NJ (0-10) vs TX ("Top 10 calpreps style")

[954gator]

2 hours ago, golfaddict1 said:

You forgot torn labrum and humidity.    Corey Holmes TD reception in the back of the end zone was called incomplete...still angry about that lol.  Score should have been 34-6 final.  

FIFY

[TheRealCAJ]

10 minutes ago, AztecPadre said:

LOL My man please never change.  You and Trump are one in the same.  If you dont agree with the numbers they are fake, false, wrong. But if you do they are gospel. LOL!!!!!!!!!!

Nothing fake about NJ being 0-20 vs TX and GA per calpreps.

[golfaddict1]

Some Calpreps fun from 2012...   * GA #1 was rated #16 nationally that year.  2 teams in CA were rated higher.  GA #2 was rated #83 nationally that year.  15 teams in CA were rated higher

 

Predict a matchup 2012 neutral sites

[2012] #23  CA 28, #2 GA 27     

[2012] #2 GA 28, #24 CA  27

-----------------------------------

*  [2012] #20 CA  28,  #1  GA  22  NEUTRAL FIELD...  #20 CA rating 55.8   #1 GA rating 68.4

[2012] #7 CA  31, #1 GA  20  
[2012] #8 CA  31,  #1 GA  22

[2012] #1 GA 28, #9 CA  26     (68.4 vs 64.5)
[2012] #10 CA 34, #1  GA  24

[2012] #11 CA 34,  #1  GA  28

[2012]#17 CA  34, #1  GA  31  

[2012] #1 GA 31, #21 CA  28    #21 CA rating 55.5  #1 GA rating 68.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[AztecPadre]

21 minutes ago, golfaddict1 said:

Some Calpreps fun from 2012...   * GA #1 was rated #16 nationally that year.  2 teams in CA were rated higher.  GA #2 was rated #83 nationally that year.  15 teams in CA were rated higher

 

Predict a matchup 2012 neutral sites

[2012] #23  CA 28, #2 GA 27     

[2012] #2 GA 28, #24 CA  27

-----------------------------------

*  [2012] #20 CA  28,  #1  GA  22  NEUTRAL FIELD...  #20 CA rating 55.8   #1 GA rating 68.4

[2012] #7 CA  31, #1 GA  20  
[2012] #8 CA  31,  #1 GA  22

[2012] #1 GA 28, #9 CA  26     (68.4 vs 64.5)
[2012] #10 CA 34, #1  GA  24

[2012] #11 CA 34,  #1  GA  28

[2012]#17 CA  34, #1  GA  31  

[2012] #1 GA 31, #21 CA  28    #21 CA rating 55.5  #1 GA rating 68.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Once again reality is proven. 

[Ararar]

2 hours ago, golfaddict1 said:

Some Calpreps fun from 2012...   * GA #1 was rated #16 nationally that year.  2 teams in CA were rated higher.  GA #2 was rated #83 nationally that year.  15 teams in CA were rated higher

 

Predict a matchup 2012 neutral sites

[2012] #23  CA 28, #2 GA 27     

[2012] #2 GA 28, #24 CA  27

-----------------------------------

*  [2012] #20 CA  28,  #1  GA  22  NEUTRAL FIELD...  #20 CA rating 55.8   #1 GA rating 68.4

[2012] #7 CA  31, #1 GA  20  
[2012] #8 CA  31,  #1 GA  22

[2012] #1 GA 28, #9 CA  26     (68.4 vs 64.5)
[2012] #10 CA 34, #1  GA  24

[2012] #11 CA 34,  #1  GA  28

[2012]#17 CA  34, #1  GA  31  

[2012] #1 GA 31, #21 CA  28    #21 CA rating 55.5  #1 GA rating 68.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When a CA also ran plays an elite team just about as well as GA best team did like this year that's what you get.

[TheRealCAJ]

13 hours ago, noonereal said:

 

I'll address this further in the am.

 

[ECHS05]

14 hours ago, noonereal said:

Nor NEVER took Cal as gospel. Nor is one of the few that takes it as it is and for what it is. 

But these posts are all distorted. No time now. The posts are ignorance on steroids. 

 

You quote the rankings/ratings exactly as is. Thats taking it as gospel.

[ECHS05]

11 hours ago, Ararar said:

When a CA also ran plays an elite team just about as well as GA best team did like this year that's what you get.

