Home Article commenting
Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:

- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)

- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans

- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum

- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.

ESPN analytics maintains Georgia ‘drop-off’ at No. 5 even after correction

SystemSystem Posts: 10,577 admin
edited July 2021 in Article commenting
imageESPN analytics maintains Georgia ‘drop-off’ at No. 5 even after correction

ATHENS — ESPN Analytics is saying it made an error in earlier projections.

Read the full story here


  • Options
    1SICemDAWGS11SICemDAWGS1 Posts: 1,809 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    I've seen enough stats, analytics, and BS from ESPN "experts" to know they're far from being experts. Never seen a game played and won on paper, or by "experts" opinions. ESPN should be listed as a comedy channel, not a sports network..

  • Options
    RomeDawg288RomeDawg288 Posts: 1,029 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Yes, this exact same rationale should drop both Clemson and Alabama equally with Georgia, if not even a greater drop-off. Remember, though. ESPN is absolutely in a love-fest with Alabama and they view Clemson as the only one to have proven to defeat the anointed one.

  • Options
    E_RocE_Roc Posts: 1,222 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Agree with the point above and below that the same knock against Georgia would apply even more to Alabama and Clemson in a clear-eyed assessment, which this clearly is not, and would add that Ohio State should also be included in that list.

  • Options
    SmartsTheManSmartsTheMan Posts: 1,516 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    What happened to logic?

    I remember a time when a writer would be embarrassed to make a conclusion on such flawed thinking.

    That's OK. I'm sure JT and the rest of the team have heard about this ranking...

  • Options
    reddawg1reddawg1 Posts: 3,636 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Saban and a group of redshirts would likely get the top pick over UGA with a team laden with Juniors and Seniors. It is what it is. Ohio St. lost 8 players to the Draft which included most of their starting defense and their starting QB. Go figure. Until we kick the door down to a NC we''ll be on the outside looking in.

    Some of this is a lack of confidence in Kirby. Saban's done it repeatedly, Dabo twice, Ohio St. almost a couple of times. Comes down to coaching. Our personnel matches up with any other team.

  • Options
    MontanaDawgMontanaDawg Posts: 1,871 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited July 2021

    You know the proof will end up being in the pudding....as usual, the Dawgs have got to PROVE that they truly belong in the playoff and Natty conversation. I understand that, so let's PROVE IT!!! Considering the cupcake regular season schedule (post-Clemson) that we've got this year, ESPN is giving the Dawgs no respect at all.

    A 25% chance to even make the playoffs? Are U kidding me? The only logic I can come up with is that they don't believe the Dawgs can beat BOTH Clemson and probably Bama in the SEC Championship game. And they are betting Oklahoma can go undefeated leaving a potential 1-loss Dawgs out of the playoffs. Like I've said before, the two things that could keep us out of the playoffs assuming we win the games we are SUPPOSED TO WIN and defeat either Bama or Clemson is: 1) Oklahoma and 2) ourselves (losing a game we should have won).

    Solution: Beat BOTH Bama and Clemson and put these pundits to bed!

    Stats are for losers ultimately, and it will all come down to results on the field. I too, though, am hesitant to proclaim Daniels as good as the hype that has been swirling around him for months now. I need to see improvements in regards to his accuracy, decision making, and mobility before I crown him the "King".

    Clemson (despite its easier path) and Bama have both proven annually that they usually deserve to be in the playoffs.

    I do agree with this statement in regards to JT - " So then, wouldn’t that same logic apply to Alabama QB Bryce Young and Clemson QB DJ Uiagalelei, too?" It should be but apparently those rules don't apply to Bama and Clemson. Go figure...

  • Options
    LoranwhaddayagotLoranwhaddayagot Posts: 2,037 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Last night, my wife and I watched the NHL Finals as Tampa hoisted the cup (I was pulling for the Islanders in the playoffs, so I kinda pulled for the Lightning to win the cup).

    Anyway, it made us both sad to learn that NBC's last game was last night. Learning that ESPN would take over made me unhappy.

