|
|
Post by chez23 on Dec 31, 2015 15:02:45 GMT -5
More talent = more wins. More stars = More talent
|
|
|
|
Post by FUBeAR on Dec 31, 2015 16:16:05 GMT -5
More talent = more wins. More stars = More talent I think you are trying to apply the transitive property of congruence theorem and state the following: More Stars = More Talent AND More Talent = More Wins, then More Stars = More Wins...so I do like the attempt to apply SOME logic to your opinion... BUT...the fact of the matter is that the data observed does not support the conclusion. I think it's hard to argue against the second part of the statement "More Talent = More Wins" (given all other things being substantially equal...which, of course, is impossible to assess given the number of 'other things' and the subjective nature of many of the important 'other things')...so, the error in the statement must be derived from the "More Stars = More Talent" part of the statement. In the aggregate, the data-driven theorem for FCS Football, the correct statement would be: More Stars ≠ More Talent AND More Talent = More Wins, then More Stars ≠ More Wins After all, 19,000 SCREAMING & WELL-SATISFIED NDSU BISON FANS just can't be wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by mercerfan on Jan 4, 2016 17:02:22 GMT -5
Mercer Coaches on Twitter talking about a new commitment. "Huge midterm playmaker, GAboy coming home". I assume this means a transfer.
|
|
|
|
Post by FUBeAR on Jan 4, 2016 18:38:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by FUBeAR on Jan 6, 2016 12:28:57 GMT -5
Post on AnyGivenSaturday.com - the most comprehensive national message board dedicated to FCS Football - very informative AnyGivenSaturday.com - 2016 FCS Recruiting Websites - Scroll to Post #11 in this thread
"None of the recruiting services actually know much about the kids after the top 150-200
Almost none of the FCS kids are ever actually looked at and those that are are glossed over due to FCS offers and commitment.
I worked for Rivals. It's pretty amazing how much politics, where they went to HS, where they have offers from vs the next kid, etc... Dictate rankings more than anything else"In Rivals, the highest ranked FCS Commit in 2015 was #303. The next highest was #735. In 247Sports, the highest ranked FCS Commit in 2015 was #497 (same guy as the #303 on Rivals). The next highest was #597. As this 'insider' reports, these services just don't know much about any of the kids that are not in the Top 200. All a bunch of hooferaw beyond those kids. |
|
|
|
Post by chez23 on Jan 7, 2016 16:02:42 GMT -5
More talent = more wins. More stars = More talent I think you are trying to apply the transitive property of congruence theorem and state the following: More Stars = More Talent AND More Talent = More Wins, then More Stars = More Wins...so I do like the attempt to apply SOME logic to your opinion... BUT...the fact of the matter is that the data observed does not support the conclusion. I think it's hard to argue against the second part of the statement "More Talent = More Wins" (given all other things being substantially equal...which, of course, is impossible to assess given the number of 'other things' and the subjective nature of many of the important 'other things')...so, the error in the statement must be derived from the "More Stars = More Talent" part of the statement. In the aggregate, the data-driven theorem for FCS Football, the correct statement would be: More Stars ≠ More Talent AND More Talent = More Wins, then More Stars ≠ More Wins After all, 19,000 SCREAMING & WELL-SATISFIED NDSU BISON FANS just can't be wrong. one school ( NDSU) does not give credibiltiy to the idea that more stars does not eqaual more wins...... there are 250 other D1 teams that may beg to differ |
|
|
|
Post by FUBeAR on Jan 7, 2016 16:38:45 GMT -5
I think you are trying to apply the transitive property of congruence theorem and state the following: More Stars = More Talent AND More Talent = More Wins, then More Stars = More Wins...so I do like the attempt to apply SOME logic to your opinion... BUT...the fact of the matter is that the data observed does not support the conclusion. I think it's hard to argue against the second part of the statement "More Talent = More Wins" (given all other things being substantially equal...which, of course, is impossible to assess given the number of 'other things' and the subjective nature of many of the important 'other things')...so, the error in the statement must be derived from the "More Stars = More Talent" part of the statement. In the aggregate, the data-driven theorem for FCS Football, the correct statement would be: More Stars ≠ More Talent AND More Talent = More Wins, then More Stars ≠ More Wins After all, 19,000 SCREAMING & WELL-SATISFIED NDSU BISON FANS just can't be wrong. one school ( NDSU) does not give credibiltiy to the idea that more stars does not eqaual more wins...... there are 250 other D1 teams that may beg to differ  |
|
|
|
Post by mercerfan on Jan 7, 2016 18:54:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by jackal on Jan 7, 2016 22:50:04 GMT -5
I think you are trying to apply the transitive property of congruence theorem and state the following: More Stars = More Talent AND More Talent = More Wins, then More Stars = More Wins...so I do like the attempt to apply SOME logic to your opinion... BUT...the fact of the matter is that the data observed does not support the conclusion. I think it's hard to argue against the second part of the statement "More Talent = More Wins" (given all other things being substantially equal...which, of course, is impossible to assess given the number of 'other things' and the subjective nature of many of the important 'other things')...so, the error in the statement must be derived from the "More Stars = More Talent" part of the statement. In the aggregate, the data-driven theorem for FCS Football, the correct statement would be: More Stars ≠ More Talent AND More Talent = More Wins, then More Stars ≠ More Wins After all, 19,000 SCREAMING & WELL-SATISFIED NDSU BISON FANS just can't be wrong. one school ( NDSU) does not give credibiltiy to the idea that more stars does not eqaual more wins...... there are 250 other D1 teams that may beg to differ Looks like Bear is going to have to do the analysis for every FCS team. |
