Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - jknezek

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 221
16
East Region football / Re: FB: Empire 8
« on: August 19, 2016, 12:18:15 pm »
I've always wondered what it's like being the OC on a really heavy option team.

I mean, you have to know when to sprinkle in your trick play (what we'd call a "pass") and I guess what side of the line to go to, but, I mean, how big/varied in your playbook

I bet you'd be surprised. But in my limited exposure, all the variations are much, much more subtle and almost exclusively focused on blocking and creating misdirection and confusion for the linebackers and dbacks.

17
East Region football / Re: FB: Empire 8
« on: August 19, 2016, 11:59:51 am »
That's the nature of the triple option. Either you have the pieces necessary to run it really, really well, or it doesn't work at all. Look at W&L

10-1
2-8
5-5
8-3
8-2
8-3
4-6
4-6
7-4
7-3

When the pieces are there, it's darn near impossible to stop on a week's worth of practice without dramatically superior athletes (the triple option can help level against a mildly superior team, but there is a limit). But when the pieces don't flow, there just isn't an adjustment you can make to win another way. For more balanced schemes, and even pass wacky schemes, you have an infinite number of tweaks you can make. But for the triple option, those tweaks are much more limited. You can't just start throwing to the flat, or changing the line to pass block for deeper attempts. You generally don't even have those guys on the roster. Everything in the triple option is specific just to that scheme.

18
South Region football / Re: FB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference
« on: August 18, 2016, 04:12:32 pm »
I'd say you'd be no worse than 70%... Just a guess though.

Agree to disagree again? It's 66.3% for 2015. Change the cutoff to 7-3/3-7, and it's 67.7%. Assume the team with the better 2014 record wins, 71.7%. If I apply this to just games featuring an ODAC team, it's 66.7%. My original model, using in-season ratings (and not preseason ratings), correctly predicted 78.6% of ODAC games in 2015, and 79.7% of all other games.

It's not that hard to pick 70% of games correctly, but the nuance in football is that the better team doesn't always win. The theoretical limit to the number of games a mathematical rating system can pick correctly is nowhere near 100%.

I don't disagree with facts. In this case I was wrong.

19
South Region football / Re: FB: USA South Athletic Conference
« on: August 18, 2016, 02:55:42 pm »
We aren't going to be that lucky

20
South Region football / Re: FB: USA South Athletic Conference
« on: August 18, 2016, 02:10:44 pm »
MC's usual scrimmage with BSC has been cancelled and MC has picked up Virginia-Lynchburg for this Saturday. Don't know what's going on with MC and BSC, but good luck to BSC this year.

Don't know much about VUL other than they lost big to Wesley a few years back and they're a small HBCU in Lynchburg VA. I can't even find a 2016 schedule for them...

I remember some of the Wesley guys talking about their huge lines, but that they couldn't move at all. Now it was Wesley, so you always have to consider where they are coming from, but I think VUL is probably not very good.

21
South Region football / Re: FB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference
« on: August 18, 2016, 01:48:29 pm »
I'd say you'd be no worse than 70%... Just a guess though.

22
South Region football / Re: FB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference
« on: August 18, 2016, 12:44:35 pm »
jknezek is correct on some points, but I wouldn't say models that don't incorporate returning starters are "useless." I don't have any returning starter info for teams prior to 2013, and my preseason predictions for those years still predicted the correct game outcomes for over 75% of games.

75% of games is a relatively low bar. Considering over a large enough sample you can get 50% right by randomly picking, and you can do significantly better than that by excluding the Purple Powers and other conference dominators and picking them not to lose, DIII just doesn't have that many surprises or toss-up games in any given week. There's too much consistency in who is good and who isn't. 

So useless might have been strong, but not particularly inaccurate when just picking winners or losers. 75% against a spread? That's a different animal.

The absolute best DI college football modelling systems barely break the 78% barrier with their in-season predictions (http://www.thepredictiontracker.com/ncaaresults.php?orderby=wpct%20desc&type=1&year=15), and none can consistenly beat the spread by over 55%.  I feel like 75% for a preseason prediction is pretty impressive. Yes, DIII is different because there are generally fewer tossup games, but we also have a much larger division with less interconference play, making comparisons more difficult.

As a point of reference, last year in the ODAC pick-'em challenge, you got 153 points over 11 weeks. With 12 games per week, 28 ODAC games, 24 ODAC non-con games, that leaves 80 out-of-conference games. At 3 points per ODAC game, 2 points per non-con game, and 1 point for the rest, that's 212 points. 153 / 212 = 72%, which is pretty good considering most of the games you're picking are going to be competitive, but I think you may have a skewed perception about the nature of predictions.

We're just going to agree to disagree. Those ODAC pick'ems don't carry the gimme games the rest of the division provides... at least once we get past the typically sad OOC schedule. The ODAC pick'em is designed to find the 5 hardest to pick non-ODAC games every week during the regular season, and HSCTiger74 does a good job of doing just that. Throw in the ODAC is one of the harder conferences to pick, with teams rarely going 6/7-0 or 0-6/7 in conference, and a year where W&L happened to come from little expectations, and it was much harder to do 70% in the pick'em last year than 75% in all of D3 in my opinion.

