Started By
Message
re: Early F+ Projections on big SEC games
Posted on 8/16/17 at 11:31 am to TonyMontana
Posted on 8/16/17 at 11:31 am to TonyMontana
quote:
LSU is incredibly overvalued
Says the state fan. Y'all are too concerned with your cheating brotherns to worry about football.
1
Posted on 8/16/17 at 11:42 am to SummerOfGeorge
It's going to be a long time before Georgia fixes their analytics because of that absolutely awful Nicholls State game last year.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 12:07 pm to WG_Dawg
Seems about right for our games
Posted on 8/16/17 at 12:24 pm to TonyMontana
And you know this how?
Posted on 8/16/17 at 12:26 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
It probably does to some extent (mainly because it can't guess what the stats would have been), but it clearly doesn't entirely as Tennessee finished 52nd in defense in 2016 per S&P+ and is predicted to finish 38th this year.
S&P+ gave us a better than a lot of our stats. That was historically the 2nd worst defense we ever fielded (we finished 95th in total defense, 104th in rushing defense, and 72nd in passing yards allowed - but injuries don't matter lol). (The other was when Sunseri switched us to a 3-4 in Dooley's final year).
But yeah, you've got to include them because you can't predict or correct for that sort of thing. It just skews the accuracy of the overall prediction for one particular team. Overall the stats will even out because you're doing every team but the exception makes the rule.
This post was edited on 8/16/17 at 12:33 pm
Posted on 8/16/17 at 12:32 pm to momentoftruth87
No, I just pay attention.
Thin on OL, average QB, below average WRs (well, unproven at the very least).
Front 7 gets very average if Key goes down.
Let's say "questionable" coach, to be kind. Yeah yeah, Aranda/Canada. Not sold on Canada, spring game and 1st scrimmage incredibly disappointing from offensive side.
They're not bad, but they won't be in the playoff hunt either. They're an 8-4 or 9-3 team.
Thin on OL, average QB, below average WRs (well, unproven at the very least).
Front 7 gets very average if Key goes down.
Let's say "questionable" coach, to be kind. Yeah yeah, Aranda/Canada. Not sold on Canada, spring game and 1st scrimmage incredibly disappointing from offensive side.
They're not bad, but they won't be in the playoff hunt either. They're an 8-4 or 9-3 team.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 12:33 pm to FightinTiga
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Posted on 8/16/17 at 12:35 pm to Prof
quote:
Prof
Just out of curiosity, what do you have the Vols regular season record at?
Posted on 8/16/17 at 12:43 pm to UAtide11
quote:
Just out of curiosity, what do you have the Vols regular season record at?
8 plus a bowl game. I think we're stuck there (tho I can see that moving in either direction +1-2 games). That said, it all depends on QB play. Dormady is talented as frick (his ball placement is sublime - hits receivers in stride almost every throw in practice and can make any throw on the field) but that talent has to translate during games. If it does translate in games this kid is going to be a NFL QB -- big, tall, pro-style guy who can make any throw.
If Dormady tanks and JG isn't ready then it will be a long season. We're also still thin at DE which is a worry going into the season.
This post was edited on 8/16/17 at 12:48 pm
Posted on 8/16/17 at 12:56 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
quote:
Gamblers will buy anything that they think will give them an edge. That is why most live in rentals.
We get it, it doesn't say Auburn 12-0 so it's dumb and stupid and you don't like it.
Understood.
We get it also, "Cocaine Monkey" Gamblers will jump at any tool they think will get them that next fix. I hate to see what your 1-800 tip line bill looks like during football season. How many New Jersey accent experts do you have on speed dial?
Posted on 8/16/17 at 1:13 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
They are based on stats, not human judgment. The stats say LSU is 17 points better than Arkansas at home, and I think that seems like a pretty fair assessment heading into the season.
What stats could they possibly be based off? The first game is 10 days away and most SEC teams don't start for 17. Other than Orgeron, coaches don't give out stats from preseason scrimmages. If they are based off of last year's stats and how the people think returning starters and newcomers will change the result from last year, than it is still subjective and affected, if not based entirely on, human judgment.
