Jan 20 - FBR - Updated...

Polardad02 wrote:

EyesWideOpen wrote:

soccernovice40 wrote:

EyesWideOpen wrote:Roid, I get your point. So why would Moreno sign up for the silver bracket in the upcoming tournament?

Do you know that they requested silver, or are you assuming? Do teams always have control over that? Not a rhetorical question...I am genuinely asking?

Soccer novice, I was assuming. Perhaps it is an FC Dallas tournament so they placed Renfro in gold above Moreno?

Moreno was originally in Bronze, so I'm assuming they requested to be removed. just assuming, dont know true story.

Seriously...maybe the new name was the issue and they were put in the wrong place. Who knows??? So many teams in NTX!

1. DT Higg
2. FCD Grubb
3. Solar Webb
4. DT South
5. DT Moreno
6. Solar Dynamo
7. Fever
8. Sting
9. Feet
10. Liverpool Rangel
11. FCD Renfro
12. Polaris

I totally agree with suburbansoccerdad and gold digger. Renfro is just a tad too high, and drop Waco Lady Blast to 15- A team that tends to hide in junk tournaments rather than challenging themselves in decent ones doesn't belong in the top 12. I'm sure I'll take some heat for that, but it's ridiculous who they play in tournaments.

EyesWideOpen wrote:Roid, I get your point. So why would Moreno sign up for the silver bracket in the upcoming tournament?

My understanding is that the team wanted to play in the gold bracket However, I am sure they are very greatful being pulled out of the bronze braket and into the silver bracket. Maybe if someone wanted to switch with them they could contact the coach or manager.

Soccerdad02 wrote:

EyesWideOpen wrote:Roid, I get your point. So why would Moreno sign up for the silver bracket in the upcoming tournament?

My understanding is that the team wanted to play in the gold bracket However, I am sure they are very greatful being pulled out of the bronze braket and into the silver bracket. Maybe if someone wanted to switch with them they could contact the coach or manager.

This is simple. If Moreno played with her core group + 6 genuine tryer-outers as guests, Silver bracket is a good place to be. They might win, but 6 unproven girls makes it a good fight. Moreno wants the win for recruiting I'm sure. If Moreno plays with her core group + 6 Higgenterminators, then the team should be in Gold. If you are the tourney director, these details about the volume and quality of the guesting are not clear, so you place Moreno in Silver. Simple.

javajake wrote:

Soccerdad02 wrote:

EyesWideOpen wrote:Roid, I get your point. So why would Moreno sign up for the silver bracket in the upcoming tournament?

My understanding is that the team wanted to play in the gold bracket However, I am sure they are very greatful being pulled out of the bronze braket and into the silver bracket. Maybe if someone wanted to switch with them they could contact the coach or manager.

This is simple. If Moreno played with her core group + 6 genuine tryer-outers as guests, Silver bracket is a good place to be. They might win, but 6 unproven girls makes it a good fight. Moreno wants the win for recruiting I'm sure. If Moreno plays with her core group + 6 Higgenterminators, then the team should be in Gold. If you are the tourney director, these details about the volume and quality of the guesting are not clear, so you place Moreno in Silver. Simple.

Nice word!

Never dealt with a TD and I have no clue how seeding/brackets etc are determined. Hoping for a fun weekend and good weather

It's a FCD tournament so Renfro has the opportunity to test itself in the top bracket. Unfortunately, DT-Moreno is the odd team out when Renfro decides to enter the gold bracket.

I am going to put together a team of brand new rec players and go play all the top teams so we can be ranked in the top 20 even though we will never win a single game. I understand this is all a computerized program and the info is only input and result are spit back out, but if you don't have a single win to your name you should not be in the top 20, 25, 30...top whatever until you go beat SOMEBODY...ANYBODY...

GirlsSoccerDad wrote:I am going to put together a team of brand new rec players and go play all the top teams so we can be ranked in the top 20 even though we will never win a single game. I understand this is all a computerized program and the info is only input and result are spit back out, but if you don't have a single win to your name you should not be in the top 20, 25, 30...top whatever until you go beat SOMEBODY...ANYBODY...

Brilliant!

I have been exploring how valid / how incorrect this FBR thing is and isn't -- see the thread on 11/25 FBR if you have not seen it. The one aspect, so obvious now, that really torqued people was that teams that sported no wins and X losses could be ranked ahead of teams with 12 wins, 2 losses albeit against weak competition. If you think about it, 12 wins against weak competition does not mean that a team can't beat stronger teams -- we just don't know -- but a team with all losses is even more a mystery.

02Dad -- why not recalculate but NOT RANK teams with less than 3 wins because the truth is we don't have a clue where a team with no wins or only one win should be in the list? Gophers, you have the most experience -- does this make sense to you? Would a team with a bunch of draws but no wins have to be an exception?

I am by no means a soccer expert, so I could be completely wrong; however, I can say that looking at the games I've watched my DD's team play--and lose and tie--over the past Fall season, it appears to me that her team is "ranked" for the best possible purposes at just about the right spot, if not a little low, in the top 20. And they literally have not won a single game since I can remember. But they've tied the teams that the FBR program and the "human" polls have ranked in the top ten and most of their losses have not been blow outs--other than those to the top 3 to 5. If my DD's team parents panicked about the rankings on here, they'd miss out on the reason we've stuck through a losing season: great coaching focused on great soccer. I'll be the first to admit that panic has occasionally set in as I'm a tad on the competitive side, but patience in youth soccer in my opinion is key--once you find that good fit for your kid. Yes, take some time to look around, and no, don't stay when it truly isn't working. But by all means pay attention to how your kid is developing, who they play with and against and who is coaching--then stick out the tough spots.

that's a good post. you don't sound insane.

deepthoughts wrote:

GirlsSoccerDad wrote:I am going to put together a team of brand new rec players and go play all the top teams so we can be ranked in the top 20 even though we will never win a single game. I understand this is all a computerized program and the info is only input and result are spit back out, but if you don't have a single win to your name you should not be in the top 20, 25, 30...top whatever until you go beat SOMEBODY...ANYBODY...

Brilliant!

I have been exploring how valid / how incorrect this FBR thing is and isn't -- see the thread on 11/25 FBR if you have not seen it. The one aspect, so obvious now, that really torqued people was that teams that sported no wins and X losses could be ranked ahead of teams with 12 wins, 2 losses albeit against weak competition. If you think about it, 12 wins against weak competition does not mean that a team can't beat stronger teams -- we just don't know -- but a team with all losses is even more a mystery.

02Dad -- why not recalculate but NOT RANK teams with less than 3 wins because the truth is we don't have a clue where a team with no wins or only one win should be in the list? Gophers, you have the most experience -- does this make sense to you? Would a team with a bunch of draws but no wins have to be an exception?

02Dad, why not figure the rankings by teams that have girls over a certain height vs under a certain height, after all there COULD be some differences in how the girls are able to play against each other so it would only be fair to add something in to the ranking program to account for that. Or how about getting a list from all the coaches and base the rankings on what the average length of time a girl has been playing academy soccer. Or how about add into the program the amount of time a poster for a certain team posts on this forum because after all they should be ranked higher because they must know more than everyone else,thus their team is more soccer smart, right?

Or 02dad, maybe you will just get tired of all these requests, questions (when things have been explained over and over again)and just plain arguments about why FBR's are bad or not accurate and perhaps you will just hibernate like you have done for the last couple of months or more. Frankly, I am glad to read the FBR's and have them back up. I read them, I may disagree with them but I wont ask you to go back to the drawing board and see if you can figure things out the way I want them because I think it would be smarter. No keep things the way it is and please keep doing the FBR's. I am quite sure most people are very tired of some questioning the system, of which you paid for and take time to do. (I know, I know, some will get mad at me and say that they are just curious and just asking questions; Please buy the program and answer your own questions!)

Sorry it is nothing to me whether 02Dad responds to the requests, I just get tired of seeing them over and over and quite frankly find them kind of silly, some of you really have too much time on your hands to sit around and think about how the FBR's could be better. Maybe you should volunteer at a local soccer association or even a club. Just sayin!

deepthoughts wrote:

GirlsSoccerDad wrote:I am going to put together a team of brand new rec players and go play all the top teams so we can be ranked in the top 20 even though we will never win a single game. I understand this is all a computerized program and the info is only input and result are spit back out, but if you don't have a single win to your name you should not be in the top 20, 25, 30...top whatever until you go beat SOMEBODY...ANYBODY...

Brilliant!

I have been exploring how valid / how incorrect this FBR thing is and isn't -- see the thread on 11/25 FBR if you have not seen it. The one aspect, so obvious now, that really torqued people was that teams that sported no wins and X losses could be ranked ahead of teams with 12 wins, 2 losses albeit against weak competition. If you think about it, 12 wins against weak competition does not mean that a team can't beat stronger teams -- we just don't know -- but a team with all losses is even more a mystery.