Huh? And where/when did this happen?  Who are we referring to... 

Im currently repredicting all of GAs OOS games from this past year on CPs PAM, and comparing them to the actual score...

So far GA has outperformed in ALL 12 games by an averages of almost 11 points... we'll see when Im done.

When theres a pattern like this, of this magnitude and consistency, I dont see how Ned cant understand GA teams arent getting enough credit for their instate games... AKA RAISE THEIR STARTING VALUES.

[Sammyswordsman]

17 hours ago, Nolebull813 said:

Garbage in,  garbage out 

PROJECT A MATCHUP

neutral field
[2011] De La Salle (Concord, CA) 28, [2011] Aquinas [St. Thomas] (Fort Lauderdale, FL) 19








 

That very well may have been he correct score had the game been played in week 14 when the ratings solidified

[Ararar]

12 minutes ago, ECHS05 said:

Huh? And where/when did this happen?  Who are we referring to... 

Im currently repredicting all of GAs OOS games from this past year on CPs PAM, and comparing them to the actual score...

So far GA has outperformed in ALL 12 games by an averages of almost 11 points... we'll see when Im done.

When theres a pattern like this, of this magnitude and consistency, I dont see how Ned cant understand GA teams arent getting enough credit for their instate games... AKA RAISE THEIR STARTING VALUES.

Do we need to go over Grayson vs IMG and LBP vs IMG again?

first half

IMG 10                     IMG 10

Grayson 7.                LBP 0

second Half

IMG 16                    IMG 24

Grayson 0                LBP 0

and lets not forget the IMG  Grayson game ended with IMG on Grayson's 6 yard line about to make it a 23-0 second half just like LBP.So bravo GA your best team was 7-10 points better than a Cali also ran against an elite opponent.

 

 

 

 

[Wooderson]

In other CalPreps misadventures, Arizona Style, let's go back to 2008 when your #2 and #3 teams in the state were (respectively) 14-0 Centennial (51.1 rating) and 13-1 Hamilton (49.6 rating); logically not a whole lot to argue with, and this will become more apparent momentarily.  Now, when you plug these two teams into their Projector we get #3 Hamilton pulling off a 28-26 win-now, while that certainly doesn't flow with their preexisting rating isn't entirely egregious since we really don't know what would happen if these two teams played each other and perhaps some reverence should be given to the larger champion that played a schedule that the CalPreps computer said was tougher.  Now that doesn't explain how your CalPreps' 2008 Arizona #1 is the champion of Arizona's third division, but that's a different can of worms altogether.  Of course, there's one small problem...

The two teams did play each other, and the higher-ranked Centennial squad won by 19 points (http://www.maxpreps.com/games/football-fall-08/centennial-vs-hamilton/9-12-2008-jd1XROSTGky7_6p58nWYrw.htm).

At its core the entire CalPreps web site is for nothing more than entertainment purposes; in my mind I can't help but think that there is some bias built in to their system, and in many cases I think the plethora of data being dealt with muddies the waters more than it brings clarity.

[AztecPadre]

2 hours ago, Ararar said:

Do we need to go over Grayson vs IMG and LBP vs IMG again?

first half

IMG 10                     IMG 10

Grayson 7.                LBP 0

second Half

IMG 16                    IMG 24

Grayson 0                LBP 0

and lets not forget the IMG  Grayson game ended with IMG on Grayson's 6 yard line about to make it a 23-0 second half just like LBP.So bravo GA your best team was 7-10 points better than a Cali also ran against an elite opponent.

 

 

 

 

Lol.  Lord here we go with another multiple page thread on how grayson didnt really lose and that if not for the turnovers and all the TD's IMG scored they would have won. 

[Ararar]

1 hour ago, AztecPadre said:

Lol.  Lord here we go with another multiple page thread on how grayson didnt really lose and that if not for the turnovers and all the TD's IMG scored they would have won. 

You really want a good chuckle.Calpreps had Grayson as GA #1 which no one will argue....They have LBP as Cali #76

[AztecPadre]

7 minutes ago, Ararar said:

You really want a good chuckle.Calpreps had Grayson as GA #1 which no one will argue....They have LBP as Cali #76

Hahahahaha.  Ga is a special kind of special.

