East Region Fan Poll

[MRMIKESMITH]

Just awaiting one more ballot. If I don't receive it by noon, I'll add in Hansen, similar to last week.

[Oline89]

Just awaiting one more ballot. If I don't receive it by noon, I'll add in Hansen, similar to next week.

Just my lonely opinion, but nobody biases against the East more than Hansen.  You already have a few pollsters from the LL, so I don't want to jump in and inadvertently affect  the poll....

[Pat Coleman]

It's not a national poll -- doesn't matter where the algorithm ranks the East nationally in a regional poll!

[jamtod]

Just awaiting one more ballot. If I don't receive it by noon, I'll add in Hansen, similar to next week.

Just my lonely opinion, but nobody biases against the East more than Hansen.  You already have a few pollsters from the LL, so I don't want to jump in and inadvertently affect  the poll....

The statistical analysis is biased against the east is quite the bold take.

[Oline89]

Just awaiting one more ballot. If I don't receive it by noon, I'll add in Hansen, similar to next week.

Just my lonely opinion, but nobody biases against the East more than Hansen.  You already have a few pollsters from the LL, so I don't want to jump in and inadvertently affect  the poll....

The statistical analysis is biased against the east is quite the bold take.

Not that bold at all, it is built into his algorithm.  Just ask him. 

[Oline89]

It's not a national poll -- doesn't matter where the algorithm ranks the East nationally in a regional poll!

I just don't put full value in an algorithm that by design biases against  the region that you are trying to rank.

[jamtod]

Just awaiting one more ballot. If I don't receive it by noon, I'll add in Hansen, similar to next week.

Just my lonely opinion, but nobody biases against the East more than Hansen.  You already have a few pollsters from the LL, so I don't want to jump in and inadvertently affect  the poll....

The statistical analysis is biased against the east is quite the bold take.

Not that bold at all, it is built into his algorithm.  Just ask him.

I've discussed this with him before. It's true that past playoff results are built into the algorithm (calculations, actually) though.

[Oline89]

Just awaiting one more ballot. If I don't receive it by noon, I'll add in Hansen, similar to next week.

Just my lonely opinion, but nobody biases against the East more than Hansen.  You already have a few pollsters from the LL, so I don't want to jump in and inadvertently affect  the poll....

The statistical analysis is biased against the east is quite the bold take.

Not that bold at all, it is built into his algorithm.  Just ask him.

I've discussed this with him before. It's true that past playoff results are built into the algorithm (calculations, actually) though.

https://twitter.com/RyanLasal_RSN/status/1183744486578556928

[jamtod]

Just awaiting one more ballot. If I don't receive it by noon, I'll add in Hansen, similar to next week.

Just my lonely opinion, but nobody biases against the East more than Hansen.  You already have a few pollsters from the LL, so I don't want to jump in and inadvertently affect  the poll....

The statistical analysis is biased against the east is quite the bold take.

Not that bold at all, it is built into his algorithm.  Just ask him.

I've discussed this with him before. It's true that past playoff results are built into the algorithm (calculations, actually) though.

https://twitter.com/RyanLasal_RSN/status/1183744486578556928

I've read this before. I don't think it makes a case for any sort of bias, aside from whatever historical (factual) bias exists based on east team performance in cross-regional games (mostly in the playoffs).

[HansenRatings]

It's not a national poll -- doesn't matter where the algorithm ranks the East nationally in a regional poll!

I just don't put full value in an algorithm that by design biases against  the region that you are trying to rank.

Howdy y'all. Just to clarify something, I didn't design my model to explicitly downgrade the East region, nor do I do any sort of manual adjustment to do so. My model is the only publicly available computer ranking that was built with the particular nuances of DIII competition in mind. Compared to FBS, the nature of DIII competition:

• Is much more regional (it's in the dang mission statement)
• Is much less interconnected due to fewer non-conference opponents
• Has a much larger spread in team quality between the have's & have-not's

With that in mind, how should you compare a team from the UMAC, a very bad conference in the Midwest, to a team from the E8, a very good conference in the Northeast? Or a team from the ECFC to a team from the WIAC? They never play each other! The UMAC only plays 1 non-conference game per team! Shoot, ASC teams only played a cumulative 3 DIII non-conference opponents a couple years ago. Do I do what every other model does and "solve a system of equations" that takes those 3 games as the perfect gospel for those teams' quality relative to the rest of the nation? Or do I devise a system that doesn't reset every team's rating to 0 at the beginning of the season, and only increases their standing relative to the rest of the country if they actually do better against the rest of the country? I opted for the latter.

I would also say you probably shouldn't use a system designed to be predictive for a ranking of team's resumes.

