SDS prediction matrix

#27
#27
General Jack said:
This perhaps is a good barometer for how our program is perceived by an unbiased observer of college football. Most of us would agree if we weren't biased one way or another.

That, along with the 6 out of 7 coaches ranking leads to a pretty poor assessment of CBJ. Is what it is... should have beat USC and Vandy.
Click to expand...

Should have beat A&M, OK,Florida a couple of more times, Ga 1 other time, but we didn't.

121 needs to make up for it all.

2017 the year of the Vol.
 
#29
#29
Okay I've already found my first issue with this "ranking" "system." It puts us near the bottom at QB. What if QD or JG comes out and lights the world on fire and we field the best offense in the SEC with an experienced line, elite athletes at RB/WR, and gunslinger QB? They have no idea what will happen and neither do any of us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#30
#30
I honestly don't think the guys who write these things know anything about the teams currently. They just need to put food on the table and all they have is the past to make judgment calls. This game has nothing to do with last season or the season before. "What happened in the past has no bearing on today or tomorrow" coach Jones
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#32
#32
sjt18 said:
Not much credibility in an "analysis" like that. UT is unknown at QB. Both options are better talents than most of the QB's in the East.

There's usually just not much reliability in basing next season on last season to that degree.
Click to expand...

Agree. Not impressed at all with the methodology. And what's the deal with declaring Bentley the best qb in the East? Kid looks like a nice player, but they need to slow their roll imo. Kid was 7-17 for 41 yards vs Clemson. He was pretty good otherwise, but nothing great. Not quite seeing it just yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#34
#34
Tennessee Golfer said:
Uh stats and statistics are the same thing.
Click to expand...

Not true. Stats=data points. Statistics=the art of manipulation of said data points to support a specific point of view.

Example. Stats: Tennessee Golfer shot a 72 with 6 birdies and 6 boggies. Statistics: Tennessee Golfers 6 boggies shows he is not a very good golfer.
 
Last edited:
#35
#35
Pseudoscience is when you create something that is utterly NON-scientific but dress it up in the look and feel of the scientific method.

This article is pure pseudoscience. Both in the relative rankings of each category, and in the combination of those categories into an overarching conclusion.

There are more logical flaws in the article than in a typical Kim Kardashian interview.

Wondering if Ed Aschoff was a ghost co-writer. :)
 
#36
#36
tomq_123 said:
Not true. Stats=data points. Statistics=the art of manipulation of said data points to support a specific point of view.

Example. Stats: Tennessee Golfer shot a 72 with 6 birdies and 6 boggies. Statistics: Tennessee Golfers 6 boggies shows he is not a very good golfer.
Click to expand...

Stats is simply shorthand for statistics. So they actually are the same thing. Sort of. It's a very imprecise term.

When you say "statistics" you mean the statistical method or the statistical field of mathematics. I do agree with you that some call it "statistics" for short, but that's not very accurate terminology. Just as it would be more appropriate to use "data" rather than "stats" for the information being studied.

Statistical method: the collection, analysis, interpretation, presentation, and organization of data.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
#37
#37
tomq_123 said:
Not true. Stats=data points. Statistics=the art of manipulation of said data points to support a specific point of view.

Example. Stats: Tennessee Golfer shot a 72 with 6 birdies and 6 boggies. Statistics: Tennessee Golfers 6 boggies shows he is not a very good golfer.
Click to expand...

Yeeeeeaaaah....No.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#38
#38
tomq_123 said:
Not true. Stats=data points. Statistics=the art of manipulation of said data points to support a specific point of view.

Example. Stats: Tennessee Golfer shot a 72 with 6 birdies and 6 boggies. Statistics: Tennessee Golfers 6 boggies shows he is not a very good golfer.
Click to expand...

Uhhh, that's not remotely true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#40
#40
QB's will be better than 3 or 4 of the teams they've got ranked ahead of them, whether it's Dormady or Gaurantano.

I also take exception to them giving the coaching edge to UGA and UK. Smart did nothing this year to prove he's a better coach than Jones and Jones has badly outcoached Stoops every time he's faced him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#41
#41
Well at least this time we get to vastly exceed predictions.

