Started By
Message
re: Bret Beilema #1 coach to boost BCS chances for a School according to study.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 8:53 am to DaleDenton
Posted on 7/24/13 at 8:53 am to DaleDenton
This makes sense to me. Bielema should be way ahead of Saban. Saban took successful teams to BCS bowls.
Look at how good Bama was before he got there. Bama had recently been to a BCS bowl before Saban....wait...sorry, he took Bama to their first BCS bowl, and they were 4 years removed from a 4-9 season...but anyone could have done that.
Let's talk about LSU, instead. Saban took a powerhouse program and just bumped it up a bit. LSU was reloading from a fully stocked cupboard that DiNardo left....oops...LSU was 3-8 the season before Saban got there, and it took him 3 seasons to get them to a BCS bowl.
Now Bielema took Wisconsin to a BCS bowl when they had never been to one before....wait...they went to the Rose Bowl after the '98 season. But it only took Bielema 5 years to get Wisconsin to a BCS bowl, while it took Saban 3 seasons at LSU and 2 seasons at Bama...wait...that is less time from schools that had worse records beofore he took over than what Bielema got when he took over...
Nevermind...after looking at the numbers, the study is even more ridiculous.
Look at how good Bama was before he got there. Bama had recently been to a BCS bowl before Saban....wait...sorry, he took Bama to their first BCS bowl, and they were 4 years removed from a 4-9 season...but anyone could have done that.
Let's talk about LSU, instead. Saban took a powerhouse program and just bumped it up a bit. LSU was reloading from a fully stocked cupboard that DiNardo left....oops...LSU was 3-8 the season before Saban got there, and it took him 3 seasons to get them to a BCS bowl.
Now Bielema took Wisconsin to a BCS bowl when they had never been to one before....wait...they went to the Rose Bowl after the '98 season. But it only took Bielema 5 years to get Wisconsin to a BCS bowl, while it took Saban 3 seasons at LSU and 2 seasons at Bama...wait...that is less time from schools that had worse records beofore he took over than what Bielema got when he took over...
Nevermind...after looking at the numbers, the study is even more ridiculous.
2
Posted on 7/24/13 at 9:02 am to madmaxvol
So after all that drivel you are trying to compare two coaches while using info about said coaches while they were in two completely different conferences. That's the true definition of apples to oranges. Find the common denominator of the two and try again.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 9:18 am to OSqueal
Wisconsin had been to a BCS bowl after the '98 season. Neither LSU, nor Bama had been to a BCS bowl before Saban took over.
So, Bielema took Wisconsin where they had already been (since the inception of the BCS in '98). Saban took both LSU and Bama to BCS bowls for the first time.
So, Bielema took Wisconsin where they had already been (since the inception of the BCS in '98). Saban took both LSU and Bama to BCS bowls for the first time.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 9:30 am to madmaxvol
Bielema was handed a program in Wiscy, after about 3-4 years at arky he is gonna wish he never left...
Posted on 7/24/13 at 9:35 am to madmaxvol
Actually, it took Saban 2 seasons to get LSU to a BCS bowl.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 10:02 am to roadGator
quote:
Stats don't lie. Bert is going to have Arky back in contention soon and their offense will be as hot as Jen in a little black dress.
ISWYDT, I will change my vote to 'tentative'.
Ok, frick it, you're not an LSU fan so I'll change to 'yes'.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 10:39 am to madmaxvol
There was more to the formula than what the team did before they took over.
CUM is up there on both lists and he took over Florida and Ohio St. programs that had been successful before his arrival.
If you would read the article it would make sense to you, maybe.
CUM is up there on both lists and he took over Florida and Ohio St. programs that had been successful before his arrival.
If you would read the article it would make sense to you, maybe.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:07 am to Chimlim
quote:
Actually, it took Saban 2 seasons to get LSU to a BCS bowl.
Thanks...I had in my mind that Saban started in '99 instead of '00. I stand corrected.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:09 am to DaleDenton
quote:
There was more to the formula than what the team did before they took over.
Well if there is a formula, and Saban isn't near the top...then the formula is flawed.
quote:
If you would read the article it would make sense to you, maybe.
I didn't say the article didn't make sense...I just said that the premise is incorrect.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:20 am to USMC Gators
quote:
Getting to a BCS bowl game doesn't really mean anything unless you win it. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Note that Bart Bulimia AND Arknsas combined are 0-4 in BCS games.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:26 am to DaleDenton
quote:
In part two of our analysis we looked at incremental participation rates in BCS bowl games (not just the BCS championship). Our approach was similar as in the winning percentage analysis and used the same set of predictor variables. On this metric, the top performer was Bret Bielema. Bielema’s record includes taking Wisconsin to the last three Rose Bowls. In terms of percentages, we find that with Bielema in charge, Wisconsin improved their rate of BCS bowl participation by 28%. It looks like Arkansas made a great choice! In positions two through five we have Chris Petersen, Bob Stoops, Frank Beamer and Urban Meyer. And where does Coach Saban fall? Just behind Urban Meyer in 6th place.
Wisconsin doesn't go to a BCS bowl last year if either Penn State or Ohio State had not been on probation...so, by their logic, Bielemia's ability to get Arkansas to a bowl game would be diminished in a conference where every team is bowl eligible. Either that or they believe that solely by his presence, the liklihood that two SEC West teams will not be bowl eligible is increased.
