re: Realistic expectations!

quote:

---

Since LSU improved by 2 wins this season, how would the two year lookback account for this trend, which by the way, is moving up, not down? 5 being greater than 3 and all that.

---

Because 8 (the number of losses the past two years) is more than 6 (the number of losses in the previous three), and all that.

quote:

---

I think there are valid anti-Miles arguments, but using selective endpoints to exclude data you don't like ain't one of them.

---

More recent data is more relevant than older data. That's simply the way it is. Sorry you don't like it, but it doesn't change the fact that it's true. Also, peculiar to the evaluation of coaches, starting points and where the program moves from there are important. A person taking over at Vandy and having Miles' record would be a coaching legend. Taking over at LSU in 2005 and having this record isn't that spectacular, just as taking over Miami in 2001 and having Coker's record after 2006 wasn't that great. The first three years were significantly affected by the state of the program when he took it over. The further removed we are from the previous regime, the more indicative the results are of Miles, and they're worse than the early years, signifying the downfall of a former powerhouse.

quote:

---

Actually, I think Miles' closest comp is Mack Brown,

---

Miles isn't nearly as good as Brown. Brown is MUCH more consistent.

quote:

---

the only difference between Nebraska and Ole Miss is that Brown got a replay ref to bail him out and Les didn't

---

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Brown didn't mismanage the clock and let it run out. It was a mistake by the refs or the clock operator that made it appear to run out, and replay fixed the mistake. Miles just fricked up. Over and over again on that last series, Miles just fricked up.

quote:

---

he's had 3 classes that finished 10th, 1st and 1st...our's in that same time period are 4th, 11th and 2nd. Plus he had several holdovers that were studs from Shula's days

---

nice cop out

I've heard many a Miles apologist say there is no tangible difference b/t the top ten recruiting classes & top 5 vs top 15/20 is marginal.

What about the great Miles classes prior to last 3?

Maybe they're not being coached up when they get to LSU....where have we heard that before?

You can't have it both ways.

quote:

---

Because 8 (the number of losses the past two years) is more than 6 (the number of losses in the previous three), and all that.

---

which now requires a five year lookback. And your original 2-year window to evlauate Miles' record is then thrown out the window. If we look at five years, suddenly Miles is far above 500.

I am ALWAYS skeptical of people using arbitrary endpoints in statistical arguments.

quote:

---

More recent data is more relevant than older data. That's simply the way it is. Sorry you don't like it, but it doesn't change the fact that it's true. Also, peculiar to the evaluation of coaches, starting points and where the program moves from there are important. A person taking over at Vandy and having Miles' record would be a coaching legend. Taking over at LSU in 2005 and having this record isn't that spectacular, just as taking over Miami in 2001 and having Coker's record after 2006 wasn't that great. The first three years were significantly affected by the state of the program when he took it over. The further removed we are from the previous regime, the more indicative the results are of Miles, and they're worse than the early years, signifying the downfall of a former powerhouse.

---

Once again, it depends on how you look at it. I just didn't like arbitrarily using two years because that's the period that makes Miles look worse. But let's follow Miles' SEC record:

7-2
6-2
7-2
3-5
5-3

Now, had the 5-3 come directly after Miles' third season, I wouldn't really call that trending down, it would be close to the same line. Is one loss really statisitically significant? There will be some inevitable variation, even in linear results.

What it really looks like is that the team is recovering from a horrible 2008. That was the huge variance. Essentially, the line looks like this:

------ \ /
\/

If the program goes back to 6-2 next year, it looks like it's a one year abberration from Miles' historic results. If it continues at 5-3, then it starts to look like a correction to a different line of success, that Miles shifted from a "6-2 coach" to a "5-3 coach". But without next year's data, we're just guessing. And if he is becoming a "5-3 coach", then he is overpaid and we'll expect to have one game variances to 6-2 and 4-4 instead of being a "6-2 coach" with variances to 7-1 and 5-3.

If that was your argument, then make that argument. Don't cherry pick only the stats which support your case. That is simply unconvincing and makes me think you're hiding something.

quote:

---

Miles isn't nearly as good as Brown. Brown is MUCH more consistent.

