Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
S&P 2019 season projections
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RonJohn" data-source="post: 544408" data-attributes="member: 2426"><p>I have several issues with the methodology:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I don't have much faith in recruiting rankings, especially the further you get away from the top 10-15 teams.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The ranking uses both recruiting and "returning production". If a highly ranked recruiting class is going to improve the team, then it has to be based on displacing the production from last year. That could be from graduations or leaving for the draft, but this ranking doesn't include whether the recruiting class fills needs or not. You could sign five four-and-five star quarterbacks(I know very unlikely), but only one would be on the field at a time. This ranking method doesn't factor whether the recruiting class fills immediate needs or not.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">As I understand the factors, things such as offensive production is weighted to "what winning teams do". If more teams tend to pass, then receivers are factored higher than running backs. So a team that runs a lot is automatically ranked lower. Not saying this as a TO fan, just pointing out that being just like everyone else doesn't mean you are great(North Texas) and being different doesn't mean you are awful(Army).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The previous 5 years doesn't mean anything if: there were a large number of injuries, there was a huge scandal(Penn State, Baylor, Miss), or the coaches left.</li> </ul><p>These things seam to be more of an indication of consistency than of how good the teams are projected to be next year.</p><p></p><p>I understand that the sports sites want page views and it is a down time of the year for college football. I also understand that people want moneyball type of computer analysis. However, big data analysis requires lots and lots of data. This analysis isn't even ranking football plays, but football teams per season. There are many times more baseball plays per year than football, so any big data analysis of football is going to be much less accurate than baseball. In comparison to even both of those, the data required for this team ranking analysis would fit on a floppy disk. Not enough data to actually make any predictions, except for click-baits to sell ads.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RonJohn, post: 544408, member: 2426"] I have several issues with the methodology: [LIST] [*]I don't have much faith in recruiting rankings, especially the further you get away from the top 10-15 teams. [*]The ranking uses both recruiting and "returning production". If a highly ranked recruiting class is going to improve the team, then it has to be based on displacing the production from last year. That could be from graduations or leaving for the draft, but this ranking doesn't include whether the recruiting class fills needs or not. You could sign five four-and-five star quarterbacks(I know very unlikely), but only one would be on the field at a time. This ranking method doesn't factor whether the recruiting class fills immediate needs or not. [*]As I understand the factors, things such as offensive production is weighted to "what winning teams do". If more teams tend to pass, then receivers are factored higher than running backs. So a team that runs a lot is automatically ranked lower. Not saying this as a TO fan, just pointing out that being just like everyone else doesn't mean you are great(North Texas) and being different doesn't mean you are awful(Army). [*]The previous 5 years doesn't mean anything if: there were a large number of injuries, there was a huge scandal(Penn State, Baylor, Miss), or the coaches left. [/LIST] These things seam to be more of an indication of consistency than of how good the teams are projected to be next year. I understand that the sports sites want page views and it is a down time of the year for college football. I also understand that people want moneyball type of computer analysis. However, big data analysis requires lots and lots of data. This analysis isn't even ranking football plays, but football teams per season. There are many times more baseball plays per year than football, so any big data analysis of football is going to be much less accurate than baseball. In comparison to even both of those, the data required for this team ranking analysis would fit on a floppy disk. Not enough data to actually make any predictions, except for click-baits to sell ads. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who won the ACC Coach of the Year Award in 2014?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
S&P 2019 season projections
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top