Good Luck/Bad Luck in 2006

#1
VolinArizona

VolinArizona

not in Arizona anymore
Joined
Feb 16, 2006
Messages
21,301
Likes
1,641
#1
I am one of the believers that you can predict the next season's overall records by the previous season's close game ratio. Well, it's only a tool, and not the ONLY thing to look at. Anyway, here were the luckiest and unluckiest teams in 2006 in close games. There were tons of teams at +2, -2, +1, -1, so I left them out.

Luckiest
Florida 12-1, +5
Wake Forest 11-2, +5
Maryland 8-4, +5
Rice 7-5, +4
Arkansas State 6-6, +4
Iowa State 4-8, +4
Boise State 12-0, +3
Auburn 10-2, +3
Notre Dame 10-2, +3
Oregon State 8-4, +3 (pending Hawaii final)
Kansas State 7-5, +3
Ohio 9-4, +3
Troy 7-5, +3

Unluckiest
North Carolina State 3-9, -5
Memphis 2-10, -5
Florida Int 0-12, -5
ULM 4-8, -5
E. Michigan 1-11, -5
Oklahoma State 6-6, -4
Colorado 2-10, -4
New Mexico State 4-8, -4
Vanderbilt 4-8, -3
Michigan State 4-8, -3
Illinois 2-10, -3
Duke 0-12, -3
Air Force 4-8, -3
UAB 3-9, -3
Miami (OH) 2-10, -3

Look for most of the luckiest teams of 2006 to have a small drop-off in wins next season, while most of the unluckiest should have an increase in wins in 2007.

Tennessee was +2 in close games.

If you want to know any team's close game ratio, let me know.
 
#5
#5
Vol423 said:
Okay. So is that defined as a 7-point spread in the final score, or an 8-point spread in the final score?

By the way, I think this is an interesting stat that you've accumulated.
Click to expand...

8 point

There are obvious holes, as the stat doesn't take into account WHEN the game became an 8 point game. For instance, say Tennessee is beating Cal 27-13 with :10 left and Cal scores as time ends, well, that game wasn't close, but the stat would come in as UT +1.
 
#8
#8
jaybird_1981 said:
I prefer to look at the turnover stat for the upcoming season.
Click to expand...

That's also a good one, as well.

Teams with an extremely high TO ratio also might fall off the next season, whereas a team with an extremely low TO ratio should improve their wins.
 
#9
#9
VolinArizona said:
That's also a good one, as well.

Teams with an extremely high TO ratio also might fall off the next season, whereas a team with an extremely low TO ratio should improve their wins.
Click to expand...


Exactly either way though Wake Forest won't have that four leaf clover in their pocket next year.
 
#10
#10
jaybird_1981 said:
I prefer to look at the turnover stat for the upcoming season.
Click to expand...

I just don't think that stat is a very good stat to use to predict success in the next year in college football. Changes in starting lineups at QB, RB, WR, and at virtually ever position on defense could cause massive swings in a team's turnover ratio from one season to the next.
 
#11
#11
Vol423 said:
I just don't think that stat is a very good stat to use to predict success in the next year in college football. Changes in starting lineups at QB, RB, WR, and at virtually ever position on defense could cause massive swings in a team's turnover ratio from one season to the next.
Click to expand...


Well the first thing you do obviously is look at returning talent all I am saying is a team that benefited from turnovers this year with the roughly the same returning talent will 9 out of 10 times have a worse year. This has been pretty proven in gambling circles.
 
#13
#13
Everybody knows the Auburn game was a close game, but doesn't fall in your matrix.

That would make Florida +4
 
#14
#14
JonWard said:
Everybody knows the Auburn game was a close game, but doesn't fall in your matrix.

That would make Florida +4
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter how it happened. I've already said there are holes. There are probably close losses Florida has had in the past years that changed their ratio, but shouldn't have.

Florida is officially +5.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top