FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[jamtod]

Platteville loses to WW but moves up one spot in top 25. Does the WIAC strength  of schedule (SOS) have any bearing. As of now the WIAC has 5 teams in the top 50 SOS (EC is 51st).

d3football.com/seasons/2019/schedule?tmpl=sos-template 

I've always wondered how a SoS based on opponent winning percentage tells anything about the quality of a team.  Across the entire set of games all SoS scores must average to .5, and the same is true within a conference.  The only variable to a conference's average score are out of conference games.  If St John's plays St Scholastica then SJU ends up with a higher SoS than if they play Stout, but it's quite clear which is the better competition.  The rating has the appearance of discriminating but, it seems to me, is a quirk of happenstance instead.

My last example is Redlands who is rated with the second toughest schedule in country.  There's no way they play the second toughest schedule, they merely play the winning teams in a closed bubble and then are compared to a larger population.  Hansen, on the other hand, has Redlands somewhere near the 100th toughest schedule and the WIAC taking the top 8 spots.  I don't know what methodology he uses to set his SoS but he has a much better grip on actual schedule strength than what simple winning percentage provides.

Hansen produces some head scratchers. St Thomas, for example, at 6, one place ahead of UWW, despite a loss to UWEC (32) which lost to St Norbert (68), which is a member of the third-worst conference in all of D3, per Hansen. I'll have to do a deeper dive into Hansen methodology but on the surface, the only way that makes any sense is if there's historical bias based on other seasons. And even then it may not make sense.

That said, the Tommies might be the 6th best team in the country. Just not seeing how you get there in purely results-based analysis.

He gives some explanations of his ranking system in the East Region Fan Poll board today.
Some key things to remember is that his system is intended to be predictive, rather than resume-based. And to arrive at that, some weight is placed on historical results (you can call that historical bias if you'd like), with the most weight given to recent results.

[emma17]

WW.
As jamtod said, once you dig into Hansen's methodology I think you'll be more supportive of his reasoning.
He measures several factors, including offensive and defensive strength.
I am not surprised at all that his data would show St Thomas ahead of UWW as I'm sure the massive offensive and defensive stats St T accumulated in that game weigh heavily in their ranking.

[OzJohnnie]

WW.
As jamtod said, once you dig into Hansen’s methodology I think you’ll be more supportive of his reasoning.
He measures several factors, including offensive and defensive strength.
I am not surprised at all that his data would show St Thomas ahead of UWW as I’m sure the massive offensive and defensive stats St T accumulated in that game weigh heavily in their ranking.

It seems he rates performance against the average performing team.  The closer your team is to average then the more precise the rating would be I think.  The farther out you get the less precise it is, although I think it's still accurate.  A team ranked out on the edge of performance belongs out there.  But how that team will perform against another team out on the edge is difficult to say by having two comparisons to average teams.

For example, you may have a team out on the edge that beats hard on the average team, running up good scores, while another team out there coasts against average teams but achieves similar results.  It's difficult to tell which team has more to give and which doesn't until they play each other.

Regardless, it's a far superior rating system to SoS.

[WW]

WW.
As jamtod said, once you dig into Hansen's methodology I think you'll be more supportive of his reasoning.
He measures several factors, including offensive and defensive strength.
I am not surprised at all that his data would show St Thomas ahead of UWW as I'm sure the massive offensive and defensive stats St T accumulated in that game weigh heavily in their ranking.

Having reviewed methodology, by the time you get to the "yards, first downs and points" criteria, you've waded through a few others that would only be final-score based. So even though StT kicked the snot out of the Blugolds on paper and 3 out of 4 plays at the line of scrimmage, EC scored more points, and therefore tilted the scale against StT in every criteria but one, and only partially so in that one. So I'm surprised at the analysis that leaves them at 6, even though I think StT is really good, and if they played EC 20 more times, they'd win 19 of them.

I like his work, though. The thing about football is the damn thing has pointy ends. Throw one on the ground and you never know which way it's gonna bounce.

