Power Rankings (Human .v. Human games)

ibmax

adrian522 wrote: »

5 days is along time when half the games are CPU games anyway. It might be different if we had 32 players.

I'm a noob to all this but i've actually found the 5 day turnaround challenging at times. There have been several occasions where I'm the last one to play... thankfully Matthew has always been there to remind me

There's no way i'd be able to make a 4 day a week turnaround on any sort of regular basis. Once September kicks off i'll be playing sport 4 evenings/days a week, have a 9 to 5 job and a wife. While i'd love to play more Madden, finding the time to do so in the first place is tricky enough. If the aim is to have 32 human players then I don't think a shorter week than present is the best idea. If you drop it from 5 to 4 days that's already a 20% reduction in the amount of time for 2 people to find a common game time.

There will always be those who have plenty of spare time and can play their match within an hour of the week being advanced; especially when so many games are against the CPU. There will also be those who are that bit busier but can still manage the 5 day turnaround. If i was guessing i'd say there are more in the second category than the first and if you exclude (not intentionally of course!!) these players then you end up with a league of CPU teams who you play every 3 or so days... in that case you might aswell be playing offline!!!

just a penny for your thoughts :cool:

matthew8

ibmax wrote: »

I'm a noob to all this but i've actually found the 5 day turnaround challenging at times. There have been several occasions where I'm the last one to play... thankfully Matthew has always been there to remind me

There's no way i'd be able to make a 4 day a week turnaround on any sort of regular basis. Once September kicks off i'll be playing sport 4 evenings/days a week, have a 9 to 5 job and a wife. While i'd love to play more Madden, finding the time to do so in the first place is tricky enough. If the aim is to have 32 human players then I don't think a shorter week than present is the best idea. If you drop it from 5 to 4 days that's already a 20% reduction in the amount of time for 2 people to find a common game time.

There will always be those who have plenty of spare time and can play their match within an hour of the week being advanced; especially when so many games are against the CPU. There will also be those who are that bit busier but can still manage the 5 day turnaround. If i was guessing i'd say there are more in the second category than the first and if you exclude (not intentionally of course!!) these players then you end up with a league of CPU teams who you play every 3 or so days... in that case you might aswell be playing offline!!!

just a penny for your thoughts :cool:

Would it help you makes time if the schedule was fixed to certain days of the week? So like if it was 2 games per week (I would go for Sunday to Tuesday and Thursday to Saturday with Wednesday being a day for the first week but added to the second week if the first week ends quickly) and you could know your schedule weeks in advance and thus be able to make time.

SantryRed

We need to get each season done with 3 months. If we shorten the play off time to 4 days, it should be fine I think?

helimachoptor

SantryRed wrote: »

We need to get each season done with 3 months. If we shorten the play off time to 4 days, it should be fine I think?

I think we should go with 5 days, with advancements over the 3 seasons we'll fit in time for a 4th.

BigBadRob83

I would agree with Dave, I personally would like to know the schedule in advance as its tough to organise games. Have lots to be doing besides Madden, and like to sort out my schedule in advance for training and other stuff. Early advancements can throw that off.
5 days a week is good for me, 4 days could be pretty tight but am up for doing 4 seasons

linebacker52

I would really struggle with anything less that a five day advance I'm in more than one league so arranging games can be tricky sometimes. If my shoulder ever gets better I will have a lot less time for madden. Keep things are they are and maybe shorten the playoffs shouldn't be a problem if we sort it out in advanace

ibmax

matthew8 wrote: »

Would it help you makes time if the schedule was fixed to certain days of the week? So like if it was 2 games per week (I would go for Sunday to Tuesday and Thursday to Saturday with Wednesday being a day for the first week but added to the second week if the first week ends quickly) and you could know your schedule weeks in advance and thus be able to make time.

Tbh itd make things worse. I know come September I'll have some wednesday evenings, Friday evenings and most of sunday spare. There will be weeks where ill be more available but theyll be rare. In your situation if the person I'm due to play isn't available on a Sunday then it's gonna be simmed more often than not. The shifting 5 days gives a few options each week. As you reduce the days you reduce the amount of time available for two people to find a common game time. That's the key element I guess.

matthew8

Well I think it's fair to say we have a bit of a verdict. Keep it 5 days. That means that in 4 regular seasons would take 340 days, leaving us 25 days for 4 playoff series and drafts. If we're aiming for 4 seasons, we will need regular season early advances.

empacher

maybe we should just stick to 3 season then. Also generally American Football is becoming more popular in Ireland so the popularity of the game should rise. Which should hopefully have an effect on us.

We dont want to drive away rookie coaches, by having them stick to a very tight schedule. I know last year if i had to play every 4 days i would have left.

etloveslsd

I duuno if we have numbers, but what about 2 leagues? The bpl has a looser schedule so might suit some players and the main franchise for people who can commit to a tighter schedule?

