- 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
re: Former LSU players had high praise for Coach Orgeron and his staff
Posted on 1/21/19 at 8:56 pm to doubleb
Posted on 1/21/19 at 8:56 pm to doubleb
quote:
know some here get mad becsuse we aren't like Bama who makes the playoffs every year. I
How about once. The problem with the last coach is we saw 3 loss seasons as the peak when they should be our floor.now 3 loss seasons are being touted as great seasons because our coaching had everyone expecting 7 wins.
0
Posted on 1/21/19 at 8:57 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Ole Miss kicked our arse
Yes, they did
Posted on 1/21/19 at 8:57 pm to RB10
quote:
Rankings across seasons are just fine though, right?
Nah.
Every season has its quirks. The big takeaway from 15 is getting beaten badly three games in a row.
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:00 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Ok then, provide context as to why you think the number of 2 loss teams in 2018 compared to 2015 is relevant or persuasive. Stating you think it is without why isn't persuasive at all.
In 2015, 9 of the top 10 teams finished with 2 or fewer losses. In 2019, 6 of them finished with 2 or fewer losses, and 1 of them finished with 4 losses.
CONTEXT
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:01 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Without providing context on the schedules, that stat is useless. At least polls take into account who teams won and lost to. Posting a blanket collective record of 14 teams without knowing who those teams made is an awful argument. I think you know this but I don't expect you to admit it at this point.
No, I don't know it. Arguing that a teams record is a poor way to measure them is stupid. Not ignorant or biased, just flat out fricking dumb.
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:01 pm to RogerTheShrubber
And the big takeaway from 18 is getting beat by the biggest margin since 1974 vs Bama, losing to an extremely inferior Florida team again proving 0 cannot beat Mullen and losing to basically a flag football team in ATM.
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:02 pm to RB10
quote:
So they finished lower than Florida, with the same records, but the rankings say they were better.
Yes, two spots. I wouldn't call a deviation of two spots all that persuasive or meaningful, not sure why you do.
quote:
I was looking at the Playoff poll.
Well if you want to go that route, Florida was ranked 10th and Ole Miss 12th in the final CFP poll. Again, a deviation of two whole spots. If they had finished far apart, then sure make that argument. But two spots? Seriously? Again, i think you know this isn't the hill you want to die on but don't expect you to admit it.
quote:
Records are a good measure from top to bottom.
See, this is your opinion. It is 100% an opinion. I don't agree with this opinion. No stat you post will make this opinion right as much as you want it to be. All schedules are not created equal; therefore, all records of 9-3, 10-2, 11-1, etc are not equal. Records are only a good measure if all of those teams have played identical schedules. If that was true, then sure. However, that isn't the case with college football so we are forced to look at more than overall records when making an evaluation
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:03 pm to Madking
quote:
And the big takeaway from 18 is getting beat by the biggest margin since 1974 vs Bama, losing to an extremely inferior Florida team again proving 0 cannot beat Mullen and losing to basically a flag football team in ATM.
I'll give you Bama, but the rest is pure fantasy, little fella. That's chic like drama there.
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:04 pm to lsufball19
quote:
See, this is your opinion. It is 100% an opinion. I don't agree with this opinion.
You don't really have to agree with it, but what you can't deny is that rankings don't even measure ~66% of a schedule. Meanwhile, overall records measure exactly 100% of a schedule.
I'll keep using the measure that takes the full schedule, and not 33% of it.
quote:
All schedules are not created equal; therefore, all records of 9-3, 10-2, 11-1, etc are not equal.
Neither are all rankings, as I've shown with 4 loss Texas being a top 10 team.
This post was edited on 1/21/19 at 9:05 pm
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:04 pm to RB10
quote:
Arguing that a teams record is a poor way to measure them is stupid
UCF has been getting screwed!
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:06 pm to RB10
quote:
Meanwhile, overall records measure exactly 100% of a schedule.
Except for renta wins, cross division competition and bowl opponent, you're right.
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:07 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
UCF has been getting screwed!
5 of UCF's opponents had a winning record.
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:08 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Except for renta wins, cross division competition and bowl opponent, you're right.
Every single one of theses is measured in a teams record, if they were good enough to reach bowl. As a plus, the record also shows who wasn't good enough to reach a bowl.
Tell me, how does one differentiate between 2-10 Arkansas and 8-5 Auburn using rankings?
This post was edited on 1/21/19 at 9:09 pm
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:10 pm to RB10
quote:
5 of UCF's opponents had a winning record.
Ah, so w/L isn't tell all.
Thanks
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:11 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Ah, so w/L isn't tell all.
It tells that UCF had a good season and was a solid, but not great opponent.
I can come to this conclusion without ever looking at the ranking. Weird how that works.
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:11 pm to RB10
quote:
Nah, you just tried to paint a picture of LSU's SEC opponents being better overall in 2018 than they were in 2015.
LSU played tougher top-end competition in 2018 was the point I was making. LSU also played a tougher slate from the East, which is pretty clearly why i compared their schedules against teams from the East. Why should I care about the collective overall record of the SEC when LSU didn't play 5 of the 14 teams included in that record? That's why I delineated the East teams they played in those years.
It was you who said rankings are useful for evaluating the top 3-4 teams on your schedule. Here is your post.
quote:
Rankings are a good measure for the top 3-4 teams you face, and a worthless measure for anything else.
So why don't you do that with 2015 and 2018. In 2015, LSU played 3 teams that finished the season ranked (#1 Alabama, #9 Ole Miss, #25 Florida). To get to 4, I guess the best non-ranked team they played was probably Arkansas. In 2018, LSU played 4 that finished in the top 12 (#2 Alabama, #7 Florida, #8 UGA, and #12 UCF). If the ranking of the top 3-4 teams is relevant, well there you go.
This post was edited on 1/21/19 at 9:17 pm
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:12 pm to RB10
quote:
can come to this conclusion without ever looking at the ranking.
Ahh.. opinion. Got it.
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:13 pm to lsufball19
quote:
LSU played tougher top-end competition in 2018 was the point I was making. LSU also played a tougher slate from the East, which is pretty clearly why i compared their schedules against teams from the East. Why should I care about the collective overall record of the SEC when LSU didn't play 5 of the 14 teams included in that record? That's why I delineated the East teams they played in those years.
You're the one that said the SEC was "mediocre" in 2015. I guess it was "mediocre" in 2018 as well. No mention at all of "just the top teams".
Weird.
quote:
outside of Alabama, the SEC in 2015 was one of the weaker years we've seen in quite awhile. Not a bunch of bad teams but a whole lot of mediocre, although I guess to be fair Ole Miss was pretty good as much as I hate to admit it.
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:14 pm to RB10
quote:
In 2015, 9 of the top 10 teams finished with 2 or fewer losses. In 2019, 6 of them finished with 2 or fewer losses, and 1 of them finished with 4 losses.
I asked why you think it is relevant or persuasive. In other words, what conclusion do you draw from that? More parity this year, what? All you did was provide the same stat. You failed to answer the question you quoted.
Posted on 1/21/19 at 9:14 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Ahh.. opinion. Got it.
Yes, opinion backed by facts (team records). Well done.
Page 36 of 89
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News