2. The supercomputer
Once upon a time, the supercomputer appeared at the start of the season, told everyone where they would finish, and then largely left us alone until the run-in. You might get a story out of it, have a discussion and move on.
Now it seems to have acquired its own press office. My inbox is forever being informed that the supercomputer has predicted this, revised that or reached a startling new conclusion after the weekend’s results.
A team wins and its prospects improve. A team loses and its prospects deteriorate. By Monday morning, we’re apparently supposed to be astonished that the latest table differs from the one sent out on Friday.
Yes, a forecasting model should update when it receives new information. I understand that, but dressing up every adjustment as a fresh revelation makes the whole exercise feel increasingly empty. If you’re selling it to me as a supercomputer, I’m entitled to expect something a little more impressive than noticing who won on Saturday.
It’s the name that really gets me. “Supercomputer” conjures up a vast machine performing calculations beyond human comprehension, when what we’re usually being presented with is a football prediction model whose workings receive considerably less attention than its exciting label.
Some models will be better than others, but calling something super doesn’t tell us how useful its predictions are. Explain the method, give us a reason to take it seriously and perhaps there is a worthwhile story there.
Otherwise, it’s another predicted league table, and we’ve already had three this week. Surely even the supercomputer would like an afternoon off.
Comments Welcome!