- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
1
Posted on 11/29/10 at 9:27 am to WillieBeau
quote:
YES! Because now they are set. Had they lost, it would have been a DUMB move.
It is a dumb move either way.
quote:
If the Saints don't get the onside kick to start the 2nd half of the Superbowl and the Colts when, Payton would have a reputation of making the biggest coaching blunder in Super Bowl history....As it were, he's known for making one of the best.... ALL coaches are either good or bad based on RESULTS!! Period.
going for an onside kick is a rsiky move, could have back fired, in which case it would be viewed by people like you and uncommon as dumb because it didn't work. That is not the same as having your team look like chickens with their heads cut off at the end of a game only to get bailed out because in the confussion, the other team's coaches did not realize they had too many men on the field.
Bill Belichick decided to to go for it on 4-2 vs Indy last year, it was a smart move, even tough it didn't work. See its not possible to know the results of everything BEFORE you make a decsion. There is a difference between a calculate risk and a careless one. People that take the first one will come out on top way more often than the later.
Posted on 11/29/10 at 9:31 am to Uncommon Cents
quote:
Yes because good coaches find a way to win especially close games.
Why can't the players be the ones finding a "way to win" despite the coaches?
quote:
Luck is undefinable.
Posted on 11/29/10 at 9:31 am to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:Yeah! Conveniently leave out this year, you cherry picker.
and before this year
Posted on 11/29/10 at 9:37 am to LSUnKaty
quote:
would you be pissed off and upset that you won?
I certainly would not declare myself a financial genius.
quote:
I would put it this way, if someone goes to a roulette wheel over the course of several months and bets, oh lets say about 78 times and wins 61 times, then I would say he definitely knows what he is doing to win that much at a game that is about 1.111 to 1 against at best!
No, Roulette is pure luck (assuming the game is not fixed), the sad part is people like you and many others in this thread are fooled by randomness into thinking that just because you get a positive result its because you know what you are doing that is not the case, google Nassim Taleb and his books on this subject. There is a certain amount of luck in almost everything, the point is the people who use smart stategy and prepare better should come out on top more often than not. Lets take blackjack for example. Say a player has 20 and the dealer has a 6 showing. The player should stay period, that is the right move. If the dealer flips over a 4, then gets an Ace, the player loses, that does not mean it was stupid for him to stay. If they player hit and got a 21, he would not have busted, but that would still be incredibly stupid and would bust him the vast majority of the time. Process matters, if you say hitting on 20 is good because you got an Ace and won, then you are a fool.
This post was edited on 11/29/10 at 9:38 am
Posted on 11/29/10 at 10:26 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
There is a certain amount of luck in almost everything, the point is the people who use smart stategy and prepare better should come out on top more often than not. Lets take blackjack for example. Say a player has 20 and the dealer has a 6 showing. The player should stay period, that is the right move. If the dealer flips over a 4, then gets an Ace, the player loses, that does not mean it was stupid for him to stay. If they player hit and got a 21, he would not have busted, but that would still be incredibly stupid and would bust him the vast majority of the time. Process matters, if you say hitting on 20 is good because you got an Ace and won, then you are a fool.
Exactly. But the average positiger would say "Hell yeah! Lessssssticles, baby! Ain't NOBODY knows what's he's gonna do next".
Posted on 11/29/10 at 10:59 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
No, Roulette is pure luck (assuming the game is not fixed), the sad part is people like you and many others in this thread are fooled by randomness
I realize roulette is all luck genius - that's why it's 1.111 - 1 against! Impossible to win over time UNLESS the game is fixed and then you know you will win!!! That's what my post said, if I have a PROCESS (eg fixed game) that allows me to win 61 out of 78 times at a 1.111-1 against game, then I will feel pretty confident it is my PROCESS and not just blind luck that is causing my success. Why is this so hard for you Einsteins to understand? And to keep on using such a process would be what? Foolish or smart according to you?
quote:
the point is the people who use smart stategy and prepare better should come out on top more often than not.
You are so right - now how does this jive with Mile's 61-17 record at LSU brainiac? He uses a shitty method but for some unknown glitch of probability he keeps coming out on top against others that use a much better process. How is that so? Please enlighten us.
quote:
Process matters, if you say hitting on 20 is good because you got an Ace and won, then you are a fool.
Good point, but if I count cards and know exactly when to hit on 20 and win - and my method works for me 61 out of 78 times, I'll continue to go with it. Yea, 17 out of 78 times I will bust and I will certainly look like a fool most of the time to brilliant onlookers like you, but I'll look like a fool all the way to the bank!
Posted on 11/29/10 at 11:07 am to LSUnKaty
quote:
Good point, but if I count cards and know exactly when to hit on 20 and win - and my method works for me 61 out of 78 times, I'll continue to go with it. Yea, 17 out of 78 times I will bust and I will certainly look like a fool most of the time to brilliant onlookers like you, but I'll look like a fool all the way to the bank!
Certainly you don't think this is a good way to frame what Les is up to, do you?
Posted on 11/29/10 at 11:15 am to Tiger JJ
All these analogies suck arse
if you don't like him, that's fine.
But you don't just luck out 80 percent of the time.
Bad coaches have bad records
bad coaches have bad recruiting, because other coaches expose the holes
bad coaches do not experience success everywhere they go
so hate him all you want, but just shut the hell up already.
The basics of football are beyond most here. Yet everyone continues to evaluate the coach.
if you don't like him, that's fine.
But you don't just luck out 80 percent of the time.