This post was edited on 8/16/17 at 1:14 pm
Posted on 8/16/17 at 1:14 pm to Irons Puppet
quote:
We get it also, "Cocaine Monkey" Gamblers will jump at any tool they think will get them that next fix. I hate to see what your 1-800 tip line bill looks like during football season. How many New Jersey accent experts do you have on speed dial?
You're probably, "see, recruiting rankings don't matter" guy after Missouri beats a good team one week. Sure, they aren't everything, but look at long term trends and you'll see that the rankings are legit.
Just like this. Sure, upsets happen. And preseason advanced stats are far from perfect. But you're ignorant af if you don't think this stat is pretty damn accurate over the long term.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 1:43 pm to Irons Puppet
quote:
We get it also, "Cocaine Monkey" Gamblers will jump at any tool they think will get them that next fix. I hate to see what your 1-800 tip line bill looks like during football season. How many New Jersey accent experts do you have on speed dial?
I'm confused, do you think the only people who deep dive into stats are gamblers?
Posted on 8/16/17 at 1:54 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
I'm confused, do you think the only people who deep dive into stats are gamblers?
Ok, I guess you are only concerned about the line for "entertainment purposes only".
Posted on 8/16/17 at 2:09 pm to Irons Puppet
Bro, is it an unwritten rule that says you have to be a douche to all Bama posters here? You fricking suck dude.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 2:21 pm to Irons Puppet
quote:
We get it also, "Cocaine Monkey" Gamblers will jump at any tool they think will get them that next fix. I hate to see what your 1-800 tip line bill looks like during football season. How many New Jersey accent experts do you have on speed dial
This sounds like the rantings of a man with experience on the subject.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 2:23 pm to TeddyWestside
quote:
What stats could they possibly be based off? The first game is 10 days away and most SEC teams don't start for 17. Other than Orgeron, coaches don't give out stats from preseason scrimmages. If they are based off of last year's stats and how the people think returning starters and newcomers will change the result from last year, than it is still subjective and affected, if not based entirely on, human judgment.
By and large, most teams are a product of their previous couple of seasons, the difficulty of their schedule, and the amount of talent and experience they have. Very few teams come completely out of nowhere and crash the party, and very few teams absolutely collapse. It happens, but those are the exceptions (with fewer teams vastly over-performing than under-performing).
W/L aren't as good of a predictive stat as say yard per play and yards allowed per play. Turnovers generally revert to the mean but can be volatile from year to year thus disproportionately affecting W/L outcomes. Other useful stats are efficiencies based on down/distance and field position, percentage of successful plays, and expected points per drive. Also all of those stats allowed by your defense.
Over time, these metrics tend to give a team an identity. The old saying is "you are what your record says you are", but for predictive purposes it's more that you are what your stats say you are. And a lot of these things are fairly steady over a window of a few years.
These rating systems take these statistics and run complex statistical simulations (10s or 100s of thousands in some cases) and come up with a range of most likely outcomes. I would argue they are considerably more objective than most other predictions. The subjective part comes into play when deciding which stats matter and which don't (which is something any analyst does anyway). They aren't gospel by any means, as anything can happen in any given game. But in my opinion they give a pretty good idea of what the most likely range of outcomes is (obviously a specific point spread is more narrow than what the modelers would prefer, but that's what the public wants a specific number). Because football is a game with fewer discrete measurements (fewer plays/possessions/pitches than the other sports) and because points are awarded in bunches, accurate to-the-spread numbers have been harder to project.
This post was edited on 8/16/17 at 2:25 pm
Posted on 8/16/17 at 2:25 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
Auburn vs Georgia : Auburn by 9.1 (70%)
seems pretty ridiculous
I agree. AU is a dog in all the other predictions and then this is thrown out there. Don't believe this at all.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 2:35 pm to bamasgot13
quote:
This sounds like the rantings of a man with experience on the subject.
Haven't bet since I lost on a sure bet "three team teaser" when I was in college.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 4:06 pm to Irons Puppet
quote:
Haven't bet since I lost on a sure bet "three team teaser" when I was in college
I had 4 team teaser last year that paid 10-1. OM over UGA (check), FSU over USF (check), Stanford over Cal (check in amazing fashion), and LSU over AU (doh)
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News