NEW 02 FBR 9/26 + Division breakdown

Before we get started - I want to mention that I am no longer following *every* academy league in north texas.
I will only be posting and calculating ranks for teams playing in the following:
TGPL, PTSAL, EAL, SDL, ASA.

With that out of the way.... on the the good stuff.

First thought I would share the breakdown between divisions inside FBR. This is key to ensuring any of the weighted ranking methods are accurate. (Last week my conference distribution was in a huge mess... as you can see now this is fixed)

Tier 1 teams are 25-1 versus Tier 2 teams. (As well as 5-0 against Tier3 and 1-0 against Tier 4)

Tier 2 teams are 1-25 versus Tier 1 teams. 12-2-4 against tier 3 and 15-0-3 against tear 4.

Tier 3 teams are 6 - 0 against tier 4 teams.

And as expected.... tier 4 teams are winless ( 0-22-3) against all other teams in tiers 1-2-3.




And now the rankings...

Calling all pollsters!

Get your top-20 posted before midnight Wednesday night and I will calculate the BCS rankings this week.

As a reminder BCS is ----> %50 FBR + %50 Consolidated Human Polls

I will post a new BCS ranking Thursday night if we have enough participants.

Thanks 02dad for your time on this.

All pollsters remember when your doing your rankings, "If your not first your last".

Shake and bake! Great work 02Dad, but I'm not very smart this late. I'm trying to follow your tier/division system so I'll ask: are the 35 teams you list all Tier 1, or can tell me where in your rankings you break out tier 1 from 2, 2 from 3, ...

Thanks again.

raider wrote:Shake and bake! Great work 02Dad, but I'm not very smart this late. I'm trying to follow your tier/division system so I'll ask: are the 35 teams you list all Tier 1, or can tell me where in your rankings you break out tier 1 from 2, 2 from 3, ...

Thanks again.

looks like about every 9 teams is the break out for tiers, But just a guess

02 Dad,

Could you list your criteria, all-in-all, on how you rank?
I realize you have a program that does it all, but can you share how you weight your rankings.... strength of schedules, opponents records, etc, etc.

I'm fascinated by how it works, and I'm sure there are others who are curious as to what all is included in your measurable statistics.

thanks.

The current tier breakdown is as follows:

5 tier 1 teams
17 tier 2 teams
8 tier 3 teams
5 tier 4 tems


My goal is to have roughly an 80/20 rule. The cummulative record (using a 3-0-1 point system for Win-Loss-Draw) of any tier should be approx 80% against the next tier and 90% against 2 tiers below them.

For the current week the breakdown is as follows:

Tier 1:
25-1-0 vs Tier 2 ~ (25*3)+(0*0)+(1*1)/(26*3) = 76/78 = 97%
5-0-0 vs Tier 3 ~ (5*3)+(0*0)+(0*1)/(5*3) = 15/15 = 100%
1-0-0 vs Tier 4 ~ (1*3)+(0*0)+(0*1)/(1*3) = 3/3 = 100%

Tier 2:
12-2-4 vs Tier 3 ~ (12*3)+(2*0)+(4*1)/(18*3) = 40/54 = 74%
15-0-3 vs Tier 4 ~ (15*3)+(0*0)+(3*1)/(18*3) = 48/54 = 89%

Tier 3:
6-0-0 vs Tier 4 ~ (6*3)+(0*0)+(0*1)/(6*3) = 18/18 = 100%


For the question about specific calculations... The current FBR is calculated on the following criteria:


(small) Margin of Victory
(small) Points Scored
(small) Points Allowed
(large) Weighted Wins
(large) Strength of Schedule
(small) Opponents Record
(small) Opponents' Opponents' Record


The small/large is an estimate into how much this criteria counts in the total/final ranking.

Did you eliminate certain games from consideration on the updated FBR ranking? It looks like the W-L records changed significantly from the last several rankings.

Sent to the Stands wrote:Did you eliminate certain games from consideration on the updated FBR ranking? It looks like the W-L records changed significantly from the last several rankings.

Yes... All games played prior to June 1 were dropped from consideration last week.

It looks like you also removed results from Labor Day tourney play or was that not previously included? I will PM you with my specific concern. Thanks.

Sent to the Stands wrote:It looks like you also removed results from Labor Day tourney play or was that not previously included? I will PM you with my specific concern. Thanks.

ditto