If you take into account that Wisconsin went to the Rose Bowl in 2010 because of Big 10 rules, then his stock drops further. Michigan State had the same record (both in conference and overall), and won the head-to-head match-up...but the Big 10 sends the highest ranked team as their BCS representative. In the SEC, the winner of the head-to-head matchup gets the nod in post-season play...so, in the SEC...Bielema would have only gone to 1 BCS game, instead of 3.
So, where it is true that Bielema raised Wisconsin's chances of participating in a BCS bowl, the same relative performance within the guidelines and history of the SEC would have resulted in a 66% lower BCS bowl participation.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:43 am to madmaxvol
quote:
If you take into account that Wisconsin went to the Rose Bowl in 2010 because of Big 10 rules, then his stock drops further. Michigan State had the same record (both in conference and overall), and won the head-to-head match-up...but the Big 10 sends the highest ranked team as their BCS representative. In the SEC, the winner of the head-to-head matchup gets the nod in post-season play...so, in the SEC...Bielema would have only gone to 1 BCS game, instead of 3.
The bowls still select who they want based on eligibilty.
The criteria for the BCS bowls is to select the conference conference champion unless the champion is playing in the BCS NCG, then they can select based on teams available who are ranked high enough provided no more than two are selected from the same conference.
Brett's 2006 Wisconsin team finished 12-1, tied with Michigan for 2nd in the big10 (Wisconsin did not play Ohio St. that year) Ohio St. played in the NCG and Michigan was selected to play in the Rose Bowl.
You still did not figure out what part of their formula knocked Saban down, I'm not surprised.
Also of note, Brian Kelly made the list, while his shadow did not.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:52 am to DaleDenton
quote:
Brett's 2006 Wisconsin team finished 12-1, tied with Michigan for 2nd in the big10 (Wisconsin did not play Ohio St. that year) Ohio St. played in the NCG and Michigan was selected to play in the Rose Bowl.
Apples to oranges. The BCS gets to pick the at-large team from the conference...In the SEC, the higher ranked team may get the at-large bid. Last year, Florida got the at-large bid over Georgia (who actually won the East and had the head-to head over UF)...similar situation.
I figured out what part of their formula knocked Saban down...I just don't agree with their premise.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 12:03 pm to madmaxvol
quote:
Apples to oranges. The BCS gets to pick the at-large team from the conference...In the SEC, the higher ranked team may get the at-large bid. Last year, Florida got the at-large bid over Georgia (who actually won the East and had the head-to head over UF)...similar situation.
Huh? You obviously do not know how bowl selection works.
Michigan St. could have been selected to the Rose Bowl in 2010, the Rose Bowl chose Wisconsin, both were Co-Champions in the big10 that year. Things changed last year with the installment of the Championship game which Wisconsin won and earn the Rose Bowl trip.
You Georgia example is no different than LSU sitting at home during the SEC-CG and then being selected over Arkansas, who played for the championship, to go to the Sugar Bowl. The year Carolina made it and lost they fell all the way to the Chic-fil-a Bowl, this has always been the result of losing the conference championship game in every conference, the only exception would be 0U the year they lost and then were destroyed by SC.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 12:05 pm to Crow Pie
quote:
Note that Bart Bulimia AND Arknsas combined are 0-4 in BCS games.
And LSU is a combined 0-2 in bowl games in just 2012. Whats your point.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 12:19 pm to madmaxvol
quote:
I didn't say the article didn't make sense...I just said that the premise is incorrect.
Correct. Ohio State has been to BCS bowls in 9 of 15 years. 60%. If Meyer boosts their chances by 22.2% then they should go 82% of the time.
Bulemia boosts it by 28.3%.
Arkansas has been to one BCS bowl game. 6%. So Bert boosts them to a 34.3% chance yet he's #1?
Please note that I don't believe any of this crap nor do I believe in the original piece. I'm just pointing out how absurd it is.
This post was edited on 7/24/13 at 12:25 pm
Posted on 7/24/13 at 12:26 pm to DaleDenton
quote:
Huh? You obviously do not know how bowl selection works.
Huh? You obviously do not know how the Big 10 works (or at least how it worked in 2010). Let me break the tie-breaker system down for you.
In 2010 there was a 3-way tie at the top of the Big 10 (before they had divisions). Ohio State, Wisconsin and Michigan State. Ohio State lost to Wisconsin and Wisconsin lost to Michigan. All three teams had the same record in and out of conference.
The Big-10 selection process stated that in case of a 3-way tie, they would chose the conference champion based on their BCS rankings. Since Michigan State started the season unranked (whereas both Wisconsin and Ohio State were ranked), they had much more ground to make up. The BCS got to select the at-large team, but the Big-10 selected the champion.
quote:
You Georgia example is no different than LSU sitting at home during the SEC-CG and then being selected over Arkansas, who played for the championship, to go to the Sugar Bowl.
I was making reference to at-large bids, rather than automatic bids. Wisconsin lost to Michigan State, but received an automatic bid, solely because of their BCS ranking...Ohio State received an at-large bid based on the fact that that is who the BCS bowl wanted to take (just like Florida over Georgia).
Posted on 7/24/13 at 1:05 pm to OSqueal
quote:
Note that Bart Bulimia AND Arknsas combined are 0-4 in BCS games
And LSU is a combined 0-2 in bowl games in just 2012. Whats your point?
quote:
Getting to a BCS bowl game doesn't really mean anything unless you win it.
The Point
Posted on 7/24/13 at 1:11 pm to Crow Pie
There's no point in anyone showing up to play their games against Arkansas because BB is the best coach in the nation. They are going to destroy everyone.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 1:13 pm to DaleDenton
Learn how to spell your coach's name right....
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News