http://www.sbnation.com/college-football...ule-roster

Good grief will SBNation ever give up on this F score thingy, its abysmal. It always has NIU in an unfavorable light and they have been wrong with this horrid stat for 5 years, just put a sock in it SBNation, know when to give up on something.

Projected 7.6 wins is hardly an improvement. Especially in year #4. It would still give Fleck an overall losing record at WMU, something like 24-27. Cubit was 51-47 while @Kalamazoo.

yeah but Cubit's boat was taking on water and he didn't have any oars.

Can you imagine NIU with all that talent? Yes I know talent does not win ball games but it would sure help our coaching staff.

(04-16-2016 09:36 AM)NIU75 Wrote:  Can you imagine NIU with all that talent? Yes I know talent does not win ball games but it would sure help our coaching staff.

I don't believe talent helps NIUs coaching staff. NIU has more talent on offense than any team in the MAC yet our coaching staff doesn't know how or is afraid to use it

(04-16-2016 10:36 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 09:36 AM)NIU75 Wrote:  Can you imagine NIU with all that talent? Yes I know talent does not win ball games but it would sure help our coaching staff.

I don't believe talent helps NIUs coaching staff. NIU has more talent on offense than any team in the MAC yet our coaching staff doesn't know how or is afraid to use it

Yeah all those constant wins over WMU and Toledo just goes to show how much our staff sucks

Have all the talent you want, if the guy your surrounding that talent with isn't the man you're not getting to the top. Terrell is good, but not special.

MD thinks the program is about to fall off a cliff, but gets mad when a computer agrees with him?

(04-16-2016 11:10 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  MD thinks the program is about to fall off a cliff, but gets mad when a computer agrees with him?

Bahahaha seriously, it probably names the MAC as "a well respected and premier G5 conference"... silly computer

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

(04-16-2016 11:10 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  MD thinks the program is about to fall off a cliff, but gets mad when a computer agrees with him?

To be honest that F score thing has had such a horrific history when I skimmed down and saw the article had that in it, I just didn't even read the article.

The best part of the article was the constant,consistent theme - They can't overcome NIU, but maybe this year. They can't beat NIU.

(04-16-2016 12:05 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 11:10 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  MD thinks the program is about to fall off a cliff, but gets mad when a computer agrees with him?

To be honest that F score thing has had such a horrific history when I skimmed down and saw the article had that in it, I just didn't even read the article.

I don't follow that particular "advanced" stat, but no one stat/metric is going to tell you everything nor is it ever going to accurately predict everything that will happen.

You should know, you tried to do it for MAC basketball.

There's an insane amount of variables that go into it. Because a system doesn't accurately predict everything (again, there's just too many variables to ever do this), that doesn't mean it doesn't have some value or at least provide food for thought.

In the last few years we've seen an explosion in advanced data and trying to numberfy everything....and though it's a impossible task, it's awesome that people are trying to look at sports in different ways and perhaps finding value and "sure things" that have been overlooked.

It's happening in tiny increments, and there's a ton of miss before a hit, but I think the average fan, one that doesn't have the time or resources to scout for themselves, is better informed than ever. And it's because people aren't afraid to look foolish and keep trying to approach sports thinking and value in new ways.

(04-16-2016 09:36 AM)NIU75 Wrote:  Can you imagine NIU with all that talent? Yes I know talent does not win ball games but it would sure help our coaching staff.

LOL that reminded me of this recent social media fail...

ESPN has released its preseason FPI.
FPI rankings predict WMU with 9 wins and NIU with 7 wins.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team...&year=2016
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team...&year=2016

Per FPI WMU has 73% chance of winning the Sat, Oct 8 NIU game.
There is a good reason the games are actually played.

(04-16-2016 01:43 PM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 12:05 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 11:10 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  MD thinks the program is about to fall off a cliff, but gets mad when a computer agrees with him?

To be honest that F score thing has had such a horrific history when I skimmed down and saw the article had that in it, I just didn't even read the article.

I don't follow that particular "advanced" stat, but no one stat/metric is going to tell you everything nor is it ever going to accurately predict everything that will happen.

You should know, you tried to do it for MAC basketball.

There's an insane amount of variables that go into it. Because a system doesn't accurately predict everything (again, there's just too many variables to ever do this), that doesn't mean it doesn't have some value or at least provide food for thought.

