jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) (10/23/84)
It seems everybody in this news group is writing programs these days to
predict NFL games. Well, I am no exception. Actually, my program was
written a while ago but I only recently got the data I needed to try it
out, and I didn't really write it as a predictor, although it doesn't seem
to do a bad job of predicting winners. Anyway, the idea behind this
program is that a team's won-lost-tied record doesn't really give you a
true indication of how well that team has been doing because it doesn't
take into consideration who they've played. I believe I've solved that
problem by awarding "good points" for wins and "bad points" for losses.
(a tie counts as half a win and half a loss) The number of good or bad
points awarded for each game depends on who the opponent was, using the
idea that wins against good teams are the most valuable and losses against
bad teams are the most detrimental. These good and bad points are then
used to calculate a rating that in most cases is roughly equivalent to
what the team's won/lost percentage would be if they had played average
competition. Also, looking at the good and bad points can tell you a lot
about a team's character. A team with a large number of good and bad points
(example: St. Louis) has probably been involved in a few upsets, while a team
with a small number of good and bad points (like San Diego and New England)
has been very consistent. Anyway, without further ado, here are the rankings:
Last This
Week Week GP W L T PCT GOOD BAD RATING
1 1 MIAMI 8 8 0 0 1.000 8.2 0.0 1.000
2 2 SAN FRANCISCO 8 7 1 0 0.875 5.6 0.9 0.789
4 3 LA RAIDERS 8 7 1 0 0.875 5.2 0.5 0.789
3 4 WASHINGTON 8 5 3 0 0.625 5.7 1.1 0.779
5 5 DENVER 8 7 1 0 0.875 5.1 0.8 0.760
6 6 NEW ENGLAND 8 5 3 0 0.625 4.0 0.4 0.720
9 7 NY JETS 8 6 2 0 0.750 4.4 1.5 0.679
7 8 SEATTLE 8 6 2 0 0.750 3.8 1.0 0.672
15 9 ST. LOUIS 8 5 3 0 0.625 5.3 2.8 0.651
12 10 DALLAS 8 5 3 0 0.625 4.5 2.1 0.646
13 11 CHICAGO 8 5 3 0 0.625 3.8 2.1 0.605
8 12 PITTSBURGH 8 4 4 0 0.500 4.5 3.6 0.555
11 13 KANSAS CITY 8 4 4 0 0.500 3.0 2.2 0.548
10 14 NY GIANTS 8 4 4 0 0.500 3.4 2.8 0.539
14 15 LA RAMS 8 5 3 0 0.625 3.3 3.0 0.519
17 16 PHILADELPHIA 8 4 4 0 0.500 2.7 2.5 0.513
16 17 SAN DIEGO 8 4 4 0 0.500 1.6 2.4 0.448
22 18 INDIANAPOLIS 8 3 5 0 0.375 1.6 2.8 0.429
18 19 NEW ORLEANS 8 3 5 0 0.375 2.0 4.3 0.356
19 20 ATLANTA 8 3 5 0 0.375 1.9 5.3 0.288
23 21 DETROIT 8 3 5 0 0.375 1.5 5.1 0.283
21 22 TAMPA BAY 8 3 5 0 0.375 1.4 5.2 0.269
26 23 CINCINNATI 8 2 6 0 0.250 0.6 4.4 0.263
25 24 GREEN BAY 8 1 7 0 0.125 1.3 5.6 0.236
20 25 CLEVELAND 8 1 7 0 0.125 1.1 5.7 0.221
24 26 MINNESOTA 8 2 6 0 0.250 1.1 6.1 0.200
27 27 BUFFALO 8 0 8 0 0.000 0.0 5.2 0.185
28 28 HOUSTON 8 0 8 0 0.000 0.0 7.3 0.056
Since the program ignores points, it can't pick spreads, but to pick winners,
just take the highest rated team of the two. Using that method, it was 10-4
in week 8 and correctly predicted the following upsets: Chicago over Tampa,
Detroit over Minnesota, and Rams over Atlanta. If nobody complains, I'll
post my rankings every week. (without the long explanation at the beginning)
--
Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073
{linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsrgv!dciem!jeff
{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jeffjeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) (10/31/84)
This is my second weekly posting of my program's NFL ratings. It did
pretty well last week, picking 11 of the 14 winners (all except Denver,
Green Bay and the Giants). Something very interesting has happened this
week: Buffalo has moved ahead of three teams in the rankings. This
doesn't really make sense because Buffalo at 0-9 couldn't be doing any
worse than they have, but if you look at the other side of the story, the
program is telling us something that is probably very important. It says
that with Buffalo's very tough schedule, they haven't really had a good
chance to win many games, so based on the games that they've played so
far, you can't conclude that they're any worse than 24th because they
haven't played enough weak teams. On the other hand, the teams ranked
below the Bills have had very easy schedules and have played a lot of weak
teams, and lost to most of them, thus proving that they belong at the
bottom of the rankings. Things will make more sense after Sunday's game
between Cleveland and Buffalo because it will be our first chance to see
how the Bills stack up against very weak competition.