[OzJohnnie]

WW.
As jamtod said, once you dig into Hansen’s methodology I think you’ll be more supportive of his reasoning.
He measures several factors, including offensive and defensive strength.
I am not surprised at all that his data would show St Thomas ahead of UWW as I’m sure the massive offensive and defensive stats St T accumulated in that game weigh heavily in their ranking.

Having reviewed methodology, by the time you get to the “yards, first downs and points” criteria, you’ve waded through a few others that would only be final-score based. So even though StT kicked the snot out of the Blugolds on paper and 3 out of 4 plays at the line of scrimmage, EC scored more points, and therefore tilted the scale against StT in every criteria but one, and only partially so in that one. So I’m surprised at the analysis that leaves them at 6, even though I think StT is really good, and if they played EC 20 more times, they’d win 19 of them.

I like his work, though. The thing about football is the damn thing has pointy ends. Throw one on the ground and you never know which way it’s gonna bounce.

You're possibly over-focusing on the UWEC result.  After that game UST smashed Concordia (who went to OT against UWL and played to within 10 against UWW).  UST slept through the UWEC game and the Blugolds cashed in on every long shot opportunity they had (nearly returning the opening kickoff and then one play in to score; recovering a fumble on the first UST play after than and two plays to score; a single long run to score.  They were up 14-0 in the first two minutes and then the defence hung on like a cat out a 10th floor window.) . Plus the Tommies missed two short field goals, either one of which would have won the game.

The Tommies are a tough team.  No creampuffs.

[Mr. Ypsi]

WW.
As jamtod said, once you dig into Hansen's methodology I think you'll be more supportive of his reasoning.
He measures several factors, including offensive and defensive strength.
I am not surprised at all that his data would show St Thomas ahead of UWW as I'm sure the massive offensive and defensive stats St T accumulated in that game weigh heavily in their ranking.

Having reviewed methodology, by the time you get to the "yards, first downs and points" criteria, you've waded through a few others that would only be final-score based. So even though StT kicked the snot out of the Blugolds on paper and 3 out of 4 plays at the line of scrimmage, EC scored more points, and therefore tilted the scale against StT in every criteria but one, and only partially so in that one. So I'm surprised at the analysis that leaves them at 6, even though I think StT is really good, and if they played EC 20 more times, they'd win 19 of them.

I like his work, though. The thing about football is the damn thing has pointy ends. Throw one on the ground and you never know which way it's gonna bounce.

I bet Alex Tanney would know!

[Alex Tanney was the best quarterback Monmouth College has ever had (or will ever have).  He had a UTube video of trick passes (don't know if it is still up) that was unfreakin' real!]

[KitchenSink]

I admit it's a slow process for me to assimilate to the new UWW offensive style. Over time, there's a chance I'll just settle in and watch the game without thinking "how will this style hold up against Mt, UMHB, St. John, UWO and the likes?"

QB Oles was the leading rusher, 14 carries for 114 yards. Passing he was 8-18. I wonder how many of those carries were designed runs/read options and how many were tucking and running.

Me thinks the new offensive style sucks. I think it goes back to my premise that UWW now lacks the elite talent that LL had at his disposal. I always felt that if the other conference teams were to be competitive & close the talent gap, they would have show remarkable improvement. Yet what seems to have happened is UWW's talent level across the board has slip back to the rest of the field ever since Bullis took over as HC. It's been slowly eroding year after year and (unfortunately) shows no signs of bouncing back to those once, glory-filled days. We'll still be a quarter or semi-final team, but that's where we will hit the wall.

I have to think that most of the Oles runs were designed. With Peete having a difficult time getting anything going again and UWW not really using the tight end anymore in short/medium length middle of the field routes, that area was left wide open by the Platteville D. Oles took advantage of it & picked up a few yards.

So, with talent that has been eroding year after year and an offensive style that sucks, how did UW-W manage to score  more points per game last year than every year since 2009 (which includes four National Championship teams)?

Or could it be that you are just impatient and grumpy?

Dangerous stat to hang your hat on Bleed. Wesley was great at scoring tons of points in the regular season and early playoff rounds, but it didn't get them to where they wanted to be. If we are all being reasonable, the question isn't "is this offense of the last 5 years different than the Stagg run?" (we all know it is), but can this offensive style get UWW to where it wants to be?
If conference championships are the ultimate goal, I'd say UWW has it right. If winning the Stagg is the goal, it seems the talent of the team this season provides a great opportunity for the new style to succeed deep in the playoffs.

So you agree with me.  Bobo's contention was an erosion of talent. Mine was not. You don't like the evidence I site, but ultimately, you agree with me.

Or are you just impatient and grumpy.

Before I agree with you that I'm agreeing with you, I need to better understand what is in consideration here.
I agree there has not been a significant erosion of talent and it's possible I'd even agree there hasn't been any erosion of talent (I'd have that conversation separately). This becomes a slippery slope for you of the purple shaded hemoglobin. If the talent hasn't eroded, why did the Stagg Bowl run come to an end so abruptly and in particular, why did UWW's post seasons in 2015, 2016 and 2018 end with such poor offensive performance?

I certainly agree I don't like the evidence, as it's empty of meaningful results based on historical program performance.

I'm on the side of the coaching staff being the obvious variable here. LL takes everything but the kitchen sink (as well as KitchenSink) with him to Buffalo after 2014. No coincidence UWW's Stagg Bowl runs ends when this occurs. I think the talent is there for the most part, but it's too darn tough to replace all the coaches and expect the Stagg Bowl runs to continue.

EXCUSE ME?  I'M STILL AROUND!!

[02 Warhawk]

I admit it's a slow process for me to assimilate to the new UWW offensive style. Over time, there's a chance I'll just settle in and watch the game without thinking "how will this style hold up against Mt, UMHB, St. John, UWO and the likes?"

QB Oles was the leading rusher, 14 carries for 114 yards. Passing he was 8-18. I wonder how many of those carries were designed runs/read options and how many were tucking and running.

Me thinks the new offensive style sucks. I think it goes back to my premise that UWW now lacks the elite talent that LL had at his disposal. I always felt that if the other conference teams were to be competitive & close the talent gap, they would have show remarkable improvement. Yet what seems to have happened is UWW's talent level across the board has slip back to the rest of the field ever since Bullis took over as HC. It's been slowly eroding year after year and (unfortunately) shows no signs of bouncing back to those once, glory-filled days. We'll still be a quarter or semi-final team, but that's where we will hit the wall.

I have to think that most of the Oles runs were designed. With Peete having a difficult time getting anything going again and UWW not really using the tight end anymore in short/medium length middle of the field routes, that area was left wide open by the Platteville D. Oles took advantage of it & picked up a few yards.

So, with talent that has been eroding year after year and an offensive style that sucks, how did UW-W manage to score  more points per game last year than every year since 2009 (which includes four National Championship teams)?

Or could it be that you are just impatient and grumpy?

Dangerous stat to hang your hat on Bleed. Wesley was great at scoring tons of points in the regular season and early playoff rounds, but it didn't get them to where they wanted to be. If we are all being reasonable, the question isn't "is this offense of the last 5 years different than the Stagg run?" (we all know it is), but can this offensive style get UWW to where it wants to be?
If conference championships are the ultimate goal, I'd say UWW has it right. If winning the Stagg is the goal, it seems the talent of the team this season provides a great opportunity for the new style to succeed deep in the playoffs.

So you agree with me.  Bobo's contention was an erosion of talent. Mine was not. You don't like the evidence I site, but ultimately, you agree with me.

Or are you just impatient and grumpy.

Before I agree with you that I'm agreeing with you, I need to better understand what is in consideration here.
I agree there has not been a significant erosion of talent and it's possible I'd even agree there hasn't been any erosion of talent (I'd have that conversation separately). This becomes a slippery slope for you of the purple shaded hemoglobin. If the talent hasn't eroded, why did the Stagg Bowl run come to an end so abruptly and in particular, why did UWW's post seasons in 2015, 2016 and 2018 end with such poor offensive performance?

I certainly agree I don't like the evidence, as it's empty of meaningful results based on historical program performance.

I'm on the side of the coaching staff being the obvious variable here. LL takes everything but the kitchen sink (as well as KitchenSink) with him to Buffalo after 2014. No coincidence UWW's Stagg Bowl runs ends when this occurs. I think the talent is there for the most part, but it's too darn tough to replace all the coaches and expect the Stagg Bowl runs to continue.

EXCUSE ME?  I'M STILL AROUND!!

Tried to imply he took every but KitchenSink. My joke missed its mark 

[bleedpurple]

It was fun to talk with Brian Borland at the game on Saturday. He seems to be enjoying his experience in Buffalo. But he did say regarding this year's team, "We've got to get better."   Unsurprisingly, Brian is as humble and enjoyable to talk with as he always has been.

[badgerwarhawk]

It was fun to talk with Brian Borland at the game on Saturday. He seems to be enjoying his experience in Buffalo. But he did say regarding this year's team, "We've got to get better."  Then he joked "I came back to remember how to win a football game." Unsurprisingly, Brian is as humble and enjoyable to talk with as he always has been.

I like Rob a lot but admittedly when it went down I was really hoping Brian would stay. 

[badgerwarhawk]

WW.
As jamtod said, once you dig into Hansen’s methodology I think you’ll be more supportive of his reasoning.
He measures several factors, including offensive and defensive strength.
I am not surprised at all that his data would show St Thomas ahead of UWW as I’m sure the massive offensive and defensive stats St T accumulated in that game weigh heavily in their ranking.

Having reviewed methodology, by the time you get to the “yards, first downs and points” criteria, you’ve waded through a few others that would only be final-score based. So even though StT kicked the snot out of the Blugolds on paper and 3 out of 4 plays at the line of scrimmage, EC scored more points, and therefore tilted the scale against StT in every criteria but one, and only partially so in that one. So I’m surprised at the analysis that leaves them at 6, even though I think StT is really good, and if they played EC 20 more times, they’d win 19 of them.

I like his work, though. The thing about football is the damn thing has pointy ends. Throw one on the ground and you never know which way it’s gonna bounce.

I bet Alex Tanney would know!

[Alex Tanney was the best quarterback Monmouth College has ever had (or will ever have).  He had a UTube video of trick passes (don't know if it is still up) that was unfreakin' real!]

If anyone would it's probably him.  That's a incredible video.  The throws he pulls off are amazing.

[emma17]

Is anybody else feeling upset Saturday is coming?
UWSP over UWW
St Thomas over St John?

[02 Warhawk]

Is anybody else feeling upset Saturday is coming?
UWSP over UWW
St Thomas over St John?

Kind of leaning towards UST pulling off the upset at home. That seems more likely than UWW laying an egg in Stevens Point. Would love to see UWW's offense finally get cooking. They haven't scored over 30 points since week one. Need to start turning long drives into TD's, rather than missed FGs.

[DuffMan]

Kind of leaning towards UST pulling off the upset at home.

It would be a minor upset, IMHO, and I'm not sure I'd consider it a home game for U$T.  It's a toss-up for me right now--either outcome wouldn't surprise me, but I think the Johnnies will pull this one out.

[WW]

Is anybody else feeling upset Saturday is coming?
UWSP over UWW
St Thomas over St John?

Not feeling the Pointers. They've got some talent, especially they're D-front, and I'm really curious to see what kind of damage Corvino can do from the interior against a good O line. He had another very disruptive game vs UWO. They've got a big grader at O tackle, too. But I think they're a tick slow at skill spots, and QB Urmanski is just too inconsistent. That said, a lot of quarterbacks have looked bad in some of the weather conditions Wisconsin has seen on recent Saturdays. But I'm expecting an outcome where you compliment the Pointers on their scrappiness and then complain that Peete et al didn't break enough runs over 20 yards, they didn't run enough slants, etc. Duddub by 17.

I'm leaning St Thomas, however. Not that it would be much of an upset, but you could call it that. I think StT has lots of residual pissed-offness about the Eau Claire game and general MIAC politics, and is gonna take it out on anybody in their path.