
(12-05-2013 10:11 AM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  3. If still tied, team with highest Bowl
Championship Series (BCS) ranking.



We have an official BCS score while Rice does not. How hard is that for you to understand?

BCS score is a real number between 0 and 1. Both of us have BCS scores.

BCS ranking is an integer between 1 and 25 inclusive. Neither of us has an official BCS ranking.

Based on your quoted post, the tiebreaker is BCS ranking, not BCS score. Unless you can tell which integer between 1 and 25 inclusive applies to Marshall, your analysis is irrelevant.
12-06-2013 04:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fiftysix Fortytwo Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 904
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 3
I Root For: Buckets
Location:
Post: #367
RE: ***Official Marshall Got Screwed Explanation/Vent Thread***
(12-05-2013 10:28 AM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  that the more accurate rating for predicting who will win is NOT the ELO," he said.

In case you didn't read the article...that is a quote by Jeff Sagarin himself. What he is essentially saying is that if you intend to drop the BCS ranking formula out of the equation (which they did) to rely solely on computer based rankings, that the ELO number is NOT for that purpose. According to Jeff Sagrain they should have used his score based rankings for a more accurate rating instead of the ELO. His very quote:

"The ultimate insult is they got Jerry Palm [of CBS Sportsline] - who has no connection with me or my rating system - to advise them on how to use the computer ratings," Sagarin said.

Palm is an expert who analyzes all of the BCS numbers. Sagarin is the expert on 1/6th of 1/3rd of the poll ranking. It would have been silly to talk to him unless all 6 computer polls were included.

In addition, Sagarin is providing the right answer to the wrong question., CUSA was not looking for a predictor of who would win the game. They were looking for a determination of the relative strengths of the teams in the six BCS-used computer polls.

The official BCS formula of 1/3 Coaches + 1/3 Harris + 1/3 BCS computer polls never changed. The computer polls used didn't change either.

But I guess math and reading both confound you. If they didn't, you probably could have ended up some place other than Marshall.
12-06-2013 04:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fiftysix Fortytwo Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 904
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 3
I Root For: Buckets
Location:
Post: #368
RE: ***Official Marshall Got Screwed Explanation/Vent Thread***
Quote:To reply with the same type of snark you have engaged -- gosh, reading comprehension is hard - for you, those that refuse to understand the problems with how the league office made this determination, and the league office.
Those of us who know what words mean and know how math works haven’t had any difficulty parsing through the CUSA release. Cipherin’ is hard work!
Quote:Your link - did you read page 2? It is an almost verbatim copy of the tie-breaker provisions adopted by the league in 2005 and posted on the website well before the Nov. 24 release by the league. Here is why this is important:

* the 2005 tie-breaker provision identifies the highest BCS ranking (without the parenthetical explanation "i.e. average computer ranking added in the Nov. 24 press release) as the third tie-breaker;
BCS ranking is an integer number between 1 and 25 inclusive. Teams outside the top 25 do not have a ranking. They do, however, have a raw score. Nowhere does it say that BCS raw score is in the tiebreaker, though Marshall fans have repeatly tried to misapply it. I asked you for proof that the raw scores would be considered for teams without BCS rankings (i.e. Marshall and Rice) – yet you provide none.

Quote: * the "highest BCS ranking" per the BCS ranking formula is:
Coaches' Poll Component + Harris Poll Component + Average Computer Rating Component / 3;
Actually, it’s (Coaches' Poll Component + Harris Poll Component + Average Computer Rating Component) / 3;
That formula – the essential BCS formula – did not change throughout this entire endeavor. That formula exists so that small changes in poll rankings don’t overwhelm large differences in the average computer rating, as was the case here.

Quote:* the Nov. 24 release states that the BCS ranking is the same as the average computer ranking -- it is not; when there are human votes to consider, the average computer ranking is but 1/3 of the consideration; only when there are no human votes in either poll is the average computer ranking equal to the BCS ranking (since the human poll components would be zero and zero).
Not quite the case, but you are having problems with the simple math so I won’t go into details. BCS ranking is still an integer between 1 and 25 inclusive.
Quote:What the link that you provided proves is that the league office was inept and sloppy, and was probably presumptuous. If ECU wins, under either formula (the BCS formula or the average computer ranking in isolation), the conversation is moot because ECU would have the higher BCS formula value and the higher average computer ranking value (regardless of the scale used). The league (probably) expected ECU to win, and assumed even if ECU lost to MU that MU would not pick up votes in the human polls (which was a stupidly presumptuous attitude to have). Under that scenario - MU and Rice wins, and neither have human votes in either poll, the average computer ranking becomes the deciding factor.
If neither program has a BCS ranking and no poll votes, then the average computer ranking is the only thing to go with.
It was unlikely that any cusa school was going to end up ranked in the BCS, and the difference in computer rankings suggested between the 3 schools was so large, and not likely to change much since 11 games had already been played, that when the BCS formula (1/3 of each from two polls and computer ranking) was applied that any team would be able to make up the difference.
I’ll agree that they were too brief in their explanation of all the possibilities and could have saved a considerable amount of confusion.

