Started By
Message
re: I'm hearing 5-star LB CJ Johnson will be a Black Bear
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:32 pm to Whereisomaha
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:32 pm to Whereisomaha
0
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:33 pm to Whereisomaha
:wavestoNIH:
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:34 pm to mmjones87
quote:
He has had a top 20 class the last 2 years. FWIW. And Mullen sucks at recruiting because he is arrogant and it turns mommas and daddys off. Hootie was born to talk to momma and daddy
You're really going to cite the class of 37 and say that it's due to Nutt's recruiting prowess that you were top 20 two years ago?
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:35 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
You're really going to cite the class of 37 and say that it's due to Nutt's recruiting prowess that you were top 20 two years ago?
Well....considering they only counted the top-20/25 in recruiting rankings....yes.
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:38 pm to pankReb
double post
This post was edited on 1/19/11 at 11:41 pm
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:40 pm to Tiger Authority
Would the probability of being ranked in the top twenty for an LSU team be more likely if they are signing 50 players in a given class or signing 100 kids in a class?
This post was edited on 1/19/11 at 11:41 pm
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:43 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
Would the probability of being ranked in the top twenty for an LSU team be more likely if they are signing 50 players in a given class or signing 100 kids in a class?
ok. but you're top 20/25 of that class would still be ranked in the top 20.
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:46 pm to pankReb
quote:
ok. but you're top 20/25 of that class would still be ranked in the top 20.
Not necessarily. Depends on the team. And you're missing the easy point I'm getting at. OM, by signing 37, didn't prove Nutt's worth on the trail. They just realized how they could increase the likelihood to be ranked highly.
This post was edited on 1/19/11 at 11:47 pm
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:50 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
Not necessarily. Depends on the team. And you're missing the easy point I'm getting at. OM, by signing 37, didn't prove Nutt's worth on the trail. They just realized how they could increase the likelihood to be ranked highly.
and you're missing the easy point I'm getting at. The top 20/25 of those athletes are what makes up the rankings.....regardless if you sign 25 or 50.
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:52 pm to pankReb
quote:
and you're missing the easy point I'm getting at. The top 20/25 of those athletes are what makes up the rankings.....regardless if you sign 25 or 50
Exactly/boom
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:54 pm to pankReb
quote:
and you're missing the easy point I'm getting at. The top 20/25 of those athletes are what makes up the rankings.....regardless if you sign 25 or 50.
And as you sign more players, the probability that you're going to have additional players included in that top 20-25 increases. That could mean an additional three star was slightly ranked higher than another three star that could be included in that top tier of players that could increase the OM ranking. The more you sign, the more likely that this occurs.
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:55 pm to pankReb
I like seeing State fans trying to brag to us about their out of state prospects after talking so much shite the past season about instate recruiting..
We're recruiting a 4* DT from WASHINGTON DC!!!
We're recruiting a 4* DT from WASHINGTON DC!!!
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:56 pm to OBReb6
quote:
and you're missing the easy point I'm getting at. The top 20/25 of those athletes are what makes up the rankings.....regardless if you sign 25 or 50
Exactly/boom
dude I know you're an OM fan but seriously go take a statistics class. Hell, use common sense and refrain from posting "boom" as if your friend understands this very basic and simple concept. He doesn't.
Team X has two options. They can either sign 50 players or they can sign 100 players. Rankings, however, are only based on the top 25 players.
Which option do you take? Which option is more likely to improve your odds of having the best 25 players for the ranking?
This post was edited on 1/19/11 at 11:57 pm
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:56 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
And as you sign more players, the probability that you're going to have additional players included in that top 20-25 increases. That could mean an additional three star was slightly ranked higher than another three star that could be included in that top tier of players that could increase the OM ranking. The more you sign, the more likely that this occurs.
and the more likely you sign 2/3 star players as well. You're making it seem like the only way we got the 4 star players is by oversigning.
Posted on 1/19/11 at 11:58 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
And as you sign more players, the probability that you're going to have additional players included in that top 20-25 increases. That could mean an additional three star was slightly ranked higher than another three star that could be included in that top tier of players that could increase the OM ranking. The more you sign, the more likely that this occurs.
There is NO advantage to over signing in regards to class rankings. At least not statistically.
Posted on 1/20/11 at 12:00 am to pankReb
quote:
And as you sign more players, the probability that you're going to have additional players included in that top 20-25 increases. That could mean an additional three star was slightly ranked higher than another three star that could be included in that top tier of players that could increase the OM ranking. The more you sign, the more likely that this occurs.
and the more likely you sign 2/3 star players as well. You're making it seem like the only way we got the 4 star players is by oversigning.
You don't know what would have happened had you not oversigned. It's an assumption assuming that if you didn't sign 37, you would still have been ranked the same. But the probability would work against you in that case as the same premise applies but negatively.
Posted on 1/20/11 at 12:00 am to Tiger Authority
quote:
dude I know you're an OM fan but seriously go take a statistics class. Hell, use common sense and refrain from posting "boom" as if your friend understands this very basic and simple concept. He doesn't.
Team X has two options. They can either sign 50 players or they can sign 100 players. Rankings, however, are only based on the top 25 players.
Which option do you take? Which option is more likely to improve your odds of having the best 25 players for the ranking?
Ok MR. Statistics.
Your logic is something that is used when judging Probability. If we were talking about busts or diamonds in the rough, then your use of this type of statistics would be valid. You're using the "guessing-game" argument when there is NO guessing which player is a 2/3/4 star. If we were just blindly grabbing 50/100 player profiles out of a bag or throwing 50/100 darts at a board with them on there, then you're argument is valid.
...but we aren't doing that. You're use of this logic is completely out of place.
Maybe you should go re-take statistics.
Posted on 1/20/11 at 12:01 am to Tiger Authority
quote:
You don't know what would have happened had you not oversigned. It's an assumption assuming that if you didn't sign 37, you would still have been ranked the same. But the probability would work against you in that case as the same premise applies but negatively.
No. If we didn't oversign, we would have just cut our offers from the XX amount of players that was the worst of the bunch. But we didn't because Nutt wanted to honor his word to them. IF Nutt would have done this based on stars, we would have STILL had the same ranking.
Posted on 1/20/11 at 12:03 am to SugarHog
quote:
And as you sign more players, the probability that you're going to have additional players included in that top 20-25 increases. That could mean an additional three star was slightly ranked higher than another three star that could be included in that top tier of players that could increase the OM ranking. The more you sign, the more likely that this occurs.
There is NO advantage to over signing in regards to class rankings. At least not statistically.
This.
And I just noticed something in your quote of his. He's referring to a player over or underranked. That isn't a viable variable in our equations. We aren't talking about busts or diamonds in the rough...as I said. We're just talking about the stars by their name.
...which, admittedly, isn't the important thing when it comes to winning football games.
Posted on 1/20/11 at 12:03 am to pankReb
quote:
No. If we didn't oversign, we would have just cut our offers from the XX amount of players that was the worst of the bunch. But we didn't because Nutt wanted to honor his word to them. IF Nutt would have done this based on stars, we would have STILL had the same ranking.
Correct, he is automatically assuming that the lower ranked kids would have kept their scholarships over the higher ranked ones if Nutt had not over signed.
That being said, over signing by so many is dumb.
Page 4 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News