2016 By the Numbers

[daj2576]

Wow. I did not know that you came up with your Matrix first and then stumbled upon Bartoo's work. I know you're not in it for accolades, but that's pretty darn impressive.

eta: you still in law school?

Yup, I thought of it while I was driving back and forth to law school, and had already tested years of data when I found Dave's stuff. He and I differ on a few things, or did the last time I checked, but our conclusions are often very similar.

The Genesis of all this is that I wanted a way to see if Dooley was as bad as he seemed. This seemed like a great way to isolate coaching from talent, and it is. So, in a way Dooley is the best and worst thing to ever happen to me. Lol.

Nope, I've been out and practicing for about a half year now (I took the bar last July).

 

[vtvol98]

A&M has no QB. Not afraid of OU throw away in that game. No way we lose to A&M. I don't believe we lose to GA with a freshman QB. 10 - 2 or 11 - 1 this year

You are underestimating Trevor Knight IMO. I agree with you as far as UGA's QB situation goes.

 

[Catbone]

Just a random thought on the whole 70% chance to win thing...

By that model, we have an equal chance to lose to Florida as we do to Vanderbilt (both 30%) Keep that in mind.

 

[daj2576]

Heh, folks, don't be too quick to give DAJ grief about his use of the term "underachiever."

He doesn't mean "underachiever in life." Or "underachiever as a coach." He only means it in a very narrow way, as an occasional underachiever on the field in comparison to the talent advantage he brings to every single game.

And yes, the way DAJ applies it, there's no way for Saban to "overachieve" on the field...because he has already achieved more than every other college coach on the recruiting trail.

break/break

I'd love to see DAJ add a bit of fuzzy logic to his stats. Build in a recognition that the game of college football is played by a bunch of 18-24 year of age young men whose energy and exuberance outweigh their maturity and deliberation by a wide margin.

I'd propose that, rather than comparing teams' talent rankings as single numbers (#3 vs #19, say, or #8 vs #9), that you think of them as bands within which the team might be. Say that on any given day, a team can play up to 3 spots above their talent ranking, or up to 3 spots below. Entirely based on the emotional and focus swings of all those young men. So the #1 team in the nation by recruiting rankings, Bama, could absolutely--and quite understandably--play like the #4 team on a given Saturday. That would be true if the #1 team were having an unfocused or unmotivated day (so #1 minus 3 = playing at #4 level), while the #5 team were having a very good day (so +3, playing as good as the #2 team). #2 beats #4 on the field, though it's #5 beating #1 in the recruiting world.

Of course, this would make a lot more games "unpredictable" using the modified system...many would be a pick-em that DAJ currently predicts. So that weakens the value of the model.

But I think it would be a step closer to the reality of college football.

Saban has a very long history of performing under his talent, this isn't just a thing that happens when he can't over-achieve.

Many people believe that Saban is the gold-standard of coaching. And, that is totally fine. But, if the vast majority of his wins and titles come when he has inarguably more talent than his opponent, can you attribute that to coaching?

My hypothesis is that many more coaches could take his talent and do as well with it as he does, than wouldnt. But, few if any coaches could sustain and build the talent and stability that Saban does. The end result is that Saban is one of the most valuable coaches (I use that word as an administrative title), but not because of any singular ability to scheme. This also goes to my continued belief, largely due to these and similar analysis, that coaching (that is, the aspect of play calling on Saturday) is the most over-valued aspect of football, and is followed closely by "quarterback".

 

[Vol8188]

Daj, how does Bill Snyder do? I've always called him the best coach in the nation, and according to your data, who is the best?

Or do you only do SEC?

 

[McDad]

Yup, I thought of it while I was driving back and forth to law school, and had already tested years of data when I found Dave's stuff. He and I differ on a few things, or did the last time I checked, but our conclusions are often very similar.

The Genesis of all this is that I wanted a way to see if Dooley was as bad as he seemed. This seemed like a great way to isolate coaching from talent, and it is. So, in a way Dooley is the best and worst thing to ever happen to me. Lol.