Just an idea

helimachoptor

matthew8 wrote: »

Well I think it's fair to say we have a bit of a verdict. Keep it 5 days. That means that in 4 regular seasons would take 340 days, leaving us 25 days for 4 playoff series and drafts. If we're aiming for 4 seasons, we will need regular season early advances.

This will happen though.

I mean even if you take every second game week across 3 seasons getting done 1 day early.

Thats 25 days saved

If the wild cards get done 2 days early in each season thats 6 days saved

If the play offs get done 2 days early thats 6 days
If the conference championships get done 2 days early thats 6 days etc tc

Thats a lot of time we'll save without much difference to what we do now.

matthew8

Well it would take 340 days to get through the regular seasons and it took 18 days to get through the last postseason so I'll just round that at 20 and say that we're looking at 420 days to get through 4 full seasons with the current way of scheduling and no early advances. So 55 is a big numbers of days to shave, it essentially means a one day early advance nearly every week. But, if we decide to go 3 seasons that means we'll be going 2 months without BFL. That sucks. The way I would do it is go through the first season with a 5 day gameweek and then see if we're playing fast enough by our own accord and if we are we'll get 4 seasons, obviously, but if we're slower than the pace we'll hsve to decide to speed up or slow down (I say if we're only getting 3 seasons done we may as well use all our time and lengthen the week to 6 days).

helimachoptor

You sai abov 4 regular seasons would take 340 days?

matthew8

helimachoptor wrote: »

You sai abov 4 regular seasons would take 340 days?

With 5 day weeks yes. 5 times 17 is 85. Times 4 is 340. That plus 20 days per postseason for 4 seasons gives us 420. That's the base number to work off. Now I have a hard time seeing us shaving 55 days off the season if we want to keep players like empacher and ibmax in the league (which we obviously do because I feel like this summer a couple people left and it feels like the bottom has been taken out of the league), we'll be very lucky to get 30 off the regular season so we'd need a real commitment by playoff teams to play quickly and shave off another 6 days per postseason, which is 2 days per pre-superbowl round.

helimachoptor

Sorry my mistake I'm not adding on the play offs

BigBadRob83

BigBadRob83 wrote: »

Explanation first of how this is worked out. Tried to use a similar formula to ones I have seen used on some college football websites to rank teams, using your opponents winning % to determine to 'strength' of each win/loss.

Worsksheets:
RESULTS-Tracks all the results for seasons 2 & 3
Records (2-3)-Summarises each teams records in different types of games
Weighting-This is where the Weighted Power Rankings are calculated
Picture-Where everything goes into a pretty picture (below)

Only Human-v-Human game results are used for this.

Each game is given a 'weighting', to take into account importance (to give heavier weight to more important games)
Regular Season = 1
Wildcard = 2
Divisional = 3
Conference = 5
Super Bowl = 10

The 'value' of each Human win is calculated as follows:
Weighting * Opponents' Human Winning Percentage

The 'value' of each Human loss is calculated as follows:
1 * (100% - Opponents' Human Winning Percentage)
Removed weighting from losses, as would actually end up making someone who lost Super Bowl's record worse

The final Power Ranking number (Weighted Winning Ratio) is calculated as follows:
(Sum total of all Weighted Wins / Sum total of all Weighted Losses)*2
Multiplied by 2 so that the average player should equal 1.00, just to give a reference point


Anyway, think it gives a fairly accurate representation (not 100% accurate, but that's never going to happen). Might update it every couple of weeks as more results come in. Obviously, more results more accurate it becomes.

EDIT: Just to give an example of what this is calculating. Take the Falcons and Eagles (both 5-11 vs. Human opponents).
This ratio ranks the Eagles higher as their victories have come against better opponents (55.4% vs 36.4%)

great job rob

was hopeing i would get ahead of rizzo and nab the eagles

Berty44

I think you really need to decide to run either 3 or 4 seasons. The early advancement thing will not really work in my opinion as most guys have other things to do need to schedule in their games.

If its 3 there are other leagues that guys can join to play extra games ( www.maddenpfl.com where many of the guys here play as well ). That may be the way forward as there are guys who can only fit in so many games and we don't want to lose anyone.

SantryRed

Berty44 wrote: »

I think you really need to decide to run either 3 or 4 seasons. The early advancement thing will not really work in my opinion as most guys have other things to do need to schedule in their games.

If its 3 there are other leagues that guys can join to play extra games ( www.maddenpfl.com where many of the guys here play as well ). That may be the way forward as there are guys who can only fit in so many games and we don't want to lose anyone.

I was having a quick look over Berty and I may be wrong with this, but if we start the second week of September, and run 5 day weeks, if we shorten the play offs to 4 day weeks, will we not fit it in?

matthew8

SantryRed wrote: »

I was having a quick look over Berty and I may be wrong with this, but if we start the second week of September, and run 5 day weeks, if we shorten the play offs to 4 day weeks, will we not fit it in?

You are wrong. Regular seasons would be 340 days.

Berty44

17 regular game weeks per season

4 rounds of playoffs

17 x 5 = 85 days
4 x 4 = 16 days

= 101 days a season PLUS do a draft thats over 300 days leaves it nigh impossible.

