Harbins...Get Lost

RollingTrain said:
I would have liked to seen voting this year WITHOUT Joe Eitel doing his thing...and then maybe have him release points after that vote. You could def see some voting follow the points.
Click to expand...

How would that work? With the regions as screwed up as they are and the distance between some teams in the region, how would coaches be able to seed 24 teams without having something to look at. Eitel is great....you can see records, opponents, the opponents opponents, scores, etc. Without out it, a lot of the voting would be like pulling teams out of a hat. With teams moving up and down in divisions every couple years and regions changing all the time because of this, expecting coaches to know where they'd seed every team in their region would be a disaster
 
I think there needs to be a combination of harbin points and a strength of record adjustment. If you are say, 7-3, but your 3 losses were to either undefeated teams or one score games it’s a better record than a 9-1 or 10-0 team that faces a schedule that has a combined record of less than .500. The voting process this year in theory was smart because you had to turn in your teams resume from the past two years so the other teams could base their vote on how your teams makeup has changed or improved. I don’t believe that the coaches alone should be the ones voting tho. There should be a committee of a combination of newspaper/radio, coaches, and OHSAA officials and then aggregate the rankings for each region.
 
carefree93 said:
Elder fans this year - this Voting process is garbage
Elder fans a few years ago when they didn’t make the playoffs - the Harbins are garbage

Its not the process, it’s the entitled complainers. When you think you walk on water, nothing is good enough.
Click to expand...

1 Elder poster posted and made no mention of the process yet here you are. Rent free lol
 
Yet every Elder blowhard in other threads are preaching how they got screwed with a .500 record Lol

I can’t wait for the “they need to move the game to a bigger venue” thread lol
 
carefree93 said:
Yet every Elder blowhard in other threads are preaching how they got screwed with a .500 record Lol

I can’t wait for the “they need to move the game to a bigger venue” thread lol
Click to expand...

Not one mention in this thread yet you're complaining. Rent free lmao
 
I think the Head to Head needs to be added in some way. Northmont beat Springfield and are still lower than them. They play the same teams.
 
KramericaIndustries said:
the end result was still MILES ahead and FAR more equitable than the brackets the archaic 1940's Harbin computer produces.
Click to expand...

Don't know about other regions, but at least in Region 4, the exact opposite is true.

Harbins are COMPLETE GARBAGE and for as outraged as so many of you homers are capable of getting on other subjects, I find it amazing that we can't channel this outrage for the common cause of modernizing this hopelessly outdated and incredibly unfair and illogical rating system.

I bet if someone broke one of the vacuum tubes on the Harbin computer, it would be so old that no one is making replacement parts for it anymore
Click to expand...

To the extent you are arguing that the Harbin system is a poor computer ranking system, I absolutely agree. Better than the RPI system that the NCAA FINALLY got rid of last year, but not by much.

So, yes, I would be more than happy to ditch the Harbins in favor of any of a multitude of other, much more accurate, computer models. But as we have just seen, coaches voting seems to be a very, very bad alternative. So in that respect, if the choice is coach voting or Harbins, I would take the Harbins everyday.
 
L Hand said:
So, yes, I would be more than happy to ditch the Harbins in favor of any of a multitude of other, much more accurate, computer models.
Click to expand...

Yeah, like yappi polls, especially ones from the purple posse.

How do you people not realize that any system will have its set of complainers when that said system produces a result negative to the team they are rooting for. The same would happen with any new system that is generated.

its not the system, it’s the idiots. For better or for worse, the Harbins have done a pretty decent job of generating teams good enough to make the playoffs. No system is or ever will be perfect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: y2h
KramericaIndustries said:
I'm sorry you dont realize that a ranking algorithm system oriented around a single piece of logic (wins) that literally was written over 50 years ago is both archaic in absolute terms and in terms of what computer science is able to do. Back then, yes it was tough to write logic and you would have to accept a lazy algorithm with 1 argument. Now a kid could do it on his home computer and use 10 factors.
Click to expand...

50 years ago huh? I guess the voting system by coaches is current? I mean we havent used this type of system for very long right? SMH

I would agree this playoff system will give you a better, truer champ than previous years because you do not get penalized near as heavy for scheduling stiffer competition and losing. The only penalty is the potential for lower seeding but at the end of the day the best team will win it all and there is no disputing it because if you felt you were better you should have just won your game. The system is better because of inclusion of more teams, not because the "voters" are smart. it is simply a better system because everyone has their shot. Yes some draws in the brackets look better than others but at the end of the day the teams have their shot. Some of these match ups are ones we would never see without the current system. I hope next year that do it again.
 
KramericaIndustries said:
A lot of Karen-ing going on about how various coaches voted, and some very impressive troll jobs by many of the coaches, but the really interesting thing is despite how incredibly bad some of that voting was, the end result was still MILES ahead and FAR more equitable than the brackets the archaic 1940's Harbin computer produces.

Harbins are COMPLETE GARBAGE and for as outraged as so many of you homers are capable of getting on other subjects, I find it amazing that we can't channel this outrage for the common cause of modernizing this hopelessly outdated and incredibly unfair and illogical rating system.