02Dad -- why not recalculate but NOT RANK teams with less than 3 wins because the truth is we don't have a clue where a team with no wins or only one win should be in the list? Gophers, you have the most experience -- does this make sense to you? Would a team with a bunch of draws but no wins have to be an exception?

At the risk of going into a long, drawn out, diatribe of geekdom...

As long as 02Dad is keeping up with the ranking tiers properly in FBR - and by all accounts he is - then FBR should be doing a good job with the relative weightings, even for teams that have very few wins against stronger opponents compared to teams with a large # of wins against weaker opponents.

Examples from the '01's...

After the conclusion of the Spring League season last April:

D'Feeters '01 - 2-7-6 FBR Ranked 8-10 all Spring. Qualified LH D1. 8th place in current LH standings.
Lady Aztecs '01 - 3-7-2 FBR Ranked 17-23 all Spring. Qualified LH D1. 19th place in current LH standings.
DT North '01 - 17-2-2 (played weaker competition all Spring) FBR Ranked 16-19 all Spring. Qualified D1 LH. 17th place in current LH standings.
TFC Blue '01 - 1-10 FBR Ranked 22-28 all Spring. Qualified LH D3. 24th place in current LH standings.

The weighted W-L record, Strength of Schedule, and Margin of Victory work to balance each other out. You would be surprised at how relatively accurate and telling the average margin of victory is when you have a large enough sample of games.

FBR isn't perfect, but it's pretty darn good, and no one has been able to come up with a system that is significantly better.

If someone is getting bent out of shape over a team being ranked a few spots too high, or a few spots too low, then they are unfortunately missing the point of the rankings, and no matter what I say, or how much data I puke out, I'm probably not going to change their mind about it.

So, as far as the FBR Rankings go...

Like 'em? GREAT! Enjoy them!
Hate 'em? GREAT! Ignore them!

So, as far as the FBR Rankings go...

Like 'em? GREAT! Enjoy them!
Hate 'em? GREAT! Ignore them!

Now that IS brilliant, Gophers!! Thank you! I am getting tired of seeing you try to explain this over and over again too, but thank you for trying. :-)

bobmac15 wrote:that's a good post. you don't sound insane.

Thanks. It comes and goes.

02Dad wrote:Updated to include games from:

2011 Hurst Turkey Shoot
TFC Blue Cup
ASA College Showcase
PTCL League Games

Also - I have removed all game results from last June and July.

What does the POINTS column mean? I noticed that the points are perfectly in order on this FBR 99,98,97,96 etc, which makes it look like it won't take a lot of POINTS for number 9 to over take number 5. Yet, in the previous FBR https://www.txsoccer.net/t9101-updated-fbr-11-25-11 there were gaps in the points column. Here is another older FBR with what appears to be accurate POINTS all the way down, never a numerical perfect sequence https://www.txsoccer.net/t6522-02-girls-fbr-rankings-5-23-11 Interesting to see how teams have moved by the way.

I'm trying to understand what that means?

We need some human polls-no way Grubb should be 4th . I'm thinking 1st

deepthoughts wrote:

GirlsSoccerDad wrote:I am going to put together a team of brand new rec players and go play all the top teams so we can be ranked in the top 20 even though we will never win a single game. I understand this is all a computerized program and the info is only input and result are spit back out, but if you don't have a single win to your name you should not be in the top 20, 25, 30...top whatever until you go beat SOMEBODY...ANYBODY...

Brilliant!

I have been exploring how valid / how incorrect this FBR thing is and isn't -- see the thread on 11/25 FBR if you have not seen it. The one aspect, so obvious now, that really torqued people was that teams that sported no wins and X losses could be ranked ahead of teams with 12 wins, 2 losses albeit against weak competition. If you think about it, 12 wins against weak competition does not mean that a team can't beat stronger teams -- we just don't know -- but a team with all losses is even more a mystery.

02Dad -- why not recalculate but NOT RANK teams with less than 3 wins because the truth is we don't have a clue where a team with no wins or only one win should be in the list? Gophers, you have the most experience -- does this make sense to you? Would a team with a bunch of draws but no wins have to be an exception?

