<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Data Dump: Schedule-Adjusted Pythagorean Ratings (1970-2012)	</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.footballperspective.com/data-dump-schedule-adjusted-pythagorean-ratings-1970-2012/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.footballperspective.com/data-dump-schedule-adjusted-pythagorean-ratings-1970-2012/</link>
	<description>NFL History and Stats</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2014 04:44:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: lucky irvin		</title>
		<link>http://www.footballperspective.com/data-dump-schedule-adjusted-pythagorean-ratings-1970-2012/#comment-146392</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[lucky irvin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2014 04:44:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.footballperspective.com/?p=5934#comment-146392</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Salute! 
I&#039;ll try to add a non-mathematical element to your equations.
I feel qualified, being taught by watching the Raiders, then the Seahawks, and plenty of boring SuperBlahs.
Current Seahawks remind me much of Madden&#039;s Raiders.
Pete C. plays the same style seems to me.
Hell, he was watching them on TV growing up at the Bay.
Both teams exhibted intense toughness, both teams built with core men of great quality, cast off and overlooked.
Though both Raiders then and Seattle now are often slow to get going.
This means one thing
Intense toughness wins games
I propose measuring this quantity/quality this way
ratio of comeback wins/easy wins?

Maybe you already show it in the tables
the way Pete grows his teams]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Salute!<br />
I&#8217;ll try to add a non-mathematical element to your equations.<br />
I feel qualified, being taught by watching the Raiders, then the Seahawks, and plenty of boring SuperBlahs.<br />
Current Seahawks remind me much of Madden&#8217;s Raiders.<br />
Pete C. plays the same style seems to me.<br />
Hell, he was watching them on TV growing up at the Bay.<br />
Both teams exhibted intense toughness, both teams built with core men of great quality, cast off and overlooked.<br />
Though both Raiders then and Seattle now are often slow to get going.<br />
This means one thing<br />
Intense toughness wins games<br />
I propose measuring this quantity/quality this way<br />
ratio of comeback wins/easy wins?</p>
<p>Maybe you already show it in the tables<br />
the way Pete grows his teams</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: George		</title>
		<link>http://www.footballperspective.com/data-dump-schedule-adjusted-pythagorean-ratings-1970-2012/#comment-6245</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[George]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jan 2013 20:46:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.footballperspective.com/?p=5934#comment-6245</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.footballperspective.com/data-dump-schedule-adjusted-pythagorean-ratings-1970-2012/#comment-6243&quot;&gt;Neil Paine&lt;/a&gt;.

Thanks - this is really helpful. I had bought the Meyer book after you mentioned it a while back and figured out how to do it that way (as I hadn&#039;t figured out how to do the SRS at that point by the other way that you&#039;d mentioned on the PFR blog) and I set up about 4 or 5, 32x32 matrix&#039;s with various combination&#039;s (total games, games between teams with a 1 or -1 etc.) and did it step by step by step to get a rating (didn&#039;t get the maths behind it but could get the figures to match the example so knew I had the procedure right). I just wondered if there was a way of avoiding using matrix&#039;s (as I ended up using large formulas to get the numbers right in the matrix&#039;s) to break it down into OSRS or DSRS.

Incidentally re: the Colts totally agree, I just don&#039;t get how a team that I&#039;d say on performance isn&#039;t in the top 20 teams in the league have made it into the playoffs (I&#039;ve only really started looking at this thing in the last year and it just struck me that the Colts that I have about 5 points below the average are there).]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="http://www.footballperspective.com/data-dump-schedule-adjusted-pythagorean-ratings-1970-2012/#comment-6243">Neil Paine</a>.</p>
<p>Thanks &#8211; this is really helpful. I had bought the Meyer book after you mentioned it a while back and figured out how to do it that way (as I hadn&#8217;t figured out how to do the SRS at that point by the other way that you&#8217;d mentioned on the PFR blog) and I set up about 4 or 5, 32&#215;32 matrix&#8217;s with various combination&#8217;s (total games, games between teams with a 1 or -1 etc.) and did it step by step by step to get a rating (didn&#8217;t get the maths behind it but could get the figures to match the example so knew I had the procedure right). I just wondered if there was a way of avoiding using matrix&#8217;s (as I ended up using large formulas to get the numbers right in the matrix&#8217;s) to break it down into OSRS or DSRS.</p>
<p>Incidentally re: the Colts totally agree, I just don&#8217;t get how a team that I&#8217;d say on performance isn&#8217;t in the top 20 teams in the league have made it into the playoffs (I&#8217;ve only really started looking at this thing in the last year and it just struck me that the Colts that I have about 5 points below the average are there).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
