Ohio newspaper says 18% chance Michigan beats Ohio
"Chances to beat Ohio State: 18 percent. When we originally planned this schedule breakdown out, we gave the Wolverines the best chance of beating Ohio State. You know now it's been flipped. Michigan State was 20 percent, the Wolverines are just behind at 18."
Source: Cleveland.com 8/6/2015
http://www.cleveland.com/osu/index.ssf/2015/08/can_michigan_beat_ohio_state_1.html
I was posting in jest, but I do think it's really stupid to apply percentages to a non-repeatable trial like this.
even if I say "Michigan has a 0.000001% chance of beating Ohio State", and then Michigan DOES beat Ohio State, nobody can say with certainty that the percentage I assigned was wrong.
My response: "Maybe that was the 1 time in 1,000,000! We have to run more trials to more accurately determine the correct prior probability!"
Would you like to bet on whether an asteroid hits the earth in the next hour? It's a single, non-repeatable trial. I'll take no asteroid, even 50-50 odds.
Except that's an event we have plenty of data on, so we could theoretically assign a percentage to it (if we conveniently ignore the scientific capability to track interstellar objects within collision distance of Earth). It is also repeatable, as we could bet again for the following hour, over and over again, until an asteroid does hit and we're both dead. The only way this UM-OSU game is even remotely 'repeatable' is if they meet again in a Playoff game, and even then we get two data points.
Do we actually have any truly applicable data that we can assign a percentage to this specific game? Especially considering it's an event where a lot can change before the end of November (injuries, suspensions, players over/underperforming, etc.). Maybe 18% is correct, maybe not, but how the hell would you even test it?
August 6th, 2015 at 11:10 AM ^
Are 2% and 40% equally valid? If so, why? If not, why is this a bad guess?
Factors in predicting the outcome of a one-off game, besides the spread, include number of returning players, recruiting rankings, last year's ranking, coaching ability...
They're equally valid in that they're equally meaningless.
August 6th, 2015 at 10:41 AM ^
There's a 100% chance I'll gladly take hundreds of those hundreds that exploded out of your very smart phone @ a 100 miles an hour, and at least a 64% chance you'll make me that offer.
Thanks in advance.
In 97 Beano Cook said on tv that we had no chance to beat penn state in happy pedophile valley, and that we should "just send the band" We proved him wrong then and we coulx it agaion vs. THE ohio.
Seriously, enough with the pedophile stuff whenever PSU is referred to on the board. It just looks childish and immature.
Childish and immature seems to be right up Penn State's alley.
August 6th, 2015 at 10:17 AM ^
August 6th, 2015 at 10:36 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Poor choice of words.
I've been to Happy Valley. These fans put football above anything else. They deserve every slight they get, and then some. They hold candlelight vigils for Joe fucking Paterno after every game. Their priorities are totally screwed up. I understand that they still deserve to be fans of their school, and I don't fault them for that. I do fault them for their justifications towards Paterno and the lack of accountability.
"It's not fair that we don't get to go to a bowl game this year!"
Really, PSU fan? Really?
August 6th, 2015 at 11:20 AM ^
There is a loud and very vocal segment of their alumni (to include some Trustees on the PSU board) who think that Paterno is a saint and did all he could in 2001. There is another contingent there that hopes Sandusky gets a re-trial and gets off. The twisted thinking is that if Sandusky is acquitted the second time around, then there was nothing for the PSU administration to report in 2001.
No, there's a sizeable chunk of asshattery there and I don't think we should ever neglect to remind them they are dickweeds who make excuses for grown men who had a chance, but failed to protect children.
August 6th, 2015 at 11:53 AM ^
Non-PSU person: "Ped State fans are nothing but a cult that worships someone who enabled a child abuser! (anecdote about PSU fan behavior given)"
PSU folk: "That is unfair to label us as Ped State! That's not all of us, it's just a vocal minority. Besides, what about this (anecdote presented about something good at PSU, e.g., Dance Marathon)."
Non-PSU person: "Well, you need to do a better job shutting those other folk up! And you're only presenting that anecdote because it makes you look good. It's a PR Stunt --- only jerks loudly proclaim the good stuff they do!"
PSU folk: "How the hell are we supposed to shut certain people up, it's a free country! And we'd be quieter about the good stuff if you stopped publicly labeling us a cult!"
Non-PSU person: "Well, Ped State fans are a cult!!! You worship someone who enabled a child abuser! (anecdote about PSU fan behavior given)"
................
August 6th, 2015 at 12:33 PM ^
as an actual Penn State alum/fan/Pennsylvania resident, but it really doesn't seem like it's a "minority". Sorry.
and think they are not a minority NOW, there is a 100% chance they BECOME a minority.
