Illinois #12 in Preseason AP Poll

Status
Not open for further replies.
#78      
Respect comes with victories.
Our 27 ranking in this particular model has more to do with our lack of recruiting than it does wins & losses. We were 19 in his formula before his most recent update that gave greater weight to recruiting.

And we were 19 in his formula, not 12 like the AP poll, because his formula doesn’t see wins & losses, just how you play. With so many one score wins last year, it keeps our ranking lower than where a 10 win team returning this many starters could be.

So if anything, our victories are giving us more respect in the human polls (12 coaches / 12 AP) than the computer models (27 SP+ / 30 KFord).
 
Last edited:
#80      
Our 27 ranking in this particular model has more to do with our lack of recruiting than it does wins & losses. We were 19 in his formula before his most recent update that gave greater weight to recruiting.

And we were 19 in his formula, not 12 like the AP poll, because his formula doesn’t see wins & losses, just how you play. With so many one score wins last year, it keeps our ranking lower than where a 10 win team returning this many starters could be.

So if anything, our victories are giving us more respect in the human polls (12 coaches / 12 AP) than the computer models (27 SP+ / 30 KFord).

Good post, and just to add one more piece of info...

We finished the season 38 on KFord and that includes the SC win. So moving up 8 spots is a pretty good jump IMO.

It's always funny to me when people get upset at these computer models.
 
#81      
Good post, and just to add one more piece of info...

We finished the season 38 on KFord and that includes the SC win. So moving up 8 spots is a pretty good jump IMO.

It's always funny to me when people get upset at these computer models.
Getting upset at computer models is fine if you have gripes with what they value/weight.

What I think is hilarious is when people accuse computer models of having a specific bias or disrespect towards our particular program.
 
#82      
Ranked higher than Michigan. Gotta love that! When was the last time that happened?
 
#83      
Getting upset at computer models is fine if you have gripes with what they value/weight.

What I think is hilarious is when people accuse computer models of having a specific bias or disrespect towards our particular program.
just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean someone is NOT out to get you

Funny Face Lol GIF by Tennis TV
 
#84      
I wasn't thinking of sold seats....I think the number through the gate on game day is what matters....(yes making money on sold tickets is great, but what does it say they don't show up?)
Eh, I kind of disagree. I mean, for one, we hardly EVER know the true "butts in the seats" number, so tickets sold is the only data we ever get to analyze. So I guess you could multiply every attendance figure by like .75 for a "butts in the seats" estimate, but what is the point? Also, I remember seeing once that our 60,670 sellout vs. North Carolina in 2016 only had like 49k tickets scanned at the gates. If THIS photo shows only 49k fans in a stadium with 60k+ seats...

Map.png


... then we can't really trust our eyes, lol.
 
#85      
Eh, I kind of disagree. I mean, for one, we hardly EVER know the true "butts in the seats" number, so tickets sold is the only data we ever get to analyze. So I guess you could multiply every attendance figure by like .75 for a "butts in the seats" estimate, but what is the point? Also, I remember seeing once that our 60,670 sellout vs. North Carolina in 2016 only had like 49k tickets scanned at the gates. If THIS photo shows only 49k fans in a stadium with 60k+ seats...

View attachment 43257

... then we can't really trust our eyes, lol.
Aren't tickets electronically scanned when you enter, like at a concert or baseball game? There should be an easy accruate count, collecting all the scan numbers, compare it to # sold.
 
#86      
Aren't tickets electronically scanned when you enter, like at a concert or baseball game? There should be an easy accruate count, collecting all the scan numbers, compare it to # sold.
I think it's more they do not release that information. I have only ever seen those figures mentioned in articles, where I am assuming the journalist had to contact someone at the DIA and specifically ask. When you think about it, why would Illinois advertise that the 60k+ fans for a sold out game were actually way less than that? Haha.
 
#87      
I wasn't thinking of sold seats....I think the number through the gate on game day is what matters....(yes making money on sold tickets is great, but what does it say they don't show up?)
I would expect the only time this is noticeable is when a team is having a disappointing season and the value of the tickets goes down. I'm sure there are other scheduling issues or weather related days where more tickets are sold than used, but absenteeism is typically predictable when you have large numbers to go off of.
 
#89      
Our 27 ranking in this particular model has more to do with our lack of recruiting than it does wins & losses. We were 19 in his formula before his most recent update that gave greater weight to recruiting.

And we were 19 in his formula, not 12 like the AP poll, because his formula doesn’t see wins & losses, just how you play. With so many one score wins last year, it keeps our ranking lower than where a 10 win team returning this many starters could be.

So if anything, our victories are giving us more respect in the human polls (12 coaches / 12 AP) than the computer models (27 SP+ / 30 KFord).
SP+ (and I assume others) also weigh heavily on success rate which we scored fairly low on last year (at least partially due to defensive play style).
 
#90      
Eh, I kind of disagree. I mean, for one, we hardly EVER know the true "butts in the seats" number, so tickets sold is the only data we ever get to analyze. So I guess you could multiply every attendance figure by like .75 for a "butts in the seats" estimate, but what is the point? Also, I remember seeing once that our 60,670 sellout vs. North Carolina in 2016 only had like 49k tickets scanned at the gates. If THIS photo shows only 49k fans in a stadium with 60k+ seats...

View attachment 43257

... then we can't really trust our eyes, lol.

I've gotten this suggestion from people on here before - that they don't care about announced attendance, only butts in seats. Okay, suit yourself. As Fighter notes, I maintain a ticket. sale. tracker. There are certain pieces of relevant information that are quasi publicly available. Things such as 1) if tickets are being sold for a game 2) generally, how many are available leading up to the game and then 3) after the game, how many were in fact sold.

Believe it or not, I don't have the ability to know if a butt plans to be in a seat eight evenings from now. Nor do I have a reliable way to learn after the fact if the butts that planned to be there ultimately showed up.

I think it's more they do not release that information. I have only ever seen those figures mentioned in articles, where I am assuming the journalist had to contact someone at the DIA and specifically ask. When you think about it, why would Illinois advertise that the 60k+ fans for a sold out game were actually way less than that? Haha.

I'm pretty sure they submit a FOIA to get that information. I plan to stick to information I can easily obtain and analyze.
 
#91      
Jeff D'Alessio of the News-Gazette has posted some fascinating articles recently about Distributed (official attendance) vs Turnstile (stadium attendance), using open records requests.

Jan 20, 2023: Illini football turnstile totals: Breakthrough season doesn't lead to huge crowds

Feb 23, 2024: Open-records report | Big Ten football turnstile totals show another side of fall attendance

The sellout watch tracker is a great guide because that's a number we get immediately, now & throughout the season. The turnstile requires a slow open records request. Would be fascinating to see the numbers from 2024. Go Illini
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back