|
|
|
Post by FUBeAR on Jan 8, 2016 3:49:12 GMT -5
one school ( NDSU) does not give credibiltiy to the idea that more stars does not eqaual more wins...... there are 250 other D1 teams that may beg to differ Looks like Bear is going to have to do the analysis for every FCS team. How 'bout a little winning % vs. StarterStars regression analysis on the 16 team sample size (13% of FCS Teams) that I've already researched instead?  So...there is a correlation coefficient of 0.2463 between Winning % and StarterStars in the selected sample. UPDATE FOLLOWING CHAMPIONSHIP GAME ON 1/9/16: The Correlation Coefficient of 2015 Stars/Starters to 2015 Winning % in the selected sample further decreased after today's game to 0.2411 because JaxSt had a higher Stars/Starter (.70) ratio than NDSU (.54) and JaxSt's winning % decreased while NDSU's increased. "Statistics for Dummies" defines this correlation coefficient as follows: In statistics, the correlation coefficient r measures the strength and direction of a linear relationship between two variables on a scatterplot. The value of r is always between +1 and –1. To interpret its value, see which of the following values your correlation r is closest to:
Exactly –1. A perfect downhill (negative) linear relationship
–0.70. A strong downhill (negative) linear relationship
–0.50. A moderate downhill (negative) relationship
–0.30. A weak downhill (negative) linear relationship
0. No linear relationship
+0.30. A weak uphill (positive) linear relationship
+0.50. A moderate uphill (positive) relationship
+0.70. A strong uphill (positive) linear relationship
Exactly +1. A perfect uphill (positive) linear relationship...
...and goes on to say... How close is close enough to –1 or +1 to indicate a strong enough linear relationship? Most statisticians like to see correlations beyond at least +0.5 or –0.5 before getting too excited about them.So...since the correlation in our sample is less than 1/2 of what 'statisticians would get excited about,' then I think we can safely CONCLUDE that there is no reason for us to 'get excited' about any type of correlation between Stars and Wins. After all, MATH can't be wrong, can it? |
|
|
|
Post by FUBeAR on Jan 8, 2016 16:45:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by FUBeAR on Jan 11, 2016 10:26:45 GMT -5
Social media plays big role in Mercer's recruitingIt wasn't exactly Bobby Lamb's idea to jump into the social media age. But Mercer's football head coach is glad he did. The Bears have used social media, especially Twitter, to help build strong recruiting classes since the program rebooted for the 2013 season. And those efforts have gone to another level since Mercer joined the Southern Conference before last season. Lamb and the Bears' football staff are hoping to reel in another strong class on National Signing Day on Feb. 3. "Recruiting is all about momentum, and certainly you want to capture that momentum and continue that momentum, and our coaches do an outstanding job of keeping everything up to date, and that's what society is about now," Lamb said. "They want to open their phone, they want a quick look at something, and they want to move on to the next thing. So really, the Twitter world has helped us tremendously in recruiting. "They got me on it when I first got here, and I was a little bit reluctant, but once you see the product and once you see how it affects young men, it's huge. So I'm out there trying to keep up with the Joneses." Mercer has one of the most aggressive social media strategies on the FCS level, showcasing players with videos, photos and graphics, and the school started a website (www.beardowneverydown.com) to help with the process. "Playing a big part in it is the videos we send out, social media, the pictures we send out, Twitter. Everything that goes out on social media has been really well received," Lamb said. "Every time I go somewhere, someone says, 'Man, y'all are doing social media better than anybody in the country.' That's a credit to our coaches, it's a credit to our video department, it's a credit to our entire athletic administration. That's where it starts. "Five, six years ago, we were basically still sending out mail. Send out a letter here, a letter there. Now there's no mail, there's no cost. It's mash a button, send a video, mash a button, send a graphic. Our graphic department has been outstanding. Our video department has been off the charts, and we feel like that has really helped us get to where we are." The Bears are coming off a 5-6 season that featured a win over No. 3 Chattanooga. Mercer is 21-14 in three seasons. Lamb said the program plans to sign seven players on offense and seven on defense and maybe one more player to get to 15. The target is to sign three offensive linemen and three defensive backs. For the first time, Mercer will be at the full scholarship limit for the FCS level as it prepares to head into its third season in the Southern Conference. "Thank goodness there are no changes," Lamb said of the constant change of the program's first few seasons. "Once you get into giving scholarships out, and this year, now we're finally to where we know exactly what we have, we know how many we're going to sign. That can change a little bit here and there, but it's a lot more comfortable going out recruiting now that you have money in your pocket, you have a great product to sell. We have been in the conference for two years now, so the recruits actually know what's going on now that we're playing in the Southern Conference. "It's great to go out and recruit with full scholarships because now, not only are you battling the teams on the field of play, you're battling the Samfords, the Woffords, the Furmans of the world, the academies, off the field, as well."
