Quantcast
Jump to content

Glitches in MaxPreps Rankings


Wilddog10
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi Y'all,

I was on MaxPreps lately looking at the rankings of teams in my area, and I found something fishy. This has do to with a team in my area, Hardee and Orlando Bishop Moore. As you see, Bishop Moore is ranked ahead of Hardee in both the MaxPreps National Rankings and the MaxPreps State Rankings. Bishop Moore is ranked 1865 in the nation and 136 in the state. Hardee is ranked 1867 in the nation and 137 in the state. However, Hardee is ranked ahead of Bishop Moore in the MaxPreps Class 5A Rankings. Hardee is ranked 23 in 5A and Bishop Moore is ranked 24 in 5A. How can this be? Since Bishop Moore is ahead of Hardee in both the National and State Rankings, should they also be ranked ahead of Hardee in the Class 5A Rankings? This is all strange and confusing.

I would appreciate your input! Thanks.

IMG_20180811_194208.jpg

IMG_20180811_194106.jpg

IMG_20180811_194309.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites


3 minutes ago, nolebull813 said:

holy smokes. Like an official one through the FHSAA? 

Was it anonymous? Who did that? Lol

That was the original proposal but based on what I've heard from fhsaa lately they have moved away from maxpreps 

 

They have a different system in place but truthfully they need to explain it, the confusion is happening because so many people are in the dark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, ColumbiaHighFan2017class said:

That was the original proposal but based on what I've heard from fhsaa lately they have moved away from maxpreps 

 

They have a different system in place but truthfully they need to explain it, the confusion is happening because so many people are in the dark

That's worse than Big tech companies putting the SPLC in charge of determining what is hate speech online 

 That would have been the dumbest move in high school football history and that is not hyperbole 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maxpreps and many other of these so called power ranking sites have never ever seen 99% of these teams play and they rank them is actually hilarious. You can input all the formulas and code all you want, until you see a team visually with your eyes ranking them is uncalled for. Whenever you take the visual aspect of a team from their game play out of the equation ranking then everything about your formula is moot. Back in the 90s and early 2000s - 2008 approx I like how the Tampa and Ledger reporters would vote. Back in the 90s many of them would actually see many games then rank the teams by that but these days people are relying on computers to rank a team. Here is the thing, many formulas are inaccurate big time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Hwy17 said:

A proposal was presented about a month ago to do just that.  

Cannot happen with the current setup. You cannot use ranking alone to setup playoffs. Yes back in the 80s they did this before we had districts and only conferences. But the way the current policies are in place they cannot use a ranking system for that and if they did FHSAA would make the worse decision in its history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, WhatsUpDoc said:

Cannot happen with the current setup. You cannot use ranking alone to setup playoffs. Yes back in the 80s they did this before we had districts and only conferences. But the way the current policies are in place they cannot use a ranking system for that and if they did FHSAA would make the worse decision in its history.

they are going to use it for other sports not football

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are my two cents. All ranking systems and polls are flawed whether it be human or computerized. Personally, I actually like MaxPreps except for one major flaw. Forfeits count as the game being played with a final score of 2-0. For example: let’s say #1 Team A is playing # 300 Team Y the last week of the year. It’s a game Team A should win by 7 or 8 touchdowns. However the entire Team A squad catches a big time STD from a cheerleader and has to forfeit. The MaxPreps computer calculates a 2-0 victory for Team Z and adjusts the strength even though the game didn’t actually occur. Obviously, the chances of this  happening (not the cheerleader thing) are microscopic but it would really affect the rankings. And there are dozens of forfeits in Florida each and every year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, LAZ said:

Here are my two cents. All ranking systems and polls are flawed whether it be human or computerized. Personally, I actually like MaxPreps except for one major flaw. Forfeits count as the game being played with a final score of 2-0. For example: let’s say #1 Team A is playing # 300 Team Y the last week of the year. It’s a game Team A should win by 7 or 8 touchdowns. However the entire Team A squad catches a big time STD from a cheerleader and has to forfeit. The MaxPreps computer calculates a 2-0 victory for Team Z and adjusts the strength even though the game didn’t actually occur. Obviously, the chances of this  happening (not the cheerleader thing) are microscopic but it would really affect the rankings. And there are dozens of forfeits in Florida each and every year. 

Pinkos awards/penalizes based on margin of victory. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Hwy17 said:

Pinkos awards/penalizes based on margin of victory. 

I do as well but with restricted move limits on margins of victory/loss. This is one of the reasons my rankings are slower to adjust than Joe’s right out of the gate. But by the 2nd half of the season, Joe and I are pretty damn close together. My system was designed for college football where there is a lot more schedule connectivity early in the season when teams are playing out of conference and out of division against schools from all across the country. In 2003 I took the same formula and applied it to high school. It definitely works but it takes a while to establish enough connectivity early in the season.This is a problem I’ve been battling for years and in the future I may have to expand the limits on margin of victory, especially over the first few weeks of the year.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, LAZ said:

I do as well but with restricted move limits on margins of victory/loss. This is one of the reasons my rankings are slower to adjust than Joe’s right out of the gate. But by the 2nd half of the season, Joe and I are pretty damn close together. My system was designed for college football where there is a lot more schedule connectivity early in the season when teams are playing out of conference and out of division against schools from all across the country. In 2003 I took the same formula and applied it to high school. It definitely works but it takes a while to establish enough connectivity early in the season.This is a problem I’ve been battling for years and in the future I may have to expand the limits on margin of victory, especially over the first few weeks of the year.

 

When one tram is a clear cut favorite, and Joe Pinkos says they should win by 30+, but they only win by 20+, their power ranking goes down. To me 20+ is still loop sided. Tells me the better team just didn't try and run up the score.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hwy17 said:

When one tram is a clear cut favorite, and Joe Pinkos says they should win by 30+, but they only win by 20+, their power ranking goes down. To me 20+ is still loop sided. Tells me the better team just didn't try and run up the score.

That is exactly what I was taking about. There are formulas in place to take care of that issue. In my system, each game has a different value. For example: Miami Central plays Northwestern and let’s say  they both have identical 140 power rtgs. The outcome of this game has extreme significance. The game should be a tie. (140-140)/2=0. So 100%-0= 100%. Therefore, the margin of victory is used in full for that game.

However:

If Central has strength value of 140 and Westland Hialeah has a value of 70. Central should win by 70 pts. The game is less significant. The value of the game is (140 -70)/2= 35. So 100%-35%=65%. In this case, you only use 65% of the margin of victory. 

This prevents Central from running up the score but does not penalize them for playing their subs. This is simplified but you get the concept.

There are also other factors I use in the formula which put a cap on how much movement can occur. These are the factors I referred to possibly changing in my previous post. 

Anyway, there is a lot more involved and I have several macros in use to assist me every week.

Hopefully, this gives you an idea of how the system works.

The most difficulty I have is accurately obtaining ALL the scores every week. There are always 20 or so results that take 2 - 4 days to find and verify. That is the most difficult part of doing the rankings and has almost forced me to quit this turd hunt several times. My son did Tennessee HS Rankings for two years and NOT ONCE was he unable to find a score the next day. It sucks because Tennessee has two time zones as do we. IMO, this is Florida. We have the best football players in the country. There is no acceptable excuse for these scores to not be 100% available, let alone accurate. This is a huge sore spot as you can see.

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.

Loading...
 Share



×
×
  • Create New...