For GAVol

[VolinArizona]

Just to keep you updated:

Of the teams that qualified under the CGVR parameters in 2006, 76.8% did exactly what CGVR predicted.

I know you're oh so interested.

 

[hmanvolfan]

:blink:

 

[emainvol]

If I could ask, what the hell are you talking about?

 

[GAVol]

Shockingly . . . I'm still not buying it.

 

[vader]

:blink:

If I could ask, what the hell are you talking about?

I take some comfort in the fact that I am not alone in my confusion.

 

[justingroves]

Phil Steele asks me for advice ViA

 

[GAVol]

I take some comfort in the fact that I am not alone in my confusion.

OK . . . Here's the deal. ViA has come up with a stat he calls "Close Game Variance Ratio". Basically he looks at the previous year's scores for a team and looks at how they did in "close" games that were within 8 points. His theory is that teams that win or lose a lot of close games are likely to have the trend even out the next year and have their record go in the opposite direction. In other words, a team that finished +3 in close games in 2007 and finished 9-3 is likely to have a worse record in 2008.

I have argued with him that the stat is flawed for a number of reasons I am too lazy to rehash.

 

[emainvol]

Phil Steele asks me for advice ViA

Wayne Allyn Root calls me every Saturday in the fall, heck I even told him to run for President.

 

[VolinArizona]

Phil Steele asks me for advice ViA

Phil Steele came from my seed.

 

[VolinArizona]

FWIW, Phil Steele originated the metric, I just gave it a name.

 

[VolinArizona]

Also, for the record, I've said a number of times that CGVR is not the only predictive tool that needs to be taken into account.