that is nice bonus change
- Member for
- 3 years 12 weeks
- View recent blog entries
- Arizona St.
- Penn St.
- New Mexico St.
- Mississippi St.
- Colorado St.
- North Dakota State 5
- Kansas 6
- 316 Hillsdale
- 330 Coppin
- 349 Nicholls
- 375 NJIT
- before 1965: no substitutions allowed for any reason
- 1965: one substitute allowed for an injured player
- 1967: one substitute allowed for any reason
- 1987: two substitutes allowed for any reason
- 1994: three substitutes allowed but only two field players (the other substitute had to be a goalie)
- 1995: three substitutes allowed for any reason
|1 hour 21 min ago||An idea...||
To do this we need to know who's using which system.
Mathlete's article a while back on shield punts ran into the same problem. He thought shield punting was probably better on circumstantial evidence--net punting was improving, and more teams were using the shield. But he didn't know which teams were using what, so he couldn't prove his point the way he wanted to.
No one of us is likely to see every team ...but all of us put together might come close. We'd at least have enough coverage to have some usable data. If you're interested in helping get this together, take a note whenever you're watching a game of which team used which style of coverage and post it here. We probably won't hit every team in the Sun Belt but I'm guessing by mid-season somebody here will have seen pretty much every major-conference team.
It might be useful to know who's rugby-punting, too.
|1 day 2 hours ago||Or maybe they forced all||
Or maybe they forced all those fair catches because their coverage was terrific, and the occasional long return happens when their punter, who's obviously got a big leg, hits one so long and low it'd be impossible to get it covered no matter what system they used.
Who knows, without looking at film? Giving all the credit for the zeroes to the punter but all the blame for the return yards to the coverage seems like handwaving to me.
And whatever they did doesn't seem to have hurt them all that badly because at the end of the day they were #1 in the country in net punting. BYU was, if memory serves, #107. That doesn't prove Alabama's system is superior but it sure as hell doesn't prove the reverse.
Or you could go back to 2012, when Alabama's net numbers were mediocre and BYU's were tops in the country...and with the same pattern as Alabama's last year, lots of fair catches but a pretty respectable average on the few that were returned.
When you know in advance what you think is right, it's easy to find something in the numbers to back it up. But since the other side can do the same thing just as well, none of it's terribly convincing.
|1 day 2 hours ago||Yes, that's a fair assessment||
Yes, that's a fair assessment of Hoke. It also might be right--if there's a tradeoff to be made between a bit of net average and a lot of TD-producing variance (long returns or blocks) it might be rational to opt for safety (and like you I don't know which method is safer).
I have no dog in this fight either. Most of the arguments I've seen put forward (I don't mean just here, anywhere I've seen it discussed) have seemed pretty poor, in both directions, and I'm hoping for something better.
|1 day 4 hours ago||No comments...||
...on Kramer being "the best athlete ever to play here"?
I thought that might trigger some debate.
|1 day 4 hours ago||I'm not even sure you were wrong.||
A desperate, back-to-the-wall OC hire might very well have done more harm then good. Back when we were arguing about this, Nussmeier (or anyone else of that calibre and fit for the program) wasn't thought to be available. When it was established that he was available, the move was made.
That's the way it's supposed to work--you don't let someone go in hopes you might find something better, you let them go because you've already found someone better and he's ready to sign on.
|1 day 5 hours ago||Here's a list of every team||
Here's a list of every team that had more than one punt blocked last year. I won't pretend to know what every team in the country is running. It's suggestive, at least, that BYU tops the list (they're one of the more famous spread-punt teams, referenced by S.S. above), but anecdotes aren't data.
Maybe somebody else can make something of this.
3 punts blocked:
2 punts blocked:
36 teams had one punt blocked, 71 didn't have any.
Both versions of this seem a bit simplistic to me. It's not obvious to me that maximizing net punting average is really the ideal goal; it's pretty obvious that minimizing punt blocks shouldn't be (if that's really your goal, don't punt in the first place). This seems like a task the football-outsiders methodology is well equipped for--how much field-position value did you gain with your punt, on average? Isn't that what we want to maximize?
|1 day 6 hours ago||The Alabama example means less than nothing...||
...because it's supposed to be an argument against the NFL-style protection they use, but they were #1 in the country in net punting.
There might well be a cogent statistical argument to make in favor of shield-punts. This wasn't it.
|1 day 11 hours ago||My favorite stat of the day.||
Wins since the beginning of 2010 against FBS competition:
Of course Kansas has had the advantage of playing 44 FBS games in that span while N. D. St.'s had just the five.
|4 days 5 hours ago||Substantial proof?||
There's almost no possible collection of facts in this case that would give you that, no matter how truthful either side is being here. Sark probably doesn't record his office conversations; Brown probably wasn't wearing a wire; nobody else was in the room.
Indefinite withholding of judgment seems a sane response though. Wish it were more common.
|4 days 23 hours ago||My thinking exactly.||
When I saw the original title, I thought "well, why not, as long as we're turning the clock back to 2007?" Pam Ward and Mike Gottfried. Jimmy Dykes. Trevor Matich in the studio. Wasn't that the crap-game lineup back then?
|4 days 23 hours ago||Depending on your institutional goals...||
...that could be an argument for either side.
If your goal is to bring in the students best equipped from the outset to tackle a rigorous academic climate you'll prefer the standardized test to GPAs for precisely the reason you've outlined.
If your goal is to equalize opportunity for students across vastly different socioeconomic circumstances you might prefer the UT solution, again for precisely the reason you've outlined. There's enormous variation among high schools, and this way students only compete against their classmates and aren't punished or rewarded for the high school they happened to get stuck in.
