Roman Tanner
Registered User
The problem, SCT, is that you're treating him like he IS proposing a thesis, which, as you already said, would be a dumb thing to do pre-publication.
It's a rudimentary compilation of the team's drafts between 1987 and 2001, with limited resources. He explained his criteria. I didn't see where he was using it as a predictor. The only criticism I have is, instead of the editorial after each ranking, something more objective be put in that was factored into the ranking.
You're right that there are so many factors that would affect the ranking. Any methodology to rank these teams, much like the scouting and drafting of these teams, yields an imperfect system.
I suggest, instead of bashing his methodology, that you provide your own input since you've done this yourself. We already know it's not a master's thesis, so how about you lay off a little bit and not treat it as such.
And Gwyddbwyll, keep at it. Your effort is certainly appreciated, and it will be interesting to see how all the teams rank through your criteria.
Well said.