---

Well, Brown is amazing consistent, but I was talking about his attributes, as you could tell by the rest of the paragraph in which I talked about his attributes. Just taking one sentence out of context and then assigning it a different meaning then it had in its context, makes me wonder how you approach numbers, which are entirely dependent on context.

For the record, here is Brown over the past five seasons in conference:

9-0
6-2
5-3
7-1
9-0

That is a good performance (maybe even great), but not exactly consistent. Not like the 6/7-2 seasons Miles pumped out like clockwork for three years. If we're looking at Brown's trendline, it looks more like this:

\ /
\ /
\ /
\/

quote:

---

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Brown didn't mismanage the clock and let it run out. It was a mistake by the refs or the clock operator that made it appear to run out, and replay fixed the mistake. Miles just fricked up. Over and over again on that last series, Miles just fricked up.

---

Brown fricked up too, and it was NOT a scoreboard operator mistake. The ball touched the ground with a second left and it took a second for the human reflex to record the event. Replay only allows for checking the clock for "egregious error" and this does not meet the standard. He got bailed out. Meanwhile, Toliver hit the ground with 3 seconds left and the clock ran to 1, essentially given Miles no chance to get off the play. The replay officials did not bail him out despite it being almost exactly the same situation.

Brown was saved, Miles wasn't. But it was the same atrocious clock management decisions.

ETA: My charts didn't work. Bugger. One looked like a long line followed by a V and Brown was a giant V.

I like what the fellow said earlier....
if you take Miles' record & reverse it, it looks much better.

7-2
6-2
7-2
3-5
5-3

5-3
3-5
7-2
6-2
7-2


That's not a good thing.
And for me, 5 years is a good sample size for a trend....particularly since I can see how the team PERFORMS (or doesn't) also.

fair enough
we'll see

Obviously, "hopefully."

I'm supportive of the team but not optimistic in the coaches.

Mike did not inherit a power house. Arnsparger inherited a Power house and after a couple of years of mediocre recriuting he left town with what was not a great team. This was about when the recruiting experts were getting started. Archer took a lot of can't miss prospects according to these recruiting gurus that turned out to be dudes

quote:

---

7-2
6-2
7-2

---

insert Perilloux being a dumbass

quote:

---

3-5
5-3

---

the facts are that Stovall was a great recruiter but not so good of a head coach. When he left he left a very good group of players. Arnsparger didn't like recruiting and didn't do a thorough job of it. The reason why I made that post because it was signing day and to note how far the recruiting gurus have come since then and earlier on this thread accused Archer for the down turn of the program when in reality the actual down turn began with Arnsparger disdain for recruiting was the real reason. I felt like it! Hopefully that this class will be as good as advertised!

Answer me this:

Prior to RP being kicked off the team, did you expect that he would eventually be kicked off the team?

This was discussed a lot prior to his release and I would guess the prevailing thought was that 70%+ of LSU fans thought RP would eventually be kicked off the team.

And yes, the number of games he started matters. It was 2 total, 1 in the SEC. It matters because LSU put all their eggs into the RP basket when IMO over half of the fanbase thought it was a matter of WHEN not IF RP would be kicked off the team unless he changed his ways dramatically.

Yes, I agree the loss of RP hurt our team. What hurt worse in 2008 was the promotion of co-DCs. Throw in our contingency plan of Andrew Hatch as starting QB and 7-5 season happens with major blowouts against us.

With all that has happened since the NC game in 2008, how responsibility for 2 seasons of varying issues can be attributed to only RP and his 2 game starting career is beyond silly.

quote:

---

I do agree with you about the fact that everyone knew he would be kicked off. It was a given. More or less what I was trying to say was that his dismissal from the team left us without a quarterback to rely on.

---

I'm off my Les criticism, so I will just say that Les would know more than anyone else regarding the RP situation. If the majority of fans thought RP was going to be kicked off, then Les must have known too. Or he was too trusting of RP?

Either way, I think LSU should have been better prepared for the inevitability of RP being released from the team. We weren't.