In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 525
Online now 466 Record: 7264 (3/12/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Ah i see ! and agree.
So we have Eitzel (on the Scout board) definitively saying that Ohio will win 6 of the next 7 regular season match-ups between the Big 2.
And we have Huburt clearly demonstrating that he neither knows nor understands how odds work.
I'm amused and intrigued.
This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by Frank C 15 months ago
* * * N E O . R E T R O * * *
That's an OSU education for you.
Or converting more DL/TE to the OL
Sorry, but you're doing it wrong too. If a team has a 12% chance of winning a championship every year, here are the odds of what will happen over a 4 year span
Exactly 0 championships: 59.97%
Exactly 1 championship: 32.71%
More than 1 championship: 7.32%
edit: I should also probably point out that vegas futures odds are not typically intended to reflect the actual mathematical odds of something happening, but that's a separate issue.
edit2: you're also extrapolating the percentages wrong. 17/2 odds reflects a 10.53% chance of Ohio State winning the national championship, not 12%; 5/1 odds reflects a 16.66% (repeating, of course) chance of Alabama winning, not 20%. So, if we want to regard those odds as true (which is problematic, as I said in my first edit, but whatever), then Ohio State's odds of winning BCS in the next 4 years are
Exactly 0 championships: 64.08%
Exactly 1 championship: 30.17%
More than 1 championship: 5.76%
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by inuyesta 15 months ago
Thats great news!! Ive been playing the Lotto for nearly 28 years so my odds of hitting the big one over the next 15 years must be way up. Gotta increases my plays with the higher percentages..thanks
Did I miss it posted elsewhere? But Dan Skipper apparently to Arkansas.
Actually, his math is correct. Yours isn't.
Say you have a 50% chance of doing something, anything, over the next 100 years. Well, then tomorrow, you do that something. You still only have a total of 50% chance of doing it over the next 100 years. The odds don't change, they don't add up.
Again, don't want to go too deep into this, kind of irrelevant.
Inuyesta...the problem with your calculation is that the OSU odds will CHANGE. They probably hit their high point this year or next with Braxton, and then will plummet when he leaves.
This post was edited by neoavatara 15 months ago
Good lord, my numbers were way off. I was going by what a previous poster said for the percentages, but still - no excuse for not checking my math.
Thanks for actually doing it out, stats were never my strong suit.
Yeah, that was what caused the thread revival, it's a couple pages back.
Right now, they're taking about converting Donovan Munger and Billy Price the second they step on campus.
Do those two know about this plan?
Probably not, it'd be Urban's style not to tell them. Just like he did a horrible job juggling Ezekiel Elliot and Dontre Wilson.
I have a feeling if Urban really told Munger that he'd be playing OL, Munger would've put a lot more thought into his recent FSU visit.
Oh, yeah, obviously. Thats just one of a number of problems with relying on that calculation as though it means anything. Probably the biggest problem is assuming anyone could actually estimate a team's probability of winning the championship in a given year with anything close to the level of accuracy I was implying.
I was just responding to CMXI's post as though it were a hypothetical about a team with a 12% chance of winning per year, which was how it was phrased.
This might be the silliest criticism of anything I've ever written, ever.
If you've played the Lotto every week for 28 years, assuming you only buy one ticket per week, that's about 1500 tickets over your lifetime. I have played the lottery only once, I bought 20 numbers to the big powerball in 2011. It should be extremely obvious that your 1500 tickets were more likely to have produced a winner than my 20 tickets. Let's go further: if you could purchase all 176 million (or however many there are) permutations of possible powerball numbers for a given drawing, you could guarantee that you would "win." I put "win" in quotes, of course, because once all the expenses of buying, cataloging, and storing all those tickets, hunting down the winning ticket, and disposing of all the losers is accounted for, you would almost certainly lose a great amount of money on the deal. But you would "win."
The problem with playing the lottery isn't that the odds of finding a winner don't increase with each additional ticket that you buy. The problem with playing the lottery is that the odds against you are astronomical and the payout is typically too small to justify the risk. The lottery has a pretty pronounced negative expected value, and it gets worse considering that almost all the "value" to be had is tied up in the jackpot, meaning that the vast majority of people in a given lottery will not actually get back the 73 cents per dollar (or whatever it is, again, I don't feel like looking this up) their tickets are theoretically worth; the huge majority of people will walk away completely empty handed, while a tiny minority will reap a huge return on their "investment."