I bet if someone broke one of the vacuum tubes on the Harbin computer, it would be so old that no one is making replacement parts for it anymore
Click to expand...
Harbins should be extended to other team sports.
 
KramericaIndustries said:
Writing computer programs that factor in more than who beat who are becoming easier all the time. There are countless examples at the pro and college level, but just for starters, the Drew Pastuer computer does 10X better job of providing fairer rankings than Harbin ever did. Bill Connellys S/P+ rankings for college are among the most detailed and accurate I've seen. Just takes a little effort to write criteria and have someone program it.

Otherwise you end up with crap like Winton Woods beating the eventual D2 champion in week 10, but not making the playoffs in favor of some goat herder school who ran up a 9-1 record beating up on tomato cans
Click to expand...
Guess they shouldve won more games ?‍♂️

In their 3 losses they allowed 51 and 42 twice. Nice win over LaSalle though.
 
KramericaIndustries said:
I'm sorry you dont realize that a ranking algorithm system oriented around a single piece of logic (wins) that literally was written over 50 years ago is both archaic in absolute terms and in terms of what computer science is able to do. Back then, yes it was tough to write logic and you would have to accept a lazy algorithm with 1 argument. Now a kid could do it on his home computer and use 10 factors.
Click to expand...
I don't know, but did they even use a computer program in 1972? Doesn't seem likely.

10 factors? Why? There is something elegant in simplicity. Just win baby.

Any system that includes votes by coaches, a committee, or the prejudices of whoever designs the computer program is more seriously flawed.
 
KramericaIndustries said:
This isn't the "only issue". This is THE issue. Harbin's do NOT measure the quality of the opponent, they only measure wins. Massillon can lose a 24-23 game to St Eds and get ZERO playoff consideration for it while Wooster is earning points for beating D3 New Lexington, and then earning more points when New Lexington goes off and beats some D4 teams. It's positively laughable.
Click to expand...
You want to reward failure?
 
y2h said:
You want to reward failure?
Click to expand...
I'm thinking Kramerica might have had a little too much of the medicinal edibles when he started this thread. The logic train went off the rails awhile back, but the caboose is still moving forward . . .
 
You can only have coaches rank teams when everyone gets in. Hopefully next year we will be back to a more "normal" scenario.
 
y2h said:
You want to reward failure?
Click to expand...

I want to reward teams who have demonstrated the most ability with an opportunity to win a championship. Rock-headed morons who need things dumbed down may only be able to think about that in terms of who won and who lost. But computer models can reward teams who showed exceptional ability vs. top competition and maybe happened to lose to the game and prioritize that over some school who went 9-1 beating D4 teams all year.

7-3, 6-4 teams put running clocks on 9-1 teams that played lesser competition every year in the playoffs. Those 7-3 teams aren't "failures", they actually challenged themselves and were TONS better a team than the 9-1 team.

It's fine to say wins count more than losses in a ranking system, that makes sense. What doesn't make sense is that wins count for 100% of the system and losses 0%.
 
AHS74 said:
You can only have coaches rank teams when everyone gets in. Hopefully next year we will be back to a more "normal" scenario.
Click to expand...

That was the original point of this thread.

Despite some absolutely horrific coach voting in certain cases, the end result was far more "normal" and logical than any Harbin brackets have ever been.
 
KramericaIndustries said:
That was the original point of this thread.

Despite some absolutely horrific coach voting in certain cases, the end result was far more "normal" and logical than any Harbin brackets have ever been.
Click to expand...
"Despite some absolutely horrific coach voting in certain cases" is the key phrase there. Overall, coaches cannot be counted on to be objective in football. Sorry :censored:
 
Let's take this discussion to the limits of absurdity. Let's use a system that rewards wins and losses. Three points for a win and one for a loss. Add a bonus point if a running clock is put on a team. Then have the coaches vote seedings for the top 12 teams. Then place the top eight in the playoffs. That should make for some great discussion.
 
There’s nothing wrong with the Harbins. It’s intent is to identify playoff caliber teams based on performance metrics, not pick the best teams. In virtually every year, it does that.

But at the same time, you have to win some too. You can’t just play a great schedule and feel obligated to be in just because of that. You have to win some to prove you are playoff caliber.
 
KramericaIndustries said:
That was the original point of this thread.

Despite some absolutely horrific coach voting in certain cases, the end result was far more "normal" and logical than any Harbin brackets have ever been.
Click to expand...
I give you a tough time Kramer, but I couldn't agree with you more on this. Beating up on goat herders & tomato cans will continue to trip the current system. I definitely understand where you are coming from.
 
Unless you plan on having every team in the playoffs the Harbin system or something similar is necessary. You don’t want coaches voting other teams into and out of the playoffs.
 
So why not do what we are doing this year but just with some adjustments?

1. Play a 9-game regular season.
2. Teams can still opt-out of playoffs just like this year and schedule a 10th game with another opt out.
3. The teams & the OHSAA will split the revenue of first round & second round (week 10 & 11) playoff games. This will make up for lost home game for schools and give the OHSAA revenue they currently do not have.
4. The top seeds still get byes for week 10 which is good because they are the most likely to play 6 playoff games.

What the downside to this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top