Latest topics
Log in
Be An Athletic Supporter!
Donate and get this nifty tag!
Statistics
We have 15806 registered usersThe newest registered user is Karly
Our users have posted a total of 205242 messages in 32019 subjects
'04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
Page 1 of 2 • Share
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2 
'04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Guest 27/03/12, 11:23 pm
I've spent the last couple of weeks working on this.
This is an '04 FBR using the same methodology that I have used with the '01 and '02 FBR rankings.
For a detailed explanation of the methodology and calculation formula, please see the website that bobmac15 has put together: http://www.ntxsoccer.net
FBR as mslater and I designed it to work, uses actual game results to determine placement of teams into the different weighted ranking tiers. In order to properly calibrate the ranking tiers, you need a reasonable # of “crossover” games between teams playing in different leagues/divisions. These normally come from tournament games and/or teams that play in more than one league. For the '04's, this was this biggest challenge, due to the # of different leagues/divisions, and more importantly, the number of “top” teams that are playing up in leagues with primarily ’03 teams.
The academy scene in NTX is pretty dynamic, so normally, for academy age rankings, I don’t like to include results that are more than 3-4 months old. However, for the ‘04’s I decided that I had to include results going all the way back to Sept. 2011, in order to have enough crossover results to properly calibrate the ranking tiers, and to frankly have enough results against ’04 teams to get a reasonably accurate ranking for some of the better ’04 teams.
After combing through a lot of the results and ranking posts from the past few months on the ’04 forum, I think that these FBR results are pretty reasonable. My goal is never to put out a “perfect” ranking… there is no such thing… my goal is to put out something that gives a good general overview of the relative strength of teams that I can defend based on the actual game result data.
If you get bent out of shape because Team A is ranked above Team B, or Team X is ranked a few spots too high or too low in your mind, then you are really missing the big picture. The primary value (other than feeding the endless forum debate monster), is to hopefully provide parents/coaches/leagues/tournaments with good general assessment on the strength of teams so that coaches could use it to help select leagues/tournaments that will provide an appropriate level of competition for their teams and league/tournament directors can use them to help set up divisions/brackets that are competitive.
Anyway, enough long-winded explanation… here you go ‘04’s…
If you like this, GREAT! ENJOY IT!
If you hate this, GREAT! IGNORE IT!
'04 FBR Rankings - 03-27-12
Current '04 FBR Ranking Tiers
Intra-Tier Records
This is an '04 FBR using the same methodology that I have used with the '01 and '02 FBR rankings.
For a detailed explanation of the methodology and calculation formula, please see the website that bobmac15 has put together: http://www.ntxsoccer.net
FBR as mslater and I designed it to work, uses actual game results to determine placement of teams into the different weighted ranking tiers. In order to properly calibrate the ranking tiers, you need a reasonable # of “crossover” games between teams playing in different leagues/divisions. These normally come from tournament games and/or teams that play in more than one league. For the '04's, this was this biggest challenge, due to the # of different leagues/divisions, and more importantly, the number of “top” teams that are playing up in leagues with primarily ’03 teams.
The academy scene in NTX is pretty dynamic, so normally, for academy age rankings, I don’t like to include results that are more than 3-4 months old. However, for the ‘04’s I decided that I had to include results going all the way back to Sept. 2011, in order to have enough crossover results to properly calibrate the ranking tiers, and to frankly have enough results against ’04 teams to get a reasonably accurate ranking for some of the better ’04 teams.
After combing through a lot of the results and ranking posts from the past few months on the ’04 forum, I think that these FBR results are pretty reasonable. My goal is never to put out a “perfect” ranking… there is no such thing… my goal is to put out something that gives a good general overview of the relative strength of teams that I can defend based on the actual game result data.
If you get bent out of shape because Team A is ranked above Team B, or Team X is ranked a few spots too high or too low in your mind, then you are really missing the big picture. The primary value (other than feeding the endless forum debate monster), is to hopefully provide parents/coaches/leagues/tournaments with good general assessment on the strength of teams so that coaches could use it to help select leagues/tournaments that will provide an appropriate level of competition for their teams and league/tournament directors can use them to help set up divisions/brackets that are competitive.