[golfaddict1]

2 hours ago, Wooderson said:

In other CalPreps misadventures, Arizona Style, let's go back to 2008 when your #2 and #3 teams in the state were (respectively) 14-0 Centennial (51.1 rating) and 13-1 Hamilton (49.6 rating); logically not a whole lot to argue with, and this will become more apparent momentarily.  Now, when you plug these two teams into their Projector we get #3 Hamilton pulling off a 28-26 win-now, while that certainly doesn't flow with their preexisting rating isn't entirely egregious since we really don't know what would happen if these two teams played each other and perhaps some reverence should be given to the larger champion that played a schedule that the CalPreps computer said was tougher.  Now that doesn't explain how your CalPreps' 2008 Arizona #1 is the champion of Arizona's third division, but that's a different can of worms altogether.  Of course, there's one small problem...

The two teams did play each other, and the higher-ranked Centennial squad won by 19 points (http://www.maxpreps.com/games/football-fall-08/centennial-vs-hamilton/9-12-2008-jd1XROSTGky7_6p58nWYrw.htm).

At its core the entire CalPreps web site is for nothing more than entertainment purposes; in my mind I can't help but think that there is some bias built in to their system, and in many cases I think the plethora of data being dealt with muddies the waters more than it brings clarity.

The algorithm doesn't even know the two teams played!  If two teams face one another 2x with different results (MP vs Chandler last year as an example) the CP wouldn't have a clue about it.  It treats every game the same (except playoff games boost) withing their rating framework.   Only a final score matters and the ratings of two teams adjust based on that and common opponents connections adjust and state scaling adjusts "if" the two teams like in this case play in-state, repeat and rinse.  

To explain this a little more to accentuate the ridiculous...  Team A could play Team B  10 times and go 10-0, but if Team A flounders in 1 game or whatever the algorithm deems a turning point of weakness in the other slate of game results, in a rating situation end of season or a predict a game... Team B could very well be favored to win and be rated higher than Team A... after going 0-10.  

Every game that is played adjusts back to week 1 rating... example a rare 100 pt+ grab here.  Essentially, MP beat the state champ end of season rating and boosted it to Sept. game week.   
09/08   Beat Chandler (AZ) 52-7 [opponent rating: 73.2] [performance: 101.2**]

SJB gets OH state champ playoff boost here... but when they played, a starting QB was missing among others if I'm not mistaken, nonetheless a good ass-kicking but 100.8 pts worthy?   December maybe, but you played in August.  
08/27   Beat St. Xavier (Cincinnati, OH) 34-0 [opponent rating: 72.8] [performance: 100.8**]

When I was going down the list of hypothetical losses the #1 GA team had vs. CA, I couldn't help but smile...  this might be your first post on Calpreps and you handled it like a seasoned pro, lol.   Well done.  

PS - Saguaro was on top in 2008 I see lol.   

[954gator]

4 hours ago, Ararar said:

Do we need to go over Grayson vs IMG and LBP vs IMG again?

first half

IMG 10                     IMG 10

Grayson 7.                LBP 0

second Half

IMG 16                    IMG 24

Grayson 0                LBP 0

and lets not forget the IMG  Grayson game ended with IMG on Grayson's 6 yard line about to make it a 23-0 second half just like LBP.So bravo GA your best team was 7-10 points better than a Cali also ran against an elite opponent.

 

 

 

 

IMG is another interesting Calpreps scenerio.  How is a team like Desoto ranked higher than IMG?   Maybe because of the extra games?   

[thc6795]

IDC how the mumbo jumbo works. In this scenario Texas owns that Jersey ass. Nor what say you sucka?

[TheMaximumHornetSting]

If you think their's a Public in NJ who can stay within 3 TDs of Buford,Lowndes or Mill Creek. Then you're drunk....

[NYHSFAN33]

4 minutes ago, TheMaximumHornetSting said:

If you think their's a Public in NJ who can stay within 3 TDs of Buford,Lowndes or Mill Creek. Then you're drunk....

You don't know anything about any publics in NJ or anywhere else and how they relate to Buford, Lowndes, and Mill Creek.  I doubt you know much of anything regarding those GA teams either, so stick to talking about what you do know.  You make a lot of comments like this with little or no knowledge.  The act is getting old.

