well that's just, like, your opinion, man
- Member for
- 7 years 27 weeks
|6 years 7 weeks ago||Tim Dwight||
It's definitely Tim Dwight. Every kid I've ever met from Saginaw/Flint wanted to grow up to be Tim Dwight.
|6 years 7 weeks ago||The complaint isn't with the||
The complaint isn't with the sample size. The number of games used is great, actually. The complaint is that the data shows little to no correlation. It implies that sacks and ints are completely unrelated to defense quality, and he's using the slope of the lines of best "correlation" to draw conclusions. It's kind of like plotting defense quality versus the length of my dog's most recent dook, finding out there's no relation, and then trying to draw conclusions about the "best" relation that statistics can come up with (except in the Mathlete's case, it's actually interesting that there's no relation between sacks/ints and defense).
|6 years 7 weeks ago||That said, I generally just||
Not to beat a dead horse here, but the Mathlete's conclusions are completely unjustified in this situation. The correlation values presented in the first two charts are way, way below accepted statistical norms. Normally I'm a huge fan of the Mathlete's posts (heck the data here is still very interesting), and the conclusions may in fact be correct, but the data shown does not back up the claim that sacks are more important than interceptions or that the offense is not affected by either.
|6 years 9 weeks ago||http://www.badassoftheweek.co|
|6 years 11 weeks ago||I went to a bachelor party||
I went to a bachelor party w/. whirley ball once and couldn't agree more. You can drink and drive (bumper cars), talk trash, and it's friendly for the underage contingent, too.
For the uninitiated, this is whirley ball:
|6 years 20 weeks ago||Mobile?||
Maybe this is the wrong place to bring this up, but while you're working on site improvements during the long off season, is mobile support in the cards? Loading this site on my phone is painfully slow, so having access to a lighter-weight version would increase my visits here significantly.
|6 years 21 weeks ago||Small nitpick: why is iowa||
Small nitpick: why is iowa listed twice in the charts?
EDIT: nice analysis, though. I always wondered how statistically significant KenPom predictions were. Thanks!
|6 years 22 weeks ago||Thinking of good teams with||
Thinking of good teams with all possession receivers, the New England Patriots before Moss showed up fit that bill. Deion Branch, Troy Brown, and David Givens were never really deep threats. I don't think anyone would consider that a good corp, though.
To answer your question, no, I think you need at least one deep threat to really open up a passing game.
|6 years 22 weeks ago||I love this blog :) I saw the||
I love this blog :) I saw the headline, saw that it had like 25 comments in less than an hour, and immediately knew there'd be all kinds of hilarious smart-ass comments on spelling! Where else on the internet does that happen?
|6 years 22 weeks ago||BSE '02, MSE '04, PhD '07 all||
BSE '02, MSE '04, PhD '07 all in computer engineering.
The only person on the blog that I know I've had contact with is Brian Cook. In '00 I went to a Presidents' Day party at his house, where he dressed up like Abe Lincoln. Half way through the party someone dressed up like John Wilkes Booth ran in the front door and fake-assassinated him. Good times.
|6 years 23 weeks ago||Ga Tech. has no medical||
Ga Tech. has no medical school, and medicine is where the big money is.
|6 years 23 weeks ago||Obviously I'm not going to||
Obviously I'm not going to argue with that. I was just trying to throw some statistics out there that begin to refute your unjustified claim that the top of the ACC is "clearly better" (which I don't think is true). So while research expenditures are not the be-all end-all statistic, I've yet to see any evidence that the ACC is better at anything.
And for what it's worth, if the Big Ten expansion committee cares about academics, research expenditures is probably what they really care about, not test scores or acceptance rate or anything like that.
|6 years 23 weeks ago||I'm not claiming research||
I'm not claiming research expenditures are the sole determinant of school excellence, but it's not completely unrelated either. Crappy schools don't get a lot of money to do research. Thus, the data I presented is at least a decent first cut at determining the quality of schools, and the ACC doesn't look great by comparison.
|6 years 23 weeks ago||What exactly are you basing||
What exactly are you basing this on? Here's a list of schools ranked by research expenditures (excerpted for the lazy)
The Big Ten looks a hell of a lot better than the ACC to me.
|6 years 23 weeks ago||You think cash-strapped||
You think cash-strapped presidents in the most struggling public school system in the country would turn down the instant money of having more conference members because of the religious affiliation of the school?
