Since we still have a chance with him. It appears if he's not going to enroll early out of concerns for who his coach would be that he's giving us every chance in the world.
Last night DP fell behind by 2 TDs but rallied to win 38-28. Hart had 21 carries for 218 yards and 2 TDs. Accounted for 324 total yards and had two TDs called back due to penalties. On the negative side he lost two fumbles- too much on his mind maybe?
Again, from a GBW poster who is friends with him on facebook:
Cullen Buc-Nasty Christian Dear Coach Rod,
keep your head up! people dont understand you, but the team and I do. i understand that you are trying to change us from boys to men, i also understand that its about more than w's and l's. i feel bad, out of all the positive things you said last night and all year, people always find ways to turn the good to the bad. dont worry your team got ya back, will see what they say in 2011
- #100 Rush Offense
- #35 Pass Offense
- #72 Total Offense
- #64 Scoring Offense (27 ppg)
- #64 Rush Defense
- #82 Pass Defense
- #70 Total Defense
- #56 Scoring Defense (24.67 ppg)
- #32 TO Margin (+5)
- #18 in TOs gained (26)
- #87 3rd Down Conversions (36.42%)
- #66 3rd Down Coversion Defense (39.77%)
- #91 in Gaining 1st Downs (17.58 pg)
- #59 in Allowing 1st Downs (19.5 pg)
- #99 Red Zone Offense (<50% TD rate)
- #27 Red Zone Defense (allowed only 24 TDs on 44 drives)
- Michigan is currently #47 in overall FEI (Fremeau Efficiency Index)
- Tennesse is #62
- Michigan is #30 in S&P (a combo of success rate [50% of yards to go on 1st down, 70% on 2nd down, 100% on 3rd and/or 4th down] and points per play)
- Tennessee is #53
- The Football Outsiders Use F/+ as their "official" rankings. F/+ is a combo of FEI and S&P.
- Michigan is #36
- Tennessee is #55
It looks like if we can take care of the football, this is a very winnable game.
Lost in the crapola being written by Terry Foster, Drew Sharp, and others regarding the Football Bust, missing were ANY stories whatsoever about one of Bo's BEST and FAVORITE teams, namely the 1985 Michigan Wolverines. After all, they were the guest of honor at the frigging banquet, weren't they?!?!?
Well, because those dirty rotten bastards DIDN'T talk about the 1985 Team like they SHOULD HAVE, sit back and enjoy the story of one of Bo's finest teams (the TEAM, the TEAM, the TEAM!!!!).
This team, along with the 1976, 1980, and 1997 teams, rank among my favorite UM teams. I don't count the '69 team (although a wonderful one at that), simply because I was too young to remember them.
The 1985 season was my senior year at UM. The team was coming off the ignominy of a 6-6 season and was not ranked in the Top 20 rankings (Top 25 ranking didn't come into vogue until later on). That was a 2nd for a Bo team (the '69 team didn't enter the Top 20 until week 2). Call me foolishly optimistic, but I had an inkling that this team would NOT disappoint the Michigan faithful!
Some defensive minded coach at MSU had beaten UM the year before in Ann Arbor and was the talk of the state. Old Bo was washed up, or so it seemed.
1985 Michigan Football season (as through my eyes and ears)
|9/14||Notre Dame, W 20-12, Ann Arbor||
|9/21||South Carolina, 34-3, Columbia||
|9/28||Maryland, 20-0, Ann Arbor||
|10/5||Wisconsin, 33-6, Ann Arbor||
|10/12||MSU, 31-0, Least Lansing||
|10/19||Iowa, 12-10 LOSS, Iowa City||
|10/26||Indiana, 42-15, Ann Arbor||
|11/2||Illinois, 3-3, Champaign||
|11/9||Purdue, 47-0, Ann Arbor||
|11/16||Minnesota, 48-7, Minny||
|11/23||Ohio State, 27-17, Ann Arbor||
|1/1||Nebraska, 27-23, Fiesta Bowl||
Is anybody else a little surprised we didn't hear anything from D Hart today? I thought the rumors were that he was going to make an announcement after his playoff game today. Correct me if I am wrong but I have found nothing today about it. Please advise, many thanks.
FYI Dr. Phillips won 38-28 today so congrats to them.
First of all, I should thank Coach Schiano for the idea for this ranking system. I've taken the concept from his diary, made a few tweaks, and applied it to all FBS and FCS teams. If you need an explanation of what is happening, I suggest reading there first.
So, the first thing that I did was I loaded all of the game results thus far (excluding last night and this night) into a database. Then, I was able to write a script that built paths between every combination of teams with the lowest possible value. So, MSU beat Wisconsin and Wisconsin beat OSU. The first step is to create paths of length 1 for those two games. After that, I can calculate the value of the path from MSU to OSU and then create a direct path of length 2 between them. Iowa's path to OSU is 3 and so on.
