Texas Agricultural & Mechanical University vs. Texas State (7:30 SEC Network)

[Beau Vine 54,881]

31 minutes ago, Rickylovesweed said:

https://www.secrant.com/rant/texas-a-m-sports/texas-state-bobcats-7-vs-fighting-texas-aggies-41-final/85050228/page-20/

aggy with a rational approach to last night's game so of course he was downvoted 6 times. 

"We will lose to Clemson, Auburn, Alabama, Miss State, Georgia, and LSU. Minimum. It's just not looking very good. That was a really shitty team we just played and their Jr. High DL made us look weak."
 

Damn, and that's Kaiser Soze, who is about the most redass aggy on SECRant.  He's probably getting downvoted for breaking their boycott, though.

[Fozzz 152]

23 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

So you are saying these kinds of projections are usually wrong because simply going off things like recruiting rankings and returning personnel is not very accurate?

Point taken. 

I think taking those things into account make them more accurate, which is why they are taken into account.  There will always be cases where other factors swamp those kinds of things, like injuries to key players or sever incompetency/mismanagement from the coaching staff. 

[HtownHorn 14,926]

I did think Buddy Johnson looked pretty good, but it was Texas State. I will most likely change my opinion next week once Etienne goes for 250.

[Armybrat 41,005]

19 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Damn, and that's Kaiser Soze, who is about the most redass aggy on SECRant.  He's probably getting downvoted for breaking their boycott, though.

Is that the same Kaiser Soze who posted on HF & TOS?

[Valmy77 13,443]

45 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

I think taking those things into account make them more accurate, which is why they are taken into account.  There will always be cases where other factors swamp those kinds of things, like injuries to key players or sever incompetency/mismanagement from the coaching staff. 

You don't need to have even marginal incompetency to miss the fake targets set up by faulty preseason data. Usually they are wrong because they are based on limited information.

Edited August 30, 2019 by Valmy77

[Huckleberry 33,564]

1 hour ago, Valmy77 said:

So you are saying these kinds of projections are usually wrong because simply going off things like recruiting rankings and returning personnel is not very accurate?

Point taken. 

You're glossing over the glaring error with the entire approach he's trying to apply.

His entire theory is that SP+ preseason rankings are believable because they closely match SP+ postseason rankings. Well no fucking shit. Especially now that the preseason ratings are never being phased out. Y'all remember how bad we were in 2010? Those performances will affect our 2019 SP+ ratings. That is an absolutely true statement. Now obviously they will have an exceedingly minor effect, but Connelly has already stated that he will not be removing preseason influence on his final season ratings even when generating the following season's preseason ratings. That means that the 2010 performance, which affected the 2011 ratings, is included in the 2012 preseason ratings. And since those preseason ratings affect the final 2012 ratings, which are included in the 2013 preseason ratings, they also affect the final 2013 ratings. And so on and so forth.

And that right there is one of the major failings in his logic. It's just as absurd as saying that Billingsley's preseason ratings are good because they match his postseason ratings pretty closely. You don't say. You know who else's postseason ratings match his preseason ratings pretty closely? Billy Liucci. A&M is a Top 10 team in 2019. And A&M will be a Top 10 team in his postseason rankings as well, no matter what happens during the season. If they win 10 games, obviously they're Top 10 with that schedule. If they win 7 games then that schedule was harder than even he imagined and they are the greatest 5 loss team of all time. The damn sips finished in the Top 10 with 4 losses last year and they play in the BDF so obviously A&M can be Top 10 with 5 losses!

Using the same system's postseason ratings to confirm their preseason ratings is about as questionable as it gets.

[Huckleberry 33,564]

Just now, Valmy77 said:

You don't need to have even marginal incompetency to miss the fake targets set up by faulty preseason data.

Charlie Strong's coaching is affecting our 2019 preseason ratings. As I mentioned previously, if South Florida and Alabama had completely swapped coaching staffs on February 15th, 2019 then the 2019 preseason ratings would not be any different. Would you have a different outlook on Alabama's upcoming season if Charlie Strong had rolled into Tuscaloosa in February? More importantly, would Vegas?