QB: No lower than 4 but 2-3 is more realistic. Drew Lock is an Int machine. Shumur better than QD or JG?...no
Rushing Offense: We should be 3 and I agree with UK at top, Snell is really good. Vandy should be higher as well. UGA is a ?
Passing Offense: We could be as high as 2 and as low as 5
Rushing Defense: Considering turnover and loss of 8 starters, FL is a bit high
Passing Defense: We should be 3-5, UK is too high
Special Teams: Ok at 1 or 2
Coaching: 6 is low, maybe 4-5 is right but if it is entire staff, then 2-3 with recent hires
Schedule: We ALWAYS have the toughest
Recruiting: Ok
Momentum: I don't see any for Georgia, we should be stuck in neutral at #4

I got us at about 34 points and 3rd, almost 2nd place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#42
#42
HuntlandVolinColo said:
Well at least this time we get to vastly exceed predictions.

QB: No lower than 4 but 2-3 is more realistic. Drew Lock is an Int machine. Shumur better than QD or JG?...no
Rushing Offense: We should be 3 and I agree with UK at top, Snell is really good. Vandy should be higher as well. UGA is a ?
Passing Offense: We could be as high as 2 and as low as 5
Rushing Defense: Considering turnover and loss of 8 starters, FL is a bit high
Passing Defense: We should be 3-5, UK is too high
Special Teams: Ok at 1 or 2
Coaching: 6 is low, maybe 4-5 is right but if it is entire staff, then 2-3 with recent hires
Schedule: We ALWAYS have the toughest
Recruiting: Ok
Momentum: I don't see any for Georgia, we should be stuck in neutral at #4

I got us at about 34 points and 3rd, almost 2nd place.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the analysis.

I agree with your take.

I was shocked at the overall low rankings in almost every category by SDS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#43
#43
HuntlandVolinColo said:
Well at least this time we get to vastly exceed predictions.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your take, appreciated reading it.

And the part of your post that I quoted, that's what I'm coming to appreciate most about this off-season. We're so far under the radar right now, you'd have to use sonar to find us in the national media. And it's kinda nice that way.

Looking forward to surprising a lot of folks this fall.

Go Vols!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#44
#44
This guy is insanely stupid..ignore what he ranked UT, look at the other ones. Guy has no idea what foozball even is...
 
#45
#45
This article is utterless crap. This guy seems to have one bad argument after another. His premise of ranking off of past year is dumb.
 
#47
#47
The other fault is the lack of weighting for each category. Assuming a team had 4's in every category but one (middle rating). Which one would mean more to a team? QB or Rushing Offense? Perhaps it depends on what type of offense they run. Rushing would be more important for Georgia and Kentucky but not as much for SCAR.

Also, why rate QB separately when there is already a rating for Passing Offense and Rushing Offense category? Maybe they should have replaced the QB category with Team Leadership...Remember Al Wilson practically willed us to that 98 Championship. And a lack of leadership when Kentucky beat us with a WR at 5 years ago and Mizzou down by over 2 TD beat us in OT at Neyland.
 
Last edited:
#48
#48
Crist historically likes to make wild claims to generate clicks. Appears that he succeeded with this one. I don't think he actually believes what he writes, but he loves to fire up the big fan bases. He likes to mess with UF at times too.
 
#49
#49
VFL-82-JP said:
Stats is simply shorthand for statistics. So they actually are the same thing. Sort of. It's a very imprecise term.

When you say "statistics" you mean the statistical method or the statistical field of mathematics. I do agree with you that some call it "statistics" for short, but that's not very accurate terminology. Just as it would be more appropriate to use "data" rather than "stats" for the information being studied.
Click to expand...

Once read a basketball story in which the writer breathlessly announced that a certain player had scored 17 points "nine in the first half alone". A lot of sports writer make their living off the normal and the Poisson distributions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#50
#50
Ancient Reptile said:
Once read a basketball story in which the writer breathlessly announced that a certain player had scored 17 points "nine in the first half alone". A lot of sports writer make their living off the normal and the Poisson distributions.
Click to expand...

Heh, wow, 9 in the first half alone! :)
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top