Dave bartoo's contenders

[gravedigger]

Not to take this conversation into a different direction, but you have just outlined here is the exact problem with analytics in sports & why ultra-analytical professional organizations will never be successful in the long haul. Sure... they can win big in time frames & be fairly consistent, due to likely never making ultra dumb decisions because the analytics in many ways works as a safety net that prevents ultra-dumb decisions.

However, you cannot replace the "eye test" scouting & the best professional/college organizations will ALWAYS be the organizations that can best blend the best attributes of both scouting & analytics. When an organization gets too far to one side, they begin making dumb decisions.

Spot on

[ShotgunDawg]

It's all good. He's an idiot who is picking name teams from their history.

No he's not & we lose credibility when we make this argument.

Bartoo's system is legit. MSU is just a curveball for it & it's not worth his time to put in the effort to correct it. He would rather just avoid betting MSU games & avoid the flaw

[msstate7]

Probably, but Bartoo's method does allow him to bet on games in which he does not have personal knowledge of the teams.

Sure, we could all pick 80% of the games that SEC teams play, but his "model" comes in handy when betting Western Kentucky vs Memphis. How many of us could make a logical bet on that game? I know I couldn't because I don't have personal knowledge of either of those teams. Bartoo can because his "model" tells him who to bet on.

His model says UCLA and tenn are playoff contenders.

Also as prediction said above that Mullen and grantham were rated poorly by him, but Florida is a playoff contender this year

[Bass Chaser]

Success at picking individual games? Take the spread out of the equation, and I think most everyone here could pick 80% or dang close. The vast majority of college games are easy to pick

He also has stats available that tell you spreads, over, under, etc. It cost like $12 a year. He's pretty close to Vegas.

[msstate7]

Does anyone know this dude's criteria for assigning the coaching scores that he uses in his rankings? I glanced at some of his stuff from last year and noticed that in his predictions for Week 3, he graded LSU's OC at B+ and DC at A+, while giving both Mullen and Grantham a C+. Mullen wasn't elite as an OC, but I think he's at least a solid B on a national scale. And how would Grantham, who was coming off three years of fielding nationally elite defenses at Louisville, not have been at least an A- at DC?

This is where his purely "analytical" approach gets off the tracks. He's assigning a value purely on what he thinks

[msstate7]

[QUOTE=Bass Chaser;971924]

Success at picking individual games? Take the spread out of the equation, and I think most everyone here could pick 80% or dang close. The vast majority of college games are easy to pick[/QUOTE

He also has stats available that tell you spreads, over, under, etc. It cost like $12 a year.

At 80% success rate?

[Bass Chaser]

[QUOTE=msstate7;971928]

At 80% success rate?

I believe so. Don't quote me on it. I use to follow him closer. Then I felt like it took the fun out of college football.

He's pretty much figured out the formula the CFP committee uses when they come out with their rankings.

[MetEdDawg]

I heard him on Finebaum a few weeks back. He had us going 7-5 this year. He literally said 8-4 then subtract 1 for a new head coach.

[the_real_MSU_is_us]

No he's not & we lose credibility when we make this argument.

Bartoo's system is legit. MSU is just a curveball for it & it's not worth his time to put in the effort to correct it. He would rather just avoid betting MSU games & avoid the flaw

I'm sorry, saying Tennessee will have better odd of making the Natty than Wisconsin or TCU is just insane. They have less talent, a tougher path, worse coaching, and worse culture. Any ranking system that thinks a first year HC will take a 4-8, #13ish 4 year recruiting profile Tennessee and turn them into a better team than Garry Patterson will field, or a 13-1 Wisconsin that returns a lot, is a bad ranking system.

I'm sorry, there is literally no excuse to think Tennessee or Florida will be better than Wisconsin. The only thing they are better at is a raw recruiting ranking.... I don't care what the flaw(s) is, his metric obviously has some big ones. His system seem to be 1) 4 year recruiting ranking, 2) how big the home crowds get, and 3) how well he personally likes the coaches. If he took the schedule into account, Washington and TCU and Wisconsin would make the list as they have an easier path to the playoffs. If he weighed QB play more than any other, there's no way Florida or Tennessee would make the list as they have shit for QBs. If he took an analytic approach to assistants, he'd have Grantham higher than C+ as he's over performed his talent level each of the last 4 years. If he took returning production into account, he'd have State, Wisconsin, and Michigan State ahead of Tenn or UF. Hell, A&M has the same recruiting profile, better coaches, AND more returning starters than those 2, yet aren't to be found.