[sushihorn 3,233]

29 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Using the same system's postseason ratings to confirm their preseason ratings is about as questionable as it gets.

Actually a high degree of internal consistency combined with complete divorce from reality is a hallmark of the best conspiracy theories.

[Funk Doctor Spock 12,810]

After seeing this game, I'm learning towards a 7-5 season for those regards. Their o-line is fucking awful, and their defense is...yeah.

[Fozzz 152]

51 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

You're glossing over the glaring error with the entire approach he's trying to apply.

His entire theory is that SP+ preseason rankings are believable because they closely match SP+ postseason rankings. Well no fucking shit. Especially now that the preseason ratings are never being phased out. Y'all remember how bad we were in 2010? Those performances will affect our 2019 SP+ ratings. That is an absolutely true statement. Now obviously they will have an exceedingly minor effect, but Connelly has already stated that he will not be removing preseason influence on his final season ratings even when generating the following season's preseason ratings. That means that the 2010 performance, which affected the 2011 ratings, is included in the 2012 preseason ratings. And since those preseason ratings affect the final 2012 ratings, which are included in the 2013 preseason ratings, they also affect the final 2013 ratings. And so on and so forth.

And that right there is one of the major failings in his logic. It's just as absurd as saying that Billingsley's preseason ratings are good because they match his postseason ratings pretty closely. You don't say. You know who else's postseason ratings match his preseason ratings pretty closely? Billy Liucci. A&M is a Top 10 team in 2019. And A&M will be a Top 10 team in his postseason rankings as well, no matter what happens during the season. If they win 10 games, obviously they're Top 10 with that schedule. If they win 7 games then that schedule was harder than even he imagined and they are the greatest 5 loss team of all time. The damn sips finished in the Top 10 with 4 losses last year and they play in the BDF so obviously A&M can be Top 10 with 5 losses!

Using the same system's postseason ratings to confirm their preseason ratings is about as questionable as it gets.

lol the entire reason he made that change was due to how it decreased the absolute error for S&P+ and increased the performance of the metric ATS.  He doesn't do it just to piss off Texas fans on shaggybevo.

[Hook1997 5,434]

Just saw a clip from the post game interview, Mond said he felt like offensive line did a good job....  lol

[Rickylovesweed 14,838]

6 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

lol the entire reason he made that change was due to how it decreased the absolute error for S&P+ and increased the performance of the metric ATS.  He doesn't do it just to piss off Texas fans on shaggybevo.

Does Connelly have naked pictures of you or something? You spend half your time on this site defending him and S&P+. 

Hell, I'm kind of convinced you might be Bill Connelly. 

[InkaUtexas 26,365]

10 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

lol the entire reason he made that change was due to how it decreased the absolute error for S&P+ and increased the performance of the metric ATS.  He doesn't do it just to piss off Texas fans on shaggybevo.

Shaggy what? You new around here? 

[HtownHorn 14,926]

13 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

lol the entire reason he made that change was due to how it decreased the absolute error for S&P+ and increased the performance of the metric ATS.  He doesn't do it just to piss off Texas fans on shaggybevo.

Answer his question, would Alabama live up to his SP+ rankings with Charlie Strong as the coach?

[Fozzz 152]

3 minutes ago, HtownHorn said:

Answer his question, would Alabama live up to his SP+ rankings with Charlie Strong as the coach?

That's a pretty difficult question to answer, isn't it?  I kinda doubt it but I wouldn't be surprised if they were excellent for at least a season or two before things began to get sidewise.  I find the whining over the recent history stuff to be curious given that it's not hurting Texas' preseason S&P+ nearly as much as the returning production component.  

[Liquor and Poker 3,659]

52 minutes ago, Spider2YBanana said:

After seeing this game, I'm learning towards a 7-5 season for those regards. Their o-line is fucking awful, and their defense is...yeah.

