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.
- 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.
Pretty interesting analysis for next year
Thought some of you would be interested in this. It's a projected ranking for all 130 college football teams based on advanced metrics.
Comments
Saw this a couple of days ago, makes no sense to me how they made the team's record two years ago to five years ago such a factor in their rankings. Don't see how that would be as big a factor as they made it - using it for one-third of their formula along with recruiting and returning production. Is especially inappropriate in our case, since that would cover years before the new coaching class took over. Can see Alabama, Ohio State, and Clemson being ahead of us, but not Washington and Auburn.
The reason he did that, not that I agree with it, was that returning production figures combined with weighting last year's record was effectively double counting.
I find SP+ to be decent, but not great as a preseason ranking tool. It's good enough for one guy with a spreadsheet, and it's way more work than I'm ever going to do before I retire at least. I personally hate how far and heavily he carries preseason rankings into the season, and this change is going to make it worse.
But from listening to his podcast and interacting with him a couple of times on their forums, one of the things I've come to understand about criticizing his approach is that if it's "working as designed" he will dismiss the criticism by saying "that's what it's supposed to do." As if that's the end of the discussion. If you've ever worked in software development, you know that one of the possible responses to that is, "yes, and there's a flaw in the design."
I've never seen anyone get that message across, and I doubt you could without submitting supporting analysis. That's obviously hard to do without his raw data. On the other hand, I've never seen the guys at PFF or ESPN engage people about their methodology, so he's already light years more open than anyone else.
All theoretical questions about his methodology aside, how well does he predict? Can he predict much more accurately than the average fan on this board? How many of his top 25 would not have been in the "average fan's' top 25? What's been his record for the past 2-5 years?
@donm last I heard him discuss it, he does something like 60% against the spread. It's really not bad overall.
I just wonder where he had us last year..... I doubt it was ending up where we did....
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2017/8/2/16021016/georgia-football-2017-preview-schedule-roster
"If Chubb is 2015 Chubb again, the offense is soaring, and the run defense is rendering everyone one-dimensional, Georgia will go 10-2 or better and make doubters like me feel silly.
But if 2017 Georgia looks like a more experienced version of 2016 Georgia, and Eason doesn’t develop that much, and Chubb never finds fifth gear, then 6-6 or 7-5 are on the table, and we feel silly for assuming greatness."
Long time reader, first time poster but this topic is interesting to me as I have followed his metrics closely the past couple years and they are certainly useful if not perfect, especially the preseason rankings. He generally gauges their success on whether they are able to consistently beat the spread, so whether they go over 53% or not over the course of a season, which is a pretty fair indicator. Also those three preseason factors are not evenly weighted, the 2-5 year success is the least weighted factor which makes sense.
Georgia began last year around 15 and ended third. I don't think you can ever come up with an incredibly accurate advanced analytics model for football due to the small sample size nature of the sport (only 12-15 games) as well as the week to week emotion that plays into college football especially, but they generally beat the spread and provide pretty good guidance into how good a team truly actually is during the course of a season (looking at you, 2015 Iowa).
Hum... thanks
Lol. Pretty much anyone could've made the prediction he made about UGA last year heading into the season. "Well, if they improve on 8-5 they can be 10-2ish. If they don't improve or regress, I could see them being 7-5."... That's a bold strategy cotton, let's see if it pays off for him. - You heard it here first on 'The Ocho."
60% ATS is VERY good. And washington and AU are in front of UGA because basically 2017 was the first year UGA has exceeded expectations in a long while. But I love S&P after about week 6 because the preseason factors lose all value
Agreed. What impact does the 2013 and 2014 Team record have on the 2018 team. The only players that they have in common would be RS seniors 2018 (2014 recruit) and how many of those are going to be impact players. Probably close to zero and bear in mind even those players had zero impact on the 13/14 results as they were in HS 2013 and red shirted in 14! There are lies, Darn lies and Stats!
Yeah I find this interesting especially considering I think our schedule will be favorable next year especially to start out the year. If we get past South Carolina, who saw Bentley regress, I think we roll into LSU undefeated. It will be a good test in terms of a road game in a hostile environment. I still think we roll, but I can't see us being less than a 2 score favorite in any game other than LSU and Auburn.
It lost me the minute it rated Auburn and Washington ahead of us. Too much weight on a 5 year metric...especially given that some programs like UGA haven't had their current coaching staff that long. I usually like SBNation but every once in a while they really miss the mark with ridiculous things like this.
Just saw ESPN's 1st FPI poll for next year, had Clemson #1 followed by Alabama #2, then us at #3, followed by Ohio St.