https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb ... spartandhpTeam 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.
Past opponents
Re: Past opponents
Victory is never permanent
Re: Past opponents
Auburn will lose their 1st game of the season. Down 24-13 at Florida, late 4th.
Victory is never permanent
- gerryb323
- Regent's Circle
- Posts: 9660
- Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 11:18 am
- Location: There's no place like home
Re: Past opponents
And Whitlow out 4-6 weeksOGSB wrote:Auburn will lose their 1st game of the season. Down 24-13 at Florida, late 4th.
Wandering around somewhere in a matchup zone
- tulaneoutlaw
- Regent's Circle
- Posts: 8868
- Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:49 pm
- Location: Greeneville, TN
Re: Past opponents
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 ... 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.
https://theathletic.com/1284371/2019/10 ... 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.
Re: Past opponents
Army in danger not just of losing, but being shut out. 10-0 WKU under 5:00 to play
Victory is never permanent
Re: Past opponents
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.
FIU appears to be on their way to 3-3 as well, up 41-23 vs Charlotte.
Victory is never permanent
- PeteRasche
- Cornerstone
- Posts: 30925
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:52 am
- Location: Cincinnati, OH
Re: Past opponents
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.
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.
Re: Past opponents
We can go 1-5 the rest of the regular season and while disappointed I could live with it.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.
Using big words is not a personal attack
#cousins don't count
#cousins don't count
- PeteRasche
- Cornerstone
- Posts: 30925
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:52 am
- Location: Cincinnati, OH
Re: Past opponents
Sad that going 1-5 would still result in an historic run by Tulane standards (meaning, consecutive bowl games).windywave wrote:We can go 1-5 the rest of the regular season and while disappointed I could live with it.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.
Re: Past opponents
Charlie Strong approves this message!windywave wrote:We can go 1-5 the rest of the regular season and while disappointed I could live with it.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.
Victory is never permanent
Re: Past opponents
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.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 ... 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.
- tulaneoutlaw
- Regent's Circle
- Posts: 8868
- Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:49 pm
- Location: Greeneville, TN
Re: Past opponents
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.ml wave wrote: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.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 ... 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.
Re: Past opponents
Auburn bouncing back. Helps that the opponent is Arkansas. 17-0 late 2nd.
Victory is never permanent
Re: Past opponents
Auburn just converted their 303rd straight PAT, new record. Haven’t missed since 2013. 24-3.
Victory is never permanent
Re: Past opponents
They were lucky they were playing a patsy team from outside the vaunted SEC (like one from the AAC) to be able to run the score that high. Oh wait...OGSB wrote:Auburn wins, 51-10.
What if the Hokey Pokey really is what it's all about?
Re: Past opponents
Army may be in danger of losing at home again. Down 17-7 to San Jose St, mid 2nd quarter.
Victory is never permanent
- long green
- Cornerstone
- Posts: 29126
- Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 10:34 am
- Location: New Orleans
Re: Past opponents
We broke Army Football.
And may our enemies, if they exist, be unconscious of our purpose. - From The Lady Vanishes
- PeteRasche
- Cornerstone
- Posts: 30925
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:52 am
- Location: Cincinnati, OH
Re: Past opponents
Um, no, it turns out that they are just worse than us and we're not really that good.long green wrote:We broke Army Football.