It’s almost like they are always the same.  

[RollLeft 5,045]

15 hours ago, Treefidy said:

I was at the game (daughter at TxSt) ...

pics not showing up for me

[Magus Ossis 2,883]

13 minutes ago, HtownHorn said:

Answer his question, would Alabama live up to his SP+ rankings with Charlie Strong as the coach?

This gives me an idea for some metrics to track. HFC win percent effect versus school historic average (overall, current P5, FBS, conference) and HFC NCAA major violation effect versus historic average. 

Edit: it would be interesting to see the coach effects factoring in something like Huck’s adjusted stats.

Edited August 30, 2019 by Magus Ossis

[Funk Doctor Spock 12,810]

6 minutes ago, Liquor and Poker said:

It’s almost like they are always the same.  

Usually they're damn near given 8 wins a year, but holy shit that line is awful. It's leaning towards our lines from 2010-2017. 

[Burt Macklin 19,099]

How all you regards don’t have Fozz on ignore already is beyond me. He still thinks Shaka is a great coach because the metrics like him and the only reason he hasn’t won more games is because he’s been one of the unluckiest coaches in America 4 years straight.

[Fozzz 152]

5 minutes ago, Burt Macklin said:

How all you regards don’t have Fozz on ignore already is beyond me. He still thinks Shaka is a great coach because the metrics like him and the only reason he hasn’t won more games is because he’s been one of the unluckiest coaches in America 4 years straight.

I think Shaka's okay, but he's probably not going to get the Texas program back where it was during the Barnes glory years.  Also, weird that you think you are owning me by saying something patently obvious like that Shaka's been extremely unlucky the past couple of seasons.  

[Funk Doctor Spock 12,810]

2 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

I think Shaka's okay, but he's probably not going to get the Texas program back where it was during the Barnes glory years.  Also, weird that you think you are owning me by saying something patently obvious like that Shaka's been extremely unlucky the past couple of seasons.  

Put  him on ignore and you won't have to read his useless diatribe. It's made this board much more readable.

[TexasMan 11,280]

1 minute ago, Spider2YBanana said:

Put  him on ignore and you won't have to read his useless diatribe. It's made this board much more readable.

New motto?

[Funk Doctor Spock 12,810]

Just now, TexasMan said:

New motto?

Most definitely 

[justhookit 4,191]

5 minutes ago, Spider2YBanana said:

Put  him on ignore and you won't have to read his useless diatribe. It's made this board much more readable.

 

[Funk Doctor Spock 12,810]

1 minute ago, justhookit said:

 

Perfect 

[hookem48 4,718]

18 hours ago, bigcigar said:

You couldn’t for last year’s Texas team. 

lol, ok, for any team that actually had long plays

[Huckleberry 33,564]

6 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Charlie Strong's coaching is affecting our 2019 preseason ratings. As I mentioned previously, if South Florida and Alabama had completely swapped coaching staffs on February 15th, 2019 then the 2019 preseason ratings would not be any different. Would you have a different outlook on Alabama's upcoming season if Charlie Strong had rolled into Tuscaloosa in February? More importantly, would Vegas?

I'd like to point out that I posted this well before the Wisconsin/USF game kicked off. Holy hell what a disaster. 

[Valmy77 13,443]

5 hours ago, Fozzz said:

lol the entire reason he made that change was due to how it decreased the absolute error for S&P+ and increased the performance of the metric ATS.  He doesn't do it just to piss off Texas fans on shaggybevo.

I am aware he doesn't have some kind of anti-Texas thing, I just think these things are stupid generally.

[Huckleberry 33,564]

Yeah, endlessly tweaking a system because it fits past results is a terrible idea without a solid logical basis. 

In the 2000s decade you could have consistently made money by betting the moneyline in the NCAA baseball tournament with one simple rule. Bet on the team whose campus was further west. But that isn't a logical methodology moving forward. 

