Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="jncuse, post: 898518, member: 1969"]
Posted this in another thread.

The "I watch basketball" is good for the top 5 and better in terms of the way people want to frame rankings.   I certainly dont look at ranking systems when I am doing a top 5 or top 10.    I may consider some of that data afterwards because there becomes more offsetting of good and bad things that is just harder to sort out.

The "I watch basketball" rankings start to sputter by around 7 or 8, has almost failed by #15, and is utterly useless by #20. People may able to assess some / many teams outside of the top 10, but they don't watch enough of every team to sort the teams properly and are unable to avoid pre-concieved biases.   They also rely to heavily on one or two results, when teams start to have more of a mix of a good and bad.   Note that I include myself in this group as well - its too difficult to accurately sort and I have unintentional biases.

And for teams in that 25-50 range (which is relevant for tracking tourney level teams moving forward)
- We have no AP ranking
- Biases (conference, prior year, a few results) become even more prevalent at this level.
- And teams at this level have an even larger mix of good and bad, that is impossible to sort.

So if you want to try to measure those teams you need to use an unbiased ranking system. What the  are you going to do.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?