ADVERTISEMENT

F+ update | week 4

chaseball

I've posted how many times?
Sep 8, 2007
7,780
2,377
113
F+ didn't like NDs performance this week and dropped them from 8th to 10th overall. The defense dropped from #6 to #7 overall, and the offense dropped from #16 to #21.

The tier 1 teams/teams competing for national titles/playoff wins/etc. are teams with top 7 defenses (as good or better than NDs) but then they are also matching with top 7 offenses as well.

The ND football program still has a LOONG WAAAYYY to go to get to that level.

Top 5 in F+ through week 4

1. Georgia, 2.30
2. OSU, 2.29
3. Texas, 2.24
4. Alabama, 2.16
5. Ole Miss, 1.92

10. Notre Dame, 1.53 (their #10 F+ ranking, matches their #10 team talent composite ranking)
  • 4 SEC teams occupying the top 5 spots in the country.
  • 4 of the top 5 teams are also top 5 in team talent composite ranking (24/7): https://247sports.com/season/2024-football/collegeteamtalentcomposite/
  • At week 6 in 2023, F+ nailed the eventual national champion (had Michigan at #1), and had 3 of the eventual playoff teams ranked in the top 5.
  • NDs best opponent TAMU has fallen to #20 in F+, and their other 3 opponents have an average F+ ranking of 90th.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: NDinNJ
Why do you waste your time posting this crap. Everyone is LOL.
I dont post for everyone, im posting for those who enjoy the analysis I provide.

And on another note, this data gets to the very core of the output/production of the football team, and just how far it still has to go as a program to get back to national championship relevancy.
 
F+ didn't like NDs performance this week and dropped them from 8th to 10th overall.
Eff the F+ nonsense.

ABCDzeFzg +÷×
Has them rught where they should be.

In other words the eye test.
Our starting QB is also our starting halfback.
Our starting half back can't throw worth a damn.

We have a player wearing #18 and he can throw the ball well.
He just doesn't make seven figures with the NIL and he's only a QB. Just a pesky, lowly QB. Nothing else.

Too bad because our offense would be much tougher.

oh well...
One of these days even if by accident they'll start the right player at QB.
 
I dont post for everyone, im posting for those who enjoy the analysis I provide.

And on another note, this data gets to the very core of the output/production of the football team, and just how far it still has to go as a program to get back to national championship relevancy.
F+ is garbage. and has no bearing on who makes the playoffs or wins the national championship, ZERO.
 
F+ is garbage. and has no bearing on who makes the playoffs or wins the national championship, ZERO.
All you need to know
about the f+233/÷×z thing is this...

The EFF + had Clemson ranked third behind Georgia and Bama EVEN AFTER CLEMSON GAVE BAMA THE BEAT DOWN IN THE TITLE GAME AND FINISHED 15-0

That was a dominating win in every facet of the game yet in the fantasy world of EFF+×÷/ Clemson wasn't even in the top 2.

That is after ALL THE GAMES WERE PLAYED!
 
All you need to know
about the f+233/÷×z thing is this...

The EFF + had Clemson ranked third behind Georgia and Bama EVEN AFTER CLEMSON GAVE BAMA THE BEAT DOWN IN THE TITLE GAME AND FINISHED 15-0

That was a dominating win in every facet of the game yet in the fantasy world of EFF+×÷/ Clemson wasn't even in the top 2.

That is after ALL THE GAMES WERE PLAYED!
LMFAO, chasemyballs love F+, total moron
 
If anybody actually wants to have a discussion about what the data says in regards to Notre Dame football this season I'm totally game.

I'm done defending the merits of the system, and I'm ready to graduate the discussion to what this system is actually revealing about Notre Dame football
 
If anybody actually wants to have a discussion about what the data says in regards to Notre Dame football this season I'm totally game.

I'm done defending the merits of the system, and I'm ready to graduate the discussion to what this system is actually revealing about Notre Dame football
No one cares except you and your other handles on this forum.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: NIN Irish
If anybody actually wants to have a discussion about what the data says in regards to Notre Dame football this season I'm totally game.

I'm done defending the merits of the system, and I'm ready to graduate the discussion to what this system is actually revealing about Notre Dame football
Does it break out the F+ for special teams?
 
If anybody actually wants to have a discussion about what the data says in regards to Notre Dame football this season I'm totally game.

I'm done defending the merits of the system, and I'm ready to graduate the discussion to what this system is actually revealing about Notre Dame football
How about we discuss football.
You as a human and me as a superhuman.

Seriously though....

Trust me when I tell you relying on a computer program to tell you how good a team is or isn't is simply foolhardy.