Things like including results from 4 seasons ago through the current season's conclusion sound like terrible ideas because they are. The fact that a very small positive retrofit effect was found over a relatively short window doesn't change that. 

Just like the only half-fleshed-out idea of post-process backchecking conference results to adjust ratings. That should be a red flag that your system is not weighing games between similarly strong opponents strongly enough in comparison to mismatches. Conferences are mathematically arbitrary groupings.

[Zavala 1,384]

Did they do this silly shit this game?

[Viper 12,158]

43 minutes ago, Zavala said:

Did they do this silly shit this game?

No, they won this time

[Fozzz 152]

2 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Yeah, endlessly tweaking a system because it fits past results is a terrible idea without a solid logical basis. 

In the 2000s decade you could have consistently made money by betting the moneyline in the NCAA baseball tournament with one simple rule. Bet on the team whose campus was further west. But that isn't a logical methodology moving forward. 

Things like including results from 4 seasons ago through the current season's conclusion sound like terrible ideas because they are. The fact that a very small positive retrofit effect was found over a relatively short window doesn't change that. 

Just like the only half-fleshed-out idea of post-process backchecking conference results to adjust ratings. That should be a red flag that your system is not weighing games between similarly strong opponents strongly enough in comparison to mismatches. Conferences are mathematically arbitrary groupings.

lol yes including results from prior seasons to expand your sample size is akin to basing your projections upon geographic location. Keep beclowning yourself, Huck. 

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

Thujone has infiltrated that Aggie band.  Interesting.

UC Davis' band is there?

Why would Thujone infiltrate the UC Davis band?

You seem confused.

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

I was at the game (daughter at TxSt) and I was thinking how nice people we being, but Mrs Fidy pointed out the the beer vendors don't count.  In hindsight I'm pretty sure none of those nice vendors went to aggy and welcome anyone who isn't wearing moron.  
Live game notes:
 they aren't as bad as I hoped, but they are nowhere near as good as aggy hopes.
Offensive line is terrible, D-line not a lot better.  Receivers pretty solid, LBs pretty good.  Secondary has a coup,e guys who can play but speed is an issue all around.  Mond looks like he did last year, Calzada throws so hard his receivers can't handle the ball.  In other words, everything we knew here confirmed again   
stands were 65-70% at peak, actually pretty lame crowd.  They pipe crowd noise in the first quarter during their choreographed scenes.  It was loud as shit but it was mostly coming from the speakers.  Is that even legal while the other team is on offense?
i did manage to embarrass Mrs Fidy a little when they tried to get us to do that seesaw sawed off bullshit, I sang the Eyes of Texas with horns up instead.  

Worst "the letter from the gobsmacked visiting fan" evah!

Kudos!

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

that might as well have been Texas 38, UNT 7 from all it could tell you about A&M'f final record this year

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

On a side note......what the fuck is the aggy band doing here????

Trying to lure bob stoops

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

we would definitely be the 9th best team in the SEC and saying so in no way undermines the credibility of the power rating in question

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

For crying out loud stop engaging with the clown.

Known aggy Swanny is mutually masterbaiting with his sock Fozz. Swanny's/Fozz's jizz jar ain't gonna fill itself.

Whoop, eh Swanny/Fozz.

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

You've chosen to ignore content by Huckleberry. Options 
You've chosen to ignore content by Machinator. Options 
YESSSSS

Coward, just like the rest of you aggy.

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

I haven't said anything remotely controversial itt and yet some here can't help but be triggered.  

Shut the fuck up Swanny.

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

You posted a *preseason* computer ranking.  If you don't see the stupid in that, you're beyond hope.

Swanny/Fozz IS aggy. Of course it is beyond hope.

[Fozzz 152]

Who?  Take your meds Phlegm. 

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

This is called wishcasting.  

You seem stupid. You being a Swanny sock, this is not a surprise.

