Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="HRE Otto IV, post: 4819300, member: 5685"]
Facts are facts. Computer rankings are not facts. They are influenced by human premises and are biased to the data points included, excluded, and given weights. On top of that CFB has few data points and a ton of variance (unlike the NFL). You can manipulate the same data to show both sides of opposite arguments.

Dino has trailed by 17 points in the 1st half of over 20% of his games. Even if he ended up losing by the "average" given his SOS, the fact that his losses are over in the 1st half while Coach X's happen in the 4th Q is a huge difference. Sure they end up at the same place, but how you get there matters.

If Dino's games are over at halftime and in garbage time nothing changes in the 2nd half, how is that the same as another coach hanging around until the 4th Q where the opponent finally pulls away? In Dino's case the team is unprepared and doesn't show up. In the later case, in the end you cannot make up for the talent gap.

UNC only scored 13 points in the 2nd half. Was that due to garbage time or good coaching by Dino? Or VA Tech only scoring 8 in the 2nd half? Then you have a team like Duke who lost to FSU by 18 points. That is a lot of points, but Duke lead until 13:03 in the 4th D. There is a huge difference in losing by 18 that way and losing by 18 only because the entire 2nd half is garbage time. I rather have the avg score regress to the avg from a positive halftime starting point and not from a negative halftime deficit.

Have you get to the avg matters, and in Dino's case it is a major issue.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?