Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="CardiacCuse, post: 4946211, member: 6979"]
not sure if you are truly open to what I have to say...but I will try:

in my opinion (yes, its subjective...so what), ranking systems should be SUMMATIVE...not PREDICTIVE

they should summarize what has already happened...not predict what will happen next!

that's my issue. and it would be my issue regardless of where SU is ranked.  I assure you.

oftentimes, there will be considerable overlap between summative and predictive rankings...but that is far from a guarantee...esp with 350 teams to evaluate.

I'm sure Auburn, Alabama and Mich St (as just 3 anomolous examples), etc are great teams and would put up a solid fight vs any team in NCABB

in that sense, yeah, they likely would be near the top of [I]potentially good teams. [/I]

However, a blind resume test would not flatter such teams, at least nowhere near to the extent that the NET currently does....even if they have theoretically elite ability.

My preference for ncaabb ranking systems is that they SUMMARIZE and DESCRIBE what has already happened...not try to PREDICT what will happen next.  I think the current models are waaaaay too predictive to be fair.  They're doing a job they shouldnt be doing.

in my 30+ years of following the sport...this is new.

I liked the AP and coaches polls etc...these analytic algorithms for ranking teams are not an improvement.  It doesnt make me a whiner to feel as such, either.  and it has nothing to do with SU's current rank...these changes are new to the sport and  dont like them.  orange colored glasses or not.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?