Printable View
https://www.espn.com/college-football/fpi/_/season/2020
It hates us. Heard brad Edwards discussing. Said 15% chance to beat Aggie at home
20% to beat KY on road
25% to beat OM on road
slight underdog vs Mizzou and NC State
53% chance to beat Ark at home
For comparison, Bartoo's college football matrix says 6.5 wins.
I'm not saying we're going to win 8 or 9 games, but the FPI is off here.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
Problem is, we don't know the formula enough to know where the issue is.
The 53% chance of beating Arkansas can't be correct. That doesn't make any sense at all from any perspective.
Did OM and arky suddenly get much better? Wow. I'm tempering my expectations, new coach, new scheme, missed spring practice, etc. but I believe we win 6-7 for sure. Heck Leach is a much better coach than joe and joe won 6 last year.
They did not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Commercecomet24
The formula is off somehow. Doesn't pass in the smell test.
While I don't agree w it, and think it's low, I can understand it. Our defense wasnt good and lost several key players. Our offense, should be ok to good but it's unknown in CML first year. He's had struggles in his first years and we have little WR talent. With all that said, we are going to have to score to win SEC games. Can we score enough. I'd take 7 wins and go to the house.
wonder what Vegas says ... I'll take them over some ESPN analyst ... most usually predict the under on us but this just seems way off with very little thought or research put into it
Problem is that Arkansas & Ole Miss both have new coaches as well. The formula doesn't make any sense. I don't understand it all, but I know it's in MSU fans blood to "understand" everything ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Homedawg
It honestly wouldn't surprise me if they confused Ole Miss & MSU
Vegas has us at 6.5, which is significantly more reasonable. Again, the FPI is off somehow, but without the formula, it's impossible to know what the issue isQuote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
https://www.sportsbettingdime.com/co...als-best-odds/
Same shit different year
I find this very interesting. I seem to recall this metric rating us way higher than we finished in the Moorhead era, almost like it thought Mullen was still our coach.
Now it seems like FPI has finally figured out how to properly gauge MSU under JoMo, but he's not here anymore. The Arkansas 53% chance of winning at home is baffling but outside that this aligns well w/ what I would have predicted if we were entering year 3 of JoMo.
The 25% chance of winning at OM is ridiculous, the 20% chance at Kentucky is retarded, & the slight underdog at home vs Mizzou & NC State is simply inaccurate.Quote:
Originally Posted by nsvltndog
Sorry, this formula is wrong just like the Rona models. Models are good when they somewhat reflect reality but with a slight emphasis. When they're clearly off, they're worthless
The early FPI is heavily weighted to returning production. We lost our top producing passer, our #2 & #3 rushers; our #2, 3, & 4 WR; Tacklers #2, 3, 4, 7 & 9 plus Willie Gay; and the players who produced 7 of our 11 INTS.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Off a 6-7 team.
Perhaps we're a conundrum that the computer struggles to calculate this year due to Leach & Costello.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg
Either way, this is incorrect & worthless
Just look at our defensive depth chart. Probably the weakest our 2nd unit has been in 10+ years.
We are not a conundrum - we lost a ton of production off of an under-performing team, and have a new coaching staff. That factors heavily into pre-season FPI:Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Quote:
In the preseason, these components are made up entirely of data from previous seasons, such as returning starters, past performance, recruiting rankings and coaching tenure (more on the preseason component below). That information allows FPI to make predictions (and make determinations on the strength of a team’s opponents) beginning in Week 1, and then it declines in weight as the season progresses. It is important to note that prior seasons’ information never completely disappears, because it has been proved to help with prediction accuracy even at the end of a season. Vegas similarly includes priors when setting its lines.
Preseason ratings historically have their flaws, but ultimately they allow for an opponent adjustment after Week 1 and are a great tool to preview the season. As noted, there are four components to the preseason rating: prior performance, returning starters, recruiting rankings and coaching tenure.
-- Prior performance is built off the framework of expected points added. The most recent year’s performance is by far the most important piece of information powering preseason FPI, but three more years are added to measure consistency and account for outliers in performance. The most recent year counts almost twice as much as the three years before it.
-- Returning starters on offense and defense, with special consideration given to starting quarterbacks or transfer quarterbacks with starting experience, is the second piece of information powering preseason FPI. Because starters interact with other inputs, it’s not as simple as saying an extra returning starter is worth one point. Nonetheless, a starting quarterback is worth about 3.3 points per game to a team returning an average offense (all else equal), and a transfer quarterback is given half the weight of a starter.
-- FPI uses four recruiting services -- ESPN, Rivals, Scouts and Phil Steele -- to measure the talent on a team’s roster and add an additional piece of information about which teams are on the rise. The addition of recruiting has been a controversial piece of FPI, but it’s worth noting that it is a very minor component that helps with prediction accuracy.
-- Coaching tenure is primarily a way to capture the addition of a new head coach. With all else equal, a team’s predictive offensive, defensive and special teams ratings will regress slightly to the mean with the addition of a new coach.
Preseason FPI debuted in 2014, and you can read more about how it performed in these recaps of the 2014 and 2015 seasons. In short, if preseason FPI, which was run retroactively to 2005, had been used with no update to predict every game over the last 10 seasons, the FPI favorite would have won 72 percent of FBS-versus-FBS games (Vegas closing line was 75 percent accurate).
Yes, but Ole Miss & Arkansas are in the same situation. That's the issue hereQuote:
Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg
I hate that Leach hasn't found a receiver named Abbot. Abbot and Costello would be glorious!Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Remember when FPI had us winning 10 a couple of years ago? FPI is worthless.
There will be growing pains because we turned over the coaching staff and are running completely new systems on both sides of the ball. But we will beat NC State, Mizzou, Arkansas, Ole Miss, and Kentucky because we are just better than they are.
Anyone that looks at our OOC schedule and thinks we won't win 6 games is a fool.
Only concern is the virus lay-off.
They are for coaching tenure, but not necessarily in returning production -which is what the pre-season FPI is weighted toward.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Ole Miss returns all of its passing production, return 4 of the 5 top rushers, 4 of their 5 top WR, 4 of their 5 top tacklers, and the bulk of their INTS.
You can argue that those players aren't as talented as what we have returning. You can argue that they are potentially not as productive as what we have.
But, they return a very high percentage of their production and that is a huge factor in the pre-season FPI.