Phil Steele has Vols In "Bear Market"

#3
#3
I like numbers and I like Phil so it was a little interesting, but it means nothing to me. This will be the same thread with a different title.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5
#5
The SMI formula is a joke. All it accounts for are wins/losses from the previous seasons.

What about new talent being brought in?
New coaching hires?
What about injuries?
Players graduating?

I think you have to look at much more than just W's and L's to make a prediction of how a team is going to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10 people
#8
#8
Say what you want to about Steele, but his predictions are usually pretty good. Then again, he was high on Tennessee in his magazine last year (had us winning the East and being a fringe playoff team).

IMO, the most interesting list he puts together is a list of dark horse national title teams (more specifically, teams outside of the preseason top 10 that he thinks have legitimate shots to win the national title). His #1 team on that list this year is Florida, and he has Auburn really high too. He has a really good track record with that list as well. For example he had Auburn and Baylor in his 2013 list when they were coming off 3-9 and 8-5 seasons respectively the year before.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9
#9
butchna said:
That's not necessarily true, people...wait. What are you doing?
Click to expand...

I don't know. I was trying to compare stock trading to football and I have no idea how cheesy science fiction plays into it. Let's give him a few centons to explain that.

Just guessing but it seemed like that T shirt that reads:

My doctor says I have ADD but,....Hey, look a chicken.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10
#10
havent seen a positive article yet this offseason from anyone. Which means they will probably all be wrong. Thats usually how it plays out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#11
#11
RiseToTheTop said:
havent seen a positive article yet this offseason from anyone. Which means they will probably all be wrong. Thats usually how it plays out.
Click to expand...

Damn straight - I love negative articles about us during the offseason. A lot of the enthusiasm I had going into last season was tempered by the media's apparent positivity towards us, although I still thought we'd go 10-2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12
#12
This is really a bit bogus. By Steele's formulation we would be better off if we had totally tanked last year. Well of course if we had lost six games last year we would be poised to have a better season this year. This formulation has no bearing on whether the team is in a position to compete for a championship or not. It's fun to play with numbers, I do it for a living, but it's important to gauge what they are truly telling you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#14
#14
You could make the argument that UT fell into a bear trap. Weak hands got shaken out of the Vol market.

Or you could argue that UT is headed up the right side of a cup and handle pattern. In that case, SCAR and Vandy had the Vols bouncing along the bottom, and the bowl win positioned the Vols for an uptrend.

It's entirely possible that the Vols could be primed for a breakout, with a bull market ahead. September will be telling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#15
#15
TNnative said:
I don't know. I was trying to compare stock trading to football and I have no idea how cheesy science fiction plays into it. Let's give him a few centons to explain that.

Just guessing but it seemed like that T shirt that reads:

My doctor says I have ADD but,....Hey, look a chicken.
Click to expand...
Ever watch the Office? :)
[youtube]https://youtu.be/WaaANll8h18[/youtube]
 
Last edited:
#16
#16
So, basically every team in the East is going to suck worse except Mizzou (which is a train wreck of a college) and UGA?
 
#17
#17
You can't predict human behavior, Jones has made a lot of changes since last year, good or bad, this team is nothing like last year's. IF players recover, stay healthy and few newbies work out, UT should have a good year. Is this a National Championship year? nobody predicted the 1998 Team to be.
 
#18
#18
"You in a b'ar market?"
images
 
#19
#19
This criteria is too simple to predict football..

Vols have been on an upward trend over the last 3 seasons regarding win totals with no dips. That is all that this indicates.

Injuries caused the Vols to wildly under-perform last season IMO. We did not reach our potential and are poised for a bounce back year as long as we stay remotely healthy
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#20
#20
Do Bears predict seasons like ducks pull trucks?

Same formula didn't predict Washington in the cfp either. You can make numbers tell whatever story you want.

I predict if Tennessee returns to its "turnover margin" that it has under Jones during his 2nd and 3rd seasons, Tennessee will win at least 9 games. Last yr record was distorted somewhat by a horrible turnover margin in games they lost. Vols laid the ball all over the field vs Ga, A&M, vandy and sc. If they reduce their turnovers by 1 each game, they probably win the 3 they lost and don't have to complete the hail mary to beat ga...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#21
#21
Phil's SMI formula applied to the Vols just before each of the past three seasons:

Before 2014 season: SMI would've predicted we would win 5 ... we won 7 (off by 2)
Before 2015 season: SMI would've predicted we would win 5 ... we won 9 (off by 4)
Before 2016 season: SMI would've predicted we would win 6 ... we won 9 (off by 3)

The largest, most glaring weakness of the SMI is that it assumes a team will do about as well in the future as it has in the recent past (last 3 years).

That doesn't work well at all for a team climbing out of its Dark Ages, nor for one falling into ruin.

There's a reason the formula is wrong about a third of the time...because about a third of teams are going through some kind of transition, and this formula denies the existence of transition periods.

Get this: even if you're one of the folks who believe Butch has peaked at 8-9 wins, this formula isn't even right for you. Because it's still looking back at the period when we were winning less than that. Because of the 3-year time span of its backward look, we haven't even reached that potential steady state yet. If you're among those who believe it's possible Butch hasn't yet peaked, the formula is an even worse mis-match.

So take it for what it's worth: very little, as applied to our current program.

Go Vols!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 8 people
#22
#22
You put way more thought into it than I did, and good job.
 
#25
#25
VFL-82-JP said:
Phil's SMI formula applied to the Vols just before each of the past three seasons:

Before 2014 season: SMI would've predicted we would win 5 ... we won 7 (off by 2)
Before 2015 season: SMI would've predicted we would win 5 ... we won 9 (off by 4)
Before 2016 season: SMI would've predicted we would win 6 ... we won 9 (off by 3)

The largest, most glaring weakness of the SMI is that it assumes a team will do about as well in the future as it has in the recent past (last 3 years).

That doesn't work well at all for a team climbing out of its Dark Ages, nor for one falling into ruin.

There's a reason the formula is wrong about a third of the time...because about a third of teams are going through some kind of transition, and this formula denies the existence of transition periods.

Get this: even if you're one of the folks who believe Butch has peaked at 8-9 wins, this formula isn't even right for you. Because it's still looking back at the period when we were winning less than that. Because of the 3-year time span of its backward look, we haven't even reached that potential steady state yet. If you're among those who believe it's possible Butch hasn't yet peaked, the formula is an even worse mis-match.

So take it for what it's worth: very little, as applied to our current program.

Go Vols!
Click to expand...

JP for the win
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top