Anyway, enough long-winded explanation… here you go ‘04’s…
If you like this, GREAT! ENJOY IT!
If you hate this, GREAT! IGNORE IT!
'04 FBR Rankings - 03-27-12
Current '04 FBR Ranking Tiers
Intra-Tier Records
Guest- Guest
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by soccerinsane 28/03/12, 08:18 am
A huge thanks to you, again! I'm guessing this just doesn't include last weekend's games yet? 
soccerinsane- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 222
Points : 5305
Join date : 2011-01-12
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Guest 28/03/12, 08:26 am
soccerinsane wrote:
Anything that was reported on the forum or was updated on the various league websites prior to last night is included.
Primetime and DIAL have been slow getting their results posted this week. There was some spotty reporting on SDL scores (have to rely on the forum for those). Most of the EAL, UAL, PSA scores are posted and included.
Had a window of time to get everything posted last night, so I went ahead and did it.
Guest- Guest
soccerinsane- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 222
Points : 5305
Join date : 2011-01-12
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Shelby427 28/03/12, 08:37 am
Nice work. I think for the most part it looks great and I certainly agree with the tiers by about 95%.
I would also say of course this is a cumlitive ranking over time so it may not necessarily reflect how a team is playing TODAY versus other teams due to recent changes ect.
All of that being said, I did have a couple of questions.
1) What is Sting Goodman's record versus other teams in Tier 1 and Tier 2. I was not able to find this. What other 04 teams have they played in these tiers?
2) LP Barnes has a very good record, and was curious why they are so low. In my "current rankings" I have them significantly higher, which agian I know is not the same as this data based over-time calcuation, but still was wondering why they are not higher.
Thanks again.
Oh, also in the "tiers" section what is "cWL"? Is that the record INSIDE that tier?
I would also say of course this is a cumlitive ranking over time so it may not necessarily reflect how a team is playing TODAY versus other teams due to recent changes ect.
All of that being said, I did have a couple of questions.
1) What is Sting Goodman's record versus other teams in Tier 1 and Tier 2. I was not able to find this. What other 04 teams have they played in these tiers?
2) LP Barnes has a very good record, and was curious why they are so low. In my "current rankings" I have them significantly higher, which agian I know is not the same as this data based over-time calcuation, but still was wondering why they are not higher.
Thanks again.
Oh, also in the "tiers" section what is "cWL"? Is that the record INSIDE that tier?
Shelby427- TxSoccer Author
- Posts : 686
Points : 5753
Join date : 2011-02-28
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Shekicks04 28/03/12, 09:00 am
1) What is Sting Goodman's record versus other teams in Tier 1 and Tier 2. I was not able to find this. What other 04 teams have they played in these tiers?
Results of the Tier 1 and Tier 2 teams listed above that Sting Goodman has played so far:
Juve Black last Fall in Dial and tied 3-3.
DT North Rosales in SDL this Spring and lost 3-0.
Results of the Tier 1 and Tier 2 teams listed above that Sting Goodman has played so far:
Juve Black last Fall in Dial and tied 3-3.
DT North Rosales in SDL this Spring and lost 3-0.
Shekicks04- TxSoccer Poster
- Posts : 92
Points : 5306
Join date : 2010-09-12
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Shelby427 28/03/12, 09:11 am
Shekicks04 wrote:1) What is Sting Goodman's record versus other teams in Tier 1 and Tier 2. I was not able to find this. What other 04 teams have they played in these tiers?
Results of the Tier 1 and Tier 2 teams listed above that Sting Goodman has played so far:
Juve Black last Fall in Dial and tied 3-3.
DT North Rosales in SDL this Spring and lost 3-0.
I am assuming since this was 03 div that it was North Manchester... is this correct?
