Ye Olde Green Wave Forum

The DEFINITIVE Tulane discussion forum
It is currently Thu Oct 17, 2019 10:37 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 63 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Past opponents
PostPosted: Mon Sep 30, 2019 11:39 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:00 pm
Posts: 15843
Quote:
Team of the Month: Auburn (1). The Tigers are The Dash’s No. 1 team right now, and frankly they should feel insulted about being No. 7 in both the AP and USA Today Coaches’ polls. If you average the Sagarin Rating of every team that the top eight unbeatens have played thus far, Auburn’s is by far the highest at 42nd. The Tigers are the only team in Sagarin’s Top 10 that has beaten another member of that Top 10 (Oregon, on a neutral field). Throw in three more Top 50 wins (Texas A&M, Mississippi State and Tulane) and this is the best résumé to date. Auburn’s start is all the more impressive when you factor in a true freshman quarterback (Bo Nix) and the fact that Gus Malzahn began the season coaching to keep his job.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/forde-yard-dash-10-key-college-football-developments-ahead-of-october/ar-AAI2B9V?ocid=spartandhp

_________________
Past performance is no guarantee of future results


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Past opponents
PostPosted: Sat Oct 05, 2019 6:05 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:00 pm
Posts: 15843
Auburn will lose their 1st game of the season. Down 24-13 at Florida, late 4th.

_________________
Past performance is no guarantee of future results


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Past opponents
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 7:55 pm 
Online
Regent's Circle
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 11:18 am
Posts: 6425
Location: Wichita
OGSB wrote:
Auburn will lose their 1st game of the season. Down 24-13 at Florida, late 4th.

And Whitlow out 4-6 weeks

_________________
#stopbunting
#stopPUNTING!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Past opponents
PostPosted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 8:32 am 
Offline
President's Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:49 pm
Posts: 3555
Location: Greeneville, TN
Why did Army go for two after scoring a touchdown late but still being down two scores? There was some discussion here about that and WF talked about mid week in an interview as well. The Athletic has a great piece out about the thinking behind it:

https://theathletic.com/1284371/2019/10/11/college-football-two-point-conversion-decisions-manny-diaz-pat-fitzgerald/?source=dailyemail

Since it's behind a paywall, the general gist is this. If you are down by two+ scores, going for two early gives you a better chance at winning the game in regulation. You have to assume you have about a 50% chance of converting a two point try. If you make the two points and then score a follow up touchdown, you win with a PAT (50%). If you don't make the try the first time, you can try again the on the second touchdown to tie the game and head to OT (25%). If you don't make it either time, you lose in regulation (25%). Again assuming a 50% shot at winning in OT (OT happens 25% of the time, so 12.5% win in OT, 12.5% L in OT), you have a 62.5% chance to win the game by going for two early as opposed to a 50% chance by waiting until the final play.

The catch here is assuming 50% splits in the outcomes. Teams are converting two point attempts at 43% right now and there's nothing saying that OT is truly a 50% split. Still, it's an interesting concept and one I think we might see WF use at some point.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Past opponents
PostPosted: Sat Oct 12, 2019 7:18 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:00 pm
Posts: 15843
Army trails at W Kentucky 7-0, halftime.

_________________
Past performance is no guarantee of future results


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Past opponents
PostPosted: Sat Oct 12, 2019 8:32 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:00 pm
Posts: 15843
Army in danger not just of losing, but being shut out. 10-0 WKU under 5:00 to play

_________________
Past performance is no guarantee of future results


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Past opponents
PostPosted: Sat Oct 12, 2019 8:34 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:00 pm
Posts: 15843
17-0, so Army is going to fall to 3-3.

FIU appears to be on their way to 3-3 as well, up 41-23 vs Charlotte.

_________________
Past performance is no guarantee of future results


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Past opponents
PostPosted: Sat Oct 12, 2019 8:51 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:52 am
Posts: 22358
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Our record looks a lot better against what people thought of our opponents before the season started than it does now that we're seeing how good (or not) those teams actually are.

FIU expected to challenge in CUSA. Pphht.
Houston expected to be borderline top 25 and challenging in the AAC. Pphht.
Army expected to be like last year, maybe losing only one or two games. Pphht.

Oh well. Just keep winning.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Past opponents
PostPosted: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:08 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:13 pm
Posts: 21219
Location: Chicago
PeteRasche wrote:
Our record looks a lot better against what people thought of our opponents before the season started than it does now that we're seeing how good (or not) those teams actually are.

FIU expected to challenge in CUSA. Pphht.
Houston expected to be borderline top 25 and challenging in the AAC. Pphht.
Army expected to be like last year, maybe losing only one or two games. Pphht.

Oh well. Just keep winning.