Actually, on second look, I'm pretty sure you completely misunderstood my post. I'm saying that a team with a 12% chance of winning the national title per year will win one or more in a random 4 year sample about 40% of the time. The odds of them winning in Year Four are, by definition, exactly the same as they were in Year One: 12%. You seem to think I'm saying that their Year Four odds are better, which is not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying that the cumulative odds are better.
Man, your neck has to be tired, carrying around that big brain.....
you've ruined the lottery for me....I was sure I was going to win....I'm going to have to save up and buy the sure thing, 176 million tickets...
So your saying my 30 % chance over 4 years isn't that crazzy? Your also saying 2% over 4 years for UM is way 2 low.
This post was edited by Huburt 15 months ago
The sample size is 4 years not 1.
Well lets get back on topic OSU will be left with scraps at OL this year.
Cameron Hunt deciding between Oregon and Cal.
When you divided an arbitrary number by yet another arbitrary number and tried to pass off the result as probabilistically significant, you exposed your ignorance.
Btw, here's a reality check for Ohio fans:
In 2009, Urban Meyer's Florida team had the following players in its 2 deep:
- QB Tim Tebow
- TE Aaron Hernandez (Pro-Bowl)
- C Maurkice Pouncey (Pro-Bowl)
- OG Mike Pouncey
- WR Riley Cooper
- LB Brandon Spikes
- CB Major Wright
- DE Carlos Dunlap
- DE Jermaine Cunningham
- CB Joe Haden
- WR Chris Rainey
- S Will Hill
- CB Ahmad Black
- CB Janoris Jenkins
I'm probably forgetting a few names but that's at least 14 current NFL players from the 2009 Florida team who play (or have played meaningful snaps) at the pro level.
The 2009 team did not have Percy Harvin or Louis Murphy from the 2008 team but it was was one year older.
That 2009 team lost 32-13 to Alabama.
It is unlikely that Meyer's future Ohio teams will be more loaded then his Florida teams. He built his Florida teams when Bobby Bowden was a lame duck coach at FSU and while Miami suffered through Randy Shannon. In other words, he was able to snag more Florida talent with less competition from in-state rivals.
After Meyer's 2009 team was beaten convincingly 32-13 in the 2009 SEC Title game and after Meyer's 2010 team was crushed 31-6 in Tuscaloosa, the Saban-Alabama dynasty forced Urban Meyer into early retirement.
Thankfully, Michigan's bread and butter is similar to Alabama's pro-style which gave Meyer/Florida so much trouble.
While Ohio fans are probably convinced that Meyer/Ohio will run the B1G, I think they should avoid being overconfident.
^While perfectly fair, I don't think the fact Meyer went 17-6 at BGSU, 22-2 at Utah, or 12-0 this year at OSU can be overlooked. He's a better coach than simply the product of a talent-rich SEC Florida system imo. Nor does he need an OSU team as talented as that Florida team to win one out of the next four BCS championships if luck is on his side. For example, ND might have very well won a BCS title this year in all likelihood if KSU or Oregon went undefeated. You don't necessarily need the same talent as Bama if you luck out and get two undefeated teams outside of the SEC.
At least until we move to the playoff format after next season. If people think the SEC is dominant now? Wait until they start getting two teams in a 4-team playoff. We're going to get SEC vs SEC championships on the regular if nothing changes.
ETA: I agree with you in the sense that I don't see OSU "running the B1G." IMO Michigan has been recruiting/putting together a team that is truly OSU's opposite (more pro-style/smashmouth whereas OSU has been trending toward speed/finesse: see LSU vs Florida in years past) but equal. In my opinion, we're going to see some of the best, most competitive OSU/Michigan games we've seen over the next few years. After OSU and Michigan, though, I don't know who can really stand up in the B1G. Northwestern is a nice darkhorse, I love what Fitzgerald is doing there.
This post has been edited 4 times, most recently by dukeluke 15 months ago
There is nothing wrong with recruiting a wide receiver who happens to line up behind the QB.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports