Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

JDawg

Football Database General Discussion

181 posts in this topic

Why did we change the offer list layout? I just listed 5 name brand schools that offered. Do I need to go through and select every school that offered them?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also for the composite ranking, each star ranking has different levels to it.

For example, Rivals has 5*s ranked with a 6.1, high level 4*s with a 6.0, upper 4*s with a 5.9, average 4*s with a 5.8 and so on which are all worth different amounts.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Auburn's are finished besides the offer lists. Will get started on UF soon.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did we change the offer list layout? I just listed 5 name brand schools that offered. Do I need to go through and select every school that offered them?

Sorry about that - the reason I changed it was because now the number of offers can be calculated rather than being input. In retrospect, it's probably about all the same.. but also it will ensure that all schools are listed alphabetically and in the same format - i.e. ole miss/mississippi, etc.

And yeah you would just select them. But hold off on that because we may split them into BCS offers and non-BCS offers, although nova suggested that the composite ranking would need an average of offers because of the discrepancy of reported offers between sites. So just hold off for now, wouldn't want your work to have been in vain.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also - I believe I'm almost done with the Commitment listing page templates.

LSU Tigers - 2013 Football Recruiting Commitments - SECTalk.com

I have to actually have the right team images come up, and also need to work on the offer display on that page. But other than that, I don't really see anything else that should be changed. I'm always open to suggestions of course.

By default, they are sorted by Composite Rating, descending order. I can add more sorting options on the main filter bar. The custom option is there as well. I may change that phrase to "Other" instead of Custom.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also for the composite ranking, each star ranking has different levels to it.

For example, Rivals has 5*s ranked with a 6.1, high level 4*s with a 6.0, upper 4*s with a 5.9, average 4*s with a 5.8 and so on which are all worth different amounts.

Yeah, we tossed around using those numerical averages. Rivals has one, 247 and ESPN have "grades".... but scout only assigns a star rating and position rank. Using all those various numerical rankings would be a pain in the ass and would have little if any bearing on the score compared to where it is now.

@@nova would know more about that, though, he was the formula wiz.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@@Benny.... this s--t has really taken on a life of its own, lately. It's nice seeing an idea come together.

That said, all we really gotta do now is incorporate the formula. That would require using the offer lists for each recruit from each service, like what's in this spreadsheet.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Al8R4ffNtcp5dHVqV2dpQ295OURfQW1SZ1NDX01ZQUE

As for whats visible to the public, I like the offer drop down list like we have now. No one cares about Cord Sandberg having 12 offers on scout, 14 on rivals etc etc.... they only care about some or most of the noteable offers... But we have to use the Offer discrepancies in the formula for the composite score. So, going forward, it'd probably be best to have the offer counts for each service as a hidden field that we input during editing, then incorporate the formula for the composite so the composite rating is automatically populated and un-editable. I know that's going to be the toughest part. Benny has done a great job getting everything to this point.... basically all we lack is the formula. No rush on that either.

It is gonna be balling ass when we get that incorporated, though.

KnoxvilleDawg: "Oh well Kailo Moore is only a 3 star on Rivals, he sucks"

JDawg "He's a 4 on 24/7"

nova "It doesn't matter, he's a 4 star on SECTalk."

We're taking over bitches.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@@Benny.... this s--t has really taken on a life of its own, lately. It's nice seeing an idea come together.

That said, all we really gotta do now is incorporate the formula. That would require using the offer lists for each recruit from each service, like what's in this spreadsheet.

https://docs.google....QW1SZ1NDX01ZQUE

As for whats visible to the public, I like the offer drop down list like we have now. No one cares about Cord Sandberg having 12 offers on scout, 14 on rivals etc etc.... they only care about some or most of the noteable offers... But we have to use the Offer discrepancies in the formula for the composite score. So, going forward, it'd probably be best to have the offer counts for each service as a hidden field that we input during editing, then incorporate the formula for the composite so the composite rating is automatically populated and un-editable. I know that's going to be the toughest part. Benny has done a great job getting everything to this point.... basically all we lack is the formula. No rush on that either.

It is gonna be balling ass when we get that incorporated, though.