Shelby427- TxSoccer Author
- Posts : 686
Points : 5753
Join date : 2011-02-28
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Black Sheep 28/03/12, 09:15 am
Out of curiosity, how far back did you go with this? Just wondering why RASE only shows 5-0-1. Only 6 games?
Black Sheep- TxSoccer Poster
- Posts : 76
Points : 4692
Join date : 2012-03-27
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Shekicks04 28/03/12, 09:16 am
Shelby427 wrote:Shekicks04 wrote:1) What is Sting Goodman's record versus other teams in Tier 1 and Tier 2. I was not able to find this. What other 04 teams have they played in these tiers?
Results of the Tier 1 and Tier 2 teams listed above that Sting Goodman has played so far:
Juve Black last Fall in Dial and tied 3-3.
DT North Rosales in SDL this Spring and lost 3-0.
I am assuming since this was 03 div that it was North Manchester... is this correct?
Yes, that is correct.
Shekicks04- TxSoccer Poster
- Posts : 92
Points : 5306
Join date : 2010-09-12
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by FriscoSoccer2004 28/03/12, 09:20 am
Thank you for doing this bwgophers, you are the man!
I will take point on collecting SDL scores on the forum with my pretty spreadsheet I did before to help you out and make it easier on you to pull those together!
Will get the post setup soon with the schedule
Thanks again!
I will take point on collecting SDL scores on the forum with my pretty spreadsheet I did before to help you out and make it easier on you to pull those together!
Will get the post setup soon with the schedule
Thanks again!
FriscoSoccer2004- TxSoccer Sponsor
- Posts : 1785
Points : 7399
Join date : 2010-09-07
Location : planning my next grilling masterpiece
DT77dad- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 124
Points : 4862
Join date : 2011-12-08
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Rookie 28/03/12, 09:47 am
Looks great bwgophers.....now can we get you to do one for the 03s?
Rookie- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 155
Points : 5037
Join date : 2011-08-19
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by DTLD 28/03/12, 09:50 am
Didn't see this reported.
March 24
Solar Kennington 04 (3) vs. Liverpool Rush 03 (1)
March 24
Solar Kennington 04 (3) vs. Liverpool Rush 03 (1)
DTLD- TxSoccer Poster
- Posts : 42
Points : 4707
Join date : 2012-02-08
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by RoidRage 28/03/12, 09:59 am
Black Sheep wrote:Out of curiosity, how far back did you go with this? Just wondering why RASE only shows 5-0-1. Only 6 games?
I believe he only puts their record against other 04 teams and since RASE plays mostly against 03's they won't have a lot of games to list. I believe RASE has only played 1 tourny against 04's.
RoidRage- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 324
Points : 5556
Join date : 2010-09-08
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by ID 007 28/03/12, 10:00 am
Shekicks04 wrote:Shelby427 wrote:Shekicks04 wrote:1) What is Sting Goodman's record versus other teams in Tier 1 and Tier 2. I was not able to find this. What other 04 teams have they played in these tiers?
Results of the Tier 1 and Tier 2 teams listed above that Sting Goodman has played so far:
Juve Black last Fall in Dial and tied 3-3.
DT North Rosales in SDL this Spring and lost 3-0.
I am assuming since this was 03 div that it was North Manchester... is this correct?
Yes, that is correct.
For those interested in DT North Manchester's scores for this SDL spring season, three games have been played
DT North Manchester - 1
Sting 03 Parker - 0
DT North Manchester - 3
Sting 04 Goodman - 0
DT North Manchester - 4
Fort Worth FC 03 Byerly - 0
ID 007- TxSoccer Poster
- Posts : 20
Points : 5237
Join date : 2010-08-06
Location : Saving the World as you know it.
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by RoidRage 28/03/12, 10:02 am
BW...I believe you have Texas Spirit-Clark listed as Texas Spirit North and they are not part of the "North" Div of Texas Spirit.
