re: Interesting article on NCAA Refs

quote:

---

I don't have the gif. It was played several times on a lsu bama thread back in nov. When this all started up.

---

Hmm interesting your saying these supposed holds on a Fournette TD run against Ole Miss were first brought up in November at the time of the LSU / Alabama game? Why didn't we hear about this right after the Ole Miss game, you would think Ole Miss fans would be screaming bloody murder.

What is your opinion on the bridge schedule that was put in by the SEC for several years?

quote:

---

Thank you, and if you don't have the numbers you can't conclusively prove any trends to indicate bias.

---

So then why start this thread and argue your point?

quote:

---

Since football is based around stats, numbers, and trends i would need to see those in order to say without a doubt they the refs are cheating.

---

Oh you don't want to go down that rabbit hole with me on football or baseball when it comes to numbers. I'm not being a jackass either....

quote:

---

Never said the calls weren't real. I just said that they, in a vacuum, don't provide indisputable proof.

---

When there is a definite pattern and that pattern becomes predictable, then yes they do. We are past the point of predictability with the Blue Bloods. Again, not just Bama.

quote:

---

One person, unless you're a paid football statistician, won't watch all plays of all games. That's my point. You, like me, are one fan watching a small portion of the overall plays in all games.

---

Dude, I watch a shite ton of CFB. Despite it being slanted, I still watch it. Same reason some folks like WWE, I guess. Again, I just know what I'm watching and don't care. I literally LOL at some of the stupid shite I see on a weekly basis when I'm watching Blue Blood games. And yes, LSU has benefited from some crazy stuff as well.

quote:

---

It's not enough data for you to say definitively there is or isn't cheating. You can have that opinion, but it's not a fact.

---

Nor is there enough to prove otherwise. Like I said, I don't consider it "cheating" as much as I consider it protection.

PS - If you want to keep the argument to just LSU/Bama games: The best officiated games between the two are when both teams are playing for the west or have similar records. See 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2015. Fairly officiated games. Hell, they even called holding on Bama in 2012, something they hadn't called on Bama all year in SEC play.

It is the years when LSU has nothing to play for is when you see more shenanigans. Rightfully so. The SEC is protecting their cash cow. The SEC isn't alone in this practice.

quote:

---

Believe there were holds against Ole Miss or don't

---

Only a biased lsu homer would say there weren't(which is the majority of this thread.) They onlt remember bad calls that go against lsu, and forget the poor calls that help us. It is lazy confirmation bias. And they dont care that the data is against them.

quote:

---

Only a biased lsu homer would say there weren't(which is the majority of this thread.)

---

I can admit it.

quote:

---

They onlt remember bad calls that go against lsu, and forget the poor calls that help us. It is lazy confirmation bias. And they dont care that the data is against them.

---

That data FOR LSU (and other Tier 2 schools) is dwarfed by data AGAINST Tier 2 programs.

I see a play like the screen shot against Ole Miss and I ask myself, "would the SEC call that against Bama, Auburn or Florida on a consistent basis?" That answer is an obvious no.

So if we get a few here and there, yay for us. I can promise you next year when we go TO OLE MISS, it will be a repeat of the 2015 game where won't get away with that. Hell, they erased nearly 150 yards of rushing by LF7 due to holding calls against Ole Miss, including the first play of the game for LSU in 2015. And those holds weren't nearly as bad as this one.

Yes, I remember all that shite. LOL

quote:

---

So then why start this thread and argue your point?

---

I started the thread because of the link, and the data it showed. I found it interesting that refs were proven to have some sort of bias based on the data. The bias seems to be, like you said:

quote:

---

PS - If you want to keep the argument to just LSU/Bama games: The best officiated games between the two are when both teams are playing for the west or have similar records.

---

I started the post to discuss this topic. I simply started out by saying i didnt think the bias was conscious (my opinion due to lack of overall evidence).

I also found it interesting that the SEC refs seemed to show less bias. I legitamitely wonder why that is. Maybe because we typically have some of the top teams in the country so those bias are offset when they play each other? Like you said when lsu and bama are competing for the west the games seem to be called more fairly than others.

Wouldn't you expect the exact opposite data to appear if the refs had it in for lsu and only supported bama? If they wanted bama to win no matter what then why would those games be called better than others?

quote:

---

Oh you don't want to go down that rabbit hole with me on football or baseball when it comes to numbers. I'm not being a jackass either....

---

But i do. I have been practically begging anyone who is 100% convinced of the conspiracy that the SEC refs actively and consciously only help Bama and Aubrun to show me those stats. No one has. Just small bits and pieces from their collective memories of games.

quote:

---

Oh you don't want to go down that rabbit hole with me on football or baseball when it comes to numbers. I'm not being a jackass either....

---

I think we would need to know whether or not the fouls are justified or not. I also linked an article showing that the penalty margin wasn't even in Bama's favor over several years of analysis. It was actually vanderbilt at the top of the list, and bama was somewhere in the middle. LSU was worst of all teams with Auburn close behind.

LINK

Eta: i quoted the wrong quote and person initially. I was responding to this quote:

quote:

---

I'll only add that the chart I posted is, I think, proof of at least a general bias towards BAMA over LSU over that stretch of time. In this case, it wasn't always the perceived "better" team, as some of those Mile Shulas teams were bad, and some of the Saban and then Miles teams were outstanding. And given we had the exact same guy on both sidelines and even that did not move the needle in terms of moving LSU in front of BAMA on this count, I'm not sure what else to say.

---

quote:

---

Congrats on your connection to the Clay Travis Show.

---

I literally had to google that to see what it was a reference to.

quote:

---

using a message board as a means to complete the thoughts on your work is a bit disappointing.

---

It's not my work. It's someone else's work, not clay travis' either, if you had read the article, and i thought the whole point of this message board was to discuss all things lsu related.

I would say despite what many have posted towards me i have remained respectful and on point. If message boards are not to be used in this manner then what is their intended use?

quote:

---

I see a play like the screen shot against Ole Miss and I ask myself, "would the SEC call that against Bama, Auburn or Florida on a consistent basis?" That answer is an obvious no

---

Well the article i linked discussing penalty margins in the SEC show LSU, Auburn, and Florida to be the worst 3 while Bama is somewhere in the middle of the pack. So i don't understand how you can watch that play and it's "an obvious no" when the data out there (that i have found) speaks against that assessment. If anything you should be saying "would the refs penalize Vandy for that shite?" Since the data shows Vandy has the best penalty margin over a four year span.

Again, i welcome any data showing me it's an obvious no. I just haven't seen it.

quote:

---

Here is a simple example. If you are playing tennis and you think a ball was in but call it out you are cheating right! That is cheating regardless of whether the ball was actually in or out!

---