KnoxvilleDawg: "Oh well Kailo Moore is only a 3 star on Rivals, he sucks"

JDawg "He's a 4 on 24/7"

nova "It doesn't matter, he's a 4 star on SECTalk."

We're taking over bitches.

I can't wait to respond to a Meo post with what you put Nova as saying. :D

Well, that is if the coward decides to return. :trollface:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it's coming together for sure. I need y'all to get me a list of those fields we need so we can get the formula working. Tomorrow I'll also redo the recruit's page. I'll make it look similar to our member profiles here on SECTalk.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@@Benny: Three questions for you bro:

1. How do you put in the multiple offers for the prospects? For example, Ole Miss commit Antonio Allen, a S, had 11 offers, yet when I try to put in multiple offers, it only recognizes the last highlighted team. As such, I've only left Ole Miss, as I am unable to put in Cincinnati and the rest who offered.

2. Why is Ole Miss' logo for SECTalk recruiting database actually being represented as the LSU Fighting Tigers?

3. Just to be certain, for the SECTalk composite rating, if a recruit has three 4* rankings and one 3* ranking, the SECTalk composite is a 4*, correct?

Thanks for the help. :cheers:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@@Benny: Three questions for you bro:

1. How do you put in the multiple offers for the prospects? For example, Ole Miss commit Antonio Allen, a S, had 11 offers, yet when I try to put in multiple offers, it only recognizes the last highlighted team. As such, I've only left Ole Miss, as I am unable to put in Cincinnati and the rest who offered.

2. Why is Ole Miss' logo for SECTalk recruiting database actually being represented as the LSU Fighting Tigers?

3. Just to be certain, for the SECTalk composite rating, if a recruit has three 4* rankings and one 3* ranking, the SECTalk composite is a 4*, correct?

Thanks for the help. :cheers:

1. Hold down CTRL and click on multiple schools.

2. All logos are LSU right now, I haven't gotten around to making a logo library yet. I'll do that soon.

3. You can leave off the Composite rating, it will be automatically calculated later based on several other factors.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mean to be a slacker but could someone else handle my teams? Between work and working on setting this all up from the technical standpoint, I've got my hands full.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I need to find out their SECTalk ratings or are y'all gonna fill that in for me?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I need to find out their SECTalk ratings or are y'all gonna fill that in for me?

It will be filled in automatically once we everything smooths out. Got to incorportate the formula.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A combination of nova, fcn or myself can handle yours I'm sure, Benny.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A combination of nova, fcn or myself can handle yours I'm sure, Benny.

Yeah, just tell me which other team you need me to do, and I should have it done soon enough. Only have 8 more to go with Ole Miss, and Mizzou's entire list.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's def no rush, fellas. Once we kind of get up to speed.... this is a process we only really have to keep updated every few weeks.... or whenever you notice a commit for your team.

I hope to find a little more time tomorrow to dig in a little deeper.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rebs now have all their current commits in the books.

Onto Mizzou tomorrow, if I get a chance.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@J-Dawg

@@Benny

@FCN!dawg

I would take Benny's but I'm going to be out of pocket for a while starting this afternoon. Have family here this weekend, next week I've gotta go to BFE Virginia to look at an airplane then off to Tupelo for graduation party and cleanup of the wife's apartment next weekend.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, we tossed around using those numerical averages. Rivals has one, 247 and ESPN have "grades".... but scout only assigns a star rating and position rank. Using all those various numerical rankings would be a pain in the ass and would have little if any bearing on the score compared to where it is now.

@@nova would know more about that, though, he was the formula wiz.

You got it covered. If all 4 services did things similarly it would be easy but since they don't it's damn near impossible.

The other part of it is we wanted to shift some of the focus away from the recruiting services evaluation to try and drive out some of the biases. That's why we use the offer lists like we do...

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You got it covered. If all 4 services did things similarly it would be easy but since they don't it's damn near impossible.

The other part of it is we wanted to shift some of the focus away from the recruiting services evaluation to try and drive out some of the biases. That's why we use the offer lists like we do...