Why not stop complaining to 02Dad so much? 02Dad spends his time and effort to look up all of the information, money to buy the software, and then people want to come on here post about how terrible, inaccurate, absurd, ridiculous the FBR computer ranking is. From what I can see, in groups of 3-5 teams, the FBR is pretty accurate as a whole, which 02Dad and BWGophers have said time and time again. This is the same software and process the 01's used pretty accurately. It is tiresome to listen to people COMPLAIN so much about rankings of 9-10 year old soccer teams? If you don't like the FBR, don't open the thread and read it? This is not the college football BCS worth millions of $$, just for fun for crazy soccer parents.

If you are so upset, put out some effort beyond typing up complaints on this forum, do something to make an improvement, stop standing around and complaining. Buy your own software and publish your own rankings. Publish your own "human" opinion poll each week, and 02Dad can average it with the FBR for a "BCS" type overall ranking, like he did in the fall, and like the 01's did last year.

02Dad - thank you for the FBR poll, please continue to publish for the majority that can read it, take in the information with a grain of salt, and move on to the next thing in our busy day.

soccerdad19 wrote:

deepthoughts wrote:

GirlsSoccerDad wrote:I am going to put together a team of brand new rec players and go play all the top teams so we can be ranked in the top 20 even though we will never win a single game. I understand this is all a computerized program and the info is only input and result are spit back out, but if you don't have a single win to your name you should not be in the top 20, 25, 30...top whatever until you go beat SOMEBODY...ANYBODY...

Brilliant!

I have been exploring how valid / how incorrect this FBR thing is and isn't -- see the thread on 11/25 FBR if you have not seen it. The one aspect, so obvious now, that really torqued people was that teams that sported no wins and X losses could be ranked ahead of teams with 12 wins, 2 losses albeit against weak competition. If you think about it, 12 wins against weak competition does not mean that a team can't beat stronger teams -- we just don't know -- but a team with all losses is even more a mystery.

02Dad -- why not recalculate but NOT RANK teams with less than 3 wins because the truth is we don't have a clue where a team with no wins or only one win should be in the list? Gophers, you have the most experience -- does this make sense to you? Would a team with a bunch of draws but no wins have to be an exception?

Why not stop complaining to 02Dad so much? 02Dad spends his time and effort to look up all of the information, money to buy the software, and then people want to come on here post about how terrible, inaccurate, absurd, ridiculous the FBR computer ranking is. From what I can see, in groups of 3-5 teams, the FBR is pretty accurate as a whole, which 02Dad and BWGophers have said time and time again. This is the same software and process the 01's used pretty accurately. It is tiresome to listen to people COMPLAIN so much about rankings of 9-10 year old soccer teams? If you don't like the FBR, don't open the thread and read it? This is not the college football BCS worth millions of $$, just for fun for crazy soccer parents.

If you are so upset, put out some effort beyond typing up complaints on this forum, do something to make an improvement, stop standing around and complaining. Buy your own software and publish your own rankings. Publish your own "human" opinion poll each week, and 02Dad can average it with the FBR for a "BCS" type overall ranking, like he did in the fall, and like the 01's did last year.

02Dad - thank you for the FBR poll, please continue to publish for the majority that can read it, take in the information with a grain of salt, and move on to the next thing in our busy day.

soccerdad19 wrote:

deepthoughts wrote:

GirlsSoccerDad wrote:I am going to put together a team of brand new rec players and go play all the top teams so we can be ranked in the top 20 even though we will never win a single game. I understand this is all a computerized program and the info is only input and result are spit back out, but if you don't have a single win to your name you should not be in the top 20, 25, 30...top whatever until you go beat SOMEBODY...ANYBODY...

Brilliant!

I have been exploring how valid / how incorrect this FBR thing is and isn't -- see the thread on 11/25 FBR if you have not seen it. The one aspect, so obvious now, that really torqued people was that teams that sported no wins and X losses could be ranked ahead of teams with 12 wins, 2 losses albeit against weak competition. If you think about it, 12 wins against weak competition does not mean that a team can't beat stronger teams -- we just don't know -- but a team with all losses is even more a mystery.

02Dad -- why not recalculate but NOT RANK teams with less than 3 wins because the truth is we don't have a clue where a team with no wins or only one win should be in the list? Gophers, you have the most experience -- does this make sense to you? Would a team with a bunch of draws but no wins have to be an exception?

Why not stop complaining to 02Dad so much? 02Dad spends his time and effort to look up all of the information, money to buy the software, and then people want to come on here post about how terrible, inaccurate, absurd, ridiculous the FBR computer ranking is. From what I can see, in groups of 3-5 teams, the FBR is pretty accurate as a whole, which 02Dad and BWGophers have said time and time again. This is the same software and process the 01's used pretty accurately. It is tiresome to listen to people COMPLAIN so much about rankings of 9-10 year old soccer teams? If you don't like the FBR, don't open the thread and read it? This is not the college football BCS worth millions of $$, just for fun for crazy soccer parents.

