S&P rankings for 2018 have State at #14

[Coach34]

https://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...gs-projections


Glad to see other people catching up with me and others here at ED. Dont see Auburn at 5 though. They will be pretty good but not top 10 good.

[dawgday166]

Don't understand how our "returning production" is ranked 15th. I'm thinking it probably should be #1. At least in top 5 probably.

And Bama's is 4th?? SMH

Maybe I don't understand what "returning production" means. Does that just mean you were on the roster?? **

[the_real_MSU_is_us]

Don't understand how our "returning production" is ranked 15th. I'm thinking it probably should be #1. At least in top 5 probably.

And Bama's is 4th?? SMH

Maybe I don't understand what "returning production" means. Does that just mean you were on the roster?? **

First thing to note is that being 14th in the nation is counting schools like SMU; it isn't just P5. I saw one metric of returning production that had us 4th in the P5, behind only other MSU (who will be really good too), Baylor, and Kansas. That calculated returning production based on % of snaps, % of tackles, % of yards gained, etc.that returned. I'm not sure how Bill Connely does it though.

I'm not sure, but I also think he weighs different positions differently. So a QB is more important than a S in his formula. I'd bet LT is fairly highly rated, and as such losing Rankin probably is a bigger hit than either CB. Of course we all know we have a very good backup LT, so in reality Rankins loss hurts less than Durrs or Clevelands.

I'm sure Cleveland, Gray, Dez, and Durr had their fair share of tackles. Their losses will count against us. Alos if you look at the receivers, Thomas, Myles, and Gray made upa large % of our yards and their loses will count against us. Now State fans know that none of them were good and the new WRs will be better than any of them, so we can safely ignore the statistical loss of production. But I understand if his formula doesn't. All in all I'd say these formulas -while they do their best- just can't go deep enough to be accurate, and fortunately for us, are underrating us this year. Hope that helps

[dawgday166]

First thing to note is that being 14th in the nation is counting schools like SMU; it isn't just P5. I saw one metric of returning production that had us 4th in the P5, behind only other MSU (who will be really good too), Baylor, and Kansas. That calculated returning production based on % of snaps, % of tackles, % of yards gained, etc.that returned. I'm not sure how Bill Connely does it though.

I'm not sure, but I also think he weighs different positions differently. So a QB is more important than a S in his formula. I'd bet LT is fairly highly rated, and as such losing Rankin probably is a bigger hit than either CB. Of course we all know we have a very good backup LT, so in reality Rankins loss hurts less than Durrs or Clevelands.

I'm sure Cleveland, Gray, Dez, and Durr had their fair share of tackles. Their losses will count against us. Alos if you look at the receivers, Thomas, Myles, and Gray made upa large % of our yards and their loses will count against us. Now State fans know that none of them were good and the new WRs will be better than any of them, so we can safely ignore the statistical loss of production. But I understand if his formula doesn't. All in all I'd say these formulas -while they do their best- just can't go deep enough to be accurate, and fortunately for us, are underrating us this year. Hope that helps

Trying to understand then Bammer at #4. They losing their whole D and Ridley. Probably both backs too.

[Lord McBuckethead]

and Hurts

[Coach34]

https://twitter.com/cffmwachsman/status/962735445812678657

[Coach34]

https://twitter.com/cffmwachsman/status/960844445175468033

[Coach34]

https://twitter.com/cffmwachsman/status/958385252401078274

[Coach34]

https://twitter.com/cffmwachsman/status/958295893924614144

[Coach34]

https://twitter.com/ncaableachers/status/958381426516353029

[Coach34]

https://twitter.com/cffmwachsman/status/957622751656898560

[Coach34]

https://twitter.com/cffmwachsman/status/957618587795156993

[Coach34]

https://twitter.com/cffmwachsman/status/957106886804942848

[Coach34]

https://twitter.com/cffmwachsman/status/955984350176165889

[Prediction? Pain.]

Don't understand how our "returning production" is ranked 15th. I'm thinking it probably should be #1. At least in top 5 probably.

