According to Football Outsiders, MSU=3, UM=26!!! LOL
A month ago I posted a link to Football Outsiders prediction that UM would loose 7 games, including a loss to UConn!! I checked the site again to see if they have made some adjustments, and to my surprise they have MSU as the 3rd most efficient team and UM 26th. They are quoted on ESPN on regular basis. I wonder if with these ridiculous ratings, anyone pays attention to them.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:03 AM ^
It IS pretty damn efficient when you score 21 points with the FCS #125 ranked offense.
Lies, damn lies, and statistics quote is pretty appropriate for Football Outsiders at the moment.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:23 AM ^
Except it isn't the offense thats scoring all the points.
Wait, maybe thats double-secret-hyper-efficient!
September 11th, 2013 at 10:04 AM ^
The flaw with those rankings is that they ignore FCS results and thus don't know about WMU-Nicholls State and USF-McNeese State.
Also, all statistical attempts to do anything come up with garbage until five or six weeks into the season.
September 11th, 2013 at 1:14 PM ^
They'll openly admit that their models are not very appropriate for early-season measurements because of the small sample size and the difference in competitiveness. I think prediction systems typically work best when all parties being measured have functionally identifical baselines. The problem with FBS vs. FCS measurements are that in most situations, those two teams are not functionally the same; the logical extreme would be measuring the Vikings against University of Minnesota. Over time the models can correct for these differences, but early on they have to accept a certain baseline that can swing wildly when you are crossing conferences let against subdivisions.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:04 AM ^
I thought this was a predicition for the score at first.
September 11th, 2013 at 11:27 AM ^
September 11th, 2013 at 1:23 PM ^
Their offense would promptly go 3 and out, field goal unit comes on and kicks 3 points. I could easily see this happening.
To get to 26, we'd need 2 touchdowns and 4 field goals. That...actually sounds plausible too. Or we could get 3 touchdowns, a field goal and a safety. Also surprisingly plausible, maybe moreso.
September 11th, 2013 at 1:28 PM ^
but quickly realized it would be impossible for their defense to score 3 points.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:06 AM ^
To be fair that number is almost entirely based on their defense. Their offense rating is the second lowest in the entire ranking.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:08 AM ^
Efficiently bad, but very, very efficient.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:08 AM ^
September 11th, 2013 at 9:08 AM ^
Other (read in a Johnny Carson voice) wild, wacky stuff in these rankings:
- Clemson ranked at 32?
- Miami (YTM) at 37?
- Texas Tech at 43?
- Northwestern at 48 (beneath 47 Iowa)?
I'm going to join with the OP and suggest that we ought not take these rankings too seriously.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:11 AM ^
September 11th, 2013 at 9:16 AM ^
2nd down: 6.4 second sack
3rd down: field goal
September 11th, 2013 at 9:19 AM ^
September 11th, 2013 at 9:30 AM ^
but they've played Western Michigan and South Florida. When they play someone like ND, the results might not be as glowing.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:34 AM ^
September 11th, 2013 at 9:42 AM ^
Home of J'Dinkalage Morgoone.
September 11th, 2013 at 11:43 AM ^
I do love me some J'Dinkalage Morgoone!
September 11th, 2013 at 9:32 AM ^
Also listed ahead of Michigan: Texas and USC.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:35 AM ^
"A month ago I posted a link to Football Outsiders prediction that UM would loose 7 games, including a loss to UConn!!"
Please spell "lose" correctly and don't blame the typo.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:37 AM ^
The rankings are formula-based, and there isn't nearly enough data yet to get reasonable results. The rankings are pretty good when we get a few more weeks in.
In the meantime, LOLSparty.
September 11th, 2013 at 10:46 AM ^
it's mostly driven by early season wonkiness and the fact that msu has pretty much crap teams so far, and their defense seems to be pretty good.
give it a few more weeks and things should get back to normal. It's certainly not a reasonable expectation for msu's defense to continue outscoring the offense at the tune of 14 ppg. if their D averages 2 TDs a game by the end of the year, i'll eat my Michigan hat and wear an msu hat for a week.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:40 AM ^
1. Stop trolling MSU boards for post topics.
2. The FEI, which is drive efficiency has Michigan higher than MSU: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fei
3. S&P takes into account non-garbage time play. That is all of what MSU has had against inferior opponents. Other schools have been involved in lots of garbage time. This plays into how bad they are that they even have so much non-garbage time info to use. Of course they look good at that time because they get to count time against very weak opponents that they can't even pull away from.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:42 AM ^
Those number sound about right...if they represent the IQ of the average student at each respective school.
