Football Graphs

#26
#26
Being a financial chartist, I would have to say this is a wait and see before investing situation. I would need to see a better finish on the next two seasons on the final poll #s before totally committing.... LOL!!!
 
#27
#27
DL916 said:
I went with Rivals so it might have been on another service.
Click to expand...

Could be. I'm just a casual follower of recruiting. Just seems like there was a lot of excitement around that class.
 
#28
#28
Can't help but notice the trend in recruiting during the Dooley years. That graph shows just where we were headed with him
 
#29
#29
ElQbyYp.jpg

koqam0w.jpg


I decided to do a graph on players drafted between us and Bama, our biggest rival who's had a similar story as far as a turn around.
 
Last edited:
#30
#30
DL916 said:
ElQbyYp.jpg

koqam0w.jpg


I decided to do a graph on players drafted between us and Bama, our biggest rival who's had a similar story as far as a turn around.
Click to expand...

So the amount of players getting drafted correlates almost directly with wins and with the quality of the recruiting classes? Seems intuitive, but the graphs help illustrate that point.
 
#31
#31
A points scored vs points allowed would be neat over that time period. Willing to bet the success and decline after the bad 2005 team would directly related to the Cutcliffe years. As a side, come up with a correlation factor for points vs recruiting class ranking.
 
#32
#32
daj2576 said:
So the amount of players getting drafted correlates almost directly with wins and with the quality of the recruiting classes? Seems intuitive, but the graphs help illustrate that point.
Click to expand...

Yeah I guess to sum it up "recruiting classes matter"
 
#33
#33
rjd970 said:
A points scored vs points allowed would be neat over that time period. Willing to bet the success and decline after the bad 2005 team would directly related to the Cutcliffe years. As a side, come up with a correlation factor for points vs recruiting class ranking.
Click to expand...

Alright I'll get to work.
 
#34
#34
daj2576 said:
So the amount of players getting drafted correlates almost directly with wins and with the quality of the recruiting classes? Seems intuitive, but the graphs help illustrate that point.
Click to expand...

Not sure if that's the right way to interpret the graph. The draft occurs after the season so the more successful a team is the more the players are noticed. Its a what-have-you-done-lately that gets you noticed. Quality of class to wins, yes but saying drafts to wins is like making a graph that shows making more money correlates to paying more taxes.
 
#35
#35
GreveHaller said:
Not sure if that's the right way to interpret the graph. The draft occurs after the season so the more successful a team is the more the players are noticed. Its a what-have-you-done-lately that gets you noticed. Quality of class to wins, yes but saying drafts to wins is like making a graph that shows making more money correlates to paying more taxes.
Click to expand...

This is a great point. I thought about finding a correlation between games won/players drafted. Seeing a kid perform on the "big" stage seems to encourage NFL teams of drafting the kid earlier or drafting him at all.

Arian Foster is a good example. Junior year good personal season and team season: projected 2nd round. Senior year bad personal season, bad team season: undrafted.
 
#36
#36
GreveHaller said:
Not sure if that's the right way to interpret the graph. The draft occurs after the season so the more successful a team is the more the players are noticed. Its a what-have-you-done-lately that gets you noticed. Quality of class to wins, yes but saying drafts to wins is like making a graph that shows making more money correlates to paying more taxes.
Click to expand...

My question was rhetorical. Better recruiting yields wins, yields more players drafted (there is a metric that suggests probability of being drafted by star rating-see below).

There might be a bump in Draft status due solely to team success, as you suggest, but what I said is still basically correct.

I've read numbers that suggest something like 30% of 5 stars, 15% of 4 stars and 10% of 3 stars get drafted (please don't quote that, I'm not solid on my memory of the exact figures, though the point is valid).

Ultimately raw talent is identifiable relatively early and can be used to predict both wins and the likelihood of being drafted.
 
Last edited:
#37
#37
rjd970 said:
A points scored vs points allowed would be neat over that time period. Willing to bet the success and decline after the bad 2005 team would directly related to the Cutcliffe years. As a side, come up with a correlation factor for points vs recruiting class ranking.
Click to expand...

ssi4Fbk.jpg


Here you go.
 
#38
#38
DL916 said:
ssi4Fbk.jpg


Here you go.
Click to expand...

I read that as Cutcliffe worked a small miracle after 2005. And given the ridiculous offense we had in 2012, it's beyond frustrating that the defense was so bad. 2005 and 2012 are almost exactly the same, but reversed in terms of offense and defense production.

Good graphs man, excellent work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#39
#39
cQ4ZNyu.png

NTfTcpo.png


Here are passing and rushing stats from 2013 of guys that will be back this year.
 
#41
#41
already been done ---> Blue-chip ratio: Which college football teams have championship-grade recruiting? - SBNation.com

keckjm said:
You should determine how strong a correlation there is between high ranked classes and wins by finding a P-Value with a significance level of 0.05. That'd be a very interesting statistic to fully illustrate how coorleated high rated recruiting classes is to winning using our recruiting and win levels over the last 14 years or so. Cool graphs BTW.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top