And Bama's is 4th?? SMH

Maybe I don't understand what "returning production" means. Does that just mean you were on the roster?? **

First thing to note is that being 14th in the nation is counting schools like SMU; it isn't just P5. I saw one metric of returning production that had us 4th in the P5, behind only other MSU (who will be really good too), Baylor, and Kansas. That calculated returning production based on % of snaps, % of tackles, % of yards gained, etc.that returned. I'm not sure how Bill Connely does it though.

I'm not sure, but I also think he weighs different positions differently. So a QB is more important than a S in his formula. I'd bet LT is fairly highly rated, and as such losing Rankin probably is a bigger hit than either CB. Of course we all know we have a very good backup LT, so in reality Rankins loss hurts less than Durrs or Clevelands.

I'm sure Cleveland, Gray, Dez, and Durr had their fair share of tackles. Their losses will count against us. Alos if you look at the receivers, Thomas, Myles, and Gray made upa large % of our yards and their loses will count against us. Now State fans know that none of them were good and the new WRs will be better than any of them, so we can safely ignore the statistical loss of production. But I understand if his formula doesn't. All in all I'd say these formulas -while they do their best- just can't go deep enough to be accurate, and fortunately for us, are underrating us this year. Hope that helps

Trying to understand then Bammer at #4. They losing their whole D and Ridley. Probably both backs too.

It looks like the "returning production" rankings included in the S&P+ rankings are modified from raw returning production numbers. About two weeks ago, Bill C. published his returning production rankings. Here they are:

https://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...ers-experience

We're 8th nationally in those rankings. Bama is 103rd. (Y'all should read his explanation of the returning production stats. Among other things, he notes that returning experience in the secondary has the highest correlation to team improvement from year to year.)

In the intro to the S&P + rankings, he says that "[f]or returning production, [he] appl[ied] projected changes (based on each team's returning offensive and defensive production, which are on different scales) to last year's S&P+ averages. The projection based on returning production accounts for a little more than 50 percent." I'm not sure I completely follow, but maybe he took the raw returning production rank and then somehow adjusted it for the quality of the team to account for returning production on bad teams? That's the best I can make of it. Otherwise, it's just a massive typo, which would surprise me. But who knows.

Bill C. has acknowledged our 2018 potential since the end of the season. In the article with the new S&P+ rankings, he gives a link to a story he wrote in November about our hiring of Joe Moorhead. It's worth a look. Here's an excerpt:

[Moorhead] will take over an offense scheduled to return quarterback Nick Fitzgerald, running back Aeris Williams and Kylin Hill, a foursome of freshman and sophomore receivers (Deddrick Thomas, Reggie Todd, Keith Mixon, Jamal Couch) that combined for 800 receiving yards and eight touchdowns, and an offensive line with only one 2017 senior.

His work with Fitzgerald could be fascinating. As important as Barkley (2,630 rushing yards, 996 receiving yards, 41 combined touchdowns in 2016-17) has been, Moorhead?s bond with quarterback Trace McSorley was as or more vital.

McSorley's completion rate was just 55 seven games into his first season with Moorhead, his passer rating just 133.4. Since then: 63 percent and 162.1. He caught fire, playing nearly perfect ball in the Big Ten title game against Wisconsin and throwing four TDs in the tight Rose Bowl loss to USC. This year, he's thrown for 3,228 yards and 26 touchdowns despite rarely playing in fourth quarters. (Not including sacks, he's also rushed for 1,093 yards in the last two seasons.)

Moorhead will only get one year with Fitzgerald. The QB pipeline isn't dry after him, mind you -- four-star prospect Keytaon Thompson got thrown into the deep end when Fitzgerald went down early in the Egg Bowl -- but how quickly Moorhead and Fitzgerald can reach the same page will set the bar for 2018.

(A defense with only two seniors among its top 16 tacklers can't hurt.)

[IMissJack]

Given the way we are usually underrated by preseason polls, this is a very good thing.

[Commercecomet24]

It looks like the "returning production" rankings included in the S&P+ rankings are modified from raw returning production numbers. About two weeks ago, Bill C. published his returning production rankings. Here they are:

https://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...ers-experience

We're 8th nationally in those rankings. Bama is 103rd. (Y'all should read his explanation of the returning production stats. Among other things, he notes that returning experience in the secondary has the highest correlation to team improvement from year to year.)