RoidRage- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 324
Points : 5556
Join date : 2010-09-08
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Guest 28/03/12, 10:15 am
Sting Goodman question was answered by someone else.Shelby427 wrote:Nice work. I think for the most part it looks great and I certainly agree with the tiers by about 95%.
I would also say of course this is a cumlitive ranking over time so it may not necessarily reflect how a team is playing TODAY versus other teams due to recent changes ect.
All of that being said, I did have a couple of questions.
1) What is Sting Goodman's record versus other teams in Tier 1 and Tier 2. I was not able to find this. What other 04 teams have they played in these tiers?
2) LP Barnes has a very good record, and was curious why they are so low. In my "current rankings" I have them significantly higher, which agian I know is not the same as this data based over-time calcuation, but still was wondering why they are not higher.
Thanks again.
Oh, also in the "tiers" section what is "cWL"? Is that the record INSIDE that tier?
For LP Barnes, it's strength of schedule. Lot's of wins last fall, but against quite a bit of weaker competition. As you pointed out, this is a cumulative ranking. They are a team that appears to be playing stronger recently, maybe closer to the 10-13 range (lost 1-0 to #10 Tx Spirit, beat # 14 Sting Searls 3-0 recently), but until they produce some ties or wins against teams ranked above 13 or so, you'd have a tough time justifying moving them much higher than about 13 right now. So FBR might have them a few spots low based on their recent play, but not completely out of whack.
...and Yes, cWL is W-L record against teams from the same ranking tier.
Black Sheep wrote:Out of curiosity, how far back did you go with this? Just wondering why RASE only shows 5-0-1. Only 6 games?
I went back to the start of fall league play (weekend of Sept 10-11, 2011). In that time frame, I can only find 6 games that RASE played against other '04 teams. I am only including games against other '04 teams in the database. Sorry, but W-A-A-A-Y-Y-Y-Y-Y too much work if I had to start including '04 v '03 or '04 v '05 games in the database as well. If you know of more games that RASE has played against '04 girls teams since Sept., please let me know.
Got it. I will make the correction.RoidRage wrote:BW...I believe you have Texas Spirit-Clark listed as Texas Spirit North and they are not part of the "North" Div of Texas Spirit.
Guest- Guest
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Nocrying 28/03/12, 10:25 am
Good job. Now if we could come up with a way to get the top 10 in the same tourney.
Nocrying- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 371
Points : 5368
Join date : 2011-04-11
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Guest 28/03/12, 10:36 am
BW- Thank you for including some of the UAL teams. For a team like us (that is just starting out) the rankings help us find like-skilled opponents. We will continue to post our scores so that we can be part of the rankings.
Thanks again!
Thanks again!
Guest- Guest
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Guest 28/03/12, 10:42 am
Rookie wrote:Looks great bwgophers.....now can we get you to do one for the 03s?
Squeaky wheel gets the grease... '04's (who are giving the '01's a run for their money as the most over-the-top academy parents in NTX history
) were clamoring all over the place for rankings.'03's, not-so-much. They would be my next logical endeavor. Would need some "inside" help to get the '03's to do a better job of reporting SDL scores though. Pretty much all of the other leagues post their results on-line, but I have to rely on the forum for SDL scores.
Although I would fully expect the '03 forum to crank up starting next fall. Something about that year leading up to select that gets parents fired up. The '02's were a very quiet group until this year...
Guest- Guest
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Guest 28/03/12, 11:16 am
What was RASE score when they played Sting 03 Parker?
Guest- Guest
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by Rookie 28/03/12, 11:24 am
Here's all your RASE scores from that tournament
Note: name had not been changed yet
http://events.gotsport.com/events/schedule.aspx?EventID=21696&Sex=Girls&Age=9
Note: name had not been changed yet
http://events.gotsport.com/events/schedule.aspx?EventID=21696&Sex=Girls&Age=9
Rookie- TxSoccer Postmaster
- Posts : 155
Points : 5037
Join date : 2011-08-19
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by FriscoSoccer2004 29/03/12, 11:25 am
This is great stuff. Thank you for doing all that work!