In the last few years we've seen an explosion in advanced data and trying to numberfy everything....and though it's a impossible task, it's awesome that people are trying to look at sports in different ways and perhaps finding value and "sure things" that have been overlooked.

It's happening in tiny increments, and there's a ton of miss before a hit, but I think the average fan, one that doesn't have the time or resources to scout for themselves, is better informed than ever. And it's because people aren't afraid to look foolish and keep trying to approach sports thinking and value in new ways.

The S&P scores and F/+ scores are both from the website footballoutsiders.com, the premier website for football metrics.

But some random guy on some random website could post a ranking system and if it agreed with MD he'd be posting it everywhere and talking it up about how accurate it is.

(04-16-2016 03:23 PM)niusfactuary Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 01:43 PM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 12:05 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 11:10 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  MD thinks the program is about to fall off a cliff, but gets mad when a computer agrees with him?

To be honest that F score thing has had such a horrific history when I skimmed down and saw the article had that in it, I just didn't even read the article.

I don't follow that particular "advanced" stat, but no one stat/metric is going to tell you everything nor is it ever going to accurately predict everything that will happen.

You should know, you tried to do it for MAC basketball.

There's an insane amount of variables that go into it. Because a system doesn't accurately predict everything (again, there's just too many variables to ever do this), that doesn't mean it doesn't have some value or at least provide food for thought.

In the last few years we've seen an explosion in advanced data and trying to numberfy everything....and though it's a impossible task, it's awesome that people are trying to look at sports in different ways and perhaps finding value and "sure things" that have been overlooked.

It's happening in tiny increments, and there's a ton of miss before a hit, but I think the average fan, one that doesn't have the time or resources to scout for themselves, is better informed than ever. And it's because people aren't afraid to look foolish and keep trying to approach sports thinking and value in new ways.

The S&P scores and F/+ scores are both from the website footballoutsiders.com, the premier website for football metrics.

But some random guy on some random website could post a ranking system and if it agreed with MD he'd be posting it everywhere and talking it up about how accurate it is.

Id highly encourage anyway to stay away from F/+, there is not a poorer stat out there, it is completely meaningless and has never done a good job.

(04-16-2016 04:52 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  Id highly encourage anyway to stay away from F/+, there is not a poorer stat out there, it is completely meaningless and has never done a good job.

There is not a bigger endorsement of a rating system than you trashing it.

Much like KenPom, I'll continue to use advanced metrics when assessing teams, which means I'll continue to look at F +/-, FEI, etc. You are free to continue using metrics that led you to the conclusion that Jacksonville State was going to beat Michigan State a couple years ago.

I'd like to remind you: you are the same guy that claimed a) Michigan State was the most overrated Top 5 team in college football history last year (they then went 12-2) and b) you called North Carolina "really, really bad" in about Week 3 (they went 11-3). You'll have to excuse us if our idea of what constitutes an accurate assessment of teams differs from yours.

They may have a lot of three star players but .1 is not that big of difference.

(04-16-2016 01:43 PM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 12:05 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(04-16-2016 11:10 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  MD thinks the program is about to fall off a cliff, but gets mad when a computer agrees with him?

To be honest that F score thing has had such a horrific history when I skimmed down and saw the article had that in it, I just didn't even read the article.

I don't follow that particular "advanced" stat, but no one stat/metric is going to tell you everything nor is it ever going to accurately predict everything that will happen.

You should know, you tried to do it for MAC basketball.

There's an insane amount of variables that go into it. Because a system doesn't accurately predict everything (again, there's just too many variables to ever do this), that doesn't mean it doesn't have some value or at least provide food for thought.

In the last few years we've seen an explosion in advanced data and trying to numberfy everything....and though it's a impossible task, it's awesome that people are trying to look at sports in different ways and perhaps finding value and "sure things" that have been overlooked.

It's happening in tiny increments, and there's a ton of miss before a hit, but I think the average fan, one that doesn't have the time or resources to scout for themselves, is better informed than ever. And it's because people aren't afraid to look foolish and keep trying to approach sports thinking and value in new ways.

It is great to look at things in a different way and it is interesting how effectively that ranking system was able to project the Vegas 16, but when a scheme has been proven as bad as that F thing has for 5 years, at some point you have to concede gracious defeat.