final S&P+ ratings
Comments
-
Congratulations on being one of a handful of people here who has an idea of how to properly evaluate.GreenRiverGatorz said:These stats are very useful for evaluating the potential of a team. What they don't account for is the intangible ability to win close games, or "clutchness", for lack of a better term, which is of course critical in a sport like college football where anything more than one loss effectively eliminates you from national championship contention.
The S&P numbers more or less mirror what any rational fan could see this year; our team was good enough to match up with anyone on our schedule, we just fucked ourselves consistently and lost too many games because of it. Folks like Auburndoog are adamant that this is 100% due to youth, and that improvement in the "clutchness" department will be linear as our players gain experience. Of course he completely ignores the possibility that our lack of "clutchness" stems from the coaching staff, and that this problem will not fade away with time. Next year will answer that question. A single-digit win season will mean our coaches have failed to develop a roster that has that intangible ability. -
Yeah, but what does Moodys say?
-
Moody's was going to have them at 14th but S&P forced their hand.PurpleJ said:Yeah, but what does Moodys say?
-
That's okay. Fitch put us in the top 10!doogsinparadise said:
Moody's was going to have them at 14th but S&P forced their hand.PurpleJ said:Yeah, but what does Moodys say?
-
This thread is about whether the objective rating systems are accurate or not. We already know the purple-tinted view is not accurate.Tequilla said:Wins and losses matter.
But at the same time, it's also not impossible to ignore the fact that we were an extremely young team on offense this year and really as a team with very few experienced playmakers when it came to making plays in tight spots.
What you hope you see out of this team going forward is that they learn from some of their mistakes in close games this year about the importance of every single play, being smart about avoiding bad penalties, the importance of protecting the football, etc. There was improvement in these areas throughout the year.
Most smart people said before the year that we'd be much better the back half of the year compared to the front and that there'd be games that we'd lose in the front half that we'd never lose as the season progressed. That happened. Nothing about this season was particularly surprising to me.
Every time we lost (six times) it was particularly surprising to you. -
Obviously wins and losses are everything. Who disagrees?Dennis_DeYoung said:This crap about Ws and Ls don't matter is a horrible direction for the 'advanced metrics' crowd to take.
The question would be how you can predict W/L record going forward because simplistically looking at past or current results doesn't get you very close. -
UW will go 5-4 at best in the Pac 12 next year. I know this by looking at the team we have now.FremontTroll said:
Obviously wins and losses are everything. Who disagrees?Dennis_DeYoung said:This crap about Ws and Ls don't matter is a horrible direction for the 'advanced metrics' crowd to take.
The question would be how you can predict W/L record going forward because simplistically looking at past or current results doesn't get you very close. -
Analytics work great for seasons that have a shit ton of games like basketball and baseball.
In a small sample size they don't really matter, you are what your record says you are. I get that it helps differentiate teams with similar records, but it's all speculation.
Maybe if UW played every FBS team in 1 season they would separate from the rest of the 7-6 pack like the stats suggest. And maybe those overrated teams with better records would slip. But that's not the point. We would still lose to most if not all the teams in the top 15.
Moral victory stats won't change that. -
This is why the player analytics are much more interesting than the team analytics.Doogles said:Analytics work great for seasons that have a shit ton of games like basketball and baseball.
In a small sample size they don't really matter, you are what your record says you are. I get that it helps differentiate teams with similar records, but it's all speculation.
Maybe if UW played every FBS team in 1 season they would separate from the rest of the 7-6 pack like the stats suggest. And maybe those overrated teams with better records would slip. But that's not the point. We would still lose to most if not all the teams in the top 15.
Moral victory stats won't change that. -
here's what connelly said on his twatter regarding UW:
