Nebraska is going to upset MSU this Sat (change my mind)

[Northside Hawk]

Nebraska could have gone after Barry Alvarez after Saint Tom retired and Barry probably would have been interested.

But for continuity sakes they went the route most programs do when a legend steps down-they went with a hand picked successor.

It's been a downward spirl ever since.

 

[Luftgekuehlt67]

Analyzing College Football's Relationship Between Recruiting Class Rankings and Wins - Stadium

Is there a positive relationship between recruiting class rankings and win totals in college football?

watchstadium.com

Why Football Recruiting Rankings Matter

By examining 17 years of recruiting rankings for college football programs, researches have determined that recruiting rankings are predictive of team success.

athleticdirectoru.com

Ha! I am reveling in the bitter irony of this statement:

"The win totals are not adjusted for NCAA violations."

Well, no shit, you don't say? Almost like the people doing the study don't care about retroactive NCAA sanctions any more than the respective fan bases do.

It kind of disgusts me, really.

Living in Denver, this place is like Transplant City. No one is actually from here, everyone's moved here from somewhere else. I rub elbows with fans of schools from coast to coast. It's mostly good fun, but I regularly hear takes that make me have to choke back bile.

I know an Arizona basketball fan. From him, I've learned that everyone cheats. Yeah, you know, like everyone breaks the law. One guy got a speeding ticket, another guy murdered a family of four. Pretty much the same thing, if you think about it. So why is Arizona getting the book thrown at them then? Well, I'll pass along what I've learned: it's ESPN's fault! They insisted on making Arizona's so called "violations" into this big dumb story and now, sigh, what a drag, the NCAA had to get involved. Sad trombone noises, there goes their Pac 12 championship hopes, thanks a lot ESPN.

 

[Ian Pike Hammer]

Personally, I think the best thing that could happen as far as our collective enjoyment of Nebraska's suffering is for Frost to win just enough games this year to make Nebraska fans and administrators go, "well...I dunno...maybe".

Everyone *thinks* they want Nebraska to go down and flames, but that's just 1 season's worth of entertainment and you also have to factor in the risk of them replacing Frost with someone halfway competent. Noted coaching savants Bo Pelini and Barney Cotton went 3-1 against the Hawks, don't forget. Mike Riley and Scott Frost have combined to go 0-6.

On the other hand, Iowa's 3 wins against Scott Frost has been by a combined 12 points, so maybe we should be rooting to get him dumped, cuz it's been uncomfortably close lately.

I don't know what to think anymore. I do still think Nebraska has a real chance @ MSU though.

Neb will have to stop the leading rusher in the nation first.

 

[CP87]

LOL. Stop it. As Fry said, he asked a rhetorical question. He didn't want an actual answer with facts and math. Seriously.

Look, I will concede this much ground to Fry. I suspect that the further you get away from the top schools, the less predictive recruiting is. But, that is sort of like saying that beyond Alabama, Clemson, OSU, and Oklahoma, its a crapshoot on who else might make the playoffs. College football is top heavy, and the rich are always going to rake in the top talent and compete for a title every year. This aint the NFL with its socialistic rules.

But even then, there is a statistically significant correlation between rankings and wins and it is across the board, not just at the top. If not, that scatter shot diagram would just be a screen full of random dots, and not a regression line as it presents.

Anecdotally, most of us know that the math is backed up by common sense. While Iowa and NW and Wisconsin overachieve their talent due to great coaching, and Texas and UCLA underachieve their talent for opposite reasons, for the most part, we see a pretty decent relationship between where you land in the recruiting rankings and where you land in the final rankings.

Que Fry disavowing math.....

If you look at the figure, though, it is essentially a 2-point correlation:


There is a group of 5 super-recruiters that win a lot. There is a group of 5 awful recruiters who don't win at all. And then there are 50 schools in the middle for whom recruiting ranking does not seem to predict winning much at all (but probably a little bit). You throw out the top 5 and bottom 5, and what kind of an r2 do you think you are left with? I would be surprised if it is much higher than 0.15 or so.