In the intro to the S&P + rankings, he says that "[f]or returning production, [he] appl[ied] projected changes (based on each team's returning offensive and defensive production, which are on different scales) to last year's S&P+ averages. The projection based on returning production accounts for a little more than 50 percent." I'm not sure I completely follow, but maybe he took the raw returning production rank and then somehow adjusted it for the quality of the team to account for returning production on bad teams? That's the best I can make of it. Otherwise, it's just a massive typo, which would surprise me. But who knows.

Bill C. has acknowledged our 2018 potential since the end of the season. In the article with the new S&P+ rankings, he gives a link to a story he wrote in November about our hiring of Joe Moorhead. It's worth a look. Here's an excerpt:

That's great work right there, Pain! Appreciate you posting that!

Rep Given!

[TUSK]

Trying to understand then Bammer at #4. They losing their whole D and Ridley. Probably both backs too.

Bama starters lost on O: Ridley (Foster/Sims) and Bozeman... (Scarbrough) left early... Each position group will be better, IMO....

On Defense, the 2ndary was completely gutted... Only 1 guy back with meaningful experience... The front 7 will be similar to recent years...

That being said, I've no idea how they computed "production" regarding Bammer.... Ridley and our secondary "produced" a lot, I thought....

[dawgday166]

Bama starters lost on O: Ridley (Foster/Sims) and Bozeman... (Scarbrough) left early... Each position group will be better, IMO....

On Defense, the 2ndary was completely gutted... Only 1 guy back with meaningful experience... The front 7 will be similar to recent years...

That being said, I've no idea how they computed "production" regarding Bammer.... Ridley and our secondary "produced" a lot, I thought....

Congrats on "Hanging Another Banner"!! Those were some very exceptional refs calling that game *

I knew y'all were losing a lot next year. Time to "reload".

Regarding next year. The link my post is about is being setup in advance IMO to show Bama should be in CFP at beginning of year, and justify that #2 ranking. Whoever did that one is either skewing it to look so, or is a complete idiot. The one that Pain linked to tho ... that is way more accurate IMO.

Also IMO ... your Oline still shouldn't be as good as ours. Wasn't this year and shouldn't be next either. Front 7 ... that may be a push, athough our D line should be every bit as nasty as yours. Of course all of this is somewhat dependent on coaching staff transition.

No team in country can lose as much as y'all do and even make CFP. Howevah .... y'all are Bama so ...

That does not matter. It's all orchestrated. Who pulls the strings ... I have no clue. But I do know this ... Bama will be in final of CFP. Even if somehow we play well and are allowed to win in TTown, at a minimum Bama will receive another at large berth and will be in title game. And most likely win it. I also know it will be an ultra-exciting game either way.

It's very good entertainment *

[Tbonewannabe]

First thing to note is that being 14th in the nation is counting schools like SMU; it isn't just P5. I saw one metric of returning production that had us 4th in the P5, behind only other MSU (who will be really good too), Baylor, and Kansas. That calculated returning production based on % of snaps, % of tackles, % of yards gained, etc.that returned. I'm not sure how Bill Connely does it though.

I'm not sure, but I also think he weighs different positions differently. So a QB is more important than a S in his formula. I'd bet LT is fairly highly rated, and as such losing Rankin probably is a bigger hit than either CB. Of course we all know we have a very good backup LT, so in reality Rankins loss hurts less than Durrs or Clevelands.

I'm sure Cleveland, Gray, Dez, and Durr had their fair share of tackles. Their losses will count against us. Alos if you look at the receivers, Thomas, Myles, and Gray made upa large % of our yards and their loses will count against us. Now State fans know that none of them were good and the new WRs will be better than any of them, so we can safely ignore the statistical loss of production. But I understand if his formula doesn't. All in all I'd say these formulas -while they do their best- just can't go deep enough to be accurate, and fortunately for us, are underrating us this year. Hope that helps

I wonder if all the bad publicity will affect Michigan St. People were calling for the coach to resign similar to Briles at Baylor.