Bad coaches have bad records
bad coaches have bad recruiting, because other coaches expose the holes
bad coaches do not experience success everywhere they go
so hate him all you want, but just shut the hell up already.
The basics of football are beyond most here. Yet everyone continues to evaluate the coach.
Posted on 11/29/10 at 11:34 am to Tiger JJ
quote:
Certainly you don't think this is a good way to frame what Les is up to, do you?
The point is, quite a few people keep talking about luck in relation to Miles. It's not luck when you win 78% of the time.
Quite a few people keep talking about "PROCESS". Well, from the outside looking in, you may see things one way and believe what you will about the PROCESS and its potential for success, but at some point you have to look at results to tell the tale.
In other words, quite a few people are talking out of the arse on here with flawed analogies to roulette and black jack that don't support what they say. They can go on for ever about how Miles doesn't do this right or doesn't do that right, but his results at LSU speak differently and if they were interested in being honest about it they would eventually have to admit that.
The fact is, 78 games over 6 years is a large enough sample to rule out external factors such as luck or previous staff's influence.
If folks would come on here and argue that LSU could maybe eek out a few more close games if only Miles would tweak his approach a bit in this direction or that, I might be able to agree. I have made these sort of suggestions myself. But to come on here and totally vilify Miles as an inept buffoon is inappropriate and simply not correct no matter how you slice it.
Posted on 11/29/10 at 11:34 am to tigerfoot
quote:
But you don't just luck out 80 percent of the time.
In the SEC where the 5 of the last 7 NCs were SEC teams.
Posted on 11/29/10 at 11:43 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
the point is the people who use smart stategy and prepare better should come out on top more often than not.
Well, isn't that exactly what LSU did in winning 10 of 12 and finishing 10th in the BCS
and isn't that exactly what LSU had been doing for 6 seasons now...."come out on top more often than not"???
In fact, a LOT more often than not. In fact, the most coming out on top, percentage wise, than EVER before.
Personally, after 6 years of the best results in LSU history and a current Top 10 BCS ranking, I don't give a flip how it's done and if all we got to bitch bout is "it's not pretty"...we in pretty sad shape as a fan base.
Posted on 11/29/10 at 12:03 pm to Hitchcock
For all the "Saban Lovers" interesting article in B-ham Sports on Sunday....
Saban is 10-8 in games decided by a touchdown or less since being at Alabama!
Pretty average if I say so myself!
Saban is 10-8 in games decided by a touchdown or less since being at Alabama!
Pretty average if I say so myself!
Posted on 11/29/10 at 12:21 pm to LSUnKaty
quote:
But you don't just luck out 80 percent of the time.
quote:
It's not luck when you win 78% of the time.
Everyone keeps acting as if people are saying that if not for luck, Miles would be winless. It's a red herring. So stop throwing out this 80% nonsense. What we're talking about is the effect at the margin. If luck played a huge role in just 8 or 10 games, then that is a MASSIVE effect on the overall outcome.
He's a good recruiter that has gotten very lucky at the margin.
Posted on 11/29/10 at 12:25 pm to Tiger JJ
quote:
If luck played a huge role in just 8 or 10 games, then that is a MASSIVE effect on the overall outcome.
So now we are able to isolate all things lucky...and they only occur, for the most part, when we are playing football in the SEC.....and only in the games that support an agenda.
This is rich.
Do you like him or not? If not just say, I dont like him. Trying to validate feelings, especially irrational ones is kinda tricky.
If your argument is now down to defining and applying LUCK. I cant imagine it is that strong.
Posted on 11/29/10 at 12:27 pm to Tiger JJ
We were the worst 10-2 I have seen in the last 40 yrs of watching football...
Posted on 11/29/10 at 12:28 pm to ForeLSU
quote:
his point is that he is intellectually superior to everyone that doesn't agree with him...
Posted on 11/29/10 at 12:31 pm to LSUnKaty
quote:
I would love to see Wisconsin play in the SEC.
They have won their last two bowl games vs SEC teams.
Style points do matter in the era of the BCS. Just winning isn't good enough since much of our ranking system is a public relations contest.
Posted on 11/29/10 at 12:45 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Did they roll up 72 points in those games?
Posted on 11/29/10 at 12:51 pm to LSUnKaty
quote:
The point is, quite a few people keep talking about luck in relation to Miles. It's not luck when you win 78% of the time.
You came in the middle of the thread. My gambling examples of luck are not in reference to Les Miles entire tenure at LSU, but in response to comments about the Tennessee game this year. Some keep claiming it doesn't matter how that game ended because we won, it was good coaching. That's absurd. You can not claim it was his plan to send a bunch of guys on the field with no time outs, let the clock almost run down, have the C snap the ball past the QB because he "knew" that in the confussion UT would have too many guys on the field and he'd get a 2nd shot like he had a timeout. Now obviously every game he has won did not end like that, but there is no way to say that was good coaching. Was in an abberation? Well, 2007 Auburn and 2009 OM lead me to beleive its not, clock management is an issue. That is a fixable issue, but will it be? Who knows.
Another part of the problem here is the all or nothing thinking. Miles is not a terrible coach but he is not a great one either. His process is not all luck, but is it as good as others? I don't think so, that doesn't mean he can't beat them, even outcoach them, but can he string together a full season where we prefrom like the Bama game this year? He hasn't so far. Lets face it a lot of the game we play, we are way better than the other team (Miles recruiting is the reason for that) what sepates the elite from the very good is the ability beat everyone. It was encouraging to beat Florida and Bama this year, but we lost to Auburn and Arkansas. Can he get us over the hump again? We'll see.
Page 9 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News