 

[ssckelley]

If you look at the figure, though, it is essentially a 2-point correlation:
View attachment 8094

There is a group of 5 super-recruiters that win a lot. There is a group of 5 awful recruiters who don't win at all. And then there are 50 schools in the middle for whom recruiting ranking does not seem to predict winning much at all (but probably a little bit). You throw out the top 5 and bottom 5, and what kind of an r2 do you think you are left with? I would be surprised if it is much higher than 0.15 or so.

View attachment 8095

I don’t think you’re reading the chart correctly. The screen shot you posted is based on wins the past 4 years. The recruiting rankings are on the left, so you would need to screenshot the chart taking off the top and bottom horizontally if you wanted to show the middle of the recruiting classes. Those 4 dots at the bottom are top 10 recruiting classes and I’m pretty sure that bottom one is ranked 5th. You chopped off the vertical rows with shows the top and bottom winners.

edit - As I look at the chart more closely those 2 dots at the bottom would be 4th and 5th best recruiting classes over the past 4 years. Looking at the top you’ve got one of the lowest ranked recruiting class, tied with Kansas but the win more.

 

[beavdawg8216]

Give me a break - It's creampuff week, so I am looking through other games of interest for this weekend.

Could Nebraska win @ MSU this weekend? I (unfortunately) think Nebraska is probably a bit better than people think. Likewise, I think people are probably a bit too high on MSU. It all just seems a bit too perfect to me.

MSU is supposedly a top 20 team, but they are only -5 at home against Nebraska? "Haw-haw, Nebraska sucks!" THAT Nebraska? And home field is worth 3 points, so...hmm.

Ill change your mind Nebraska Sucks!!!!!!

 

[NorthKCHawk]

If you look at the figure, though, it is essentially a 2-point correlation:
View attachment 8094

There is a group of 5 super-recruiters that win a lot. There is a group of 5 awful recruiters who don't win at all. And then there are 50 schools in the middle for whom recruiting ranking does not seem to predict winning much at all (but probably a little bit). You throw out the top 5 and bottom 5, and what kind of an r2 do you think you are left with? I would be surprised if it is much higher than 0.15 or so.

View attachment 8095

But here is the thing about math, you can't throw out 10% of the stat lines and claim the rest is bullshit. Part of what makes the regression accurate is that it includes the most predictive variables. Yes, the math gets less predictive the further you get away from Kansas and Alabama, but that is almost always the case with a regression.

I have never argued that there is a perfect correlation between recruiting rankings and wins on the field. That would be silly to advance. And, I have conceded that the middle is less predictive than the extremes. The point I have countered is Fry's argument that recruiting rankings are meaningless when judging the success of a program. That is untrue both mathematically, and in my view, from my subjective view as a fan. Winning programs tend to win the stars game too.

 

[CP87]

I don’t think you’re reading the chart correctly. The screen shot you posted is based on wins the past 4 years. The recruiting rankings are on the left, so you would need to screenshot the chart taking off the top and bottom horizontally if you wanted to show the middle of the recruiting classes. Those 4 dots at the bottom are top 10 recruiting classes and I’m pretty sure that bottom one is ranked 5th. You chopped off the vertical rows with shows the top and bottom winners.

edit - As I look at the chart more closely those 2 dots at the bottom would be 4th and 5th best recruiting classes over the past 4 years. Looking at the top you’ve got one of the lowest ranked recruiting class, tied with Kansas but the win more.

I get that...I took out 5 losing outliers (who are all among the worst recruiters) and 5 winning outliers (who are all among the best recruiters). They are outliers either way (whether on their recruiting or winning), and there are clear clusters in the upper left and lower right.

But you are right, to technically take out the 5 worst and best recruiters you would cut off the top and bottom, but the effect would essentially be the same. There is still no way you are getting an r2 above 0.15 out of that mess.