[Pat Coleman]

It's not a national poll -- doesn't matter where the algorithm ranks the East nationally in a regional poll!

I just don't put full value in an algorithm that by design biases against  the region that you are trying to rank.

By results it seems to bias against it, but not against individual members of it. Seems like even if you don't like where it ranks East teams nationally, that it still should rank the East accurately within itself.

[Bombers798891]

With that in mind, how should you compare a team from the UMAC, a very bad conference in the Midwest, to a team from the E8, a very good conference in the Northeast? Or a team from the ECFC to a team from the WIAC? They never play each other! 

Or do I devise a system that...only increases their standing relative to the rest of the country if they actually do better against the rest of the country?

These two statements seem to sort of run counter to each other. The only way for a team's standing to go up or down is if they...do something they're almost never given the chance to?

And just to clarify, I don't really have an issue with IC's ranking, or the East's in general. But I can't remember the last time IC even played a team from another region. Either Frostburg in 2014 or Moravian in 2013, I'd guess?

[HansenRatings]

With that in mind, how should you compare a team from the UMAC, a very bad conference in the Midwest, to a team from the E8, a very good conference in the Northeast? Or a team from the ECFC to a team from the WIAC? They never play each other! 

Or do I devise a system that...only increases their standing relative to the rest of the country if they actually do better against the rest of the country?

These two statements seem to sort of run counter to each other. The only way for a team's standing to go up or down is if they...do something they're almost never given the chance to?

And just to clarify, I don't really have an issue with IC's ranking, or the East's in general. But I can't remember the last time IC even played a team from another region. Either Frostburg in 2014 or Moravian in 2013, I'd guess?

I used this analogy on that Twitter thread someone posted earlier, but I view my model like a heads-up poker tournament that started in 1997. Everyone had the same number of chips at the beginning, and then by playing against each other, some rooms (regions/conferences/whatever) of the casino have people with larger purses than other rooms. If I'm in the East region, I can increase my own personal pot by outperforming my opponents, but for my room's total purse to increase, someone in that room (it doesn't have to be me) has to get more chips from some other room. Then, when they come back to my room, there's more total chips for everyone.

[Bombers798891]

With that in mind, how should you compare a team from the UMAC, a very bad conference in the Midwest, to a team from the E8, a very good conference in the Northeast? Or a team from the ECFC to a team from the WIAC? They never play each other! 

Or do I devise a system that...only increases their standing relative to the rest of the country if they actually do better against the rest of the country?

These two statements seem to sort of run counter to each other. The only way for a team's standing to go up or down is if they...do something they're almost never given the chance to?

And just to clarify, I don't really have an issue with IC's ranking, or the East's in general. But I can't remember the last time IC even played a team from another region. Either Frostburg in 2014 or Moravian in 2013, I'd guess?

I used this analogy on that Twitter thread someone posted earlier, but I view my model like a heads-up poker tournament that started in 1997. Everyone had the same number of chips at the beginning, and then by playing against each other, some rooms (regions/conferences/whatever) of the casino have people with larger purses than other rooms. If I'm in the East region, I can increase my own personal pot by outperforming my opponents, but for my room's total purse to increase, someone in that room (it doesn't have to be me) has to get more chips from some other room. Then, when they come back to my room, there's more total chips for everyone.

Right. Except it's not heads up poker if you never play against someone whose chips you can take

[HansenRatings]

With that in mind, how should you compare a team from the UMAC, a very bad conference in the Midwest, to a team from the E8, a very good conference in the Northeast? Or a team from the ECFC to a team from the WIAC? They never play each other! 

Or do I devise a system that...only increases their standing relative to the rest of the country if they actually do better against the rest of the country?

These two statements seem to sort of run counter to each other. The only way for a team's standing to go up or down is if they...do something they're almost never given the chance to?

And just to clarify, I don't really have an issue with IC's ranking, or the East's in general. But I can't remember the last time IC even played a team from another region. Either Frostburg in 2014 or Moravian in 2013, I'd guess?

I used this analogy on that Twitter thread someone posted earlier, but I view my model like a heads-up poker tournament that started in 1997. Everyone had the same number of chips at the beginning, and then by playing against each other, some rooms (regions/conferences/whatever) of the casino have people with larger purses than other rooms. If I'm in the East region, I can increase my own personal pot by outperforming my opponents, but for my room's total purse to increase, someone in that room (it doesn't have to be me) has to get more chips from some other room. Then, when they come back to my room, there's more total chips for everyone.

Right. Except it's not heads up poker if you never play against someone whose chips you can take

But if I you and I are in the same room, and play against each other frequently, and you go play in a different room, I can take some of your winnings from you the next time we play!