23
South Region football / Re: FB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference
« on: August 18, 2016, 11:11:03 am »
jknezek is correct on some points, but I wouldn't say models that don't incorporate returning starters are "useless." I don't have any returning starter info for teams prior to 2013, and my preseason predictions for those years still predicted the correct game outcomes for over 75% of games.

75% of games is a relatively low bar. Considering over a large enough sample you can get 50% right by randomly picking, and you can do significantly better than that by excluding the Purple Powers and other conference dominators and picking them not to lose, DIII just doesn't have that many surprises or toss-up games in any given week. There's too much consistency in who is good and who isn't. 

So useless might have been strong, but not particularly inaccurate when just picking winners or losers. 75% against a spread? That's a different animal.

24
South Region football / Re: FB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference
« on: August 18, 2016, 08:59:23 am »
Let me understand; W&L ran the table in 2015/return 18 starters and are picked to finish 2nd in the odac ? Not sure I'm understanding, but there again, I could give a S+++ about preseason predictions anyway.

Well, it's a mathematical model that isn't including returning starters. Given W&L just pipped Guilford at home last year, and Guilford ran the rest of the table, a math model that doesn't include things like returning starters could very easily give Guilford an edge playing at home this year depending on what factors are included. It's just fairly useless to do those kinds of predictions without including returning starters, hence my previous comment. That being said, predicting a tight ODAC is probably as correct as anyone else will be. It's not like W&L was a trendy pick to run the table last year. I think I had them 4th in my preseason thoughts, and I believe Kickoff might have even had them lower.

25
South Region football / Re: FB: American Southwest Conference
« on: August 18, 2016, 08:45:24 am »
Hey yeah! I get to give Hooyah their first +.

I do that with more knowledge than I've ever had of the ASC. 
I drove from D.C to Orange County mainly on Hwy 20 because I wanted to stay in Abilene and tour HSU. My impression? Sul Ross is more in the middle of nowhere than HSU.  :)
sul Ross is more in the middle of nowhere than most places!

As far as D3 football goes, it's hard to say anyone is more in the middle of nowhere than Sul Ross. Those conference trips to Sul Ross are the ugliest in DIII. I can't imagine La Col to SRST or the reverse. 800 miles, 11+ hours each way. I know teams have taken longer trips, but that's a conference match up! Uggh... That alone might have convinced MC to go DII. And yet here's is Belhaven lining up for 900 miles and 12 hours 45 minutes each way!

26
South Region football / Re: FB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference
« on: August 17, 2016, 09:06:42 pm »
Until you have the returning starter info I just don't see the point.

27
You don't want to open the can of judgement required, and employee the bureaucracy, to start having to weigh intentions and parse the rules.

I don't think it's that hard.  We can do it right here.  Did Kalamazoo award aid to football players as compensation for agreeing to play football at Kalamazoo?

Nope, but they may have gotten some players by offering more aid compared to other schools because they were calculating based on an illegal formula. Either way, not all cases will be as easy as this one. So make an easy rule and follow it. It's not hard. The point isn't the NCAA rule is wrong in my mind. D3 has agreed to abide by it. The point is K'zoo f'd up. Follow the simple rule and this isn't a problem. Mess up the simple rule and people start whining and complaining about how unfair it is. I'll whine and complain the NCAA is being unnecessarily harsh to the kids caught in this trap, but I won't whine and complain about D3 having an easy to follow, black and white rule. That just makes sense for the purposes of the division.

28
For the same reason that you can't have a trustee pay for a kid's tuition when he's a football player. The trustee could pay for a kid's tuition if he wasn't a football player, that's a good samaritan, but if he happens to play football, that's an improper benefit. Sorry Susquehanna. The rules are written to keep D3 pretty simple and therefore pretty cheap and easy to manage. No money for athletics. You don't want to open the can of judgement required, and employee the bureaucracy, to start having to weigh intentions and parse the rules. It gets complicated and expensive in a hurry. And we don't want it to be expensive because then fewer schools will participate and there will be fewer opportunities for student athletes to play.

It's better to have a simple rule. No money for athletics. It's easy to understand, should be easy to follow, and easy to enforce.

29
South Region football / Re: FB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference
« on: August 17, 2016, 02:00:03 pm »
It's a discussion for a different board. I 100% agree and I simply don't care. We hand out way to many college degrees in this country. And way too many of them come from schools that simply have to admit kids and churn out degrees that have very little value other than a necessary piece of paper. It's become more a right of passage, money, and perseverance than learning and achievement. And jobs that 10 or 20 years ago wouldn't have required a college degree now do, because there are so many floating around looking to get hired. And good jobs that would have required a college degree now require a masters because a simple bachelors degree doesn't mean what it used to.

30
That's hardly fair.  The school can award merit-based aid on extracurricular athletics activity in high school for everybody except the students that want to play in college?  That makes negative sense.  I remain of the opinion that there's a way for the NCAA and Kalamazoo to deal with the aid process that doesn't punish the current student-athletes.  Punishment levied on the S-As for a college administration policy error is wrong.  Like egregiously, offensively wrong.

I wish they had given them this year to sort it out. But regardless, you have to either take the aid away or take the students off the team. The one area I agree with the NCAA is they can't play while receiving aid based on athletics. That's not DIII any way you cut it, regardless of intention. As I said though, the timing is unacceptable to me.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 221