The result's likely to be a fair number of students that wash out at UT. There will also be some students that kick ass in those remedial courses and then flourish when finally exposed to an environment they never would have seen otherwise. How many of the former are you willing to suffer in exchange for the latter?
|5 days 6 hours ago||or reduce the size of the||
or reduce the size of the school by the same proportion as the decline in state population.
I think the bigger issue is the decline in funding from the state. I haven't seen numbers but my sense is that Illinois has gone through something similar--as their government funding got squeezed the proportion of out-of-state and especially international students went up.
|5 days 7 hours ago||The schools that weren't included||
are Rutgers and Maryland because their students predominantly take the SAT and not the ACT.
Northwestern's scores are the highest by some distance (31/34 for the 25/75 percentiles) but at the high end they haven't changed much over the decade--the 75th percentile was 33 in 8 of the 10 years, 34 in the other 2.
|6 days 2 hours ago||Clicks. Eyeballs. Buzz.||
They also pay Stephen A. Smith.
All of those people are very good at their job, and every person that watches them, gets angry, posts negative comments on social media is confirmation of that fact.
|6 days 3 hours ago||Now that that's off your chest...||
...maybe it's time to change your MGoBoard Member avatar to something more fitting?
Truth in advertising and all that....
|1 week 3 hours ago||"I think the consistency that||
"I think the consistency that he has played with at times..."
Am I the only one that found that line hilarious?
|1 week 4 days ago||Works great at Stanford...||
...which may or may not have inferior personnel relative to its conference, but has as least as big a natural recruiting disadvantage relative to it as Arkansas does relative to theirs (probably more, closer to Vandy than Ark.). If that disadavantage isn't showing in recruiting results these days, I suspect a big part of the reason is the attractiveness of the scheme to a certain segment of the recruiting world--precisely those players that would thrive in it.
|1 week 4 days ago||how is his body more tanned than his face||
That, generally, is what happens when you bury your head in the sand.
|6 weeks 5 days ago||I'm not sure the ego trip is||
I'm not sure the ego trip is the whole story. There's a lot of money to be made if you land a construction contract or happen to own or control the right real estate and as a former Chicagoan I can tell you that that's a form of power most Chicago politicians understand very well.
|6 weeks 5 days ago||Massey all-division power rankings from last year||
To give some context to "nonexistent":
Unlike football there are enough cross-division games in basketball to give this some validity, although Massey treats the preseason exhibitions as if they were regular games, which maybe skews the lower divisions higher a bit.
There's a lot of overlap between divisions--the D2 champions were 146 (about a point better than EMU) and the D3 champions were 241.
|7 weeks 2 days ago||I give the US full credit for||
I give the US full credit for not pulling a Brazil, but they were completely dominated by a Germany that didn't need to win the match and played much of it at half speed.
I hope the program remains in the hands of people that realize there is still a very long way to go.
|7 weeks 2 days ago||It's basically a friendly and||
It's basically a friendly and Haimoudi didn't want to create a spectacle by sending off a Brazilian in the first two minutes.
It has to be that. It's not possible for an official at this level to miss that call. Did you notice he started to reach for the red, then changed his mind?
|7 weeks 2 days ago||Ugh.||
Brazil would have been the worst team ever to play in a final and it wouldn't be close.
|7 weeks 3 days ago||Maybe...||
the Scott's Get off my Lawn Bowl?
|7 weeks 3 days ago||Even if he accepted the role||
Having the senior player on your squad so audibly at odds with management as Donovan has been can be a recipe for disaster. Ask a French fan what he thought of 2010.
|7 weeks 3 days ago||Plausible but probably wrong.||
Postseason rating-differences in the Massey archive (the spreads in these cross-division games tend to track Massey and Sagarin pretty closely--I'm guessing the oddsmakers use them heavily):
2008: Michigan by 5 over App St.
2009: Michigan by 1 over App St.
2010: Michigan by 8 over App St.
I agree with your general point but I think you've exaggerated slightly. Of course, part of that is a decline at App St., who peaked in '06 and '07.
|7 weeks 4 days ago||The problem is...||
unsponsored games don't last long.
I'm looking at a list of Phoenix-area corps, trying to decide who should sponsor this. Taser International? The Make-a-Wish Foundation? Fender Guitars? U-Haul?
But I think I'm going to go with the ClubJenna Cactus Bowl. That's got real possibilities.
|7 weeks 4 days ago||I thought maybe the final straw...||
...was Hoke's food poisoning in the run-up last year.
Not the ideal promotional incident for a restaurant.
|7 weeks 4 days ago||Maybe that'll happen someday;||
Maybe that'll happen someday; we've crept slowly in that direction. I'm not sure how many younger fans realize how limited substitutions used to be.
Here's a history of the EPL rules I just found:
I think the EPL was a bit behind the international game throughout--the first sub in a WC match or qualifier was in '56.
Forcing players to play the entire match and dole out their energy accordingly is an essential part of the game. It wouldn't be different if there were one more sub allowed in extra time--you'd still have seven players that had gone the full 120. If those players don't know in advance that there's a cap on the number of minutes they might have to play, they'll have no choice but to expend less energy, just in case. I don't think a lot of people want that.
|7 weeks 4 days ago||Use an MLE calculator and translate his stats||
and you get an average rookie-league hitter with less than average power.
Whether that's good or not depends on your perspective. Compared to any of us it's fantastic; compared to other high-level athletes that haven't played baseball in over a decade it would probably be pretty good if we had anyone else to compare to. Compared to the set of players that ever have MLB careers, it's off-the-charts bad.
I'm having trouble finding anybody with a similar slash line then that ever made the majors, and Jordan was already 31 so he wouldn't have had a lot of years to improve (if it's even possible at that age). Glen Barker is a pretty close equivalent and he eventually spent some time with the Astros as a pinch runner--that's the best I've got.