Wargor's picture

Wargor


Newark (via Pickerington)

MEMBER SINCE   November 10, 2014

Favorites

  • NFL TEAM: Pass
  • NHL TEAM: CBJ
  • NBA TEAM: Pass
  • MLB TEAM: Pass
  • SOCCER TEAM: Arsenal

Recent Activity

Comment 18 Oct 2019

Okay, I ran an analysis of the top 4 teams in either the AP or Coaches poll going back to 1992.  

This is by no means complete, but I'm leaving soon, so here is what I have:

Looking at every 5 year chunk of time and counting the number of unique teams in the top 4 (after bowls) shows we've bounced as high as 16 (2009-2013) to a low of 10 (2014-2018).  Average is 13.12 and the mode is 11.  

I don't see a distinct trend, though obviously the last number being the lowest would account for the feeling you have (borne of the last 5 years), but it is too soon to be sure it is a trend vs. noise.  

Most dominant over that time frame is FSU with 12, OSU with 11, and Alabama with 10.  

Looking at it since 2010, Alabama 7, Clemson 4, OSU 4, and Oregon 4

Strong teams that have dropped off: Florida 8 vs. 0, FSU 12 vs. 1, Miami 6 vs 0, Nebraska 5 vs 0, USC 8 vs 1.

For those reading this tomorrow, TTUN had just one top 4 finish in the last 28 years, and none in the last 8.

Gotta go.  Go Bucks!

Comment 18 Oct 2019

Interesting point.  So you would say that when there were only two schools playing for a championship, it was too much of a crapshoot between the various top schools for great recruits to clump as much as they are now?

Comment 18 Oct 2019

Odds are you are right, but what if:

OSU, LSU, and Oklahoma all win their conferences, either 13-0 or 12-1.  Pac-12 has a two loss champ.  Clemson loses a game they shouldn't (perhaps late) and looks like shite the rest of the way.

12-1 Clemson vs. 11-1 Bama that lost to LSU (13-0) by less than a score.  

Comment 18 Oct 2019

I agree, but I'm not going to do that, cause I just mow it when it gets tall and that's it.

Pay money to mow it, pay money to water it, pay money to fertilize it.

Work to mow it. Work to rake up the leaves.  Work to water it.

And if you give a rip at all about the environment, how much damage do we do with the gasoline, the chemicals, and the drinking water we use making it look that way?

What's really fun is the people who rail against giving in to society's PC pressure, yet slavishly manicure their yard to keep up with the Jones's.  

Comment 18 Oct 2019

nothing but an avenue to make old men rich while enabling corruption at all levels

Well, that certainly makes it unique!

Comment 18 Oct 2019

To me this is easily fixed by just removing the auto spot for 3 loss teams.  If USC was to go 10-3 and be the Pac-12 winner, they don't get the auto bid, but could still be put in if their ranking put them there.

Comment 18 Oct 2019

What if (and this is hateful to type) we beat Wisconsin like a drum, lose by one point in double OT to PSU, and Wisconsin edges by PSU in the championship.  Any 11-1 team is going to need a lot of help, so yeah, it is unlikely, but I think we'd at least have a case for two B1G teams IF a spot was open.  

Comment 18 Oct 2019

This needs posted here:

Imagine the conversation The Creator might have had with St. Francis on the subject of lawns:

God: Hey St. Francis, you know all about gardens and nature. What in the world is going on down there in the Midwest? What happened to the dandelions, violets, thistle and stuff I started eons ago? I had a perfect "no maintenance" garden plan. Those plants grow in any type of soil, withstand drought and multiply with abandon. The nectar from the long lasting blossoms attracts butterflies, honey bees and flocks of songbirds. I expected to see a vast garden of colors by now. But all I see are these green rectangles.

St. Francis: It's the tribes that settled there, Lord. The Suburbanites. They started calling your flowers "weeds" and went to great lengths to kill them and replace them with grass.

God: Grass? But it's so boring. It's not colorful. It doesn't attract butterflies, birds and bees, only grubs and sod worms. It's temperamental with temperatures. Do these Suburbanites really want all that grass growing there?