Also, liberal hippies don't tend to climb the hyper-political academic ladder up to university president. Those folks tend to be more on the cold and calculating side of the populace.
|6 years 24 weeks ago||You'll love being an engineer||
You'll love being an engineer after you graduate and start looking for jobs.
|6 years 24 weeks ago||Phil 340||
When I took Mind, Matter, and Machines taught by Eric Lormand there was no attendance, no papers, and no tests. We were "graded" on two 5-minute in class presentations at recitation. Honestly, I have no idea why I got an A- (as opposed to an A, or even a C), but no class I've ever heard of required less effort.
20th century physics (I think it was Phys 109 or something) was also ridiculously easy. 70% of the students were people looking to kill their quantitative reasoning requirement, so if you can do math, you were way ahead of the curve.
Both classes were really interesting, too.
|6 years 24 weeks ago||One of the best tips I've||
One of the best tips I've ever heard (from a psychologist who studies body language), is to mimic the posture of the interviewer. If they sit forward and look serious, you sit forward and put on your game face. If they're more relaxed, lean back, too. There's obvious limits; don't put your feet on their desk or anything, but generally just do what they do. The idea is that you're trying to be likeable, most people like themselves, so try act like them.
Other tip: "I don't know," is a perfectly good answer for technical questions (as long as it's not used too often). Nobody knows everything, and saying so, says 1) you understand your limits, which is a sign of intelligence, 2) you're confident enough in what you do know to won't let this phase you, and 3) you're not going lie and bullshit whenever you run into an unforeseen situation. #3 is particularly valuable in the IT field, where people tend to be straight shooters with little tolerance for BS.
|6 years 24 weeks ago||Whoops! Let's replace||
Let's replace "annoying" with "asshole" or "worthless".
|6 years 24 weeks ago||annoying carbon sack please||
annoying carbon sack
|6 years 25 weeks ago||I thought it was East Hall||
I thought it was East Hall was sinking because the civil engineer was an MSU grad. Maybe both are true (quick Googling turned up nothing).
|6 years 26 weeks ago||yep||
|6 years 26 weeks ago||I'm faculty at an engineering||
I'm faculty at an engineering school, and we haven't even looked at applications yet. The PhD decisions will likely be made in the next 2-3 weeks, and MS decisions sometime after that. As someone else noted, 1st round PhDs must accept by 4/15, and occasionally some people will get 2nd round offers after that (though this is not common).
|6 years 26 weeks ago||I can't believe Hayden||
I can't believe Hayden Epstein was drafted... just wow. Wonder what happened to that guy.
|6 years 27 weeks ago||Maybe I'm feeding the troll...||
"Original thought and differing opinions are consistently attacked. If you don't fall in line, you get negged, attacked...until the MGODREAM is reached"
Can you give me an example or three? Obviously, the community is more valuable if original thought is valued, and if I can reverse the trend you describe by altering my voting behavior, I would like to do that. However, I need some evidence that original thought is not valued beyond your assertions. What have you got?
|6 years 27 weeks ago||I saw the story you did on this problem!|
|6 years 28 weeks ago||I don't get all the rioting.||
I don't get all the rioting. Why are they so upset about football at a women's basketball school like Tennessee?
|6 years 28 weeks ago||More info||
If you want more data, here's another analysis of all NFL playoff teams instead just the wildcard games. Michigan leads all teams with 20 players, USC and LSU are second with 18. The SEC has 104 to the Big Ten's 97 players, as well. You can go back a couple years, too. The most interesting thing to me was that 118 players didn't come from a D1 school.
|6 years 28 weeks ago||My favorite made up accolade||
My favorite made up accolade is "Nominee for the MacArthur Genius Grant". The beauty is that they never release the list of nominees, so no one can ever prove you wrong.
|6 years 28 weeks ago||I always found this||
I always found this amusing:
If you go to the Wilson (sports equipment manufacturer) website, they have links at the bottom of the page for the different sports. Most of them have really great players: the football link has a picture of Tom Brady, the tennis link has a picture of Roger Federer, the volleyball link has Misty May-Traynor.
And if you look at the basketball link you get Graham Brown.