Last This
Week Week TEAM (DIV) GP W L T PCT GOOD BAD RATING
1 1 MIAMI (AE) 9 9 0 0 1.000 8.7 0.0 0.986
5 2 DENVER (AW) 9 8 1 0 0.889 6.5 0.7 0.820
2 3 SAN FRANCISCO (NW) 9 8 1 0 0.889 6.4 0.9 0.806
6 4 NEW ENGLAND (AE) 9 6 3 0 0.667 5.4 0.6 0.766
3 5 LA RAIDERS (AW) 9 7 2 0 0.778 5.0 0.7 0.739
4 6 WASHINGTON (NE) 9 5 4 0 0.556 5.9 1.8 0.727
9 7 ST. LOUIS (NE) 9 6 3 0 0.667 6.3 2.7 0.704
8 8 SEATTLE (AW) 9 7 2 0 0.778 4.6 1.0 0.701
10 9 DALLAS (NE) 9 6 3 0 0.667 5.4 1.9 0.695
7 10 NY JETS (AE) 9 6 3 0 0.667 4.4 1.8 0.646
11 11 CHICAGO (NC) 9 6 3 0 0.667 4.3 1.8 0.639
14 12 NY GIANTS (NE) 9 5 4 0 0.556 4.8 2.9 0.604
12 13 PITTSBURGH (AC) 9 5 4 0 0.556 5.0 3.7 0.570
13 14 KANSAS CITY (AW) 9 5 4 0 0.556 3.4 2.3 0.561
15 15 LA RAMS (NW) 9 5 4 0 0.556 3.5 3.4 0.505
16 16 PHILADELPHIA (NE) 9 4 5 0 0.444 2.7 2.9 0.490
17 17 SAN DIEGO (AW) 9 4 5 0 0.444 1.3 3.1 0.400
18 18 INDIANAPOLIS (AE) 9 3 6 0 0.333 1.6 3.5 0.394
19 19 NEW ORLEANS (NW) 9 4 5 0 0.444 2.3 4.2 0.393
24 20 GREEN BAY (NC) 9 2 7 0 0.222 1.8 5.5 0.294
23 21 CINCINNATI (AC) 9 3 6 0 0.333 0.4 4.3 0.286
20 22 ATLANTA (NW) 9 3 6 0 0.333 1.8 6.3 0.250
22 23 TAMPA BAY (NC) 9 3 6 0 0.333 1.3 5.9 0.244
27 24 BUFFALO (AE) 9 0 9 0 0.000 0.0 5.0 0.221
21 25 DETROIT (NC) 9 3 6 0 0.333 1.3 6.6 0.207
25 26 CLEVELAND (AC) 9 1 8 0 0.111 1.1 6.6 0.194
26 27 MINNESOTA (NC) 9 2 7 0 0.222 0.9 7.2 0.153
28 28 HOUSTON (AC) 9 0 9 0 0.000 0.0 8.9 0.004
--
Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073
{linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsrgv!dciem!jeff
{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jeffjeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) (11/06/84)
Well, my program had a terrible week picking winners (7-7, counting the
tie as a wrong pick); however, several of the teams that were involved
in upsets had high totals of both good and bad points (St. Louis, the
Giants, the Rams and New Orleans especially) which, as I said two weeks
ago, means they had a good chance of being involved in an upset. Anyway,
regardless of whether it can predict winners, I still think the program
is the best indicator of the true meaning of a team's won/lost record.
Here are the revised ratings:
Last This
Week Week TEAM (DIV) GP W L T PCT GOOD BAD RATING
1 1 MIAMI (AE) 10 10 0 0 1.000 9.0 0.0 0.950
2 2 DENVER (AW) 10 9 1 0 0.900 8.0 0.6 0.870
3 3 SAN FRANCISCO (NW) 10 9 1 0 0.900 7.1 0.9 0.810
8 4 SEATTLE (AW) 10 8 2 0 0.800 6.3 1.1 0.759
5 5 LA RAIDERS (AW) 10 7 3 0 0.700 5.7 1.1 0.727
4 6 NEW ENGLAND (AE) 10 6 4 0 0.600 5.3 1.0 0.710
6 7 WASHINGTON (NE) 10 6 4 0 0.600 6.1 2.0 0.705
11 8 CHICAGO (NC) 10 7 3 0 0.700 6.0 2.0 0.701
12 9 NY GIANTS (NE) 10 6 4 0 0.600 5.9 2.9 0.646
9 10 DALLAS (NE) 10 6 4 0 0.600 5.5 2.8 0.635
7 11 ST. LOUIS (NE) 10 6 4 0 0.600 5.9 3.6 0.617
10 12 NY JETS (AE) 10 6 4 0 0.600 4.1 2.1 0.598
15 13 LA RAMS (NW) 10 6 4 0 0.600 4.8 3.5 0.567
13 14 PITTSBURGH (AC) 10 6 4 0 0.600 5.1 3.9 0.557
14 15 KANSAS CITY (AW) 10 5 5 0 0.500 3.6 2.9 0.533
17 16 SAN DIEGO (AW) 10 5 5 0 0.500 2.4 3.0 0.469
16 17 PHILADELPHIA (NE) 10 4 5 1 0.450 3.0 3.9 0.452
20 18 GREEN BAY (NC) 10 3 7 0 0.300 2.5 5.2 0.362
19 19 NEW ORLEANS (NW) 10 4 6 0 0.400 2.2 5.3 0.343
18 20 INDIANAPOLIS (AE) 10 3 7 0 0.300 1.4 5.1 0.313
21 21 CINCINNATI (AC) 10 3 7 0 0.300 0.5 4.7 0.288
22 22 ATLANTA (NW) 10 3 7 0 0.300 1.8 6.4 0.270
25 23 DETROIT (NC) 10 3 6 1 0.350 1.9 6.6 0.267
26 24 CLEVELAND (AC) 10 2 8 0 0.200 1.4 6.7 0.237
27 25 MINNESOTA (NC) 10 3 7 0 0.300 1.5 6.8 0.237
23 26 TAMPA BAY (NC) 10 3 7 0 0.300 1.7 7.1 0.229
24 27 BUFFALO (AE) 10 0 10 0 0.000 0.0 7.1 0.146
28 28 HOUSTON (AC) 10 0 10 0 0.000 0.0 10.0 0.002
--
Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073
{linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsrgv!dciem!jeff
{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jeff