Started By
Message
1
Posted on 1/14/16 at 12:50 pm to cas4t
2011 LSU is one of the 2-3 best non-title winning teams in the last 25 years.
Come on now.
Come on now.
Posted on 1/14/16 at 12:51 pm to SummerOfGeorge
I never disagreed 
Posted on 1/14/16 at 1:00 pm to RB10
quote:
2011 LSU gave up 20+ 3 times total that season, but this 2015 Clemson team would beat them by more than 20 four times out of ten games?
Right.
Look, goob, it was just a simulation with a small sample size. I provided a link.... run a few more and see what you get. It will average out to the true probable game situation in the end if you run enough.
Posted on 1/14/16 at 1:01 pm to iglass
quote:
Look, goob, it was just a simulation with a small sample size. I provided a link.... run a few more and see what you get. It will average out to the true probable game situation in the end if you run enough
The simulation spit out 4 20+ point wins for Clemson in 10 games.
It's clearly shite.
Posted on 1/14/16 at 1:54 pm to RB10
Honey Badger and crew would have would have eaten that spread for lunch. Only reason Clemson scored so much is Bama's style of defense has the most trouble against the spread. LSU's was built to stop the spread.
Just ask Johnny Football how he thinks Watson would have done...
Just ask Johnny Football how he thinks Watson would have done...
This post was edited on 1/14/16 at 1:56 pm
Posted on 1/14/16 at 1:55 pm to cas4t
quote:
I never disagreed
Ha, sorry, it was a reply to the entire thread in general, not you.
Posted on 1/14/16 at 2:10 pm to RB10
quote:
The simulation spit out 4 20+ point wins for Clemson in 10 games.
It's clearly shite.
I'm not sure you understand what a "small sample size" is and how that relates to Monte Carlo simulations.
Follow the link. Simulate some more for yourself. The more you run, the closer to the true probability average will occur. Go. Have fun. Get out of the house a bit. See some sunshine.
Edit: here's the link again: 2015 Clemson vs 2011 LSU Simulation
At the original posting, the simulation had been run about 20 times, now it is up to at least 50 and the overall winning record has swung slightly to Clemson.
You might find it quite interesting to unhide player stats and show the individual plays. It's not perfect - it's a theoretical exercise, though one statistically based. I find these sort of simulations to be interesting, maybe you will too.
This post was edited on 1/14/16 at 2:18 pm
Posted on 1/14/16 at 2:54 pm to iglass
Yeah and if you run the simulation for LSU 2012-2013 2015-2016 it's at 3-3 after 6 sims. That simulator sucks lol.
Posted on 1/14/16 at 3:36 pm to The Human Fetus
IMO, LSU'11 beats Clemson'15 about 7/10 times. That defense from front to back would have really limited Watson's ability to create plays out of breakdowns. Even with JJ at the helm, that offense of LSU's was better than people remember. LSU would force 1+ turnovers with that D (Reid and the Badger at their peak) and be able to make hay with the power run game.
But, Clemson would win more often than LSU fans want to admit. At the most important position in any sport, QB, Clemson'15 has a huge advantage.
But, Clemson would win more often than LSU fans want to admit. At the most important position in any sport, QB, Clemson'15 has a huge advantage.
Posted on 1/14/16 at 3:37 pm to iglass
quote:
You might find it quite interesting to unhide player stats and show the individual plays. It's not perfect - it's a theoretical exercise, though one statistically based. I find these sort of simulations to be interesting, maybe you will too.
By interesting, I hope you mean "shite", because that's what it is.
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:53 am to The Human Fetus
quote:
Yeah and if you run the simulation for LSU 2012-2013 2015-2016 it's at 3-3 after 6 sims. That simulator sucks lol.
Yet another person who doesn't seem to understand the concept of "small sample size". Only six tries???
It's just pushing a button. Run it 50 times or more. Look at the plays and stats to see if they look reasonable and within expectations.
Don't just say "it sucks a lot" if you really don't understand the concept and methodology.
Posted on 1/15/16 at 12:20 pm to GIbson05
OP- Ohio state was better than ya'll last year, and if they would have made it to the playoffs they would have beat your butt again! :lol:
Btw there is know way to tell which team was better. 2011 Lsu had an incredible defense, and special teams
2015 Clemson had an incredible offense.
My guess LSU would have won in a close game.
:lol: Btw there is know way to tell which team was better. 2011 Lsu had an incredible defense, and special teams
2015 Clemson had an incredible offense.
My guess LSU would have won in a close game.
This post was edited on 1/15/16 at 12:27 pm
Posted on 1/15/16 at 12:21 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
2011 LSU is one of the 2-3 best non-title winning teams in the last 25 years
SummerofGeorge is correct
OP is just trying to start crap!
Posted on 1/15/16 at 12:23 pm to GIbson05
quote:
Which was the best team not to win a national title?
05 USC
Posted on 1/15/16 at 12:24 pm to PurpleandGeauld
quote:
Just ask Johnny Football how he thinks Watson would have done
Also ask Oregon their offense had a few similarities to Clemson, and we smoked them Ducks.
This post was edited on 1/15/16 at 12:27 pm
Posted on 1/15/16 at 12:29 pm to Tiger79
The difference being Clemson plays physical football, unlike Oregon. The 2015 Tigers wouldn't get pushed around by anyone, I feel like Monday night proved that.
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News