His problem is not that he's too analytics driven and ignres the eye test... it's that he takes the easiest part of analytics (recruiting rankings) and stops there. His method of evaluating assistants is questionable, and home crowd size just isn't that important. He ignores culture, returning production, QB play, and he completely ignores coaching continuity which a huge as any system take more than 1 year to get installed as it should. It's really terrible, no 2 ways about it. Talent and a rough estimate of coaching ability will get you 80% of games, but it is far from being "too analytical"

[TrapGame]

Bartoo is Common Core analytics. Half his shit makes no sense.

He had his analytics telling him last year that App State was comparable to UGA and would be a close game. Yeah, Kirby didn't break a sweat 31-10 UGA. Those 10 points App State scored were all in the 4th quarter when Kirby was playing the water boy and some walk ons.

[dawgday166]

His model says UCLA and tenn are playoff contenders.

Also as prediction said above that Mullen and grantham were rated poorly by him, but Florida is a playoff contender this year

When I've listened to him, he always rates Mullen high on coach effect.

[ShotgunDawg]

When I've listened to him, he always rates Mullen high on coach effect.

That's just because we win more games than our recruiting rankings say that we should.

The problem is that, if the recruiting rankings are not really indicative of MSU's talent level, then the system starts to break down.

Bartoo's system is based on the assumption & track record that recruiting rankings are fairly accurate. The argument for MSU is that variables in MSU's recruiting make recruiting rankings less accurate about MSU's talent level.

[the_real_MSU_is_us]

That's just because we win more games than our recruiting rankings say that we should.

The problem is that, if the recruiting rankings are not really indicative of MSU's talent level, then the system starts to break down.

Bartoo's system is based on the assumption & track record that recruiting rankings are fairly accurate. The argument for MSU is that variables in MSU's recruiting make recruiting rankings less accurate about MSU's talent level.

You're greatly understating the flaws in his system. He doesn't take into account returning production, he doesn't take into account returning QBs, he seems to think year 1 of a coach will be just as good as year 5, and his coaching rankings are subjective. The underrated talent part may be the biggest reason we are so low, but all these are still flaws in the system

[ShotgunDawg]

You're greatly understating the flaws in his system. He doesn't take into account returning production, he doesn't take into account returning QBs, he seems to think year 1 of a coach will be just as good as year 5, and his coaching rankings are subjective. The underrated talent part may be the biggest reason we are so low, but all these are still flaws in the system

I believe Bartoo could come on this board and destroy me in an arguement and bury me with research because he knows his algorithm better than I do.

However, that doesn't change the fact that the eye test says that there is a missing component with MSU. There is something about MSU that his algorithm doesn't account for but it's hard to put your finger on.

I believe it's a product of systematic underrating of talent within the state of Mississippi including both HS and JUCO players that, if they were rated correctly, would give MSU somewhere between the 13th-17th most talent in the country. Throw that in with above average coaching and you've got a top 10 caliber team.

I could be wrong though, and he may be making an assumption that Moorhead will just be average, which isn't unfair because he hasn't coached yet.

[BuckyIsAB****]

This guy is a bafoon. Notre Dame, USC, Texas, Tennessee, UF, LSU, and for Gods sake UCLA have as much of a shot at making it as the jackson state tigers do

[Ari Gold]

I heard him on Finebaum a few weeks back. He had us going 7-5 this year. He literally said 8-4 then subtract 1 for a new head coach.

The -1 for a new coach is stupid and ****ing lazy , unless he uses it every time a new coach is hired. And if he does then it’s just plain stupid.
I don’t listen and haven’t listened to this guy but based on some of the shit he says and throws out there that some of you are posting I’m glad I don’t waste my ****ing time..
Sounds more like Bartool than Bartoo .

[Johnson85]

I believe so. Don't quote me on it. I use to follow him closer. Then I felt like it took the fun out of college football.

He's pretty much figured out the formula the CFP committee uses when they come out with their rankings.

IF he was hitting at 80% against the spread, he move the spread when he released his projections.

[Commercecomet24]

This guy is a bafoon. Notre Dame, USC, Texas, Tennessee, UF, LSU, and for Gods sake UCLA have as much of a shot at making it as the jackson state tigers do

This.

[Bubb Rubb]

Dave Bartoo
@CFBMatrix
So its a wrap

Tier I Contenders - Bama Auburn tOSU Clemson
Tier II - USC UGA FSU LSU ND Texas PSU
Tier III - (maybe get to NC but not win) OU Vols UCLA UF

11:58 PM - Jul 16, 2018

LSU? Tennessee? Florida?

Absolutely retarded. All three of those teams will struggle to be bowl eligible.

[TUSK]

NOBODY hits 80% versus the spread over time, nobody...