If you are so upset, put out some effort beyond typing up complaints on this forum, do something to make an improvement, stop standing around and complaining. Buy your own software and publish your own rankings. Publish your own "human" opinion poll each week, and 02Dad can average it with the FBR for a "BCS" type overall ranking, like he did in the fall, and like the 01's did last year.

02Dad - thank you for the FBR poll, please continue to publish for the majority that can read it, take in the information with a grain of salt, and move on to the next thing in our busy day.

soccerdad19 wrote:

deepthoughts wrote:

GirlsSoccerDad wrote:I am going to put together a team of brand new rec players and go play all the top teams so we can be ranked in the top 20 even though we will never win a single game. I understand this is all a computerized program and the info is only input and result are spit back out, but if you don't have a single win to your name you should not be in the top 20, 25, 30...top whatever until you go beat SOMEBODY...ANYBODY...

Brilliant!

I have been exploring how valid / how incorrect this FBR thing is and isn't -- see the thread on 11/25 FBR if you have not seen it. The one aspect, so obvious now, that really torqued people was that teams that sported no wins and X losses could be ranked ahead of teams with 12 wins, 2 losses albeit against weak competition. If you think about it, 12 wins against weak competition does not mean that a team can't beat stronger teams -- we just don't know -- but a team with all losses is even more a mystery.

02Dad -- why not recalculate but NOT RANK teams with less than 3 wins because the truth is we don't have a clue where a team with no wins or only one win should be in the list? Gophers, you have the most experience -- does this make sense to you? Would a team with a bunch of draws but no wins have to be an exception?

Why not stop complaining to 02Dad so much? 02Dad spends his time and effort to look up all of the information, money to buy the software, and then people want to come on here post about how terrible, inaccurate, absurd, ridiculous the FBR computer ranking is. From what I can see, in groups of 3-5 teams, the FBR is pretty accurate as a whole, which 02Dad and BWGophers have said time and time again. This is the same software and process the 01's used pretty accurately. It is tiresome to listen to people COMPLAIN so much about rankings of 9-10 year old soccer teams? If you don't like the FBR, don't open the thread and read it? This is not the college football BCS worth millions of $$, just for fun for crazy soccer parents.

If you are so upset, put out some effort beyond typing up complaints on this forum, do something to make an improvement, stop standing around and complaining. Buy your own software and publish your own rankings. Publish your own "human" opinion poll each week, and 02Dad can average it with the FBR for a "BCS" type overall ranking, like he did in the fall, and like the 01's did last year.

02Dad - thank you for the FBR poll, please continue to publish for the majority that can read it, take in the information with a grain of salt, and move on to the next thing in our busy day.

I made an observation, then asked a couple of questions. I am puzzled as to how anything I said, even re-reading it twice, turned into being perceived as complaints. I can't say I've every been upset about soccer or rankings. I actually did hope to make things a bit better. It is moments like this that make one realize time on the forums is not time well spent.

deepthoughts wrote:

soccerdad19 wrote:

deepthoughts wrote:

GirlsSoccerDad wrote:I am going to put together a team of brand new rec players and go play all the top teams so we can be ranked in the top 20 even though we will never win a single game. I understand this is all a computerized program and the info is only input and result are spit back out, but if you don't have a single win to your name you should not be in the top 20, 25, 30...top whatever until you go beat SOMEBODY...ANYBODY...

Brilliant!

I have been exploring how valid / how incorrect this FBR thing is and isn't -- see the thread on 11/25 FBR if you have not seen it. The one aspect, so obvious now, that really torqued people was that teams that sported no wins and X losses could be ranked ahead of teams with 12 wins, 2 losses albeit against weak competition. If you think about it, 12 wins against weak competition does not mean that a team can't beat stronger teams -- we just don't know -- but a team with all losses is even more a mystery.

02Dad -- why not recalculate but NOT RANK teams with less than 3 wins because the truth is we don't have a clue where a team with no wins or only one win should be in the list? Gophers, you have the most experience -- does this make sense to you? Would a team with a bunch of draws but no wins have to be an exception?