ZING!
Am I right, guys? Am I right? Yeah, I'm right.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:59 AM ^
3 might be a bit generous.
September 11th, 2013 at 1:01 PM ^
i'm the one bringing down the U of M IQ....
September 11th, 2013 at 9:43 AM ^
i think brian has mentioned this previously, but FO uses about 5 years worth of data, so the two games played this year, although weighted heavily, are not going to significantly change michigan's rating in the FEI. it's just a system that happens to be particularly harsh to michigan. we shouldn't worry.
September 11th, 2013 at 10:02 AM ^
In the past five years, many many FBS prorgams have had a 100% turnover in players, coaches, offensive and defensive systems. Of what value is 2008 data for determining how good Michigan is this year? It's a completely different team, top to bottom.
September 11th, 2013 at 2:40 PM ^
September 11th, 2013 at 8:16 PM ^
reminds me of when RR was forced to bypass a 4* qb to go with a walk-on because he was faster, able to run the 40 in 4.2 days instead of the 5 it took Threat.
October 14th, 2013 at 10:15 PM ^
Bwaaaaahahahhhhhaaaa
September 11th, 2013 at 11:21 AM ^
When it comes to the record predictions, the Program FEI that they use has the unusual effect of probably hitting Michigan harder than it would most teams. Year over year, we were 11th in 2007, 21st in 2008, 39th in 2009, 50st in 2010, and 33rd in 2011 - the trend is upward, but the calculation still contains some of the year in which our ranking was not that high.
September 11th, 2013 at 9:50 AM ^
...are innovative in the wrong way. Not just Sparty, but USC at #15 = LOLZ
September 11th, 2013 at 9:51 AM ^
Perhaps the name 'Outsiders' comes from their rankings being 'Outside the Normal Distribution'?
It sort of reminds me of one of my sons who, from my perspective, has the belief that "Physics doesn't apply to him". On the other hand, he is extremely smart, so maybe his way of looking at things 'sideways' will lead to a great invention, maybe even the world's next great energy source. Certainly the odds of that don't fall into middle of any kind of normal distribution.
Tim
September 11th, 2013 at 10:05 AM ^
September 11th, 2013 at 11:35 AM ^
FCS is formerly known as 1-AA, not D2. D2 is reserved for Grand Valley, Ferris State, Wayne State, etc.
September 11th, 2013 at 10:04 AM ^
Football Outsiders continually post predictions that do not pass the 'eye test'.
- They had MSU as a dark horse national championships contender
- Said Michigan would likely finish 5-7
- Have MSU at #3 after two weeks in which they've shown a complete inability to move the football against two really bad FBS schools
- Hell, they even have USC at #15 this week and Texas at #23 after giving up 550 yards of rushing to BYU!
Crunching numbers is the sexy thing to do in sports analysis right now, but if they don't mean anything, then you just look stupid. Football Outsiders is proving to be very stupid
September 11th, 2013 at 1:50 PM ^
They actually have us losing 8 games, schedule as follows:
CMU - Win by 19
ND - Lose by 10
Akron - Win by 33
Ucon - Lose by 5
Minn - Win by 13
PSU - Lose by 11
Indy - Win by 9
MSU - Lose by 16
Neb - Lose by 7
NW - Lose by 11
Iowa - Lose by 8
OSU - Lose by 13
September 11th, 2013 at 10:09 AM ^
September 11th, 2013 at 1:52 PM ^
September 11th, 2013 at 10:22 AM ^
Loose? Lose? Awww fuck it.
- Corso
September 11th, 2013 at 12:35 PM ^
Had to run a quick search and watch it again. Yep, still gut-splitting funny. Thanks
September 11th, 2013 at 10:26 AM ^
As in outsiders they mean they don't actually watch the games.
September 11th, 2013 at 10:29 AM ^
proving yet again GIGO.
September 11th, 2013 at 10:48 AM ^
It should be noted that only Hawaii has a lower offensive S&P than MSU in the entire country...
September 11th, 2013 at 11:32 AM ^
But this is just by one of the FO metrics (S&P+). They usually use a combination of that and FEI to get F/+.
By FEI, Michigan is 15th and MSU is 34th.
September 11th, 2013 at 11:37 AM ^
are http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fei
Michigan is #15 while MSU is #34 which is about right.
September 11th, 2013 at 11:47 AM ^
obviously you pay attention to these ridiculous ratings as evidenced by your frequesnt clicks to their site. Also, it's spelled "lose" not "loose" and it's an MGOBLOG cardinal sin to use "LOL" in any way, shape or form.