Flaws in the Massey Ratings

   Am I competitive? You betcha.  Are their flaws in my unscientific weekly ratings on Northern California JC Men's Basketball, absolutely.  I took a look at my current sole competitor ,the Massey Ratings, for California Community College Men's Basketball to see where our ratings compared.  To no surprise, I noticed some big differences in my ratings compared to the computerized ratings by Massey.  For this reason I decided to dig a little deeper into how everything is calculated by Massey. I've never looked at these ratings in such detail before, it was interesting to see all the various calculations and predictions.
   On thing that stood out to me was the 'Strength of Schedule - played games only' (SoS) and 'Strength of Schedule - including future games' (SSF).  These rankings based on Strength of Schedules seem to heavily influence where teams are rated.  I analyzed these numbers out of curiosity to see which teams had the toughest schedules ahead, when I realized something just didn't seem to fit.  When I clicked on a few teams to see their schedule I realized that some key match-ups where omitted and also noticed some other glaring defects to the calculations.

   San Francisco has the #1 ranking currently on Massey with a #3 based on (SoS) and #2 based on (SSF).  Therefore I would assume that most teams in their conference would have a pretty high (SSF) since they would have to face CCSF at least twice this year.   Looking at CCSF's schedule on Massey Ratings I realized that both their games against Chabot were omitted in the conference schedule.  I then went on Chabot's schedule and they also did not have these two match-ups scheduled.  Chabot's (SSF) is #70 currently, which I'm sure would be adversely affected if the two match-ups with the #1 team on this rating system were included. This also would benefit every team on Chabot's schedule.
    I then did some more searching around and noticed that in the Central Valley Conference some games were missing as well. West Hills, currently (4-0) has a (SSF) of #88, but their schedule is omitting the February 12th game between Fresno City College, the #3 team ranked in the North on the Massey Rating.  I looked on Fresno City College's schedule and they are missing this game as well.  I figure this match-up would benefit both these teams in their Massey Rating, as well as every team on their schedule.
   Lassen has a #87 for their (SSF), which is obviously affected by the fact they are playing in 7 tournaments. This is because the Massey system can only include the first match-up in these tournaments, until these tournaments begin.  Since Lassen's conference, The Golden Valley Conference, historically is one of the weaker conferences in the state, their conference schedule heavily influences this score for their Strength of Schedule.   This flaw not only affects Lassen, but every team they are scheduled to play.  Cosumnes River has a #82 based on (SoS). Their schedule consists of only 3 games, one against Lassen in the first game of the season.  Lassen's (SSF) has to have an impact on everyone they face based on this rating system until Lassen plays through these tournaments and all their opponents can be added to the calculations.
   DVC has a #2 rating based on 'Strength of Schedule - played games only', yet DVC hasn't played a single game this year.  This would have to be pretty advantageous to any teams scheduled to face DVC since this would obviously bolster their (SSF) having a team with such a high (SoS) on their schedule.
   I'm sure their are even more flaws to this system, most of which are because the season is just starting.  But the defects and omitted match-ups not only influence the score of the team involved, but it has a domino effect on every teams' rating. Just think of an algebra problem that has only one # wrong, it throws off the entire calculation and the answer will obviously not be correct.
   I still enjoy looking at these ratings and I think they are interesting and helpful to observe.  But I feel that nothing can make up for the 'human approach' to rating teams.  Their is something to be said for actually physically seeing these teams play and talking to other coaches/scouts about the different programs.  Knowing about the coaching styles and traditions of programs is also a factor that is always an added benefit to the 'human approach'.  Of course, in the 'human approach' their is always room for bias to influence the ratings.  
   I feel that the fans and athletic departments benefit from both types of ratings systems, and when using both systems we are able to experience a more reliable and true ranking overall.
   Now that I know where to find the Massey Ratings, I will definitely include them in my considerations for my weekly ratings.  I can also use them to calculate my own state rankings, since I probably won't see many teams from the South play this year.
   Overall, the Massey Ratings are a cool and beneficial system for the basketball world.  However, I am looking forward to a 'Coaches Poll' or other Poll where the 'human approach' is also a factor in the ratings.