Nope, I've been out and practicing for about a half year now (I took the bar last July).

Congrats, man.

 

[daj2576]

Congrats, man.

Thanks!

I always appreciate your comments and the discussion you bring.

How are things with you?

 

[VonVol]

Saban has a very long history of performing under his talent, this isn't just a thing that happens when he can't over-achieve.

Many people believe that Saban is the gold-standard of coaching. And, that is totally fine. But, if the vast majority of his wins and titles come when he has inarguably more talent than his opponent, can you attribute that to coaching?

My hypothesis is that many more coaches could take his talent and do as well with it as he does, than wouldnt. But, few if any coaches could sustain and build the talent and stability that Saban does. The end result is that Saban is one of the most valuable coaches (I use that word as an administrative title), but not because of any singular ability to scheme. This also goes to my continued belief, largely due to these and similar analysis, that coaching (that is, the aspect of play calling on Saturday) is the most over-valued aspect of football, and is followed closely by "quarterback".

Spurrier hinted at this same idea about Saban a couple years back, I believe. Just said that it's hard to tell how good of a coach he is because he is constantly the coach with the most talent on his roster. Really angered some of the faithful around here. But I thought he made a pretty good point.

 

[daj2576]

Daj, how does Bill Snyder do? I've always called him the best coach in the nation, and according to your data, who is the best?

Or do you only do SEC?

I don't only do SEC, and I have looked around at other coaches more specifically. The list of coaches that people see as being great, at one time or another, but who really don't perform all that spectacularly in relation to talent is pretty long.

Examples:
Malzahn.
Chip Kelly.
Pinkel.
Meyer.

But, there are those that tend to stand out in relation to talent for significantly over-achieving.

Petrino (at Arkansas)
Spurrier (at SCAR)

The problem is, the coaches who do have a long run of significantly over-performing also have some major flaws. First, they don't tend to recruit well long term. Second, while they do tend to play the role of giant killer well, they don't have the horses to truly compete. Third, they tend to have an arc from inception, to peak, to flame-out, that is pretty repetitive.

To answer your question about Snyder, I'll let you look for yourself (I ran a quick visualization for you).



His performance in relation to talent, Snyder is certainly one of the best. Since returning in 2009, he is averaging about 5 games a season over expectations. But, he has the same inherent flaws as other coaches who over-perform. Namely, he doesn't recruit well. And, in Snyder's case (opposed to either Petrino, Spurrier, and others) he plays in a conference that is relatively weak. Understand that as a general statement, the meat of the Big XII are less talented teams than the worst of the SEC. That doesn't mean that he also isn't performing the role of giant killer well (namely beating the best talented teams in his conference relatively frequently) but he is doing it in (generally) the middle of the road in terms of talent in all of the division formerly known as 1.

As I mentioned earlier, the further down you go on the talent list, the less stable the predictions tend to become. I surmise that part of that is when you get to the middle to bottom tier teams, that the roster trends more towards 0-3 star players instead of 3-5 star players, and I believe that recruiting services don't know how to differentiate the bottom of the talent pool as well as they do the top.

The point is, that while what he is doing is hyper impressive, it won't lead to true long term success, or to a legitimate shot at titles (though, he will rack up a lot of wins with a very limited roster).

 

[daj2576]

Spurrier hinted at this same idea about Saban a couple years back, I believe. Just said that it's hard to tell how good of a coach he is because he is constantly the coach with the most talent on his roster. Really angered some of the faithful around here. But I thought he made a pretty good point.

Yup.

I try to explain it to people like this. Saban is Fulmer with more consistent talent. That is the key to both of their success.

 

[Vol8188]

I don't only do SEC, and I have looked around at other coaches more specifically. The list of coaches that people see as being great, at one time or another, but who really don't perform all that spectacularly in relation to talent is pretty long.

Examples:
Malzahn.
Chip Kelly.
Pinkel.
Meyer.

But, there are those that tend to stand out in relation to talent for significantly over-achieving.

