I'VE HAD JUST ABOUT ENOUGH OF YOU SONNY
- Member for
- 5 years 15 weeks
- View recent blog entries
- Karma value
|12 weeks 20 hours ago||A thought for future analysis (maybe)||
Have you ever looked at using other statistical categories for qualification?
I mean, would using median instead of mean (average) influence ranking at all? That would throw out the outlier plays, possibly at the expense of penalizing quick-strike teams.
In a similar vein, would standard deviation serve a similar function to categorize offensive/defensive efficiency? I realize that would reward "grind-it-out" offenses and "bend-but-don't-break" defenses, but categorizing Getting Torched/Homerun play frequency might be interesting.
|17 weeks 1 day ago||You're secretly using hex, aren't you?||
B1G would be the Big 17, if G was a valid hex code.
WHO WILL BE THE 17th TEAM IN THE BIG TEN???
|19 weeks 1 day ago||And that's why Braylon's #1 scholarship is dumb||
Why does Braylon get to say who gets AC's #1?
|20 weeks 5 days ago||As someone who was at that Rose Bowl,||
I don't remember needing a jacket.
Wunderground says a high of 71 for January 1, 1998.
|32 weeks 20 hours ago||Thanks!||
I guess I didn't expect such a random distrubution of TDs for given yardage. If kicking 40 yards gives a 10% chance of TD, and 50+ is only 25%, then kicking deep doesn't seem like a negative.
|33 weeks 23 hours ago||If you're looking for something to do,||
it's not very exciting, but I'm curious about the concept of "outkicking the coverage." Specifically, do longer punts give more variance and more chance of a long return? Is there an optimal length of punt to maximize distance and minimize return?
It seems to me that kicking, say, 35 yards and forcing a fair catch is a safer play than punting 50+ and having a potential return for TD. But I'd be curious if the data shows that longer punts are more likely to give up a longer return.
|43 weeks 17 hours ago||Nothing about Kiffin and USC?||
Nothing about Kiffin and USC? Oh, I see...
|45 weeks 1 day ago||Or, make it connect-the-dots||
Travel around, randomly tweeting locations. Make those locations spell the name/logo of your school of choice.
|1 year 2 weeks ago||I say screw it||
This makes the B1G Championship game a formality, and opens the door for promotion/relegation.
|1 year 7 weeks ago||Wow, I have a fan||
There's a number of reasons I quit doing the UGotW.
1. I started to feel bad about picking on EMU every week.
2. I have a whole lot less time to preview/review the games, between a new job and a little future Wolverine
3. The amount of content really picked up, so I felt like there wasn't a big need for one more diary.
4. I wanted to do the Pick Six review, but never heard back from the guy who took all the votes.
5. I can't think of #5.
If there's really a subculture of people who read it (besides me, you and Seth), I will think about bringing it back.
|1 year 10 weeks ago||Also, your author page is messed up||
is only showing stuff from May/June.
does work, though.
It just feels like the whole of sbnation is yelling at me.
|1 year 11 weeks ago||How ridiculous is Denard's EV last week?||
Have you ever had a +20 EV, let alone almost +0.5 per play?
|1 year 16 weeks ago||Once this is done||
somebody needs to build these rosters in NCAA '13, build playbooks and let them fight it out.
|1 year 17 weeks ago||Drupal Module?||
Their demo site
seems like it would do the trick. No idea how well it would scale, but it's an option.
|1 year 22 weeks ago||Conference Champs||
I think the deck is getting stacked to avoid LSU v. Alabama III. Having said that, I do think that the committee will prefer a 4th conference champ over the runner-up from another one, simply for the money going to that conference. And I think that makes it harder for the independants/mid-majors to make it in. I just expect it to be Big-10, SEC, Pac-12, Big-12 more or less every year.
In 2011, the Big 10 would have been shut out of a large pile of money. But I think we'll see a lot of situations like 2010, where I predict that Wisconsin gets in over Stanford, simply because the Pac-10 already has a team in the playoff. Or 2008, where it could very well be Oklahoma, Florida, USC, Penn State just to spread the teams around.
Once the mid-majors combine into a big enough conference to raise enough of a stink is when we'll see the next change (to 6 or 8 teams, or a play-in game or something).
|1 year 28 weeks ago||300m hurdles||
Only because I'm a former hurdler. Anything above high school runs 400m hurdles outdoors. That's why that record has stood for 20+ years - no one runs it in professional competition.
But that's still a pretty good time.
|1 year 30 weeks ago||Context||
"Raping their fanbase" is probably not appropriate when discussing Penn State.
|1 year 33 weeks ago||Trafalmadore||
I would have thought it sounds much more like the Marketing Division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation.
|1 year 38 weeks ago||Average?||
Personally, Seth's looks the best to me, but if you average them together you get:
|1 year 39 weeks ago||As someone married to a Kansas grad,||
I can confirm this statement is true.