FriscoSoccer2004- TxSoccer Sponsor
- Posts : 1785
Points : 7399
Join date : 2010-09-07
Location : planning my next grilling masterpiece
Re: '04 FBR Rankings 03-27-12
by soccer.stats.05 30/03/12, 08:35 pm
First, great work. I feel you pain....primarily in the data. Check out the 05 forum with the thread of: statistical rankings.
In the spirit of getting better results, let's get cerebral. First I acknowledge that no system is perfect and everyone strives to tweak to predict the future.
Why use tiers? My feeling is that tiers give a greater chance to ignore the true differential of the teams.
Your site says "We establish ranking Tiers in the FBR that give greater weighting to games played against stronger opponents." Why can't the weighting be the true difference of the teams.... which is the difference in the score of the game? Why water it down? Why try to correct actuals?
The FBR solution you use was created for American College Football. Suspect the developer implemented the weighting because they could not get enough statistical data in a college football season. College football teams average about 10 games a year (8 conference, 2 out of conference). Our academy soccer teams are averaging about 30 games a year (league and tournament). 3x more data and multiple tournaments that really help in normalizing the strength of schedule. Just don't think you need the tiers with all the games and cross play.
If the #1 team plays team #10 team. How much should team #1 wins by....statistically speaking? Hard to say with a more subjective weighting system. The 80/20 is more of a guess too....and it is applied across all teams/tiers (socialism?). You assign a value (eg 52, 26, 13...) for a win? You know the difference from the score though. The 40/10 on the weighted wins. How do you get 40/10? Applies to each age level the same also?
On the Most Weighted Wins, seems like the team that play less games are penalized. That concept is a bit like the one that gotsoccer uses ....and that is garbage (imo).....check out the rankings on their site. Not terribly reflective of the actual landscape if you are familiar with big girl soccer (aka select).
I don't want to do other age groups because data is a pain. PM me the data, I'll run it through my model, and send you the results without posting. See how close (or not) they are. We could track the last few weeks of the year to see which is more accurate. I've got no dog in the fight....just looking for the best mousetrap.
In the spirit of getting better results, let's get cerebral. First I acknowledge that no system is perfect and everyone strives to tweak to predict the future.
Why use tiers? My feeling is that tiers give a greater chance to ignore the true differential of the teams.
Your site says "We establish ranking Tiers in the FBR that give greater weighting to games played against stronger opponents." Why can't the weighting be the true difference of the teams.... which is the difference in the score of the game? Why water it down? Why try to correct actuals?
The FBR solution you use was created for American College Football. Suspect the developer implemented the weighting because they could not get enough statistical data in a college football season. College football teams average about 10 games a year (8 conference, 2 out of conference). Our academy soccer teams are averaging about 30 games a year (league and tournament). 3x more data and multiple tournaments that really help in normalizing the strength of schedule. Just don't think you need the tiers with all the games and cross play.
If the #1 team plays team #10 team. How much should team #1 wins by....statistically speaking? Hard to say with a more subjective weighting system. The 80/20 is more of a guess too....and it is applied across all teams/tiers (socialism?). You assign a value (eg 52, 26, 13...) for a win? You know the difference from the score though. The 40/10 on the weighted wins. How do you get 40/10? Applies to each age level the same also?
On the Most Weighted Wins, seems like the team that play less games are penalized. That concept is a bit like the one that gotsoccer uses ....and that is garbage (imo).....check out the rankings on their site. Not terribly reflective of the actual landscape if you are familiar with big girl soccer (aka select).
I don't want to do other age groups because data is a pain. PM me the data, I'll run it through my model, and send you the results without posting. See how close (or not) they are. We could track the last few weeks of the year to see which is more accurate. I've got no dog in the fight....just looking for the best mousetrap.
soccer.stats.05- TxSoccer Poster
- Posts : 17
Points : 4652
Join date : 2012-03-11
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Page 1 of 2
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
