For those interested in the Rivals scoring formula (long)...

[thunder5]

Here's an explanation of why I think their current total points calculations are all wrong:

This is the Rivals formula:

POINTS = ((N / (N + 50)) * H) + ((50 / (N + 50)) * L)

where...

H = 250 for each 5-star commit + 140 for each 4-star + 75 for each 3-star + 20 for each 2-star + 10 for each 1-star

L = 18 for each 5-star + 12 for each 4-star + 8 for each 3-star + 3 for each 2-star + 1 for each 1-star

N = a big honkin' calculation

Here is a link explaining how to calculate N:

Rivals formula for their rankings. - FalconsLIFE

Long story short, N is effected by a players position ranking and their placement in the Rivals 100, JUCO 50 or Prep 50...

There is also an average ranking factor...If the team's average stars are greater than 3, add (100 * (Avg stars -<br> > 3)) to N...this is only in play if the average player rating is 3 or above...

Michigan's current class breaks down like this as far as scoring is concerned:

Ten 4*'s, nine 3*'s and one unrated player...they also have the following that effects their N value:

Rivals 100 players: 3 (Kalis, Stone, Magnuson)

Players that score at thier given position: 17 (Kalis, Stone, Magnuson, Bars, Funchess, Stacey, Williams, Bolden, Brown, Ruchardson, Ross, Strobel, Wilson, Gant, Goodin, Ringer, Standifer)

Average star rating: 3.43

With a m value of 50 (as described in the link that explains the formula) these things should give Michigan a total of 1783 points (they have a very solid class needless to say)....but currently they only have 1324...

I chose Michigan as an example because they have 20 total recruits and Rivals formula only considers the top 20 players...

Given the same formula Tennessee breaks down like this:

One 4*, seven 3*'s, one 2*, two unrated players...we also have the following factors affecting N:

Rivals 100: 0

Players that score at thier given position: 4 (Bowles, Peters, Peterman, Cross)

Average star rating: 2.82

With a m value of 50 (as described in the link explaining the formula) this should give Tennessee 320 points

I hope this clarifies my belief that the current points calculation in the team rankings are wrong...

If anyone has any questions please let me know

 

[Cyclopskiller]

My head hurtz

 

[canine_vol]

you get the feeling of the guys who sat around and thought this up were just having fun. now they're laughing at everyone who takes it so seriously.

i once made up a formula for what the true probability of getting a girl pregnant on your first time (which is often the 'story' for the high school and college ages). it was very scientific. i need a website to promote it, then charge subscriptions.

 

[PaceFLVol]

you get the feeling of the guys who sat around and thought this up were just having fun. now they're laughing at everyone who takes it so seriously.

i once made up a formula for what the true probability of getting a girl pregnant on your first time (which is often the 'story' for the high school and college ages). it was very scientific. i need a website to promote it, then charge subscriptions.

"What do you mean we are not top 50"!!!! "I checked the damn formula"!!!lol:

 

[thunder5]

"What do you mean we are not top 50"!!!! "I checked the damn formula"!!!lol:

Pacevol in another thread:

I would expect most Vol fans to be upset with us being ranked outside the top 50 with half our class commited. I would expect that most fans would agree with you as your yelling conspiracy and that is an excuse that is used alot on this board when it comes to Tennessee football and how it should be viewed. 1st it was ESPN, now it's Rivals. I'm sure it will be someone else next week trying to hold Tennessee down. We are going through a tough spot and while the rest of the SEC is stockpiling talent and counting up their "stars" we sit back and talk about character, grades, and bringing in kids who will stay out of jail. While it may help to wipe the black eye from the program...it's not looking to do much for the winning %. All the formulas in the word(accurate or not) will not equal wins when your having to cherry pick from the mid 2-3 star talent.

But in this thread where his assertions are mathmatically proven false....well...suddenly top 50 and star ratings are irrelevant

lol:lol:lol:

 

[PaceFLVol]

Pacevol in another thread:




But in this thread where his assertions are mathmatically proven false....well...suddenly top 50 and star ratings are irrelevant

lol:lol:lol:

I think your missing the point of almost all my posts in these 2 threads...is poking fun at you. Hold on..maybe I can come up with a formula to explain it.

 

[thunder5]

I think your missing the point of almost all my posts in these 2 threads...is poking fun at you. Hold on..maybe I can come up with a formula to explain it.

And I think you're missing the point...you bring nothing but baseless conjecture to this board and for some reason it's always skewed against the team you claim to pull for...