We can go 1-5 the rest of the regular season and while disappointed I could live with it.

_________________
Using big words is not a personal attack


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Past opponents
PostPosted: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:52 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:52 am
Posts: 22358
Location: Cincinnati, OH
windywave wrote:
PeteRasche wrote:
Our record looks a lot better against what people thought of our opponents before the season started than it does now that we're seeing how good (or not) those teams actually are.

FIU expected to challenge in CUSA. Pphht.
Houston expected to be borderline top 25 and challenging in the AAC. Pphht.
Army expected to be like last year, maybe losing only one or two games. Pphht.

Oh well. Just keep winning.


We can go 1-5 the rest of the regular season and while disappointed I could live with it.

Sad that going 1-5 would still result in an historic run by Tulane standards (meaning, consecutive bowl games).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Past opponents
PostPosted: Sun Oct 13, 2019 8:23 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:00 pm
Posts: 15843
windywave wrote:
PeteRasche wrote:
Our record looks a lot better against what people thought of our opponents before the season started than it does now that we're seeing how good (or not) those teams actually are.

FIU expected to challenge in CUSA. Pphht.
Houston expected to be borderline top 25 and challenging in the AAC. Pphht.
Army expected to be like last year, maybe losing only one or two games. Pphht.

Oh well. Just keep winning.


We can go 1-5 the rest of the regular season and while disappointed I could live with it.


Charlie Strong approves this message!

_________________
Past performance is no guarantee of future results


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Past opponents
PostPosted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 1:41 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle

Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 4:19 pm
Posts: 10745
tulaneoutlaw wrote:
Why did Army go for two after scoring a touchdown late but still being down two scores? There was some discussion here about that and WF talked about mid week in an interview as well. The Athletic has a great piece out about the thinking behind it:

https://theathletic.com/1284371/2019/10/11/college-football-two-point-conversion-decisions-manny-diaz-pat-fitzgerald/?source=dailyemail

Since it's behind a paywall, the general gist is this. If you are down by two+ scores, going for two early gives you a better chance at winning the game in regulation. You have to assume you have about a 50% chance of converting a two point try. If you make the two points and then score a follow up touchdown, you win with a PAT (50%). If you don't make the try the first time, you can try again the on the second touchdown to tie the game and head to OT (25%). If you don't make it either time, you lose in regulation (25%). Again assuming a 50% shot at winning in OT (OT happens 25% of the time, so 12.5% win in OT, 12.5% L in OT), you have a 62.5% chance to win the game by going for two early as opposed to a 50% chance by waiting until the final play.

The catch here is assuming 50% splits in the outcomes. Teams are converting two point attempts at 43% right now and there's nothing saying that OT is truly a 50% split. Still, it's an interesting concept and one I think we might see WF use at some point.
That's all great, but Army was down by 15 when they scored to make it 9 and then went for two. The analysis should be on the TD they scored down 21 and the decision to go for 2 to make it 13. I guess the same analytics apply roughly, but still makes no sense to me.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Past opponents
PostPosted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 1:56 pm 
Offline
President's Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:49 pm
Posts: 3555
Location: Greeneville, TN
ml wave wrote:
tulaneoutlaw wrote:
Why did Army go for two after scoring a touchdown late but still being down two scores? There was some discussion here about that and WF talked about mid week in an interview as well. The Athletic has a great piece out about the thinking behind it:

https://theathletic.com/1284371/2019/10/11/college-football-two-point-conversion-decisions-manny-diaz-pat-fitzgerald/?source=dailyemail

Since it's behind a paywall, the general gist is this. If you are down by two+ scores, going for two early gives you a better chance at winning the game in regulation. You have to assume you have about a 50% chance of converting a two point try. If you make the two points and then score a follow up touchdown, you win with a PAT (50%). If you don't make the try the first time, you can try again the on the second touchdown to tie the game and head to OT (25%). If you don't make it either time, you lose in regulation (25%). Again assuming a 50% shot at winning in OT (OT happens 25% of the time, so 12.5% win in OT, 12.5% L in OT), you have a 62.5% chance to win the game by going for two early as opposed to a 50% chance by waiting until the final play.

The catch here is assuming 50% splits in the outcomes. Teams are converting two point attempts at 43% right now and there's nothing saying that OT is truly a 50% split. Still, it's an interesting concept and one I think we might see WF use at some point.
That's all great, but Army was down by 15 when they scored to make it 9 and then went for two. The analysis should be on the TD they scored down 21 and the decision to go for 2 to make it 13. I guess the same analytics apply roughly, but still makes no sense to me.


They were just using down two scores as an example. The math still works even down more than two scores, although it is all based on a 50% conversion rate which often doesn't apply.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 63 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group