Petrino (at Arkansas)
Spurrier (at SCAR)

The problem is, the coaches who do have a long run of significantly over-performing also have some major flaws. First, they don't tend to recruit well long term. Second, while they do tend to play the role of giant killer well, they don't have the horses to truly compete. Third, they tend to have an arc from inception, to peak, to flame-out, that is pretty repetitive.

To answer your question about Snyder, I'll let you look for yourself (I ran a quick visualization for you).

View attachment 111158

His performance in relation to talent, Snyder is certainly one of the best. Since returning in 2009, he is averaging about 5 games a season over expectations. But, he has the same inherent flaws as other coaches who over-perform. Namely, he doesn't recruit well. And, in Snyder's case (opposed to either Petrino, Spurrier, and others) he plays in a conference that is relatively weak. Understand that as a general statement, the meat of the Big XII are less talented teams than the worst of the SEC. That doesn't mean that he also isn't performing the role of giant killer well (namely beating the best talented teams in his conference relatively frequently) but he is doing it in (generally) the middle of the road in terms of talent in all of the division formerly known as 1.

As I mentioned earlier, the further down you go on the talent list, the less stable the predictions tend to become. I surmise that part of that is when you get to the middle to bottom tier teams, that the roster trends more towards 0-3 star players instead of 3-5 star players, and I believe that recruiting services don't know how to differentiate the bottom of the talent pool as well as they do the top.

The point is, that while what he is doing is hyper impressive, it won't lead to true long term success, or to a legitimate shot at titles (though, he will rack up a lot of wins with a very limited roster).

I appreciate the detailed response. It was far more than I had anticipated. Thank you.

 

[daj2576]

I appreciate the detailed response. It was far more than I had anticipated. Thank you.

Most welcome.

Also, add Fisher to the top list. And, if it wasn't obvious, add Snyder to the bottom list.

 

[tonybologna]

Sorry but you must not have gotten the memo. Recruiting and talent don't matter.

The only reason we've lost to Florida is because the players are mentally weak.

Or so I've been told.

Are you serious? Because our players were just too mentally weak is the reasons behind us losing to UF all these past 11 years? I don't agree with that. I would argue more our coaches have been the ones more mentally weak.

Some of the decisions made during the past 11 losses to UF by Kiffin/Dooley/Butch have been highly questionable. I think they were more responsible for most of these 11 straight losses than our actual players.

No. Only 11-1 an SEC title will do. Anything less will be collosal failure.

Agree 100% with you on this one. I've said we'd go 11-1 with only loss coing to Texas A&M on the road. We beat Bama. We beat UF. We beat Georgia. I think we beat UF & Georgia handily this time around. I really do.

I think we slide by Bama by a field goal or no more than a TD but we still win. We'll beat UF by 17+ points. We'll beat Georgia by 10+ points.

The Texas A&M game will be really close as well. I just don't think we're going to pull through in such a tough place to play. I say we'll be up 30-28 late in that game but A&M gets in field goal range to make the winning kick & we lose 30-31.

That's still 11-1 with the SEC championship game ahead. I'm predicting we play Ole Miss(not Bama or LSU) in the SEC Championship. I say we win that game by 3-7 points & this puts us into the national playoffs. I'd say as the #4 or possibly the #3 seed.

Either seeding though is still going to be tough for us. I say we lose to no matter who we play in the 1st playoff game unless we get a very favorable playoff matchup. No way we beat Clemson. I really think Clemson is the only team we can't beat that will make the playoffs.

Of course, there's no way we know ahead of time which teams will make it but I think Clemson is the one team that's a given. The other 3 teams is a tossup but I do think we make it there with a chance.

 

[Vol8188]

Most welcome.

Also, add Fisher to the top list. And, if it wasn't obvious, add Snyder to the bottom list.

Wait, what? I thought Snyder was one of the best coaches in the nation?

 

[daj2576]

Wait, what? I thought Snyder was one of the best coaches in the nation?

Yeah. I see why that's confusing. The top list was the unspectacular coaching. The bottom list was spectacular coaching. Add Snyder to the bottom list with Spurrier and Bobby P.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

D4H please see above. TN is not close to having 4 consecutive top 10 recruiting classes. Please stop saying this is the most talented roster ever created. It is not.