Quote:Except that didn't happen. Even excluding the now reverse-conspiracy theory that Doc alone voted for Marshall in the Coaches' Poll, and placing a zero value for that component, Marshall received 10 votes in the Harris Poll. That alone would have been enough to determine the highest BCS ranking according to the actual BCS formula. Instead, because certain expectations were not realized (no votes for MU and Rice), CUSA cobbled together a formula that went against its approved tie-breaker method for reasons truly known only to the league office.
Can you show me in writing where CUSA or BCS says this is a way to calculate BCS ranking? No? Didn’t think so.
My guess is that Doc did indeed vote for his team to attempt to game the system. Bailiff obviously did not. It would not surprise me if CUSA caught wind of this potential conflict of interest.
At any rate, 13 and 10 are miniscule numbers in those polls, and could result from 2 wayward voters. It is not the intent of the system to allow the opinions of 2 individual voters (or 23, about 15%) to circumvent the will of the other 85% of voters and 83% of computers.

Since neither team received a BCS ranking (again, an integer number between 1 and 25, just like all the rankings), the conference was forced to decide an alternate method.
One method they could have chosen, which would be less labor intensive, but inconsistent with the BCS ranking methodology and subject to wider corruption and general incompetence, is the raw score method that Marshall fans would have liked. Unfortunately, you get a score of (x/62 coaches consider + x/105 Harris voters considered + 0/0 polls considered). 0/0 is not a defined number and l’Hopital’s rule doesn’t help us here. This is not a suitable method for determining who is ahead per the BCS formula (again the 1/3 of each of the available datasets)
Another method would have been to use simply the computer results. Whereas this would provide the same end result, it unfairly neglects Marshall’s (relatively miniscule) contributions from the polls.
Thus, they had to use a formula which took all the features into account. Looking at the BCS raw score data, a Harris poll vote is worth 1/(105*25)= 3.81e-4 and a Coach’s poll vote is worth 1/(62*25) = 6.45e-4 points. Place in the average computer rankings, on the other hand, is worth 0.04 points. The conference could have certainly extended the computer rankings into negative numbers – those things do exist for non-junior Math majors at Marshall. Instead, they chose to scale the ranking (making each position in the poll worth only 0.008 points) which undervalued Rice’s relative strength in the polls compared to the traditional means.
Let’s look at a thought experiment for two cases:
Case 1: Team A is the 26th best team in the country (10-2, 6-2 in conference). Every computer poll and every pollster thinks they are #26. Team B is less so (6-6, 6-2 in conference). Every computer poll has them ranked 100, because they have some losses to some really bad teams. One voter decided to have pity on them (or as a joke, or because he is an alone) ranks them #25.
Using the raw score method, that .000381 points from the raw score would trump everything, and team B, although far less deserving would host.

Case 2: Teams A and B are really close in the computer polls, separated by 0.5 standing place (B ahead of A) when averaged out, but neither value being in the top 25. Team A has, however, been far more impressive in their wins, and gotten dozens of poll votes, but not enough to crack the top 25. The purely computer poll method would neglect this, and a less deserving team B would host.

The CUSA method of applying the BCS rankings methodology would get the right answer in both cases. Unfortunately, in this case, applying an appropriate methodology disadvantaged Hillbilly U while rewarding Egghead U, hence the outrage.
In short, this entire thread can be summed up by the following three statements:
(1) Marshall fans are upset because they lack reading comprehension skills
(2) Marshall fans are upset because they lack basic math skills
(3) Marshall fans will believe anything to be true, as long as it is what they want to hear
12-06-2013 10:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
rileylives Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,703
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 814
I Root For: Marshall
Location:
Post: #369
RE: ***Official Marshall Got Screwed Explanation/Vent Thread***
Bumping this thread for those ready to be butthurt over the 2020 CUSA championship scenario.

This happened in 2010...a decade later, CUSA about to have one more program with the "CUSA screwed us" merit badge (boy scout reference).
(This post was last modified: 11-28-2020 09:06 PM by rileylives.)
11-28-2020 09:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 58,534
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 854
I Root For: Rice
Location: DFW Metroplex

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #370
RE: ***Official Marshall Got Screwed Explanation/Vent Thread***
(11-28-2020 09:04 PM)rileylives Wrote:  Bumping this thread for those ready to be butthurt over the 2020 CUSA championship scenario.

This happened in 2010...a decade later, CUSA about to have one more program with the "CUSA screwed us" merit badge (boy scout reference).

I thought y’all got that merit badge in 2013.
11-29-2020 11:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
rileylives Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,703
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 814
I Root For: Marshall
Location:
Post: #371
RE: ***Official Marshall Got Screwed Explanation/Vent Thread***
(11-29-2020 11:03 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(11-28-2020 09:04 PM)rileylives Wrote:  Bumping this thread for those ready to be butthurt over the 2020 CUSA championship scenario.

This happened in 2010...a decade later, CUSA about to have one more program with the "CUSA screwed us" merit badge (boy scout reference).

I thought y’all got that merit badge in 2013.

You're right, I don't know why I thought that was in 2010.
11-29-2020 03:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 58,534
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 854
I Root For: Rice
Location: DFW Metroplex

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #372
RE: ***Official Marshall Got Screwed Explanation/Vent Thread***
(11-29-2020 03:52 PM)rileylives Wrote:  
(11-29-2020 11:03 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(11-28-2020 09:04 PM)rileylives Wrote:  Bumping this thread for those ready to be butthurt over the 2020 CUSA championship scenario.

This happened in 2010...a decade later, CUSA about to have one more program with the "CUSA screwed us" merit badge (boy scout reference).

I thought y’all got that merit badge in 2013.

You're right, I don't know why I thought that was in 2010.

One more and you can be an Eagle Scout (NOT a Golden Eagle Scout)
11-29-2020 05:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.