    I agree 100% that ESPN's excuse of not enough evidence is so laughable.

    I hope Kirby plasters the locker room with this garbage as motivation!

  • Options
    Dawgfan1995Dawgfan1995 Posts: 77 ✭✭✭ Junior

    I asked the writer of the article on Twitter. He said that yes, Clemson and Alabama are affected by their QB inexperience -- even more than Georgia is. But, he added, the rest of the package is what affects our ranking over the others -- and the fact that our offense still has further to go to prove itself as elite.

    It's ESPN. They'll throw stuff at the wall to see if it sticks in order to drive eyeballs to their website. Sort of like some other websites I know...

  • Options
    Billy21Billy21 Posts: 196 ✭✭✭ Junior

    assumptions, assumptions, and more assumptions... Let's just get to Sept. 4 already.

  • Options
    srialiensrialien Posts: 13 ✭✭ Sophomore

    ESPN FPI is now and has always been garbage. It’s not a statistical model at all. Neither is strength of schedule. Both require a person to include their opinion into the formula. Thereby making no longer a statistical model at all. Just another opinion pice from media that is garbage

  • Options
    randyglass14randyglass14 Posts: 199 ✭✭✭ Junior

    Look Dawg fans…I don’t like the negative lean on UGA either and I would certainly bet the over on the opinion of ESPN. BUT the hard truth is that until UGA beats Bama and wins the Natty, we will never get the benefit of the doubt like the other elites. I get it…the media has gotten tired year after year of predicting UGA will break through. So until we do, we just have to use it as motivation! And if we don’t, then all eyes turn to Kirby.

  • Options
    jamboogiejamboogie Posts: 188 ✭✭✭ Junior

    I don't hang my love for the Dawgs on them winning a national Championship; would it be nice undoubtedly but why not enjoy the games and not get so bent out of shape on this ring quest. We beat each other up on numbers of stars and who gets away. Support who we have. Relax and enjoy the game

  • Options
    reddawg1reddawg1 Posts: 3,636 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    I think there are many a DAWG fan commenting on here who have loved the DAWGS and cheered them on win or lose for 30,40, 50 years or more. Many more years than some on here have been alive. Been 55 years for me personally and I remember the 1980 NC . Don't talk to me about just "enjoying the games and loving our Dawgs". I have been with the DAWGS thick and thin every year that I was big enough to understand the game. It's about wanting the best for something you really care about and not being satisfied with a participation trophy.

    If they, say, get beat by Clemson that will more than likely (IMO) drop them out of the hunt for a NC. Will I be disappointed? Yep! But will I be there watching and cheering them on every game? And commenting on here? Yep! It's not one or the other.

    If the talent wasn't there no one on here is even mentioning a NC. But it's there. Thousands of frustrated UGA fans are tired of close but no cigar. But we're not tired of the Dawgs and there is a difference.

  • Options
    stonestone Posts: 399 ✭✭✭ Junior

    For a preseason rating, it seems about correct. The teams ranked above UGA have more success when playing other elite teams and also have a better history of reloading. I would think after the first two weeks of the season there will be some adjustments. It will be interesting to see where the dawgs are ranked..

  • Options
    87dawg87dawg Posts: 376 ✭✭✭✭ Senior
    edited July 2021

    I must have missed the name of the ohio state quarterback in the article. Has he ever played a college game? It seems they just didn't think enough of him to even state his name. Luckily they somehow managed to power through that 6 game "Big" 10 schedule last year.

    I may give you the kid from clem(p)son because he played while Lawrence was out and did well but the Alabama kid is still unproven, to me. I don't doubt his talent but he just didn't get the time in to be considered "better". Meanwhile, Daniels had a full year of playing at USC and half a year at UGA. I think that's a pretty good sample size.

    The reasoning in this is just plain silly. Luckily it is espn so it's like reading the comics.


    I have to add, Daniels playing in 4 games is almost ohio state's entire season last year.

Sign In or Register to comment.