I agree with everything you said, except the last paragraph. Salem has athletes and play makers too. I think Salem's D will show up with heart and passion to win. King's Fork and Courtland were pretty successful against LT, but in the end their defenses gave up too many points and turnovers were factors. If Salem plays Salem football, disciplined and error free, they can win.
Salem vs. Lake Taylor
- Thread starter GilliamRatings
- Start date
They will be open because of the LB/MV game. Once you go in you can't leave without paying to get back in is my understanding.
That would be a no. LT only needs two, especially when they're both major D1 school commitments. The Salem receivers have never seen anything close to this type of coverage, speed or athleticism and I'm not kidding. Nothing even close.
Salem can win and they have athletes but you're very mistaken if you think LT doesn't have At least 4 or 5 that far exceed their level. College level athletes is a big difference. You have seen a Navy Jones and shut him down. Kudo's. Now quadruple that. Makes it a little tougher.
We'll agree to disagree. There are 4-5 athletes on Salem that can match their speed and ability. Recruiting is a fickle thing. It's about getting noticed just as much as it is about ability. It should be a great game
You were right about the 17!
First game prediction I've ever got wrong, too.
Congrats!
Here's the thing about computer ratings. We all use them. They're just looking at the scores of games and making predictions based on that. Even most people who watch the games with their eyes are aware of won-loss records and about how many points a team is scoring and allowing. All a computer does is use these things objectively where the human brain, almost by definition, uses it subjectively.
There is absolutely nothing that goes into any of these computer systems other than scores (and in some cases dates) of games. Most don't even take into account who the home team was.
I don't know of any humans who predict every high school game in America like CalPreps and and Kenneth Massey (USA Today). I also don't even know any who try to predict all of the games in the state. I would also submit that anyone who did try that would have been checking out the computer ratings every week.
Some people will predict every game in a certain part of the state and I don't really try and keep up with how the various systems do against those people, but I would bet that when a person beats a computer, it's not by much, maybe 2 or 3 games over the course of a season based on a lead they got in the first three weeks. Imagine trying to predict the games, though if you had no information about points scored or allowed or even the win-loss records of the teams. You don't get to know yardage totals or 40 times or height and weight. You don't know past history of the teams, etc. All of that is statistics and every one of you who bashes a computer uses that stuff all the time. Computers are used by people like me who admit that being objective is hard.
I actually use my ratings to teach my statistics classes. I always give a percentage chance that the system will pick the winning team in any given game. I never know exactly how a particular game will go, but what does amaze me is how close I am to being able to predict the number of games I will get right each week. I can almost count on 83% right after 3 weeks in the regular season. Though I can actually calculate this based on an expected value. I can actually get a pretty good idea of how much I'll be off using a formula which tells me that 95% of the time my formula will pick between 77% and 89% of the time. Since the margin of error in my predictions for a week where I'm expecting 83% is around 6%.
I want to be clear. This does not indicate that I know anything about football, whatsoever. This is purely statistics, and when applied properly, which I do, these numbers hold for any data. The success of my computer system has nothing to do with football. It would work just as well if my numbers had something to do with cancer treatments, the stock market, or the weather.
Nevertheless, I think the system does what it has always been intended to do, demonstrate to students the power of statistical methods.
Finally, I really think people taking shots at Kenneth Massey are really way off base. He is easily considered THE expert on using mathematics to predict the outcomes of sporting events. I really think the guy is amazing and he'll take the time to really go into depth about anything you ask him about. My ratings are much, much better because of e-mails I've exchanged with him and when I retire I intend to take a couple of classes from him while I get my master's degree. The guy has devoted his life to some pretty high powered math and understands mathematical theorems that I don't even try to crack. Attacking his computer ratings because you know better, is akin to me giving Usain Bolt advice on stride mechanics because I coach cross country and like watching running races.
People who do computer ratings are far more aware of the drawbacks to their system than most people are aware of their own biases. The cool thing is that those guys can actually quantify the exact error.
I can stare at this page for hours. The systems are ranked (More or less) on how they are doing from left to right. You never see the human systems anywhere near the left.
Thank you Gilliam for all you do, I appreciate your effort and time sir!
I love what you do with the stats. I used to install and consult on systems that would do exactly what you've done with this historical data to predict future outcomes. Businesses around the world use such systems on a daily basis to predict Web usage, Call volumes, system designing, etc. and the numbers used can get quite elaborate. I doubt if there's any large business in the world does not utilize statistical analysis to predict future outcomes and provide the most efficient business practices by modeling countless possible scenarios rather than trail and error methodology.
I hated statistics in College but I've sure made a lot of money implementing the systems that use them. Thank you stats. As for football, no system is perfect but some can be improved by adding factors and properly weighing them. Still, 83% is more than enough to make you pretty successful in Vegas. Where do you think they get their betting lines anyway? The complications and possibilities that would need to go into their weighing systems must be almost unimaginable.
That Gilliam, for the work you do and a reminder to all, it's nothing personal. It's all about the numbers.
Saw it too. Spartans sure impressed the hell out of me. Congrats.I came and I watched it.