So what fields do I need to add to make the data complete? I think we have everything we want to output to the end user, but still don't have all the fields to make the formula work.

If someone wants to write the formula out mathematically for me and post it here, I'll work on that today too. Along with the fields.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what fields do I need to add to make the data complete? I think we have everything we want to output to the end user, but still don't have all the fields to make the formula work.

If someone wants to write the formula out mathematically for me and post it here, I'll work on that today too. Along with the fields.

Since I can't see google docs at work, @J-dawg will have to correct me if I miss anything. The fields we need should be

Number of 24/7 Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of 24/7 non-Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of Scout Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of Scout non-Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of Rivals Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of Rivals non-Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of ESPN Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of ESPN non-Automatic Qualifier Offers

Everything else that goes into the numerical rating is calculated in some way shape or form...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since I can't see google docs at work, @J-dawg will have to correct me if I miss anything. The fields we need should be

Number of 24/7 Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of 24/7 non-Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of Scout Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of Scout non-Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of Rivals Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of Rivals non-Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of ESPN Automatic Qualifier Offers

Number of ESPN non-Automatic Qualifier Offers

Everything else that goes into the numerical rating is calculated in some way shape or form...

Alright I'll get those fields in today. How about the formula?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright I'll get those fields in today. How about the formula?

https://docs.google....NDX01ZQUE#gid=0

Here's link to my spreadsheet in google docs.

Notice the columns of offers under each service. AQ offers are just offers from BCS conference teams. Non-AQ are non-BCS conference offers.

-The gray columns in the spreadsheet are the columns used in the formula. Obviously, the gray column under "Star Rankings" is just a straight up average of the star ranking from each service.

-In column P, there is the Ave. AQ column, which is a straight up average of the number of AQ offers from each service. For example, DeAndre Woods has 7 on 247, 8 on scout, 6 on rivals and 7 on ESPN.. giving an average AQ offer of 7.

-In Q, it's the same exact thing, except it averages out the Non-BCS offers.

Here's where it gets tricky, and you may want to hold off until nova can provide some input as well.........

-In column R, this column is "Offer Quality Factor". Basically, this is a normalization of AQ vs. Non-AQ offers. The range of this column is always between 0.1 and 1.0. The closer to 1, the better the "quality" of offers. Check out Deon Mix in the spreadsheet.... an OQF of 0.9.... this is b/c he has so many reported AQ offers and hardly any reported Non-AQ's. This essentially says that his offers are of higher quality b/c he has so many BCS teams after him. This column is the most important of all. The formula uses logic, and I'm not sure how well your database can integrate that. The formula is below:

a= Average of AQ offers

b=Average of Non-AQ offers

Offer Quality Factor = if(a+b<=2, 0.1, a/(a+b

This says that if the sum of the average of offers is less than 2 (aka he only had 1 offer, regardless of offer quality) then his OQF is automatically 0.1, or the lowest possible score. BUT, if the recruit has more than 2 offers, then you standardize the # of AQ offers.... it divides the total of average offers (a+b, then divides the # of AQ offers by that total. So, if Benny has 8 AQ offers and 2 Non-AQ, then he has 10 total and this step would do this: 8/10, or a OQF of 0.8.... compared to J-Dawg who has 2 AQ offers, but 8 Non-AQ: 2/10 = OQF of 0.2.

I'll try to explain the final "Grade" column in my next post.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright I'll get those fields in today. How about the formula?

Let me see. I can't see formulas on my phone so I'm having to reconstruct this from memory...

(Average star rating / Max Stars) * Recruiting service weight + (Average AQ offers / Max AQ offers) * AQ offer weight + (Average NAQ Offers / Max NAQ Offers) * NAQ Weight + (Offer quality factor * Offer quality factor weight)

where

Max Stars = 5

Recruiting Service Weight = 30

Max AQ offers = 17

AQ Offer Weight = 35

Max NAQ Offers = 12

NAQ Offer Weight = 5

Offer quality factor weight = 30

and

Offer quality factor = (Average AQ offers) / (Average AQ offers + Average NAQ offers) if (Average AQ offers + Average NAQ offers) => 2, else 0.1

I think that's pretty close anyway...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites