Stats in games against 3 top teams

[Grizfan7]

Looking at the main football board, I have to chuckle at the Cat-Griz comparison thread. Lots of season stats comparisons, even though UM has improved considerably the season. And, no comparison of the Idaho and SS games. Those are much more important comparisons. None of this shows who will win the game, but those 2 games are much better comparisons. Yup, the no. 1 team in the nation is a better team than any FCS team any FCS team has played this season.

You dont like those comparisons but your own comparison equates SDSU #1 with unranked Davis and you played them when they did bot have arguable the best running back in the BSC.

If you wanted a fair comparison you should have picked 3 common opponents or better yet all common opponents Utah Tech, NAU, Idaho, Sac and PSU. a comparison using those five games for each team.

I really don't care though, because I think that transitive stats are a poor way to predict a games outcome even though it is really the only objective method we have.

Davis will be 7-4 and a possible playoff team if they beat SS. Davis was ranked when UM played them. Davis is a pretty good team. Again, I chose the 3 best teams. If you want to do stats with just Idaho and SS, that's fine with me. Those stats would have some validity. And the 2 biggest "stats" would be UM beat Idaho (and MSU lost to Idaho), and UM beat SS by 27 points, and MSU won by only 12 points. If someone looked only at the Idaho and SS games played by UM and MSU, they would conclude that UM is better than MSU. I don't not try to make that assertion.

[Grizfan7]

SDSU >>>>>> Davis

Way better. UM beat Idaho; Cats didn't. UM beat SS 34-7. Cats beat SS 42-30. You walked right into that one. Game is in Missoula.

You forgot to mention NAU. You walked right into that one.

NAU was not one of the top 3 teams UM played, and that's what the stats were about. NAU not relevant in my chosen stat analysis.

Things that make my team look bad aren't relevant.

Is that why some Cat posters want to exclude the game against SDSU?

[coachouert]

SDSU >>>>>> Davis

Way better. UM beat Idaho; Cats didn't. UM beat SS 34-7. Cats beat SS 42-30. You walked right into that one. Game is in Missoula.

You forgot to mention NAU. You walked right into that one.

NAU was not one of the top 3 teams UM played, and that's what the stats were about. NAU not relevant in my CHERRY PICKED stat analysis.

Fixed it for you.

[coloradocat]

SDSU >>>>>> Davis

Way better. UM beat Idaho; Cats didn't. UM beat SS 34-7. Cats beat SS 42-30. You walked right into that one. Game is in Missoula.

You forgot to mention NAU. You walked right into that one.

NAU was not one of the top 3 teams UM played, and that's what the stats were about. NAU not relevant in my chosen stat analysis.

Things that make my team look bad aren't relevant.

Is that why some Cat posters want to exclude the game against SDSU?

Man, NAU really broke you.

[cats2506]

I actually love what he is trying to do. It wasn't that many years ago I would do something similar for myself, analyze a group of games that I could somehow justify as being "unbiased" and pick finer points in the stats where I could believe that my team had an edge. Sometimes it worked out, but a majority of the time the final result didn't match my analysis. Like everything else the more data points you have the more accurately you can predict outcome.

Football is more about matchups and mismatches. The stats may give us some indicators but they don't tell the whole story. I have gone away from trying to refine statistical analysis and more towards subjective evaluations of matchups and mismatches. The problem with subjective analysis is that its really hard to justify what you believe sometimes, but you just know how this matchup is going to turn out so you go with it.

[Grizfan7]

SDSU >>>>>> Davis

Way better. UM beat Idaho; Cats didn't. UM beat SS 34-7. Cats beat SS 42-30. You walked right into that one. Game is in Missoula.

You forgot to mention NAU. You walked right into that one.

NAU was not one of the top 3 teams UM played, and that's what the stats were about. NAU not relevant in my chosen stat analysis.

Things that make my team look bad aren't relevant.

Is that why some Cat posters want to exclude the game against SDSU?

Man, NAU really broke you.

The NAU game is what ignited the UM season. I'm fine with NAU.

[Grizfan7]

SDSU >>>>>> Davis

Way better. UM beat Idaho; Cats didn't. UM beat SS 34-7. Cats beat SS 42-30. You walked right into that one. Game is in Missoula.

You forgot to mention NAU. You walked right into that one.

NAU was not one of the top 3 teams UM played, and that's what the stats were about. NAU not relevant in my CHERRY PICKED stat analysis.

Fixed it for you.

I have not cherry picked anything. NAU is not one of the best teams UM has played.

[Grizfan7]

I actually love what he is trying to do. It wasn't that many years ago I would do something similar for myself, analyze a group of games that I could somehow justify as being "unbiased" and pick finer points in the stats where I could believe that my team had an edge. Sometimes it worked out, but a majority of the time the final result didn't match my analysis. Like everything else the more data points you have the more accurately you can predict outcome.

Football is more about matchups and mismatches. The stats may give us some indicators but they don't tell the whole story. I have gone away from trying to refine statistical analysis and more towards subjective evaluations of matchups and mismatches. The problem with subjective analysis is that its really hard to justify what you believe sometimes, but you just know how this matchup is going to turn out so you go with it.

None of my stats were selected to give UM an edge. NONE. I agree with most of your second paragraph.

In my view, the most relevant factors are: the game being played in Missoula in front of a loud and lively crowd, Bradford and T. Hauck designing the D scheme and game plan, lessons learned by UM players who played last year and realizing the many mistakes they made, UM having come on big in the past half dozen or so games, UM having found/picked a QB who is improving each week, UM having found a young QB who is a very accurate passer and gamer (I am told), and UM's D being very good and having improved each week in recent times. And, MSU has shown that it can be beaten (Idaho loss) and that it's not all powerful (SS game). Of course, MSU is very good. Even if MSU is better than UM (and they may be): because of these other factors I just mentioned, I believe UM has a good chance of prevailing.

Feel free to try to refute any of my factors.

Both teams are taking good care of the ball, probably very good care of the ball. UM has reduced big mistakes. I assume MSU isn't making a lot of big mistakes either, but don't know. Of course, turnovers and big mistakes could turn the game, as is often the case. But, I believe both teams are capable of continuing to take care of the ball and not make a bunch of mistakes.

[BozoneCat]

The only thing I have gotten from this entire discourse is a reminder of how much I loathe lawyers. FTG