New babies are born every day, they grow up, and they simply won't care. Paterno and Sandusky will just be some guys in a history book to them. Not because that generation is callous and doesn't care about "lessons learned" or such. But because their generation will have their own modern-day contemporary villians and heroes to discuss.
The folk who say stuff like "this will always be a stain on Ped State, ha ha ha" --- I think those folk are wrong.
Many Southern schools didn't admit African-Americans to be students 50 years ago. Big emotional issue 50 years ago. But today, I don't think many folk at all care, at least as regards how they view those schools.
It's in a loop only because Paterno's supporters refuse to acknowledge the failures in 2001.
They post non-sequiturs and flat out lies with abandon...
"Sandusky didn't get a fair trial"
"Paterno did all he could do, legally"
"McQueary is a liar"
"There was no legal requirement for anybody at PSU to report Sandusky"
"Sandusky was retired, so he wasn't Paterno's problem, he was the Second Mile's problem"
"If Paterno had called the police after Spanier and Curley did nothing, Sandusky could have sued Paterno"
"If McQueary didn't call the police that night, then there was nothing Paterno could do within school policy after the fact"
"The police failed to charge Sandusky in 1998 so Paterno and PSU couldn't be expected to report Sandusky in 2001"
"Paterno was old school and couldn't understand how Sandusky could molest a young boy"
"Paterno couldn't do anything with McQueary's eyewitness report as it was hearsay and that is inadmissable in court"
"Corbett and the BoT were out to get Joe"
"Few if any assaults took place on PSU property, so how is that PSU's or Paterno's problem"
"Sandusky got his victims from the Second Mile, not PSU, therefore this is a Second Mile Probem.
This crap above is getting posted daily.
This is about the 2015 OSU game .... then out of nowhere a poster says "Ped State" in a comment.
Then another U-M fan says "you look childish using the phrase Ped State."
And off we go .......
Yes, there are many PSU fans who say dumb stuff, but sometimes we get into an infinite loop because a non-PSU person STARTS the damn loop.
It isn't going to stop as long as you have a very vocal group of fans trying to whitewash history.
August 6th, 2015 at 11:24 AM ^
WB75 - you are sooooo right. Whenever they are mentioned I should say how proud I am that they are a part of the B1G and that I respect them and their loyal fan base and all their traditions. Sorry, not going to happen as this is a huge stain that will never go away. This is way beyod SEC bagmen and free tattoos, this has to do with a TOTAL lack of moral compass, TOTAL lack of contrition and just plain blind and delusional are the majority of that fan base and YES I am ashamed that they are part of this conference, so I will never welcome those degenerates.
That's not the quote from the movie. Sorry.
Massey's site is even less generous, placing the base probability at 9% right now, but of course that's based on exactly zero data from this season's performance being in the algorithm used. Based on recent seasons, anything in the 10%-20% range has been typical at most points during the season in this particular model.
well Irish papers are saying Ohio is a bunch of perverts! So take that Ohio paper!!
An Ohio media outlet stating OSU is pretty much guaranteed to beat Michigan. I'm just.....shocked.
1) Realize you've missed another deadline
2) Skim internet for information to put into a Michigan Preview. (MGoBlog is very helpfuly here. The kid from Iowa? Who knew!)
3) Assign a random number below 20% to make OSU fans happy. 19%? No, no. Make it 18%!
4) Head to the bar to celebrate a very hard 45 minutes at work.
August 6th, 2015 at 10:49 AM ^
So 18% is a bit low to me. I'd go somewhere between 25 and 40%.
August 6th, 2015 at 10:33 AM ^
August 6th, 2015 at 12:08 PM ^
But hey, I'll take it. Harbaugh will have his team rounding into form come November. And hell, if Brady Hoke could go toe to toe with Urban Meyer and give us legitimate chances to win those games, you think Harbaugh can't?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
August 6th, 2015 at 12:37 PM ^
For an analysis in early August, this seems reasonable. Ohio State is an almost unanimous #1 preseason pick, they are favored in every game by double digits, etc. etc. Michigan could be a 9-3 team and still have not much more than a 20% chance of winning IF everything comes together for OSU the way it did last year and they're hitting on all cylinders. (FWIW I think it's like a coin flip if that actually happens-- two years in a row is asking for an awful lot of luck, or at least for avoiding a lot of bad luck.)
If HARBAUGH lives up to the expectations of this site, then by the time November rolls around, I expect the line will be under a touchdown (maybe well under a touchdown) and pundits will be calling it a pick 'em.
But for a piece written even before Fall practice starts, when neither team even has a starting QB named yet, this doesn't seem absurd to me.