Even when I prove that something is off that is directly screwing UT you're still more concerned with sticking to your guns and saying whatever inane crap you need to get attention...

You can poke fun at me all you want...I have accomplished my goal of using facts to prove what I am claiming...and since this directly refutes the crap you have posted since we "dropped" out of the top 50 and since you have no facts to refute what I have posted you have resorterd to the only thing someone of your mental stature has at this point...mockery

 

[volroadwarrior]

You can figure anyway you want to prove a point one way or another. Use the good data and leave out the bad if you like the way things are going. Use the bad and leave out the good if you are a troll, want DD fired next year, didn't want DD hired in the first place. You can pick out the participants on this thread to see where they stand.

 

[thunder5]

You can figure anyway you want to prove a point one way or another. Use the good data and leave out the bad if you like the way things are going. Use the bad and leave out the good if you are a troll, want DD fired next year, didn't want DD hired in the first place. You can pick out the participants on this thread to see where they stand.

nm...sorry warrior

 

[volroadwarrior]

And I think you're missing the point...you bring nothing but baseless conjecture to this board and for some reason it's always skewed against the team you claim to pull for...

Even when I prove that something is off that is directly screwing UT you're still more concerned with sticking to your guns and saying whatever inane crap you need to get attention...

You can poke fun at me all you want...I have accomplished my goal using facts to prove what I am claiming...and since this directly refutes the crap you have posted since we "dropped" out of the top 50 and since you have no facts to refute what I have posted you have resorterd to the only thing someone of your mental stature has at this point...mockery

Don't get upset with Pace. We all know who he is!!

 

[TennGentry]

Get a life.

 

[g8terh8ter_eric]

Either which way, if a class plays up to a championship standard, the rankings prove themselves. If that class doesn't play up to that championship standard, then that is on the coaches. It will be 2014 before we know the standard to which Dooley will take us.

 

[thunder5]

Get a life.

Yet here you are taking the time to read through this thread and respond to it

 

[volroadwarrior]

nm...sorry warrior

I didn't follow the math, but I am sure you are correct. I am also confident that our recruiting and program are all going in the right direction.

I like the kids we have now and like our chances to fill out the class nicely. It is only July and most of the best prospects are not committed and some that are committed might get turned.

I also don't like our chances to end up with a top 10 class even if we win 10 games this year. It won't matter if we can get a couple of good DTs and LBs. Next year will be much better if we have a decent record in 2011.

For guys like Pace, he has an agenda and thinks he will prove you wrong even if your facts are indisputable. He reminds me of a present politician who runs up the debt and blames the other guys for not giving him more to borrow. It is best to just ignore him.

 

[PaceFLVol]

I didn't follow the math, but I am sure you are correct. I am also confident that our recruiting and program are all going in the right direction.

I like the kids we have now and like our chances to fill out the class nicely. It is only July and most of the best prospects are not committed and some that are committed might get turned.

I also don't like our chances to end up with a top 10 class even if we win 10 games this year. It won't matter if we can get a couple of good DTs and LBs. Next year will be much better if we have a decent record in 2011.

For guys like Pace, he has an agenda and thinks he will prove you wrong even if your facts are indisputable. He reminds me of a present politician who runs up the debt and blames the other guys for not giving him more to borrow. It is best to just ignore him.

Facts are what a person wants to believe them to be.

Arkansas has a ranking of 3.08, Rutgers has a ranking of 2.92, Tennessee has a ranking of 2.90. It's not hard for me to see why we are rated behind them. :thumbsup:

I did not even need a 2 page formula to figure it out.

 

[thunder5]

Facts are what a person wants to believe them to be.

Arkansas has a ranking of 3.08, Rutgers has a ranking of 2.92, Tennessee has a ranking of 2.90. It's not hard for me to see why we are rated behind them. :thumbsup:

I did not even need a 2 page formula to figure it out.

Nice try but the average rating factor is only a small portion of their formula...and it only has an effect when the team has an average rating of over 3...

So what you just tried to cite as a reason only has about a 2% effect on the total score...

And what you have cited should be in and of itself a red flag to you...if you truly believe that's all that matters then why does a team with a 0.02 higher average rating have a rank of 30th and UT isn't even in the top 50?

There's no way for you to dance around this...their calculations are off...you should save yourself some time and not try to find any more current examples that refute this...they don't exist

 

[Volinnooga]

Wake me up when, and if, this thread gets interesting

 

[PaceFLVol]

Nice try but the average rating factor is only a small portion of their formula...and it only has an effect when the team has an average rating of over 3...