Perhaps you can learn some things in discussion/observation instead of simply going off what Gates or Jobs program is telling you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NDinNJ
I dont post for everyone, im posting for those who enjoy the analysis I provide.

And on another note, this data gets to the very core of the output/production of the football team, and just how far it still has to go as a program to get back to national championship relevancy.
To add.....

You want national title relevancy?

Ok...you take your little formula gimmicks and just simply give me...

Eli Holstein!
Transferred to Pitt.
Apparently he wasn't the type QB we covet around here.
He's far too accurate and has a good arm and knows how and when to be mobile. He gets the ball down the field.
So yeah...definitely not the QB we like around these parts.

Tell you what....
Give me Angeli and several weeks to get #1 QB practice reps and game time...
We'll be relevant with him.

This team is literally that close.

We can run. Our blocking will progress. Our defense plays at a tier 1 level.
Good running backs.

What lacks? A passing game. Hell anything resembling an accurate pass.

That's all we're missing but it's a huge miss.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Golson5
Eff the F+ nonsense.

ABCDzeFzg +÷×
Has them rught where they should be.

In other words the eye test.
Our starting QB is also our starting halfback.
Our starting half back can't throw worth a damn.

We have a player wearing #18 and he can throw the ball well.
He just doesn't make seven figures with the NIL and he's only a QB. Just a pesky, lowly QB. Nothing else.

Too bad because our offense would be much tougher.

oh well...
One of these days even if by accident they'll start the right player at QB.
Today's BELLY LAUGH is now in the can.

And I love the word "rught" in this circumstance. Seems RIGHTER than "right."

Love the MIDDLE ENGLISH "RUGHTEOUSNESS" of it.

But seriously, there's nothing like reading F+ data.

On one hand, as a charts, graphs and scales man, I do enjoy the team vs team comparisons, but then I also enjoy posts that ROAST THE WHOLE CONCEPT.

There will always be something I find COMICAL in IRRECONCILIABLE points of view.
 
If anybody actually wants to have a discussion about what the data says in regards to Notre Dame football this season I'm totally game.

I'm done defending the merits of the system, and I'm ready to graduate the discussion to what this system is actually revealing about Notre Dame football
I'm going to research it MYSELF as I actually have the STOMACH for this stuff just having listened to a Jesuit try to convince a youtube audience of the existence of God using a METAPHYSICAL PROOF developed by Thomas Aquinas.

I just hope that the F+ schema doesn't have as many holes in it as the Jesuit's metaphysical "proof" which boiled down to SEMANTIC ANTICS at their best, i.e. THEIR WORST.

I will advise you of my FINDINGS in due course.
 
If anybody actually wants to have a discussion about what the data says in regards to Notre Dame football this season I'm totally game.

I'm done defending the merits of the system, and I'm ready to graduate the discussion to what this system is actually revealing about Notre Dame football
So we held Miami to 7 points and beat them by 21. What would we have to have done to hold our position?
 
How about we discuss football.
You as a human and me as a superhuman.

Seriously though....

Trust me when I tell you relying on a computer program to tell you how good a team is or isn't is simply foolhardy.

Perhaps you can learn some things in discussion/observation instead of simply going off what Gates or Jobs program is telling you.
This is just one of several ways to look at the game. The reason why I like the data/stats approach is because there's so much subjectivity in human opinion /evaluations and a formula like F+, even though limited in some ways, is 100% objective.

At its core F+ provides a ranking of all the teams in college football based on their week to week performance and adjusts for opponent quality and for luck. That's it.

If a team racks up a lot of wins but was really lucky and played against really s***** competition their F+ ranking is going to suffer as a result

If a team racks up a lot of losses but are really unlucky and play against really high level competition they're not going to be as penalized as much

The system gets to the core of the performance of a team drills down deep to the play-by-play level. Are you having successful plays? successful drives? Are you putting up more points than the opposition? Are you winning the game without needing fluky turnovers/luck? What is the quality of your competition?

These are important questions to ask when ranking teams and F+ is the only system I'm aware of that really captures this.
 
Last edited:
So we held Miami to 7 points and beat them by 21. What would we have to have done to hold our position?
They didn't do enough against the 93rd rank team in the country to maintain a top eight ranking.

NDs previous opponents have lost ground in F+ as well TAMU dropped to 20th from 13th which reduces NDs opponent quality in the F+ rating as well
 
Last edited:
All you need to know
about the f+233/÷×z thing is this...

The EFF + had Clemson ranked third behind Georgia and Bama EVEN AFTER CLEMSON GAVE BAMA THE BEAT DOWN IN THE TITLE GAME AND FINISHED 15-0

That was a dominating win in every facet of the game yet in the fantasy world of EFF+×÷/ Clemson wasn't even in the top 2.

