Peterman - worst power 5 coach
Comments
-
So 1 year?
-
Original title didn't troll hard enough, had to change it up?
-
Oh fer fuck sakes here we go. In 3-4 more years he'll be the best so fuck you punto
-
By the nature of the matrix it would not be possible for Peterman to be the best in this study. UW recruits at too high of a level. But your poont stands.puppylove_sugarsteel said:Oh fer fuck sakes here we go. In 3-4 more years he'll be the best so fuck you punto
-
While I want to agree with you, you said the same thing about Sark, and therefore you cannot be trusted.puppylove_sugarsteel said:Oh fer fuck sakes here we go. In 3-4 more years he'll be the best so fuck you punto
#BlindSquirrel -
So CFB Matrix thinks UW should've gone 12-2? His sweatpants were tighter than anyone here.
-
I like how this poll measure a coaches performance to his talent on the roster, however, it doesn't account for the coach recruiting those great players to begin with.
So if you recruit a bunch of 5 star guys, and you finish the year 12-1, you're going to get a lower rank than a 3-8 coach because you had better players? Shouldn't you get credit for bringing in the better players in the first place?
College coaching is about 80% game planning, in-game adjustments, playcalling, etc. But I'd argue that there is a very important 20% that requires you to have talent as well. Urban Meyer could coach Kentucky next season, and he might get them to 8-9 wins, but without the necessary talent, he isn't close to sniffing a SEC title.
-
Deleted...
-
Yup, it is naturally flawed. He actually has a great formula for picking records before the season is even close to starting. But this one for coach effect is naturally flawed because the worst recruiters are rewarded and the best recruiters are punished.greenblood said:I like how this poll measure a coaches performance to his talent on the roster, however, it doesn't account for the coach recruiting those great players to begin with.
So if you recruit a bunch of 5 star guys, and you finish the year 12-1, you're going to get a lower rank than a 3-8 coach because you had better players? Shouldn't you get credit for bringing in the better players in the first place?
College coaching is about 80% game planning, in-game adjustments, playcalling, etc. But I'd argue that there is a very important 20% that requires you to have talent as well. Urban Meyer could coach Kentucky next season, and he might get them to 8-9 wins, but without the necessary talent, he isn't close to sniffing a SEC title. -
That is surprising actually. I thought Oregon, Stanford, and UCLA had all recruited better?CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:All this study does is take into account recruiting rankings of the teams. UW outrecruited 4 teams over the previous 4 years that they lost to this season, therefore the -4 Coach Effect.
-
According to that matrix, Mike Leach is the 10th best coach in the country.
I can't stop laughing. -
I guess the developer doesn't watch the red-zone channelwhatshouldicareabout said:According to that matrix, Mike Leach is the 10th best coach in the country.
I can't stop laughing. -
Between this and SRS ranking a 2-6 SEC team #10, I'm about to give up on advanced metrics in college football.whatshouldicareabout said:According to that matrix, Mike Leach is the 10th best coach in the country.
I can't stop laughing. -
They did.RoadDawg55 said:
That is surprising actually. I thought Oregon, Stanford, and UCLA had all recruited better?CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:All this study does is take into account recruiting rankings of the teams. UW outrecruited 4 teams over the previous 4 years that they lost to this season, therefore the -4 Coach Effect.
-
l-o-lpuppylove_sugarsteel said:Oh fer fuck sakes here we go. In 3-4 more years he'll be the best so fuck you punto
-
I messed up, CFBmatrix was doogin big time based off of only their numbers... Coach Effect is based on loosing games you were predicted to win, based on talent and field advantage combined. Here is what they said prior to the season about UW:
"They have a higher talent ranking than ten of the teams on their schedule for a talent only baseline record of 10-3. Adjust up 2 games for home wins versus Stanford and UCLA and the record is 12-1. Down -1 games for a new head coach and have 11-2 with my favorite middle number at 10.5."
So the -4 comes from loosing to Stanford, ASU, UCLA and Arizona. -
And really it's -2.5 off of his own prediction.CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:I messed up, CFBmatrix was doogin big time based off of only their numbers... Coach Effect is based on loosing games you were predicted to win, based on talent and field advantage combined. Here is what they said prior to the season about UW:
"They have a higher talent ranking than ten of the teams on their schedule for a talent only baseline record of 10-3. Adjust up 2 games for home wins versus Stanford and UCLA and the record is 12-1. Down -1 games for a new head coach and have 11-2 with my favorite middle number at 10.5."
So the -4 comes from loosing to Stanford, ASU, UCLA and Arizona.
Still bad. But not worst in the nation. -
-
That is so FUCKINGLY STUPID, I can't even abbreviate FUCKINGLY STUPID.whatshouldicareabout said:According to that matrix, Mike Leach is the 10th best coach in the country.
I can't stop laughing.
-
Any analysis that looks at 3 star Mariota as lower on paper than four star miley is fucktarded.
That's the only way this guy is doing a "talent analysis," by dry star counting.
Anyone with even one functional eyeball on Miley the season before he was named starter knew that the young noodle arm who had the throwing motion and slow delivery of a trebuchet, but without the zip and range, was taking you nowhere good, or certainly not to 10+/- 1 wins.
Well, at least I was laughing at the sweatpants boners around here. You'll have to acquit yourself if you were in the Great Purple Circle Jerk of 2014. -
Canard said:
Any analysis that looks at 3 star Mariota as lower on paper than four star miley is fucktarded.
That's the only way this guy is doing a "talent analysis," by dry star counting.
Anyone with even one functional eyeball on Miley the season before he was named starter knew that the young noodle arm who had the throwing motion and slow delivery of a trebuchet, but without the zip and range, was taking you nowhere good, or certainly not to 10+/- 1 wins.
Well, at least I was laughing at the sweatpants boners around here. You'll have to acquit yourself if you were in the Great Purple Circle Jerk of 2014.
-
Awesomed for "Great Purple Circle Jerk of 2014"
going into the rotation -
The Great Purple Circle Jerk is much older than 2014
hth -
Yes, UW should be finishing in the top 5 of the Pac every year with this decent talent...battling ASU for 4th.CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:Here was his preseason preview:
cfbmatrix.com/20-washington-huskies-preview-2014/ -
puntoing is winningpuppylove_sugarsteel said:Oh fer fuck sakes here we go. In 3-4 more years he'll be the best so fuck you punto
-
Fuck metrics Fuck matrices Fuck everybody
8-6 bitches!!!1 -
Perhaps you can take consolation in the fact that at least you'll be able to root for the Tide.PurpleJ said:Fuck metrics Fuck matrices Fuck everybody
8-6 bitches!!!1 -
A lot of this analysis is also associating luck with coaching. Was it incredible coaching that led to Rich Rod beating Cal or UW this year? Or the buzz-cut midget beating SC? No.
-
Is there a bronze medal game?oregonblitzkrieg said:
Perhaps you can take consolation in the fact that at least you'll be able to root for the Tide.PurpleJ said:Fuck metrics Fuck matrices Fuck everybody
8-6 bitches!!!1
-
I heard the great Rick Rod on the radio today. He asked how his QB is. Rich says he still hasn't talked to him since the bowl game because he's still pissed at him. Noted that he probably should see how he is.BallSacked said:A lot of this analysis is also associating luck with coaching. Was it incredible coaching that led to Rich Rod beating Cal or UW this year? Or the buzz-cut midget beating SC? No.