So what you just tried to cite as a reason only has about a 2% effect on the total score...

And what you have cited should be in and of itself a red flag to you...if you truly believe that's all that matters then why does a team with a 0.02 higher average rating have a rank of 30th and UT isn't even in the top 50?

There's no way for you to dance around this...their calculations are off...you should save yourself some time and not try to find any more current examples that refute this...they don't exist

Odd....2 % huh?

The Arkansas total comes out just right. The Rutgers total comes out just right...and both would be above Tennessee. Maybe you just gave us 2 bad examples as those were part of that 2% huh? I would guess that total class count comes into play as well and that would be why a team like Indiana while close to Tennessee's ranking # of 2.90 is higher as they have 4-5 more commits. As I said, unrated players may play into it as well.

 

[thunder5]

Odd....2 % huh?

The Arkansas total comes out just right. The Rutgers total comes out just right...and both would be above Tennessee. Maybe you just gave us 2 bad examples as those were part of that 2% huh? I would guess that total class count comes into play as well and that would be why a team like Indiana while close to Tennessee's ranking # of 2.90 is higher as they have 4-5 more commits. As I said, unrated players may play into it as well.

IF the formula is the same or similar to the one they have used for the last 10 years the yes...average star rating is a very small part of the formula....

Total 4 and 5*'s is a huge part of the formula...but average rating is not at all...

You should just trust me that it doesn't add up...no matter how you look at it

 

[PaceFLVol]

IF the formula is the same or similar to the one they have used for the last 10 years the yes...average star rating is a very small part of the formula....

Total 4 and 5*'s is a huge part of the formula...but average rating is not at all...

You should just trust me that it doesn't add up...no matter how you look at it

Ok, I will just trust you.

Arkansas= 1 (4) star, and (11) 3 stars = 37 stars. Divide that by 12 players rated. It comes out to 3.08..which is their exact ranking per rivals. But...I will trust you and your formula. Maybe Arkansas was a bad example. :thumbsup:

I did that with 1st grade math..no formula needed.

 

[supersmo18]

Wut?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[NMVol]

I think I am observing some forum stalking in this thread. Some of us are not interested in seeing others tracked down so someone else can make their point for the umpteenth time. I appreciate the information on the board, the big personalities who are always putting down what's happening from day to day, not so much.

 

[DBBaker26]

FWIW I got a total of 311 points with the addition of Bullock(now one 4star, seven 3stars,one 2 star, and 3 NR's). Your numbers look spot on to me Thunder. Only thing i can think of is someone was too lazy to update the formula where they add points for your avg. stars being over 3.0. Ours actually gives a negative "N" value if the formula isn't adjusted.

 

[thunder5]

Ok, I will just trust you.

Arkansas= 1 (4) star, and (11) 3 stars = 37 stars. Divide that by 12 players rated. It comes out to 3.08..which is their exact ranking per rivals. But...I will trust you and your formula. Maybe Arkansas was a bad example. :thumbsup:

I did that with 1st grade math..no formula needed.

Do you have some kind of learning disability? Is that what's wrong here?

What you did in this post was make up your own formula to try to understand the rankings as they are right now...

3.08 is NOT their ranking...it is their average star rating...which is only a small factor in the overall formula used to calculate a total point score...which leads to an overall ranking which is 26th for Arkansas...

Here is a link to the formula Rivls has used for the last 10 years to come up with their team rankings:

Rivals formula for their rankings. - FalconsLIFE

What you posted above was an absolutely pathetic attempt to refute the math I have done based on the weighted residual formula that Rivals uses...

But I will say this...it doesn't surprise me at all that you want to stick with 1st grade level math...as a matter of fact it's exactly what I would expect out of you

 

[thunder5]

FWIW I got a total of 311 points with the addition of Bullock(now one 4star, seven 3stars,one 2 star, and 3 NR's). Your numbers look spot on to me Thunder. Only thing i can think of is someone was too lazy to update the formula where they add points for your avg. stars being over 3.0. Ours actually gives a negative "N" value if the formula isn't adjusted.

Thank you...I think it's awesome that someone else does this math too...

I have noticed that as well about the negative star rating factor we have now...although the star rating factor isn't supposed to count if the average is below 3 so it's shouldn't be hurting us now...

The only way I was able to come up with the number they had before when we were at 37th (187) was to include the negative star rating and also drop the value for m to 85...

It doesn't add up...as you have confirmed