[NYHSFAN33]

54 minutes ago, golfaddict1 said:

The algorithm doesn't even know the two teams played!  If two teams face one another 2x with different results (MP vs Chandler last year as an example) the CP wouldn't have a clue about it.  It treats every game the same (except playoff games boost) withing their rating framework.   Only a final score matters and the ratings of two teams adjust based on that and common opponents connections adjust and state scaling adjusts "if" the two teams like in this case play in-state, repeat and rinse.  

To explain this a little more to accentuate the ridiculous...  Team A could play Team B  10 times and go 10-0, but if Team A flounders in 1 game or whatever the algorithm deems a turning point of weakness in the other slate of game results, in a rating situation end of season or a predict a game... Team B could very well be favored to win and be rated higher than Team A... after going 0-10.  

Every game that is played adjusts back to week 1 rating... example a rare 100 pt+ grab here.  Essentially, MP beat the state champ end of season rating and boosted it to Sept. game week.   
09/08   Beat Chandler (AZ) 52-7 [opponent rating: 73.2] [performance: 101.2**]

SJB gets OH state champ playoff boost here... but when they played, a starting QB was missing among others if I'm not mistaken, nonetheless a good ass-kicking but 100.8 pts worthy?   December maybe, but you played in August.  
08/27   Beat St. Xavier (Cincinnati, OH) 34-0 [opponent rating: 72.8] [performance: 100.8**]

When I was going down the list of hypothetical losses the #1 GA team had vs. CA, I couldn't help but smile...  this might be your first post on Calpreps and you handled it like a seasoned pro, lol.   Well done.  

PS - Saguaro was on top in 2008 I see lol.   

This is a good post Golf, it shows the fact that the algorithm isn't mathematically incorrect, but flawed in it's execution.

[Ararar]

17 minutes ago, NYHSFAN33 said:

This is a good post Golf, it shows the fact that the algorithm isn't mathematically incorrect, but flawed in it's execution.

Serious question because I have no idea.....how would you correct the execution?

[TheMaximumHornetSting]

17 minutes ago, NYHSFAN33 said:

You don't know anything about any publics in NJ or anywhere else and how they relate to Buford, Lowndes, and Mill Creek.  I doubt you know much of anything regarding those GA teams either, so stick to talking about what you do know.  You make a lot of comments like this with little or no knowledge.  The act is getting old.

I know that NJ publics are not on par with GA publics. 

I also know for a fact that Lowndes,Mill Creek and buford would beat the best NJ public into submission. 

And considering that I grew up playing against Lowndes in HS. Id say I know alot more about them than you do. As well as the fact Ive had family play for Lowndes and Valdosta and still have connections to the programs. 

So I'd recommend you sit back buddy... 

And by the way NJ's best Public Wayne Hills? 

Lost to a FL 1A school.... 

That doesnt exactly scream that you're gonna keep pace with GA's Best. 

[AztecPadre]

Just now, TheMaximumHornetSting said:

I know that NJ publics are not on par with GA publics. 

I also know for a fact that Lowndes,Mill Creek and buford would beat the best NJ public into submission. 

And considering that I grew up playing against Lowndes in HS. Id say I know alot more about them than you do. As well as the fact Ive had family play for Lowndes and Valdosta and still have connections to the programs. 

So I'd recommend you sit back buddy... 

And by the way NJ's best Public Wayne Hills? 

Lost to a FL 1A school.... 

That doesnt exactly scream that you're gonna keep pace with GA's Best. 

How is this fact?

[AztecPadre]

26 minutes ago, NYHSFAN33 said:

You don't know anything about any publics in NJ or anywhere else and how they relate to Buford, Lowndes, and Mill Creek.  I doubt you know much of anything regarding those GA teams either, so stick to talking about what you do know.  You make a lot of comments like this with little or no knowledge.  The act is getting old.

OH SNAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[TheMaximumHornetSting]

2 minutes ago, AztecPadre said:

How is this fact?

Have you seen Lowndes play? Have you seen any of GA's best play? 

Now I want you to look at NJ's best and tell me which one you're gonna take. 

Of course you'll say NJ for the sakes of trolling... 

But be real we hear about how NJ is great but all we ever hear about is the privates... 

Everytime you turn around its DBP,PC,BC,DP and SPP. Thats it... and when we do hear about a NJ public its usually not good. 

And I have one question for you. 

If NJ publics where that great. Why dont they schedule the BNU teams?