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

How about wins and losses.  I'm an engineer, and I am well versed in garbage in equals garbage out.  If the model doesn't fit reality, you just alter reality right?

Not at all. You add (or change) "constants" to bring the model back into line.
 

I think taking those things into account make them more accurate, which is why they are taken into account.  There will always be cases where other factors swamp those kinds of things, like injuries to key players or sever incompetency/mismanagement from the coaching staff. 

You don't need to have even marginal incompetency to miss the fake targets set up by faulty preseason data. Usually they are wrong because they are based on limited information.

You're glossing over the glaring error with the entire approach he's trying to apply.
His entire theory is that SP+ preseason rankings are believable because they closely match SP+ postseason rankings. Well no fucking shit. Especially now that the preseason ratings are never being phased out. Y'all remember how bad we were in 2010? Those performances will affect our 2019 SP+ ratings. That is an absolutely true statement. Now obviously they will have an exceedingly minor effect, but Connelly has already stated that he will not be removing preseason influence on his final season ratings even when generating the following season's preseason ratings. That means that the 2010 performance, which affected the 2011 ratings, is included in the 2012 preseason ratings. And since those preseason ratings affect the final 2012 ratings, which are included in the 2013 preseason ratings, they also affect the final 2013 ratings. And so on and so forth.
And that right there is one of the major failings in his logic. It's just as absurd as saying that Billingsley's preseason ratings are good because they match his postseason ratings pretty closely. You don't say. You know who else's postseason ratings match his preseason ratings pretty closely? Billy Liucci. A&M is a Top 10 team in 2019. And A&M will be a Top 10 team in his postseason rankings as well, no matter what happens during the season. If they win 10 games, obviously they're Top 10 with that schedule. If they win 7 games then that schedule was harder than even he imagined and they are the greatest 5 loss team of all time. The damn sips finished in the Top 10 with 4 losses last year and they play in the BDF so obviously A&M can be Top 10 with 5 losses!
Using the same system's postseason ratings to confirm their preseason ratings is about as questionable as it gets.

Yeah, endlessly tweaking a system because it fits past results is a terrible idea without a solid logical basis. 
In the 2000s decade you could have consistently made money by betting the moneyline in the NCAA baseball tournament with one simple rule. Bet on the team whose campus was further west. But that isn't a logical methodology moving forward. 
Things like including results from 4 seasons ago through the current season's conclusion sound like terrible ideas because they are. The fact that a very small positive retrofit effect was found over a relatively short window doesn't change that. 
Just like the only half-fleshed-out idea of post-process backchecking conference results to adjust ratings. That should be a red flag that your system is not weighing games between similarly strong opponents strongly enough in comparison to mismatches. Conferences are mathematically arbitrary groupings.

lol yes including results from prior seasons to expand your sample size is akin to basing your projections upon geographic location. Keep beclowning yourself, Huck. 

Lulz at all of the above. 40+ year career in IT. VERY familiar with GIGO. BUT you can get Garbage Out from Good In WHEN you pass it through a mindless algorearythimum. I am very familiar with THIS pair-a-dime too, having implemented federal regulations which as anyone who has encountered them are byzantine, arcane, overly complex, and bear no semblance of reality.

I find it hilarious that anybody would believe anything that comes from a computer. Ooooh computer. It has to be right.

NOPE! You are a MORON if you believe anything just because it came from a computer.

All these Polls you idoits are citing are all pulled out of some con man's prolapsed rectum.

Remember, these projections were dreamed up, devised, and programmed by folks like ME. BBBWWWWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAA!!!

Who?  Take your meds Phlegm. 

Fuck off Swanny you mindless git.

FUCK aggy.

OU sucks.

Lowel Galindo is GOD!

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

Eat flying dicks swannyfozzlooch aggy cunts

[Walden Ponderer 12,639]

Thursday night, we could see that aggy would crumble against a really good team. Looks like they only play 4 of those. I'm changing my 6-6 tune to 8-4; gawd, the SEC is awful this year.