St. Francis: Apparently so, Lord. They go to great pains to grow it and keep it green. The begin each spring by fertilizing grass and poisoning any other plant that crops up in the lawn.

God: The spring rains and warm weather probably make grass grow really fast. That must make the Suburbanites happy.

St. Francis: Apparently not, Lord. As soon as it grows a little, they cut it... sometimes twice a week.

God: They cut it? Do they then bail it like hay?

St. Francis: Not exactly, Lord. Most of them rake it up and put it in bags.

God: They bag it? Why? Is it a cash crop? Do they sell it?

St. Francis: No Sir. Just the opposite. They pay to throw it away.

God: Now let me get this straight. They fertilize grass so when it does grow, they cut it off and pay to throw it away?

St. Francis: Yes, Sir.

God: These Suburbanites must be relieved in the summer when we cut back on the rain and turn up the heat. That surely slows the growth and saves them a lot of work.

St. Francis: You are not going to believe this Lord. When the grass stops growing so fast, they drag out hoses and pay more money to water it so they can continue to mow it and pay to get rid of it.

God: What nonsense. At least they kept some of the trees. That was a sheer stroke of genius, if I do say so myself. The trees grow leaves in the spring to provide beauty and shade in the summer. In the autumn they fall to the ground and form a natural blanket to keep moisture in the soil and protect the trees and bushes. Plus, as they rot, the leaves form compost to enhance the soil. It's a natural circle of life.

St. Francis: You better sit down, Lord. The Suburbanites have drawn a new circle. As soon as the leaves fall, they rake them into great piles and pay to have them hauled away.

God: No. What do they do to protect the shrub and tree roots in the winter and to keep the soil moist and loose?

St. Francis: After throwing away the leaves, they go out and buy something which they call mulch. The haul it home and spread it around in place of the leaves.

God: And where do they get this mulch?

St. Francis: They cut down trees and grind them up to make the mulch.

God: Enough. I don't want to think about this anymore. Sister Catherine, you're in charge of the arts. What movie have you scheduled for us tonight?

Sister Catherine: "Dumb and Dumber", Lord. It's a real stupid movie about.....

God: Never mind, I think I just heard the whole story from St. Francis.

Comment 18 Oct 2019

My gut tells me to penalize the 6/12 team more.  12 opportunities for disaster.  

I'd want to look at the data before making the real call though.

I'd also be interested to know if there is a difference in recovery stats for pocket QB fumbles vs. other fumbles.  You hit the QB with his arm raised and the ball comes loose, is there a higher likelihood of a turnover than if a RB gets it popped out with a hard hit.  I don't know, but I think it'd be worth knowing when thinking about how to account for fumbles.

Comment 17 Oct 2019

I don't understand what all the negativity against your post is about (of course, I can't see what was written).  For better or worse, you have described things the way they are.  There is no right to play football, so the program / coach can do what they want.  Don't like it, quit the team.  Though I don't think it is limited to football.  If the women's soccer coach says, "no social media" she is just as much to be obeyed in that regard as Mike Leach is.  

Now, whether a coach can make it stick and or whether it is a good long term strategy...those are separate questions.

Comment 17 Oct 2019

Too true.  And we focus so much on winning at the young ages that taking the time to develop a kid who is only mediocre or worse doesn't happen.  What we should do is form the teams with less (not zero) restriction on ages, so that a kid who hasn't played before (or isn't very good) can learn at an easier level for a season or two.  But of course, there is a reason we are so strict on the age rules, namely that way too many coaches and parents will bend and break the rules to form a super team.  That and we misguidedly worry about the self esteem of telling a kid he is not very good and thus will play at a level where he has a chance.  Instead we consign him to be 'that kid' who plays the minimum the rules allow in right field only, as if that isn't a self-esteem issue (if that is something that matters to you).

Now baseball and sports in general aren't for everyone, and I'm not calling for a trophy for everyone; but on the spectrum of winning being the only thing and extreme daddy-ball on one side (100) and not keeping score and everyone gets a ribbon on the other (0), I think we do too much at the extremes and not enough in a better middle ground (call it 70)*.  

* Disclaimer placed since too many people think in terms of absolutes these days.

Comment 16 Oct 2019

I'm sure that is a draw for some.  But I don't think it is enough of a draw for enough top tier athletes. 