 

[CP87]

But here is the thing about math, you can't throw out 10% of the stat lines and claim the rest is bullshit. Part of what makes the regression accurate is that it includes the most predictive variables. Yes, the math gets less predictive the further you get away from Kansas and Alabama, but that is almost always the case with a regression.

I have never argued that there is a perfect correlation between recruiting rankings and wins on the field. That would be silly to advance. And, I have conceded that the middle is less predictive than the extremes. The point I have countered is Fry's argument that recruiting rankings are meaningless when judging the success of a program. That is untrue both mathematically, and in my view, from my subjective view as a fan. Winning programs tend to win the stars game too.

But back to @Fryowa 's point, it was basically that it matters at the extremes, but not so much in the middle. Certainly as we look at the big picture, it matters. But that figure also backs up his point, which is that once you get into the muddy middle, it is not very predictive at all (but I wouldn't say completely unpredictive).

 

[CP87]

I can't find the figure, but Iowa's win% tracks very nicely with the average of the prior 5 years recruiting class rankings...so that is another data point in the "recruiting rankings matter" column.

 

[loesshillshawk]

What's the home life issue?
And who ya calling old?

Not calling anyone old but we have been friends awhile. Scott is a father from a young 19 year old. His wife left him, and returned when all this went public supposedly to keep the moral clause in his contract from being used against him. She is not stupid she will gain a big amount of cash if he gets bought out.

 

[CP87]

Off-topic, but related to recruiting...

BYU Athletics: SmartyStreets Signs NIL Deal With All Female Athletes

The NIL space continues to boom for BYU athletics. Provo-based comapny SmartyStreets signed agreements with all female BYU student-athletes.

kslsports.com

A Provo-based company has signed a deal with BYU so that all female athletes who go to BYU will get a $6,000 NIL deal. So which Iowa City-based company is going to pony up some big bucks to guarantee Iowa athletes money the moment they step on campus?

Things are gonna get wild.

https://twitter.com/stevemagness/status/1441060129017942017

 

[Luftgekuehlt67]

10-10 with 4:20 to go in 1st half.

Will I be eating crow, or doing my bare assed told you so dance?!? It all hangs in the balance, I have never felt so invested in a football game not involving the Hawks!

 

[thedukeofearl]

Give me a break - It's creampuff week, so I am looking through other games of interest for this weekend.

Could Nebraska win @ MSU this weekend? I (unfortunately) think Nebraska is probably a bit better than people think. Likewise, I think people are probably a bit too high on MSU. It all just seems a bit too perfect to me.

MSU is supposedly a top 20 team, but they are only -5 at home against Nebraska? "Haw-haw, Nebraska sucks!" THAT Nebraska? And home field is worth 3 points, so...hmm.

You on the money, Baby

Very Close so far

 

[M1911A1Hawkeye]

We just got back from dinner and turned the game on. Debbie is still in this game

 

[Luftgekuehlt67]

You on the money, Baby

Very Close so far

Frost looking more inbred than usual tonight, but knotted up 13-13 with a few mins to go in the 3Q.

Stats are leaning towards a Nebraska W. Nebraska has shut down the MSU run game while racking up good yardage themselves.

 

[vork22]

This is the best that I have seen Nebraska play in years. They are improving. Sparty is forcing the run game that just isn’t there tonight too.

 

[Luftgekuehlt67]

Fuckin' hell, actually a heck of a football game. 20-20 with about 4 to go.

 

[tweeterhawk]

Who do we want to win? Part of me wants Frost to lose so Big Red morons see that they suck and yet another miracle worker can’t resurrect a shitty Fusker program. But keeping Frost may mean more mediocre years of Nebby football.

 

[Luftgekuehlt67]

Nebraska mounting a potential game winning drive here. If they could cover a punt, they'd be up 20-13. Dopes.