After this season, TN will hopefully continue to recruit at a high level and will likely compile future solid 4 year rosters going forward. It isn't win a national title or bust in 2016. TN needs to continue to improve this season and a 10-2 regular season would be a great result.

Good thing we had back to back top 5 classes where we signed 30 guys each year. That's basically the equivalent of 4 straight top 10 classes.

Plus 2014 and 2015 were much stronger years for talent than 2013 and especially 2016. It makes our classes even more valuable that we loaded up on talent on years with an excess amount of great players.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Are you serious? Because our players were just too mentally weak is the reasons behind us losing to UF all these past 11 years? I don't agree with that. I would argue more our coaches have been the ones more mentally weak.

Some of the decisions made during the past 11 losses to UF by Kiffin/Dooley/Butch have been highly questionable. I think they were more responsible for most of these 11 straight losses than our actual players.

I dont believe that. I was just being sarcastic. I've been arguing for months against people trying to show the talent disadvantage we've had against Florida.

Yet some on here are unwilling to believe that. And instead want to blame the players for being mentally weak.

Kinda sad since it's actually them that's mentally weak.

 

[chargervol]

Yes, every team experiences attrition, but how many lose 2 - 5* quarterbacks along with some other players in one season (Texas A&M)? I would think that is a significant loss in talent.

I'm not arguing that being a significant loss, but we are discussing a 4 year cycle.
For some teams, it's "snake bit with injuries", up to 2 or 3 years in succession. For some it may be arrests. Others still, it may be players personal lives or coaching changes.

Hell, you could be UT and the answer be 'all of the above'.
The results aren't a 100%, only 70%.
But they set a much better trend than some wish to acknowledge.
A good coach does matter.. But just because you hire someone "proven", say a Dave Serrano for your baseball team, the importance of other pieces will still have a huge impact on final results. And vice versa - Handing tons of talent over to say.... a Dooley.

 

[KBVol]

Good thing we had back to back top 5 classes where we signed 30 guys each year. That's basically the equivalent of 4 straight top 10 classes.

Plus 2014 and 2015 were much stronger years for talent than 2013 and especially 2016. It makes our classes even more valuable that we loaded up on talent on years with an excess amount of great players.

Lol. Because we signed essentially 11 extra players over the course of 2 classes (2014 & 2015) that's "basically the equivalent of 4 straight top 10 classes"?? Do what? So not only do you struggle with logic, math gives you fits as well.

Also, remember that we have lost 8 4-star players from those two classes as well.

 

[Volosaurus rex]

Wait, what? I thought Snyder was one of the best coaches in the nation?

Vol8188, these are the only numbers you need to recognize Bill Snyder’s greatness. Prior to his arrival in 1989, Kansas State’s all-time record (300-510-40) was dead last in winning pct. (.37647) among 107 BCS programs (I-A Winning Percentage 1869-1988). Conversely, Snyder’s all-time record at KSU is 193–101–1, which includes six top-ten finishes in both polls (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Snyder). To place his achievements in the proper context, Snyder took a program at rock bottom, starting 1-10 in 1989 (0-7 in conference play) and amassed an 18-26 record over his first four seasons. 1993 was a breakthrough season, with a 9-2-1 record, followed by a 10-2 campaign in ’95. From 1997-2003, he compiled a 72-19 record, finishing with less than eleven wins only in 2001 (6-6).

Just shy of his 70th birthday, he began his second tour of duty at KSU. From 2009-present, his teams have compiled a 57-33 record. I contend that the job Snyder has done at Kansas State qualifies as one of the greatest coaching jobs of all-time when you consider the historically abysmal status of that program. Snyder did a better job of recruiting at that school than anyone they otherwise would have been capable of hiring, even if much of their talent was recycled through the ranks of junior colleges in Kansas.

 

[ReaderVol]

These are recruiting rankings. These numbers predict about 70% of all SEC games, all but one national champion since 2005, etc.

Those teams have recruited better than us for the preceding four years.

Go back far enough, like to the Auburn/FSU national championship game, and you'll find that I said then that Malzahn was a disaster waiting to happen, that his history against talent wasn't predictive of anything positive long term, but that Auburn was an insanely talented team (they were under Chizik, too). I was told I didn't know anything about football.

As I've said repeatedly, Butch has a history of significantly over-performing those numbers, but has trended slightly below them at UT. But, like his win totals are increasing every year, so is his accumulated talent, and he is cutting the under-performance in relation to talent. The trajectory at UT is upwards as most can see, but this year's recruiting class will be more important to Jones's long term stability on Rocky Top than his actual record (barring a disaster).

Just understand that for the first time since 2005 (as far back as my data takes me), the prediction of the annual UT v. Florida game has swapped from being a 70% chance of losing, to a 70% chance of winning.

Let that sink in for a minute. During our 11 year losing streak, these numbers never indicated UT should ever have more than a 30% chance to win.

Would those #'s not have had UGA beating us last year too?
I get what you're saying but I think there's a little more to it. But it's very interesting info for sure.

 

[99gator]

Daj...

I'm sorry, but the way you are choosing to evaluate these guys just makes no sense.

Urban Meyer and Nick Saban have won 7 of the last 10 national titles. Meyer is 154-27. Meyer has the 3rd highest winning percentage in the history of Division 1 college football. Saban has 5 national titles.

Not only are they the two greatest college football coaches of our lifetime, but they are two of the greatest college football coaches of all time, in any era, period.

The "underachiever" thing is just laughable.

 

[tonybologna]

Vol8188, these are the only numbers you need to recognize Bill Snyder’s greatness. Prior to his arrival in 1989, Kansas State’s all-time record (300-510-40) was dead last in winning pct. (.37647) among 107 BCS programs (I-A Winning Percentage 1869-1988). Conversely, Snyder’s all-time record at KSU is 193–101–1, which includes six top-ten finishes in both polls (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Snyder). To place his achievements in the proper context, Snyder took a program at rock bottom, starting 1-10 in 1989 (0-7 in conference play) and amassed an 18-26 record over his first four seasons. 1993 was a breakthrough season, with a 9-2-1 record, followed by a 10-2 campaign in ’95. From 1997-2003, he compiled a 72-19 record, finishing with less than eleven wins only in 2001 (6-6).

Just shy of his 70th birthday, he began his second tour of duty at KSU. From 2009-present, his teams have compiled a 57-33 record. I contend that the job Snyder has done at Kansas State qualifies as one of the greatest coaching jobs of all-time when you consider the historically abysmal status of that program. Snyder did a better job of recruiting at that school than anyone they otherwise would have been capable of hiring, even if much of their talent was recycled through the ranks of junior colleges in Kansas.

Very good post there buddy. Snyder has certainly done an amazing job with KSU with the lack of talent that they get almost every single year. He turns this lack of talent into a more talented bunch of players almost every single season too. Truly an amazing job.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Lol. Because we signed essentially 11 extra players over the course of 2 classes (2014 & 2015) that's "basically the equivalent of 4 straight top 10 classes"?? Do what? So not only do you struggle with logic, math gives you fits as well.

Also, remember that we have lost 8 4-star players from those two classes as well.

Our 14 and 15 classes included an incredible amount of hits. Way more than the typical top 5 class. IMO we collected 30 quality starters in those 2 classes alone. That's the equivalent of 4 top 10 classes in quality.

Just watch how easily we win it all this upcoming season. It'll be a testament to how special those 2 classes were.

 

[tonybologna]

Our 14 and 15 classes included an incredible amount of hits. Way more than the typical top 5 class. IMO we collected 30 quality starters in those 2 classes alone. That's the equivalent of 4 top 10 classes in quality.

Just watch how easily we win it all this upcoming season. It'll be a testament to how special those 2 classes were.

So, you think we're winning the national championship in 2016? To me, that's a little overly optimistic but I do think we can make the playoffs.