Why not stop complaining to 02Dad so much? 02Dad spends his time and effort to look up all of the information, money to buy the software, and then people want to come on here post about how terrible, inaccurate, absurd, ridiculous the FBR computer ranking is. From what I can see, in groups of 3-5 teams, the FBR is pretty accurate as a whole, which 02Dad and BWGophers have said time and time again. This is the same software and process the 01's used pretty accurately. It is tiresome to listen to people COMPLAIN so much about rankings of 9-10 year old soccer teams? If you don't like the FBR, don't open the thread and read it? This is not the college football BCS worth millions of $$, just for fun for crazy soccer parents.

If you are so upset, put out some effort beyond typing up complaints on this forum, do something to make an improvement, stop standing around and complaining. Buy your own software and publish your own rankings. Publish your own "human" opinion poll each week, and 02Dad can average it with the FBR for a "BCS" type overall ranking, like he did in the fall, and like the 01's did last year.

02Dad - thank you for the FBR poll, please continue to publish for the majority that can read it, take in the information with a grain of salt, and move on to the next thing in our busy day.

I made an observation, then asked a couple of questions. I am puzzled as to how anything I said, even re-reading it twice, turned into being perceived as complaints. I can't say I've every been upset about soccer or rankings. I actually did hope to make things a bit better. It is moments like this that make one realize time on the forums is not time well spent.

Deep, this may be the shortest post I've seen from you! I didn't think you were complaining, just wondering about the results with the input of different data

this happens every time 02dad gens out a new list. the questions, the criticisms, the conspiracy theories. seems as though many have really no concept of the basic foundation and objective of the rankings.

we (the parents) already know who the really good teams are, the pretty good teams, the transistional teams, etc.. no one needs any mathmatical point system to know that some teams are better than others - a little or by a wide margin b/c we see it on the field.

fbr is an analytical approach to entertain enthusiatic parents. its not NASA caliber analytics either; theres all kinds of skewed data from the objective nature of removing games, setting up the tiers, and the all time popular skew - guesting. but what it does is employ some calculations to somewhat validate what we already know anyway. at a minimum it makes it more interesting.

for example, in the latest poll fcd is #4 and LP rangel is #5. thats a little wierd. but if youve been to 4000 02 games (it seems like it anyway) you would know that. but does it matter really? to do we need to have a freakin recount? not really.

the system is for fun, its pretty good, but has its limits. you dont get a prize for being #1. but it does do a good job of validating chunks of competetiveness. a team ranked #4 is likely to beat a #14 every time.

and another thing. it always seems like its the up-and-comers that have the biggest beef with the points or the guests or whatever thinking 02dad is some wizard keeping them down. when you finally make it from 25 to 1 here's what you can expect; the same heat, the same outrageous toll tag expenses, and the same club dues.

the only thing new you get is nobody will like you.

javajake wrote:

02Dad wrote:Updated to include games from:

2011 Hurst Turkey Shoot
TFC Blue Cup
ASA College Showcase
PTCL League Games

Also - I have removed all game results from last June and July.

What does the POINTS column mean? I noticed that the points are perfectly in order on this FBR 99,98,97,96 etc, which makes it look like it won't take a lot of POINTS for number 9 to over take number 5. Yet, in the previous FBR https://www.txsoccer.net/t9101-updated-fbr-11-25-11 there were gaps in the points column. Here is another older FBR with what appears to be accurate POINTS all the way down, never a numerical perfect sequence https://www.txsoccer.net/t6522-02-girls-fbr-rankings-5-23-11 Interesting to see how teams have moved by the way.

I'm trying to understand what that means?

It seems that something is wrong with the points column in latest FBR. Did the software breakdown? What do the points mean?

02Dad wrote:Updated to include games from:

2011 Hurst Turkey Shoot
TFC Blue Cup
ASA College Showcase
PTCL League Games

Also - I have removed all game results from last June and July.

PLEASE 02DAD BRING BACK THE FBR!!!!!! WITH ALL THE SMACK TALK AND GAMES PLAYED SO FAR WE NEED MORE THAN JUST OPINIONS TO SEE WHERE TEAMS STAND.

RedBull wrote:

02Dad wrote:Updated to include games from:

2011 Hurst Turkey Shoot
TFC Blue Cup
ASA College Showcase
PTCL League Games

Also - I have removed all game results from last June and July.

PLEASE 02DAD BRING BACK THE FBR!!!!!! WITH ALL THE SMACK TALK AND GAMES PLAYED SO FAR WE NEED MORE THAN JUST OPINIONS TO SEE WHERE TEAMS STAND.

Any ETA for this to return?