Once I had calculated the minimum value for all possible paths, I averaged out the values and had a very redimentary ranking. This is the exact system that was used in the original diary to rank the teams of the Big Ten, but now we have expanded the teams to compare.
|Original, Unweighted, Without Record|
|North Carolina State|
As you can see, this isn't a very accurate reflection of the best teams in college football. It took me a few minutes to figure out what was going on, but it became clear when I realized that Michigan was on there. The problem is that this system strongly favors a diversified schedule. The more teams that you beat that don't play each other, the better chance you have of getting 2 or 3 length paths.
The first thing that I tried to do to fix this was to weight the games. Instead of automatically giving a team a path of length one for a win, I started dividing that by the number of scores (8 points) that a team won by. So, winning by 24 points, or 3 scores, would give you a path length of .333 over that team. This works out really well because it benefits teams that win by 2 or 3 scores, but it doesn't benefit teams too much for going beyond that.
|Weighted, Without Record|
This seemed to get me a lot closer to where we want to be with a poll, but there are still some issues. How can Auburn be ranked 14 and Missouri be ranked 3? Well, now there is too much weight on winning strong games. But wait, if that's the case, then why isn't Wisconsin ranked in the top 10? That's because all of their blowouts came in the Big Ten. Wisconsin looked like a pretty bad team at the beginning of the year because they won some very close games against lesser opponents.
The only way that I could figure to solve the problems with overweighting is to add another weighting component, which is actually pretty obvious. I decided to add a winning percentage multiplier at the end. Originally, I figured that the concept of graph theory would account for winning. What it really does is account for beating the right teams, i.e. it is the strength of schedule calculation. The reason that I went with a winning percentage is because I don't want to give an advantage to teams playing Hawaii or in championship games, so raw wins was out of the question. I also need a way to penalize a team that loses a 13th game. The only way to do this is to do a winning percentage. 13-0 and 12-0 are now 1.000. 12-1 and 11-1 are only .006 apart. This gives a slight benefit to teams playing an extra game, but also makes sure to penalize properly for losses.
|Weighted, With Record|
|29||Delaware (Highest rated FCS Team)|
|31||Jacksonville State (Beat Ole Miss)|
As you can see, this looks like a real ranking now and it won't automatically place an undefeated team ahead of a 1-loss team. I'm pretty excited about the outcome, because this is actually pretty comparable to the polls that are out there. How comparable?
|My Poll||R||BCS||R||D||AP||R||D||Coaches||R||D||Harris||R||D||Computer Average||R||D|
|Ohio State||5||Ohio State||6||1||Ohio State||6||1||Ohio State||6||1||Ohio State||6||1||Ohio State||9||4|
|Boise State||6||Boise State||11||5||Boise State||9||3||Boise State||10||4||Boise State||10||4||Boise State||14||8|
|Michigan State||11||Michigan State||8||3||Michigan State||7||4||Michigan State||7||4||Michigan State||7||4||Michigan State||11||0|
|Oklahoma State||13||Oklahoma State||14||1||Oklahoma State||16||3||Oklahoma State||15||2||Oklahoma State||16||3||Oklahoma State||12||1|
|South Carolina||15||South Carolina||19||4||South Carolina||18||3||South Carolina||16||1||South Carolina||17||2||South Carolina||18||3|
|Virginia Tech||16||Virginia Tech||15||1||Virginia Tech||12||4||Virginia Tech||11||5||Virginia Tech||12||4||Virginia Tech||20||4|
|Texas A&M||19||Texas A&M||18||1||Texas A&M||19||0||Texas A&M||18||1||Texas A&M||19||0||Texas A&M||16||3|
|Florida State||21||Florida State||21||0||Florida State||20||1||Florida State||20||1||Florida State||20||1||Florida State||22||1|
|Northern Illinois||22||Northern Illinois||25||3||Northern Illinois||24||2||Northern Illinois||23||1||Northern Illinois||24||2||Northern Illinois||25||3|
|West Virginia||24||West Virginia||24||0||West Virginia||23||1||West Virginia||24||0||West Virginia||23||1||West Virginia||24||0|
|Mississippi State||33||Mississippi State||22||11||Mississippi State||22||11||Mississippi State||22||11||Mississippi State||22||11||Mississippi State||21||12|
What you have here is my ranking along with some of the more common rankings you will see. I didn't think all of the computer rankings would fit in this chart, so I just took the average of them. The numbers to the right of the poll are the ranking of those teams in the poll and then the difference between that ranking and my ranking. The BCS poll does not show beyond the top 25, so I can't compare those teams to mine. At the bottom, you will see the average difference and and the most common difference between the polls. The team that seemed to cause me the most troubles is Mississippi State. They alone account for a little less than half a rank in each of the averages.
So, I'm planning on doing another ranking next week after all the games have been played and another after all the bowls have been played. I'd also like to do conference rankings and go back to previous years and "resolve" controversies. By next week, I will have tweaked this a bit more to add in homefield advantage and hopefully perfected the formula.
I have one last ranking for you. This is the algorithm without the margin of victory used to weight the wins. This is essentially what would be submitted to the BCS because they don't allow points into the calculations. It's interesting that it places Auburn in first now just like the rest of the computers.
|No Weights, With Record|