Jump to content

2018 Tier Placement - Final


Sammyswordsman

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Pops said:

EYE-TEST DISCIPLE!!!

The Tiers despises lack of data points which is why  undefeated teams are held down until they get a relevant win.   A team that has a marquee win and a marquee loss will rank higher than an undefeated team without a marquee contest.

I am not referring to DLS because Folsom was a marquee win.  If Folsom destroys their remaining opponents and DLS whips Liberty by 3 scores and can stay within 14 of MD, then I can see DLS getting to Tier 1

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Sammyswordsman said:

Yep a big part.  in 2015 I  would have had DLS on Tier 1 and Trinity on Tier 2 or 3.  If a team has multiple Top end games, I weight them all and don't use a loss as an automatic knock out. 

Is that a characteristic of “tiers”

would you employnsame approach to rankings 

for example, in this thread, I’ve described how DLS’15 @ #1 was justified at a rating service (resume evaluators). It not imho in the rankings (where you’d HAVE to put deserving undefeateds above them even if you would have bet on DLS in a game)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Pops said:

Is that a characteristic of “tiers”

would you employnsame approach to rankings 

for example, in this thread, I’ve described how DLS’15 @ #1 was justified at a rating service (resume evaluators). It not imho in the rankings (where you’d HAVE to put deserving undefeateds above them even if you would have bet on DLS in a game)

I think that is a fault of the rating services, being slaves to w/L records.  DJ used to make me go nuts when he would put some undefeated team from Massachutsets or there abouts, ahead of a Trinity League team who lost a league game.

That is why I started the Tiers.

People seem to be buying into the Tiers as a better way to evaluate teams truthfully.  Like you say, you may not argue with undefeated team "a" being ranked ahead of one loss team "b", but you may not be willing to put $$ on Team "a" were an actual game be played vs Team "b"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Sammyswordsman said:

I think that is a fault of the rating services, being slaves to w/L records.  DJ used to make me go nuts when he would put some undefeated team from Massachutsets or there abouts, ahead of a Trinity League team who lost a league game.

That is why I started the Tiers.

People seem to be buying into the Tiers as a better way to evaluate teams truthfully.  Like you say, you may not argue with undefeated team "a" being ranked ahead of one loss team "b", but you may not be willing to put $$ on Team "a" were an actual game be played vs Team "b"

I understand 

i think accomplishments need to mean something and whether the final score is 21-20 or 20-21 ought to matter more than a smidgen on a algorithm or eye test 

canes and you actually have common ground — no better teams are irrelevant sooner than the lower 2/3 of TL — their seasons will be made or broken by whether they get beat in first or 2nd rounds so why would you weight accomplishments more and are constantly defending teams that could win 25 states but have 6 losses — sta seemingly always needs a pass and a “trust me” on the eye test 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Sammyswordsman said:

Columbia is on the correct Tier.  I would also add Lee, Edgewater, and Hagarty to that Tier.

Columbia split with Lee. Lee lost to Edgewater.  Edgewater lost to Hagarty, and Hagerty lost to Lee.  A vicious circle.

Lakeland is border line Tier 4 but will stay in Tier 5 due to SOS until we see how then do next week.

lol. A Hagerty team that finished 6-5 is a Tier 4 team? Ok, I get it, you're trolling. 

http://www.maxpreps.com/high-schools/hagerty-huskies-(oviedo,fl)/football/schedule.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, CaliNorth said:

Which means he will only accept what he wants to believe and nothing else. You will never, ever, ever get him to  concede anything, ever. He's completely God in his universe with no parameters,  only using metrics for the moment, that he  will  try and use for his agenda. I don't think once I ever have heard him agree with anyone about anything, except for STA like you said

Is this Pops you're taking about? Because it's certainly not me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2018 at 7:41 PM, Sammyswordsman said:

Chandler AZ moved from Tier 4 to Tier 3 despite being idle.  This was a correction from the previous week Tier.  Chandler has been red hot since losing by only 14 on the road to Cen10.  Chandler can end up in Tier 2 with a win next week and in the Geico, if they get there.

BTW, Chandler lost by 22 against Cen10 (Ca) and has had 3 victories by 14 points or less since. 

Centennial’s only game within 23 pts was when they beat Bishop Gorman. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, StingMan44 said:

BTW, Chandler lost by 22 against Cen10 (Ca) and has had 3 victories by 14 points or less since. 

Centennial’s only game within 23 pts was when they beat Bishop Gorman. 

Thanks for the updates.  I have moved Centennial to the same Tier (3) as Chandler.  We will see how both perform in the coming weeks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sammyswordsman said:

For once you are the more diplomatic member.  I called the remainder of opponents...turds.

Same number of games against Top 1650 opponents as Duncanville (7)......and SFA hasnt played a top 2100 team this year but is somehow Tier 2. So SFA’s spot is 100% based on who is on their roster and not how good the team has proven to be.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Goldmember said:

Top 1650 opponents.

Good one, guy.

Oh, I’m sorry (sarcasm)! Is there a well known cutoff of solid teams? 1000? But 1001 sucks? Since there are about 15,000 high schools with 11 man football in the US, #1650 would be 89th percentile. To me, if you are 89th percentile, you must be at least a solid team. Tell me what the proper cutoff is? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, StingMan44 said:

Oh, I’m sorry (sarcasm)! Is there a well known cutoff of solid teams? 1000? But 1001 sucks? Since there are about 15,000 high schools with 11 man football in the US, #1650 would be 89th percentile. To me, if you are 89th percentile, you must be at least a solid team. Tell me what the proper cutoff is? 

The cutoff is playing teams more than 3 Tiers below your team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Sammyswordsman said:

The cutoff is playing teams more than 3 Tiers below your team

LMAO....so Allen, Duncanville, STA, St Louis, John Curtis, Warren Central, Christian Brothers, West Monroe, ULAB and Massillon have combined for ZERO quality wins by your Tier rankings/quality opponent qualifications??? Way to make yourself look dumb!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, StingMan44 said:

LMAO....so Allen, Duncanville, STA, St Louis, John Curtis, Warren Central, Christian Brothers, West Monroe, ULAB and Massillon have combined for ZERO quality wins by your Tier rankings/quality opponent qualifications??? Way to make yourself look dumb!!!!

 Not all teams are listed on the Tiers.  (Please refer to the methodolgy) Only the ones we talk about.  Many of the opponents of these teams would be listed in the Top 6 Tiers if anyone asked for a certain team to be added.  Last week I placed a couple of Nor Cal teams because a poster inquired about them and where the teams would be placed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...