Only way to get 4 seasons in would be to have every week a 4 days gameweek.

21wks x 4 days x 4 seasons = 336 days

Thats leaves less than a month spare so you could maybe change to 5 day week for final season.

adrian522

I think we need a poll or something...

Choices seem to be 4 or 5 day gameweeks

and separately should we use early advances or keep to a fixed amount.

helimachoptor

Ok, I'll add a poll to a new thread

BigBadRob83

Seeing as all the Human games have been completed for the week, thought I'd post up the updated Power Rankings after a couple more weeks of action



Made a slight adjustment to the calculation to make it more accurate

PREVIOUSLY
The final Power Ranking number (Weighted Winning Ratio) is calculated as follows:
(Sum total of all Weighted Wins / Sum total of all Weighted Losses)*2

NOW (Change in Italics)
(Sum total of all Weighted Wins / Sum total of all Weighted Losses) + (1 * Human Winning Percentage )

The change is to slightly increase the importance of your own winning percentage. Saw it looked a bit strange where teams with a good bit higher winning % were ranked below teams with lower win %.
To give you a flavour of the results of this; for the previous rankings, this change in formula would only have affected four teams:
Buccs (5) and Bills (4) would swap positions, as it looked strange that the Buccs 83% was below Bills 60%
Titans (16) and Chargers (15) would swap positions, as it looked strange that the Titans 50% was below Chargers 40%

Average player should equal 1.00, just to give a reference point
* Tested this out by copying all of the games into the workbook and reversing the result, so everyone ended up at 50% winning ratio and all teams had a Power Ranking value of 1.00

EDIT: Attached file

BigBadRob83

Noticed one little error-still had Cardinals down as Human team for last week. Only affects W/L total for Cardinals and Bills.

BigBadRob83

All Human games completed, and some big results over last two weeks see a lot of change up and down the rankings:



-The Buccs under ibmax keep up they're winning ways and look like the Packers' biggest threat in the NFC
-Bills drop down despite beating the Jets, thanks to their loss at Seattle
-The Raiders keep winning and rise up to no.9
-Lions big win over the Bears propels them back up
-Seahawks big win over the Bills which sees them jump 5 places
-This big jump affects everyone below in a crowded bottom third of the table, as the Chargers, Redskins, Bengals and Falcons all drop down

etloveslsd

BigBadRob83 wrote: »

The Buccs under ibmax keep up they're winning ways and look like the Packers' biggest threat in the NFC

Lets just ignore the team that have been the only team to stop the Buccs:cool:

ibmax

etloveslsd wrote: »

Lets just ignore the team that have been the only team to stop the Buccs:cool:

No team can stop the Bucs!!! Only the Bucs can stop the Bucs... and the weather in New york of course!!!

Stupid dome friendly roster, who drafted this team? Thankfully the Bucs play in a dome... division with lots of domes...

...Big announcement: Bucs are the NFL team moving to LA. From next season we will be playing in the "Andre Agassi Chrome Dome" in Hollywood

Paully D

Bump

BigBadRob83

Seeing as we're in the no-mans-land before Madden 13 and there are only 5 guys with anything to left to play for in the BFL, thought I might do a quick mock draft of the Madden 13 teams for a bit of fun.



Obviously not everyone will pick the team with best rating. Personally there is no way I could pick the Jets.

Who is the no.1 pick - Pats or Pack?
Will Dave end up with the Bills again?
Will Matthew pick second favourite team the Panthers or will he do an Al Davis and let his heart rule his head and take the Raiders?
Can Heli pass up the Titans for a higher rated team?

Based the rankings on the spreadsheet I do (will post up rankings after Packers-Buccs matchup) as the bottom of the rankings is decided and the guys at the top will only move a couple of places

Notes
Assumed everyone playing now at end of season will be back
(?) Don't know if thy will be back
* Still playing in M12 playoffs, so position may change

matthew8

Ugh, it's so hard to decide. The Panthers and Raiders both have so many positives for me. The Raiders of course have speed on their side, run a 4-3, have a strong defensive line and safeties. But the line can't block and the corners/LBs can't cover. That's where the Panthers are different. LBs are coverage gods. Unfortunately Sherrod Martin is a pile of crap. D-line also a big step down from the Raiders but Charles Johnson will at least allow me a pass rusher to play around with. The offensive line is a major strength for the Panthers, and the daily show gives me the sort of back I want. Greg Olsen is a guy I love (though TBH I would rather Marcel Reece of the Raiders) and Cam Newton would be absolutely awesome to play with. The one concern is the WRs. Steve Smith for the first year is fine but he really starts slowing down, at which point I would have to turn to Gettis. I would have Louis Murphy back though. On the other hand the Raiders have awesome Madden WRs in DHB, Ford and Moore.

I think I'll pick the Panthers if I can. Unfortunately Jerry Richardson isn't the easiest guy to make fun of.

And the team ratings for the Texans and Ravens are a joke.