|
|
|
|
Post by jackal on Jan 11, 2016 11:16:18 GMT -5
Interesting writeup. The borderline obsession with social media, and particularly with Twitter, is something that I have really noticed with Mercer. I have had to unfollow a few Mercer coaches and programs on Twitter just to get some of my feed back. I'm interested in what goes on with these programs, but the tweeting is constant.
The article does not mention this, but the weird touchdown celebration last year against Warner is a good example of how the strategy works. Mercer, playing a school it knew it could score virtually at will against, set up a play to get an OL a touchdown. They did a celebration right in front of a conspicuously well placed camera. Almost immediately, everyone of Mercer's athletics programs started to tweet and retweet the video. Eventually ESPN picked it up (after being attached to the Twitter storm from Mercer), and did an interview and posted the video to ESPN. Using basic social media, Mercer had now managed to make a national story out of something that would have been noticed only by those sitting in the stadium that day.
I do find its strange that if Mercer loses (in just about any sport), the social media approach is silent. You would think (and I am sure this is by design), that Mercer never loses by reading their Twitter feed. No references to losing to UTC in basketball last week, for instance, but numerous infographics on their wins over Samford and Citadel. Show no weakness, I guess.
In short, Mercer is doing what it takes to get high school age kids interested in their programs in a digital age. I can respect that. I think the jury is still out on whether the approach is better than the traditional approach or some combination of both (which is what, I think, Furman generally does). They absolutely have figured out how to do it, the question I have is whether it is actually beneficial.
|
|
|
|
Post by FUBeAR on Jan 11, 2016 15:01:39 GMT -5
Interesting writeup. The borderline obsession with social media, and particularly with Twitter, is something that I have really noticed with Mercer. I have had to unfollow a few Mercer coaches and programs on Twitter just to get some of my feed back. I'm interested in what goes on with these programs, but the tweeting is constant. The article does not mention this, but the weird touchdown celebration last year against Warner is a good example of how the strategy works. Mercer, playing a school it knew it could score virtually at will against, set up a play to get an OL a touchdown. They did a celebration right in front of a conspicuously well placed camera. Almost immediately, everyone of Mercer's athletics programs started to tweet and retweet the video. Eventually ESPN picked it up (after being attached to the Twitter storm from Mercer), and did an interview and posted the video to ESPN. Using basic social media, Mercer had now managed to make a national story out of something that would have been noticed only by those sitting in the stadium that day. I do find its strange that if Mercer loses (in just about any sport), the social media approach is silent. You would think (and I am sure this is by design), that Mercer never loses by reading their Twitter feed. No references to losing to UTC in basketball last week, for instance, but numerous infographics on their wins over Samford and Citadel. Show no weakness, I guess. In short, Mercer is doing what it takes to get high school age kids interested in their programs in a digital age. I can respect that. I think the jury is still out on whether the approach is better than the traditional approach or some combination of both (which is what, I think, Furman generally does). They absolutely have figured out how to do it, the question I have is whether it is actually beneficial. I'll be right back with some Scatter Plots, Regression Analysis, and Coefficients of Correlation of Social Media Presence & Recruiting Stars & Winning %'s in Football and Basketball. (not really - after receiving no 'love' from ANYONE (lookin' at you BearDownMU) for bringing SCIENCE to this message board, I've decided to hang up my abacus and leave you cretins to outshouting and/or out-anecdote-ing one another to settle disagreements  ) |
|
|
|
Post by BearDownMU on Jan 11, 2016 19:39:14 GMT -5
They Tweet about losses. Just no need to dwell on them.
Honestly FUBeAR, this Bear of Little Brain could BEARly understand what you were saying. So I just left it alone. lol
|
|
)