menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Analytics
Page: 2 of 2
mail
bornacatfan
10/26/2016 9:42 PM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
I presume the fact that the experimental Analytics program is in Lincoln is related to the fact that HUDL is headquartered here.
That makes a ton of sense. Silicon Prarie is turning heads and making changes to the landscape. HUDL has some interesting products across several sports. Good observation.
mail
person
GoCats105
10/27/2016 7:18 AM
bshot44 wrote:expand_more
the league would have to get a lot better to even sniff two teams going to the dance.
Strongly disagree.

To get two bids, you really only need one really good team. Then that really good team needs to get upset in the conference finals. The rest of the conference could be crap in this scenario and you could still get two-bids.

It's arguments like this that make me a huge believer in analytics.
False. If Ohio goes 27-3 this year and they DON'T win the MAC tournament...they most likely are NIT bound.

You have to be a really good team....AND play a somewhat decent schedule. Beating up on Cleveland State, UW-Milwaukee, WKU and Tennessee Tech will not get you an at-large bid. When your "best" game is at Georgia Tech you are putting all your eggs in the MAC Tourney basket.

Ask Murray State a few years ago when they went 27-6....won 25 straight...lost in OVC title game and had RPI of 47. They did NOT get a bid because their SOS was 175th.

You HAVE to play someone....and ideally you HAVE to beat someone.

That's what is so frustrating about this year's hoop schedule. We might have an at-large worthy roster....but that schedule totally jams Ohio up. No way they get an at-large with that schedule.

Jim Christian had his faults...but I will say this (and honestly it might be more of a pat on the back to Groce if he set up schedule before he bolted)....but the year after Ohio's Sweet 16 run, the Cats played AT Memphis, AT Oklahoma, AT UMass, AT Robert Morris, AT Belmont...and had home games with Oakland, Richmond and St. Bonnie. All were Top 100 except RMU, SBU & Oakland who were all Top 200. That's an at-large worthy schedule if they had taken care of some business.

Instead they went 0-5 in those road games and that killed any chance they had before they started in the MAC where they went 15-1 (Belmont was BracketBuster mid-season)
Or in the case of Monmouth last year, you can go 5-2 against power programs (wins over UCLA, USC, Georgetown, Rutgers and Notre Dame - losses to Dayton and USC), finish the season as the MAAC regular season champ, lose to Iona in the MAAC title game and still not get in.

There is no exact formula other than winning your conference tournament. At-large bids are a total crap shoot for the little guy no matter what your schedule is.
mail
OU_Country
10/27/2016 10:03 AM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
How would turning our attention to basketball be so great? We only get one school in the dance right now and they are usually done quickly.
Simple - it's cost so much less to fund a basketball program simply because of the number of scholarships and staff required of football. Take even a portion of that and direct it to other sports. You know all those home games against better name opponents everyone wants? It's a lot easier to convince them to come to Athens if you're paying them because you have a bigger budget.
Actually on a per player basis, it cost much more.

So basketball, on a per player basis costs much more? I suppose that makes sense, but I'd be interested to see the numbers. I'd also be interested to see profit/loss numbers on basketball versus football at all the MAC schools.
mail
OU_Country
10/27/2016 10:18 AM
cbus cat fan wrote:expand_more
Excellent point Mark. Some of it has to do with the NFL trying to be politically correct, the other has to do with busy families and millennials who don't seem to watch sports for as longer duration as previous age groups. It hit me the other night when an NFL game was on CBS for a Thursday night and the National League Championship series was on Fox Sports 1, a cable channel that not all cable customers have yet to be have added on their cable line-ups. In addition, the NFL is experiencing the biggest one season decline since they began to measure ratings.

Lots of changes going on and many are still trying to figure it out. Recently there was a symposium put together by sports retailers asking why the drop in participation in high school sports. A local guy who does a lot of sports camps was invited and he told me there are no easy answers, but a lot of it has to do with kids burning themselves out with summer camps and traveling teams. He also told me that the concussion fear can't be underestimated, lots of kids and their mothers in particular are scared off by it.

In addition, many kids are probably realistic about their chances of ever playing college sports, unlike some of us who probably thought we were going to be stars. It was fun to dream but each generation of kids is a little different, I guess.
I agree with a whole lot of this. The concussion fears and realities can't be discounted. The length of attention span combined with the longer, slower paced games as a result of replay and TV timeouts has an affect.

Seems like a great use of the data mining concepts that this thread was supposed to be about. ;-)
mail
person
BillyTheCat
10/27/2016 6:59 PM
cbus cat fan wrote:expand_more
Billy

Having coached a fair amount and knowing those who still do, the idea that youth participation football hasn't dropped a great deal is more than a little ridiculous. In the fast growing Columbus area there is a huge drop. Go to the rural areas of Ohio where I grew up and once proud high school football programs are a shell of themselves, some are even struggling to field a team.

Ohio 69

As far as high school sports, my fear is some day we would follow the European model where there really is no high school teams only club teams which really would change sports culture in this country, especially in rural areas.
Just look at the latest numbers, participation last year increased.
mail
person
cbus cat fan
10/27/2016 9:20 PM
Billy

Honestly, do you really believe that? You can skew a couple of numbers any way like but there is a thing called reality. Below is a link to an article that came out a couple of months ago and talks about plummeting participation in youth football. I like football as much as the next guy but the numbers don't lie.

I can tell you about youth programs and middle schools that have had to merge in fast growing areas of Columbus. Then there's rural Ohio where I grew up and once proud programs that are a shell of themselves and some barely fielding teams. I see these things first hand because of my coaching background and my own kids, and the kids in the neighborhood.

I am not saying football is going to collapse, but we are likely to never see youth participation at a level it once was not only because of the rise of soccer and lacrosse, but mainly because of the way kids and their parents (especially moms) look at sports and concussions.

Here's a key quote from the article linked below that illustrates my point.

"The full picture of youth football participation shows athletes are leaving the game in great numbers."


http://www.vocativ.com/298019/youth-football-participatio... /
Showing Messages: 26 - 31 of 31
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)