ESPN Article Questioning ISU's CFP
- Thread starter RonBurgundy
- Start date
An inside look at College FPI
ESPN's Sports Analytics Team provides all the info you need to know about what goes into the College Football Power Index ahead of the 2016 season.www.espn.com
"It is important to note what FPI is not -- FPI is not a playoff predictor, and it is not designed to identify the four teams most deserving of making the College Football Playoff."
"In the preseason, these components are made up entirely of data from previous seasons, such as returning starters, past performance, recruiting rankings and coaching tenure (more on the preseason component below). That information allows FPI to make predictions (and make determinations on the strength of a team’s opponents) beginning in Week 1, and then it declines in weight as the season progresses. It is important to note that prior seasons’ information never completely disappears, because it has been proved to help with prediction accuracy even at the end of a season. Vegas similarly includes priors when setting its lines."
FPI is also not designed to deal with a season where there has been very little non-conference play, and no games between the power 5 conferences. Not to mention that the prior seasons' information influence is a much bigger deal when some teams have still only played a few games going into the last couple weeks of the season.
Agree. But it's really lazy of the writer not to ask a committee member if this exact assumption applies. Instead, it's just more "this is how it's supposed to be done."
Yep-- they figured it out, the selection committee has an obvious biased towards (checks note) Iowa State.
Committee who spends hours reviewing resumes and analytics
vs.
ESPN writer who sees #7 next to the name Iowa State and cannot compute.
Committee who spends hours reviewing resumes and analytics
vs.
ESPN writer who sees #7 next to the name Iowa State and cannot compute.
Well the last time that Ohio State was gifted a spot they hadn't earned into the playoff, all the talking heads could say was that Ohio State "proved the committee right" by winning it all. With the 4 team playoff I have no doubt that there are teams in quite a few years who were capable of winning it all but they were excluded because they hadn't earned their spot or the committee gave an earned spot to someone else. Just because you win it doesn't mean the committee got it right. You should have to have earned the right to win it all. The chance to win it has to (or should be) earned.
The fact that Walder only uses FPI as the basis for his argument tells you he's just aiming for clicks, because that is widely regarded as the most useless metric in college football this season.
They are trying to use some stupid formula to create pressure to boost some undeserving blue blood. But at some point your play on the field needs to matter.
They are trying to use some stupid formula to create pressure to boost some undeserving blue blood. But at some point your play on the field needs to matter.
I was thinking this as well. Does the previous season influence go down by the week of the season or by the number of games played by individual teams? If the latter, no wonder select big 10 teams are rated so high even though the current teams suck ass. Their rating is more last year's team than this year's team.
Leave it to ESPN talking heads to not even understand their own organization's rating system.
Outside of the chairman, which is Barta this year, committee members don't openly share their process or reasoning with the media. They get what Barta is willing to share on Tuesdays with Rece Davis and then maybe a teleconference during the week. It's pretty clear that most people on these boards have never actually been a journalist lol.
Not good or bad, just see a lot of posters on this board that seem to think they know what a journalist should/shouldn't be doing. You said it was "lazy" to not ask a committee member for their perspective. How do you know the writer didn't reach out to committee members? Did you assume that if a writer reaches out to a committee member, they're obligated to respond?
Can you say media catering to a TV audience? Geez that hasn't happened at all this year.No shocker that ESPN is not supportive of ISU.
Should Iowa State really be on the fringes of the College Football Playoff race?
Iowa State climbed to No. 7 in this week's College Football Playoff rankings. This has been one of the Cyclones' best seasons, but does it merit CFP respect? Our Allstate Playoff Predictor takes a look.
Not necessarily obligated, but if he's got an opposing view from the people he's ripping, let's hear it. But he most likely doesn't have one. Just a lazy hit piece.
Regarding committee members "don't openly share their process or reasoning", how does the writer know what previous committees have done?
Just went to have a look at the FPI rankings. There are numerous indications the algorithm isn't suitable for the available data set. Wisconsin at 2-2 and #4? Penn State at 2-5 and #22?!
Then again, we are probably benefiting a little bit from Texas at #9. Less inexplicable than some of the B1G rankings, still.
Then again, we are probably benefiting a little bit from Texas at #9. Less inexplicable than some of the B1G rankings, still.
Exactly. The FPI is a garbage too. It’s like trying wipe with a hand full of fresh cooked spaghetti. It’s gonna move some things around but it’s not gonna put things where they belong.