Though honestly, I'm not sure why you think 8 B1G titles is a draw.  Of the 10 B1G schools that predate the PSU expansion Northwestern only has more than Indiana.  Though they can boast to be past Chicago by one (hopefully those interested in the strong academics won't factor in the 83 extra years Northwestern has had to get past the Maroons)

We aren't going to change our minds, but it might worry you that you keep putting out selling points that really aren't.  B1G titles this time and current NFL players before.  I don't understand how tied for 8th in the B1G win none since 2000 would be considered a selling point.  I grant the academics are good, but I do think that is a double-edged sword, because there are plenty of kids with their eye on the NFL who aren't looking for the best academics.

Comment 16 Oct 2019

You really seem to be working hard to look past the holistic nature of what I'm saying.  It isn't one factor, it is a combination of factors.  They all add up.

Also, your use of blue chip (define?) moves the goalposts a bit.  I'm talking about schools with a reputation for top talent getting into the NFL.  Going off of the top 25 you reference: Spots 1-12 all qualify.  Then add Michigan and Texas.  So I'm not sure how you are getting to your 20 that are not blue chips and who are outside of CA, FL, or TX.  I count 3 texas schools, one florida school, and zero California schools.  

Again though, it is about the whole big picture, and my only point was that Northwestern does have challenges in recruiting that others don't have.  Especially if we are talking about long term sustainability.  Any team can get a good run, or a hot coach, but there are reasons Northwestern isn't and won't be a constant fixture at the top of the recruiting world.  In short, the recruits don't know something that we don't, it is all right out in the open for all of us to know.

Comment 15 Oct 2019

Yeah, 15 in the NFL.  Compares poorly to powerhouses like Colorado (17), California (21), Pittsburgh (26), Purdue (16), and West Virginia (20) to name just a few. 

For local competition look at MSU (21), TTUN (30), Notre Dame (36), Illinois (16), Iowa (28), and Wisconsin (32)

They do have Indiana (11) beat.

So yeah, not a pipeline to the NFL,and most everyone knows it.  Obviously you can get to the NFL from Northwestern, but it isn't known for that relative to their competition.

As for Notre Dame and Standford, yeah, the tough academics are a strike against them too for many of the 4 and 5 star guys looking for their best shot at the NFL.  That doesn't say that that can't be overcome, of course it can, but it isn't something you put in your plus column for mass appeal.

Concerning location, sure it has its upsides, but like I said, it isn't California or Florida, that might have a 'cool' factor, nor is it a college oriented city like Columbus, Tuscaloosa, Baton Rouge, etc.  Go to one of those as a star and you're going to be a pretty big deal around town.  Chicago?  Not so much.  Chicago also doesn't do too well in the press in recent years.  How many parents guiding their sons think about ending up on the wrong side of East Lansing or Blacksburg vs. the wrong side of Chicago one night?  All of it factors in, fair or not.

Comment 15 Oct 2019

I'd hope so too, since 12-1 is better than 11-1, all else being equal; but the committee has never put a conference runner up in.  I think we'd need even more chaos to get one in.  They'll gladly put in an 11-1 division runner up in over a 12-1 team that just lost their last game if the two didn't play.  And they'd certainly put in 11-1 ND.  

As OSU has shown, losing early you can overcome.  Losing late is a problem, and there's nothing later than a conference championship game*.

* Army Navy, yeah I know.

Comment 15 Oct 2019

Solid points.  I am curious though how the numbers change between your two poles of top TV markets (all TV) and individual games.

the number crunchers at the networks would presumably be looking in between these two extremes.  Where are the top college football viewing markets (NE takes a hit vs the SE which gets a boost)?  Also, what about the total conference footprint's viewing potential?  Nothing in Louisiana or Mississippi is ever going to be a market top 10, but how many of those households are tuning in to college football vs. how many in the NYC viewing area?  And along those lines, OSU may get the top draw most of the time, but how do the conferences stack up in viewership?  

Now if you really want to get complex you'd probably want to factor in elasticity of support, if you wanted to decide if putting your thumb on the scale would help or hurt.  

Whole bunch of factors that I doubt any of us has the data to truly judge.