But I don't think Michigan v. ND UTL should count as Random Michigan game, but point taken.
|1 year 42 weeks ago||Offensive Goals||
I agree that the "staying ahead of the chains" adage is like "establish the ground game", "win between the tackles", or any number of meaningless announcer-isms. Staying ahead of the chains is only meaningful based on your offensive strategy. If you're playing Three Yards and a Cloud of Dust, then you're expecting 3 plays of 3 or so yards to move the ball. If you're playing Mike Leach's Air Raid, you're expecting 1 play of 10 yards. West Coast/Spread/Run and Shoot fall in between, say, 2 plays of 5 yards to keep moving. I guess it's a way to try and quantify offensive efficiency, but not much else.
Imagine an offense where all you do is throw Hail Mary's. Your success rate would be terrible, but your effectiveness would probably be reasonable (complete 2 or 3 a game, and you've got a shot).
Looking forward to some numbers.
|1 year 44 weeks ago||He may have good backpedal,||
but how are his hips?
|1 year 45 weeks ago||Sheed's Jingle Bells||
I always wondered what a Biz Markee and Wesley Willis duet would sound like. Now I know.
|2 years 3 days ago||I think #2 is the best solution||
I don't know what happens with baseball/hockey players once they are drafted, aside from the pro team keeping the rights to the player. Do they get a stipend from their team?
But I do think that it does make the college game a noticeable step down from pro games, since the best players are in the pros as soon as they're capable. Compare that to college basketball/football and the skill-level doesn't seem to drop off as much.
I think a position that give some power to the players is best for them. You get a guarenteed 4 or 5 years unless you are ruled ineligible, and are free to leave after any season. I don't know what to do directly about the problem of agents, but maybe this would decrease their demand.
|2 years 2 weeks ago||Caught that at the end of their game on Saturday||
Oklahoma drove down the field to set up the scoring TD. The brought in the aforementioned huge QB (dude looked like a TE), a FB and a TE/H-back. They just plowed into the endzoe to be down one. It looked like Stoops was going to run it again to win, but the offense got a false start called and they kicked to send it into overtime.
I don't know if we have enough huge guys to pull it off, though. Maybe Devin/Hopkins/Koger.
|2 years 2 weeks ago||You can keep saying it, but it doesn't make it true||
1. You ignore special teams totally. Last year we had 4 FGs all season. This year, we have 8 already. That's 12 more points that need to be controlled for. Removing 4 of those to put us on pace with last year gives PPP of 0.508. Otherwise you're attributing the scoring to the offense, which isn't the case.
2. I concede that deleting OT is valid, in that playing with the short field skews the scoring numbers. However, deleting the entire game should not be valid. The first 4 quarters of the game should stand on there own.
3. The season ain't over. If you're want to compare apples to apples, compare 2010 through Purdue to 2011 through Illinois. Also, last year's SOS was higher, so that level of opposition should be controlled for as well.
Here's the turnover rank for the top 20 teams scoring defence from the NCAA:
No correlation. Ditto for offense (I'll save you the chart). Look at the numbers. Out of 600 to 700 plays, 30 TOs is about 4%. Even if it was 10 TO, it's still 1.5%. It's just too small a factor to matter.
|2 years 2 weeks ago||4th and 1||
What's your thoughts on the 4th and 1 from the 1 to go for it? I plugged the numbers into the calculator Brian posted yesterday and came up with this:
That says to me that you have a 68% chance of scoring a TD and a 100% chance of scoring a FG if you kick. The EP total is about double for going for it, but do you really need the points? The total WP is higher for making the FG than for scoring the TD, so it seems like a good idea to kick when already up 14.
|2 years 3 weeks ago||Kick, dammit, kick!||
I'm sure I'm in the minority, but I would have had no problem with kicking on 4th and 1 the first time. You put yourself up three scores, and take the momentum of the goal line stand out of the crowd. Now it turned out to not matter, but I kept looking at the scoreboard into the 3rd quarter and thinking "17-0 would be much more comfortable."
Anybody know offhand the odds of getting a safety when the opponent has 1st and 10 from their own 1? I'd imagine that it's pretty low, even factoring in chances of scoring from the short field after a punt. If you ask me, I'd put 3 on the board every time. If you need 7, go for 7. If you can get points, get points.
|2 years 3 weeks ago||I vote||
that if we lose, Brian does a video podcast, dressed like the guy from Masterpiece Theater.
Also, I think both sides run the Kitchen Sink offenses, and it turns into a trackmeet again. 48-40.
|2 years 3 weeks ago||You might say||
*puts on glasses*
he's going to be merciless...