That is after ALL THE GAMES WERE PLAYED!
F+ isn't a resume ranking (like the AP poll) it's more like a power ranking. The best team doesn't always win in a single head to head game. Have you never watched a sport where a team loses in a single head to head game but then wins in the rematch or in a series?

In any situation where F+ is still ranking the team that won below the team that lost it just means that in a rematch F+ thinks the team that lost would win (and it thinks that based on the entire body of work from the team all season).

We've had this conversation going years back and I've made this point again and again and I don't understand why it's not registering with you and other critics of the F+ system
 
Last edited:
This is just one of several ways to look at the game. The reason why I like the data/stats approach is because there's so much subjectivity in human opinion /evaluations and a formula like F+, even though limited in some ways, is 100% objective.

If a team racks up a lot of wins but was really lucky and played against really s***** competition their F+ ranking is going to suffer as a result
I prefer the results on the field vs your computer crap

Did you see Michigan's schedule last season? 😂
 
I prefer the results on the field vs your computer crap

Did you see Michigan's schedule last season? 😂
F+ is entirely driven by the results on the field down to the play-by-play level. far more comprehensively than any other mainstream poll or ranking system out there.

I think what you mean to say is you prefer teams to be ranked based on wins and losses. But college football has such a short season / small sample size, and a wildly-varied quality of opponent from week to week, that you got to look more granularly at the performance than just the win-loss result to better evaluate the quality of a team
 
Last edited:
This is just one of several ways to look at the game. The reason why I like the data/stats approach is because there's so much subjectivity in human opinion /evaluations and a formula like F+, even though limited in some ways, is 100% objective.

At its core F+ provides a ranking of all the teams in college football based on their week to week performance and adjusts for opponent quality and for luck. That's it.

If a team racks up a lot of wins but was really lucky and played against really s***** competition their F+ ranking is going to suffer as a result

If a team racks up a lot of losses but are really unlucky and play against really high level competition they're not going to be as penalized as much

The system gets to the core of the performance of a team drills down deep to the play-by-play level. Are you having successful plays? successful drives? Are you putting up more points than the opposition? Are you winning the game without needing fluky turnovers/luck? What is the quality of your competition?

These are important questions to ask when ranking teams and F+ is the only system I'm aware of that really captures this.
See this is the problem.

The reason why I like the data/stats approach is because there's so much subjectivity in human opinion /evaluations
But you'd rather follow a computer's subjectivity and opinion


Styles make fights...right?

Are you winning the game without needing fluky turnovers/luck?

You do realize defense is part of the game..no?

Give me an opportunistic defense any day that always scores me the winning touchdown and I go undefeated..YEP...I'll gladly take that.


What is the quality of your competition?

Based on what?
See above....the penalization of teans who are having success.

A win is a win is a win....
Just not with f+×= nonsense.

Nope...F+ rewards teams who lose games.
I don't care one but if a team is losing games in a close manner. They lost. Period. No asterisk after the loss saying F+ moved them up after their tough loss.


NOTE...

I don't buy into the stupid polls ...yesterday or tomorrow. Meaning nobody should be ranked until after week 6.

That way you have a better gauge on where teams are plus it doesn't hurt a tram that wasn't ranked to start the year and can't reach the end because they had too far to climb.

Total bullshit.
UCF should've been in the playoff that year ..
The only team that finished undefeated. The team also beat the only team who beat Alabama in Auburn.

But...they were a nobody in the stupid preseason polls thus they had too much ground to make up to catch the top.

In 1993 your F+×÷ would've had ND ranked 5th or so.

Why? Lou's style wasn't to throw every play. He was perfectly content with winning 14-7 or 17-10.

FSU, Florida, Auburn, Miami were all aerial attacks and would've all been ranked over us and Nebraska that year.

Thankfully they play the games and luckily they declare winners based on the scoreboard, and not hypothetical bulldlshit.
 
F+ isn't a resume ranking (like the AP poll) it's more like a power ranking. The best team doesn't always win in a single head to head game. Have you never watched a sport where a team loses in a single head to head game but then wins in the rematch or in a series?
Sure have...

But...

We aren't doing a rematch.

I say sgain...


Georgia and Alabama were both ranked ahead of Clemson at seasons end.
The seasons end that saw Clemson embarrass Alabama.
The sane season end that had one team at 15-0
Clemson.
Final F+ ranking...
3rd!


D
U
M
B
 
  • Like
Reactions: NDinNJ
I dont post for everyone, im posting for those who enjoy the analysis I provide.

And on another note, this data gets to the very core of the output/production of the football team, and just how far it still has to go as a program to get back to national championship relevancy.
Who enjoy’s your post on this nonsense? Who name one poster because I sure as heck have never seen one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NDinNJ
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT