- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 1/4/13 at 12:42 am to CptBengal
quote:
CaptBengal
I would be interested to see this graph but for defensive ranks.
I don't have your skills, could you make that happen???
Posted on 1/4/13 at 12:42 am to CptBengal
quote:
CaptBengal
I would be interested to see this graph but for defensive ranks.
I don't have your skills, could you make that happen???
Posted on 1/4/13 at 2:03 am to CptBengal
quote:
Btw. I noticed you avoided the leverage question. Good choice as you would have gotten beat up pretty hard for not even recognizing the underlying pattern in the data.
There is no reason to address it. You ran your tests and got your conclusions, I just think you took variables that are skewed away from LSU and it makes the picture look worse than it is.
I am not a Miles defender, I am a LSU defender and fancy chart crap like this is pointless unless it gives the person reading it meaningful information. To say Miles is bad at developing talent because our offensive yardage is low compared to the rest of the FBS doesn't make that arguement. I am interested in seeing how it really does measure up, but I don't think there is a realistic way to do it without a tremendous amount of effort manipulating data to do it and in the end, what will be the conclusion? That our offense has underperformed? We don't need statistics to see that.
quote:
A good coach/recruiter gets talent for both sides of the ball
100% agree, but our defensive production isn't in the comparison and yet they are in the recruiting rank.
quote:
lmao. The miles defender argument if choice....answer me how many teams had ten win seasons this year. Then tell me how many of them are psid as much as miles.
Saban, Meyer, Stoops, Brown are all paid higher than Miles. If aTm beats OU, then Miles will have done better than half of the group and we had a much tougher schedule than all of them.
quote:
Good choice as you would have gotten beat up pretty hard for not even recognizing the underlying pattern in the data.
LOL. A statistics guy talking shite about virtually "beating me up pretty hard".........made my night. Happy data mining, mate.
Posted on 1/4/13 at 2:08 am to stho381
quote:
Saban, Meyer, Stoops, Brown are all paid higher than Miles. If aTm beats OU, then Miles will have done better than half of the group and we had a much tougher schedule than all of them.
Oklahoma is 10-2. If Oklahoma loses to A&M they will end up at 10-3, the same record as us. And they will have lost their bowl game, though to a better team than we did. I wouldn't call that worse. I'd call that equal. Not so sure about the "tough schedule" part either, given that we beat 2 good teams and a lot of shitty teams.
Posted on 1/4/13 at 8:15 am to stho381
quote:
I just think you took variables that are skewed away from LSU
Nope. I took two variablesof interest and related them temporally.
You dont like the results because it casts a negstive light on miles as a coach. It actually shows tha despite miles awful coaching, LSU continues to get good recruits.
Your base analysis belies your claims of being pro LSU rather than a miles fan.
Btw, yhe beat up pretty hard relates to the intellectual discussion you are currently flsiling at...as evidenced by your fsilure t o understsand the context where it was used. That's pretty pathetic, especially for someone will came in the thread to tell me how my analysis was wrong. Are you delusional, or maybe youre les.... that's soething a msn who should be managing s trucking depot would miss.
A pro lsu fan wants the best for lsu. This data shows we dont have the best.
Posted on 1/4/13 at 8:17 am to CptBengal
quote:
It actually shows tha despite miles awful coaching, LSU continues to get good recruits.
this doesn't make any sense.
in fact...this entire thread is pretty much retarded
This post was edited on 1/4/13 at 8:19 am
Posted on 1/4/13 at 8:21 am to Topwater Trout
quote:
If you had asked me I could have saved you some time.
Posted on 1/4/13 at 8:39 am to TheDoc
quote:
so alabama is competing for their 3rd BCS national championship in 4 years and LSU is sitting at home after choking against clemson.
They shouldn't have played in it last year, you can thank Ok. St. for losing to Iowa St.
They shouldn't have played in it this year, you can thank Oregon for losing and Ohio St. for having tattoo's
shite happens!! It has all helped Bama
They have gotten lucky the last two years to even be in there!
The only one that is legitimate is the first one where they beat UT
Posted on 1/4/13 at 12:57 pm to CptBengal
quote:
You dont like the results because it casts a negstive light on miles as a coach. It actually shows tha despite miles awful coaching, LSU continues to get good recruits.
despite awful offensive coaching. The defense and special teams are doing fine.
quote:
Your base analysis belies your claims of being pro LSU rather than a miles fan.
No, my base analysis calls your statistics irrelevant because you are taking 1/3 of the team picture and comparing it to 100% of the recruiting picture. Apples to oranges as in my first post.
quote:
Btw, yhe beat up pretty hard relates to the intellectual discussion you are currently flsiling at...as evidenced by your fsilure t o understsand the context where it was used. That's pretty pathetic, especially for someone will came in the thread to tell me how my analysis was wrong. Are you delusional, or maybe youre les.... that's soething a msn who should be managing s trucking depot would miss.
This is the point where I know I've gotten under your skin becasue instead of continuing with our disagreement you have now lowered yourself to calling me "pathetic", "delusional", "les", and a "[man] who should be managing a trucking depot". How are any of these statements conducive to our discussion? My opinion, you got butthurt, because I called out flaws in your statistics and now you have resorted to calling me names and trying to take personal shots.
quote:
A pro lsu fan wants the best for lsu. This data shows we dont have the best.
A pro-LSU fan supports to the team and argues against others when they try to poopoo on the team they love. I am just as freakin mad as anyone about our non-offense over the past 5 years, but I don't see the point in piling on the shite pile. I will however, try to help clean some off if I can and you posting some statistical analysis looking at a realtionship designed to make LSU look as bad as possible is something I chose to speak up against. LSU isn't just an offense. We recruit all 3 phases. We are excellent in two and fair-poor in the third, so when you say "Les with more..." you aren't just taking a shot at the HC, you are taking a shot at the program, one that has been wildly succesful in the last decade. Lastly, I ask the question, what are you trying to prove? That our offense isn't good? You don't need any numerical analysis to determine that. It's plain as day on Saturdays for the last half-decade.
ps - I won't be responding to this thread anymore. It needs to die.
This post was edited on 1/4/13 at 1:00 pm
Posted on 1/4/13 at 10:54 pm to stho381
quote:
Lastly, I ask the question, what are you trying to prove? That our offense isn't good? You don't need any numerical analysis to determine that.
Some people do. This was great work by CptBengal. It adds merit to the claim that our O is underachieving under Les as of recent.
Posted on 1/5/13 at 1:35 am to CptBengal
Cpt everything 'Lulz' is saying is right
your argument is ''Les does les with more'
Let's put aside the fact LSU won two SEC titles with Les at the helm (harder to do than win the NC)
One, your relationship is simple... LSU recruits top 10 classes... does LSU have a top 10 class? NO... if ranters are really paying attention, you are not telling us anything new, you made it into a picture, that is all...
But as 'lilz' says, thta picture is very much faulty...
-- Did you use all the FBS teams? 120?.... don't you think the defenses faced has a lot to do with it as well.....
Lulz is also right, with all the spread teams, that means more plays and longer games.... so LSU will NEVER be in the top 5 in offense because of this...
Nothing against you, I have a brother making stastitics for fun all the time, ( but he includes varables in his formulas )... so spending time on this stuff... glad you enjoy it..
Thanks for the picture as well... but no one here didn't know that LSU gets top 12 recrutiing classes every year, and have far from top 20 offenses....
But again as 'lulz' says... Having a top 12 class and a lower ranked offense is nothing to do with anything...
1- Recrutiing class has defensive players, could be easily said that LSU recruits top players on defense at every position...
2- Offensive recruits although valued, still do not show in the production because , once again as 'lulz' says.. style of play and the quality of defense is not registered in your statistics, and total offense in no way illustrates individual development...
you also are comparing LSU to all of the FBS aren't you?
What about all the blow out games LSU has had and killed the clock in the whole 4th Quarter in the last 4/5 years?
comparing, let's say Houston who always has the pedal to the medal versus LSU.. in only Total Off yards and Recruiting Rankings..
Is in NO WAY giving a legitimate representation of your argument, Les is getting les with more
Furthermore, wich rnkings did you use in recruitng? Because they aren't all the same, did you use a composite?
I also agree with lulz on you have to use Yards per play.... because even Points Per Game is not completely telling us the story, as a bad or a good kicker can change the scoreboard no matter how long the offense came, and defense and special teams do score as well.....
So you have to qualify your relationships before you use them .. because otherwise, it is just FAULTY...
your argument is ''Les does les with more'
Let's put aside the fact LSU won two SEC titles with Les at the helm (harder to do than win the NC)
One, your relationship is simple... LSU recruits top 10 classes... does LSU have a top 10 class? NO... if ranters are really paying attention, you are not telling us anything new, you made it into a picture, that is all...
But as 'lilz' says, thta picture is very much faulty...
-- Did you use all the FBS teams? 120?.... don't you think the defenses faced has a lot to do with it as well.....
Lulz is also right, with all the spread teams, that means more plays and longer games.... so LSU will NEVER be in the top 5 in offense because of this...
Nothing against you, I have a brother making stastitics for fun all the time, ( but he includes varables in his formulas )... so spending time on this stuff... glad you enjoy it..
Thanks for the picture as well... but no one here didn't know that LSU gets top 12 recrutiing classes every year, and have far from top 20 offenses....
But again as 'lulz' says... Having a top 12 class and a lower ranked offense is nothing to do with anything...
1- Recrutiing class has defensive players, could be easily said that LSU recruits top players on defense at every position...
2- Offensive recruits although valued, still do not show in the production because , once again as 'lulz' says.. style of play and the quality of defense is not registered in your statistics, and total offense in no way illustrates individual development...
you also are comparing LSU to all of the FBS aren't you?
What about all the blow out games LSU has had and killed the clock in the whole 4th Quarter in the last 4/5 years?
comparing, let's say Houston who always has the pedal to the medal versus LSU.. in only Total Off yards and Recruiting Rankings..
Is in NO WAY giving a legitimate representation of your argument, Les is getting les with more
Furthermore, wich rnkings did you use in recruitng? Because they aren't all the same, did you use a composite?
I also agree with lulz on you have to use Yards per play.... because even Points Per Game is not completely telling us the story, as a bad or a good kicker can change the scoreboard no matter how long the offense came, and defense and special teams do score as well.....
So you have to qualify your relationships before you use them .. because otherwise, it is just FAULTY...
This post was edited on 1/5/13 at 2:56 am
Posted on 1/6/13 at 7:47 am to CptBengal
quote:
show how badly talent is misused by Miles and Co.
Why not do defense or overall?
I would say our overall success is right in line with our recruiting classes.
Posted on 1/6/13 at 8:24 am to shel311
Because for some reason...CptBengal and his ilk actually believe that Miles has nothing to do with the defense and special teams.
Posted on 1/6/13 at 8:36 am to CptBengal
I can't read that shite
Posted on 1/6/13 at 8:50 am to CptBengal
Ok, a few things, because I love shite like this.
First off, this is just OFFENSIVE ranks, correct? This doesn't take into account how great our defense and ST have done as well, right? For example, on defense, you have several outliers. One, right off hand, would be Mo Claiborne, a 2 star recruit who ended up being a first round pick in the NFL. There are several others as well. That is clearly doing more...
Next, does this take into account what types of schedules LSU has been playing? For example, everyone here loves to suck Saban's cock, but damn it has to be easy on you when your toughest division rivals have to go through a gauntlet that, by design of Bama alumni running the SEC, are two to three times harder than yours annually. Isn't it easier to do more when you only have to play maybe two ranked teams all year, and have the luxury of knowing you can lose one of them? That has to factor in this as well...
What about games where LSU was blowing people out? While people love to bash on Miles, he has won a LOT of games (and many against top programs) where the LSU offense literally needed to sit on the ball the majority of the second half in order to finish the game. Some notables: The ENTIRE frickING 2011 Season (minus the Game of the Century that didn't count), several big games in 2005, 2006 (AZ comes to mind right away), 2007 (Va Tech), 2008 (Bowl), etc.
Don't get me wrong, I KNOW LSU's offense is average/below average. It has been since our "resurection", but it was this way under Saban too. Our best offensive years this decade were 2003, 2006 and 2007. That's it.
I have more questions once these are addressed. Either way, this is cool.
First off, this is just OFFENSIVE ranks, correct? This doesn't take into account how great our defense and ST have done as well, right? For example, on defense, you have several outliers. One, right off hand, would be Mo Claiborne, a 2 star recruit who ended up being a first round pick in the NFL. There are several others as well. That is clearly doing more...
Next, does this take into account what types of schedules LSU has been playing? For example, everyone here loves to suck Saban's cock, but damn it has to be easy on you when your toughest division rivals have to go through a gauntlet that, by design of Bama alumni running the SEC, are two to three times harder than yours annually. Isn't it easier to do more when you only have to play maybe two ranked teams all year, and have the luxury of knowing you can lose one of them? That has to factor in this as well...
What about games where LSU was blowing people out? While people love to bash on Miles, he has won a LOT of games (and many against top programs) where the LSU offense literally needed to sit on the ball the majority of the second half in order to finish the game. Some notables: The ENTIRE frickING 2011 Season (minus the Game of the Century that didn't count), several big games in 2005, 2006 (AZ comes to mind right away), 2007 (Va Tech), 2008 (Bowl), etc.
Don't get me wrong, I KNOW LSU's offense is average/below average. It has been since our "resurection", but it was this way under Saban too. Our best offensive years this decade were 2003, 2006 and 2007. That's it.
I have more questions once these are addressed. Either way, this is cool.
Posted on 1/6/13 at 8:51 am to CptBengal
Fire everyone. Hire Saban. Right?
Posted on 1/6/13 at 8:56 am to Camp Randall
quote:
Fire everyone. Hire Saban. Right?
Perhaps. I just have to wonder how good Saban would look if he had to continue to win under LSU standards and not Bama standards.
Everyone forgets that, in 2003, ESPN/CFB media shite all over Saban in favor of Cheating Pete. That would never happen today to Saban bc of the Bama label he sports.
Posted on 1/6/13 at 9:03 am to heartbreakTiger
If Les ever realizes that offense is part of football, maybe we will have one! 
Posted on 1/6/13 at 1:01 pm to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:
EZE Tiger Fan
I don't pretend to speak for the Cpt but his work shows a simple realtionship between recruiting rankings and O productivity (I don't even know what metric he was using for this) over a five year span.
quote:
First off, this is just OFFENSIVE ranks, correct?
His data spans five years. Most of the questions being asked such that the exceptions, blowouts, etc come out in the wash.
I thought it was great work and suggests Les needs to rethink what we're doing on O. If we were better on O we could be winning more championships.
I think it includes all recruits.
He could refine things to only include offense but this would only change things if there was a significant disparity between the recruiting rankings of those who play O vs those who play D. It's probably a good assumption that that isn't the case.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News